COB-RGB

 

 

 

 

 

Council  Agenda

 

 

 

27 July 2016

 

 

 

 

 

ALL INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN VARIOUS FORMATS ON REQUEST

 

 

 


CITY OF BUSSELTON

MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA – 27 July 2016

 

 

 

TO:                  THE MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS

 

 

NOTICE is given that a meeting of the Council will be held in the Meeting Room One, Community Resource Centre, 21 Cammilleri Street, Busselton on Wednesday, 27 July 2016, commencing at 5.30pm.

 

Your attendance is respectfully requested.

 

 

 

Mike Archer

 

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

 

15 July 2016


CITY OF BUSSELTON

Agenda FOR THE Council  MEETING TO BE HELD ON 27 July 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

ITEM NO.                                        SUBJECT                                                                                                                              PAGE NO.

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

2....... Attendance. 5

3....... Prayer. 5

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

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

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

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

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

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

Previous Council Meetings. 5

9.1          Minutes of the Council Meeting held 22 June 2016. 5

Committee Meetings. 6

9.2          Minutes of the Policy & Legislation Committee Meeting held 21 June 2016. 6

10..... Reports of Committee. 7

10.1        Policy and Legislation Committee - 21/06/2016 - USE OF INTERNET POLICY - YOUTH POLICY. 7

10.2        Policy and Legislation Committee - 21/06/2016 - PROPOSED CITY OF BUSSELTON CEMETERIES AMENDMENT LOCAL LAW 2016. 18

10.3        Policy and Legislation Committee - 21/06/2016 - POLICY: LEASES OF CITY LAND AND BUILDINGS. 23

11..... Planning and Development Services Report. 38

11.1        AMENDMENT 22 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME 21 - TO REZONE LOT 41 (182) GEOGRAPHE BAY ROAD QUINDALUP FROM R12.5 TO R20 - CONSIDERATION FOR INITIATION.. 38

11.2        DISPOSAL OF RESERVE 44384 (LOT 5016 (75) FORD ROAD, GEOGRAPHE) FOLLOWING CONSULTATION.. 48

11.3        SCHEME AMENDMENT 10 -  TRANSPORTABLE AND PREFABRICATED BUILDING CONTROLS. 53

11.4        ENVIRONMENT STRATEGY REVIEW... 65

11.5        DA16/0273 - HOLIDAY HOME (6 PEOPLE) - 67 LINDSAY DRIVE, YALYALUP. 119

11.6        CONSOLIDATED PARKING SCHEME AMENDMENTS. 124

11.7        DA14/0561 - PROPOSED EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRY - LOT 61 (NO.1958) CAVES ROAD, NATURALISTE. 131

12..... Engineering and Works Services Report. 220

13..... Community and Commercial Services Report. 220

13.1        GLC ALLIED PROFESSIONAL HEALTH SUITES. 220

13.2        BUSSELTON SENIOR CITIZENS EXPANSION PROPOSAL. 230

13.3        RFT04/16 KOOKABURRA CARAVAN PARK MANAGEMENT CONTRACT. 236

14..... Finance and Corporate Services Report. 241

15..... Chief Executive Officer's Report. 241

15.1        COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN.. 241

16..... Motions of which Previous Notice has been Given.. 275

17..... Confidential Reports. 275

17.1        BUSSELTON FORESHORE REDEVELOPMENT:  HOTEL/SHORT STAY ACCOMMODATION PRECINCT

17.2        RENEWAL OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S CONTRACT

18..... Questions from Members. 275

19..... Public Question Time. 275

20..... Next Meeting Date. 275

21..... Closure. 275

 


Council                                                                                      5                                                                          27 July 2016

 

1.               Declaration of Opening and Announcement of Visitors

2.               Attendance 

Apologies

Approved Leave of Absence

 

Nil

3.               Prayer

The Prayer will be delivered by Pastor Tony Peak from the Abundant Life Centre.

4.               Public Question Time

Response to Previous Questions Taken on Notice 

Public Question Time

5.               Announcements Without Discussion

Announcements by the Presiding Member 

Announcements by other Members at the invitation of the Presiding Member

6.               Application for Leave of Absence

7.               Petitions and Presentations 

8.               Disclosure Of Interests

A decleration of Impartiality Interest has been received from:

 

·         Chief Executive Officer, Mike Archer in relation to agenda Item 11.7 - DA14/0561 - Proposed Extractive Industry - Lot 61 (No.1958) Caves Road, Naturaliste

 

In accordance with the Local Government (Rules of Conduct) Regulations 2007 this declaration will be read out immediately before Item 11.7 is discussed.

9.               Confirmation and Receipt Of Minutes 

Previous Council Meetings

9.1             Minutes of the Council Meeting held 22 June 2016

Recommendation

That the Minutes of the Council  Meeting held 22 June 2016 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

 

Committee Meetings

9.2             Minutes of the Policy & Legislation Committee Meeting held 21 June 2016

RECOMMENDATION

 

1)    That the minutes of the Policy and Legislation Committee Meeting held 21 June 2016 be received.

 

2)    That the Council notes the outcomes from the Policy and Legislation Committee Meeting held 21 June 2016 being:

 

a)    The Use of Internet Policy - Youth Policy item is presented for Council consideration at item 10.1 of this agenda.

 

b)    The Proposed City of Busselton Cemeteries Amendment Local Law 2016 is presented for Council consideration at item 10.2 of this agenda.

 

c)    The Policy: Leases of City Land and Buildings item is presented for Council consideration at item 10.3 of this agenda.

 

 


Council                                                                                      9                                                                          27 July 2016

10.             Reports of Committee

10.1           Policy and Legislation Committee - 21/06/2016 - USE OF INTERNET POLICY - YOUTH POLICY

SUBJECT INDEX:

Use of Internet - Libraries / Youth Policy

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Community Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Busselton and Dunsborough Libraries

REPORTING OFFICER:

Manager, Community Services - Maxine Palmer

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Youth Policy

Attachment b    Use of Internet Policy  

 

This item was considered by the Policy and Legislation Committee at its meeting on 21 June 2016, the recommendations from which have been included in this report. 

 

PRÉCIS

 

As part of the Council’s ongoing policy review, two policies relating to the delivery of youth services and pubic internet use at the Busselton and Dunsborough Libraries are presented to Council for review and updating.  

 

BACKGROUND

 

Internet Use within the Busselton and Dunsborough Public Libraries Policy

On 27 April 2016, Council adopted the 2016/17 Schedule of Fees and Charges for advertising, effective from 1 July 2016. These fees include a new $2.00 charge for non-library members to use the public internet computers within Busselton and Dunsborough libraries. This fee was included to encourage travelers and tourists to use their own devices instead of the public PCs which are in high demand for study and other essential services by local residents. This report contains the corresponding amendment to the Policy: Internet Use within the Busselton and Dunsborough Public Libraries Policy.

 

Youth Policy

In 2015 Council endorsed the City of Busselton Social Plan (2015-2025) as a guide for future planning.  The Social Plan considers ten (10) sectors of the community, one being Youth Services. This report proposes the key issues, goals and outcomes outlined in the Youth Services section of the Social Plan now supersede the issues and role of the City as outlined in the Youth Policy – 067.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

In accordance with Section 2.7(2)(b) of the Local Government Act 1995 it is the role of the Council to determine the Local Government’s policies.  The Council has proposed to do this on a recommendation of a Committee it has established in accordance with Section 5.8 of the Act.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

This report relates to the City of Busselton Social Plan (2015–2025) and the following policies:

-      Youth Policy – 067

-      Internet Use within the Busselton and Dunsborough Public Libraries Policy - 077

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

As part of the 2014/15 adopted Fees and Charges Schedule, the City imposes a $2.00 fee for non-library members to use the public internet computers.  This has been considered in the development of the Library Services 2016/17 draft budget.

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

Nil.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

This proposal aligns with the City of Busselton Strategic Community Plan 2013 (revised 2015) Key Goal Area 1 of a Caring and inclusive community

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

An assessment of the potential implication of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk assessment framework.  No risks of medium rating or above were identified for the Policy changes detailed in this report.

 

CONSULTATION

 

Public notice has been given for the implementation of the Council’s Schedule of Adopted Fees and Charges 2016/17.

 

Significant consultation was conducted to develop all aspects of the City of Busselton Social Plan 2012-2020 when it was first adopted by Council in 2012 with further consultation conducted during 2015 when it was reviewed to become the City of Busselton Social Plan (2015-2025). In particular for the Youth Services Sector, Officers consulted the City’s Youth Advisory Council and relevant government departments, agencies and groups who work with young people in our local community.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

Internet Use within the Busselton and Dunsborough Public Libraries Policy

The new $2.00 charge for non-library members to use the public internet computers within Busselton and Dunsborough libraries has already been adopted by Council in the 2016/17 Schedule of Fees and Charges. This fee was included to encourage travelers and tourists to use their own devices instead of the public PCs which are in high demand for study and other essential services by local residents. This report updates point 1. in the corresponding Policy: Internet Use within the Busselton and Dunsborough Public Libraries to incorporate a requirement for non-library members to purchase a ‘Guest Pass.’

 

Youth Policy

The current Youth Policy outlines issues associated with youth affairs, and broadly how the City will determine its role and/or involvement in issues affecting young people.  The Council endorsed City of Busselton Social Plan (2015-2025) identifies current key issues and a series of actions for the City’s Youth Sector. For each action a lead agency is identified and who the lead agency will partner with to achieve each action. The role of City is therefore clearer in the Social Plan as opposed to the current Youth Policy, with the issues outlined the Youth Policy also being outdated. The Youth Policy could be updated to reflect the key issues in the Social Plan, however this is deemed unnecessary. Officer’s therefore recommend the Youth Policy is revoked on the basis that the City of Busselton Social Plan (2015-2025) now supersedes it.

 

CONCLUSION

 

Officers recommend that the Council adopts the amended Policy 077 - Internet Use Within The Busselton and Dunsborough Public Libraries’ and revokes the current Policy 067 – ‘Youth.’

 

OPTIONS

 

Council may determine one or more of the following:

 

1.    Not to amend Policy 077- Internet Use Within The Busselton and Dunsborough Public Libraries’ on the basis that the $2.00 fee for non-library members to use the public computers be reviewed, and/or

2.    Policy 067 - ‘Youth’ be updated to reflect the City of Busselton Social Plan (2015-2025).

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Should the Officer Recommendation be endorsed the relevant changes will be made to the associated Policies immediately.

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council:

 

1)       Adopts amended Policy 077 – ‘Internet Use Within The Busselton and Dunsborough Public Libraries’ as attached;

 

2)       Revokes Policy – 067 ‘Youth’ on the basis that it has been superseded by the City of Busselton Social Plan (2015-2025);

 


Council

13

27 July 2016

10.1

Attachment a

Youth Policy

 


 


 


 


 


Council

17

27 July 2016

10.1

Attachment b

Use of Internet Policy

 

 

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­077                         Internet Use within the Busselton and Dunsborough                                        V8 Current

                                Public Libraries

 

PURPOSE

 

In response to developing technology and the changing needs of the community, the Busselton and Dunsborough Public Libraries endeavour to satisfy the education, information, recreation and cultural needs of the community by providing electronic access to relevant and up-to-date information resources.

 

SCOPE

 

Busselton and Dunsborough Public Libraries provide free Internet access to all library members.

 

POLICY CONTENT

 

1.      Non Library members may purchase a “Guest Pass” and will be charged in accordance with the Council’s Schedule of Fees and Charges.

 

2.      Printing from the Internet is available and will be charged in accordance with the Council’s Schedule of Fees and Charges.

 

3.      Latecomers will forfeit the unused portion of reserved time.  If a user is more than fifteen (15) minutes late for a booking, they may forfeit the entire booked period.

 

4.      All users for the service, excluding accessing the Library catalogues, must read and agree to the Busselton and Dunsborough Public Libraries “Conditions of Public Access – Internet Use”.

 

5.      Supervision of a child’s access to the Internet is the responsibility of the parent or guardian.  A parent or guardian must read the “Conditions of Public Access – Internet Use”.

6.      The Library does not take any responsibility for technical problems in accessing sites on the Internet.  The Library cannot guarantee the Internet will remain operational at all times, and if down-time occurs, the user will lose their booked time.

 

7.      A maximum of two public users per Internet computer is allowed at any one time.

 

8.      Due to the problem of computer viruses, NO outside software programs may be used in the library computers.

 

9.      Users are not permitted to modify the installed hardware of software in any way.

 

10.   As with all formats of information, patrons must respect copyright laws and licensing agreements and abide by general rules of acceptable Internet conduct.  Acts of behaviour which may jeopardise a source’s files, or behaviour which may jeopardise the Library account or access to resources will result in revocation of Internet privileges at the Library.

 

11.   The Library cannot be held responsible for the security or privacy of content left on the Internet by users.  It is the user’s responsibility to remove any content at the completion of a booked session.

 

 

 

12.   The following disclaimer applies to the Libraries Public Internet Access Facility.

 

a)    The City of Busselton has no control over the information accessed through the Internet and cannot be held responsible for its content.

 

b)    A person must not use a library computer to transmit, obtain possession of, demonstrate, advertise or request the transmission of an article knowing it to contain objectionable material (WA Censorship Act 1996, s101).  The city of Busselton is not responsible for any access points reached.

 

c)    A person must not use a computer service to transmit restricted material to a minor (WA Censorship Act 1996, s3).  Supervision or restriction of a minor’s access is the responsibility of the parent or guardian.

 

d)    The City of Busselton does not guarantee or accept any liability for the information’s accuracy, authoritativeness, timeliness or usefulness for a particular purpose.  The City of Busselton shall have no liability for any direct or indirect or consequential damages related to the use of the information contained therein.

 

Policy Background

 

Policy Reference No. – 077

Owner Unit – Libraries

Originator – Manager, Information Services

Policy approved by – Council

Date Approved – 13/12/2006

Review Frequency – As required

Related Documents – N/A

Background / History – Implemented 27 August 1997

 

 

History

 

Council Resolution

Date

Information

 

 

Review June 2016 to include a “Guest Pass”

Version 8

C1103/072

9 March 2011

Reviewed by Council.  No changes made.

C0612/375

13 December 2006

New policy 077/03 to replace former 077/02 for more efficient method of registering use and the removal of operational information.
Version 7

C018/444

22 August 2001

Implementation of the provision of free access to the internet.

Version 6

C011/037

24 January 2001

Fees and charges levels removed as dealt with during budgeting process.

Version 5

C9911/507

10 November 1999

Student discount approved.

Version 4

 

28 August 1999

New fees and charged inserted into policy.

Version 3

C995/0208

26 May 1999

New policy to include access to email facilities from library computers.

Version 2

C978/330

27 August 1997

Date of Implementation.

Version 1

 


Council                                                                                      21                                                                        27 July 2016

10.2           Policy and Legislation Committee - 21/06/2016 - PROPOSED CITY OF BUSSELTON CEMETERIES AMENDMENT LOCAL LAW 2016

SUBJECT INDEX:

Local Laws

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Corporate Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Legal Services

REPORTING OFFICER:

Legal Services Coordinator - Cobus Botha

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Finance and Corporate Services - Matthew Smith

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Proposed Cemeteries Amendment Local Law 2016  

 

This item was considered by the Policy and Legislation Committee at its meeting on 21 June 2016, the recommendations from which have been included in this report. 

 

PRÉCIS

 

Following gazettal of the City of Busselton Cemeteries Local Law 2015 (Cemeteries Local Law) the Joint Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation (JSC) notified the City that a penalty imposed under clause 9.1 of the Cemeteries Local Law is inconsistent with the Cemeteries Act 1986 (Cemeteries Act) and consequently required amendment of the local law to resolve the issue. Council subsequently resolved to authorise the preparation and advertising of the proposed City of Busselton Cemeteries Amendment Local Law 2016 (Amendment Local Law). The purpose of this report is for Council to consider submissions received in relation to the proposed Amendment Local Law and to consider whether to make the proposed Amendment Local Law pursuant to section 3.12 of the Local Government Act 1995 (Act).

 

It is recommended that Council resolve to make the proposed Amendment Local Law.

 

BACKGROUND

 

On 11 November 2015 Council resolved to make the Cemeteries Local Law which was subsequently gazetted on 10 December 2015 and came into operation 14 days after its publication in the Government Gazette.

 

The JSC, which is a committee of state politicians from both houses of the Western Australian Parliament, has delegation from Parliament to scrutinize and recommend the disallowance of local laws to the Parliament of Western Australia.  Under the above mentioned delegation, the JSC reviewed the Cemeteries Local Law following gazettal thereof and advised the City that, although section 55(1)(p) of the Cemeteries Act limits the further fine for a continued contravention of a local law to $20 for every day or part of a day during which the offence has continued, clause 9.1 of the Cemeteries Local law specifies a maximum penalty of $50 for such an offence; resulting in this provision of the Cemeteries Local Law being inconsistent with the Cemeteries Act. As a consequence the JSC requested Council to give certain undertakings in relation to the Cemeteries Local Law, which resulted in Council resolving on 9 March 2016 as follows:

 

That the Council:

 

1.    Provides, in relation to the City of Busselton Cemeteries Local Law 2015, the following undertaking to the Joint Standing Committee on Delegated Legislated:

 

a)         To amend by no later than 25 August 2016 clause 9.1 of the local law by replacing the amount of $50 with the amount of $20;

b)        Not to enforce the continuing fine under clause 9.1 of the local law until it has been amended in accordance with resolution 1(a) above; and

c)         Where the local law is made publicly available, whether in hard copy or electronic form, ensure that the law is accompanied by a copy of these undertakings.

 

2.    Commences the law-making process for amending the City of Busselton Cemeteries Local Law 2015, the purpose and effect of the amendment local law being as follows:

 

Purpose: To amend clause 9.1 of the City of Busselton Cemeteries Local Law 2015 to ensure   consistency with the Cemeteries Act 1986.

 

Effect: Replacement of the penalty $50 for a continuing offence under clause 9.1 of the City of Busselton Cemeteries Local Law 2015 with a penalty of $20 to achieve consistency with the relevant provisions under the Cemeteries Act 1986.

 

3.    Authorises the CEO to carry out the law-making procedure under section 3.12(3) of the Local Government Act 1995, by –

 

(i)            giving Statewide public notice and local public notice of the proposed amendment of the local law; and

(ii)           giving a copy of the proposed amendment local law and public notice to the Minister for Local Government.

 

4.    That the CEO, after the close of the public consultation period, submit a report to the Council on any submissions received on the proposed amendment of the local law to enable the Council to consider the submissions made and to determine whether to make an amendment local law in accordance with section 3.12(4) of the Act.

 

Pursuant to abovementioned Council resolution the City provided the requested undertakings to the JSC, gave Statewide and local public notice of the proposed Amendment Local Law and provided the Minister for Local Government and Communities with a copy of the public notice and proposed Amendment Local Law.

 

The proposed Amendment Local Law is now referred to Council for consideration to resolve whether or not to make the proposed Amendment Local Law. 

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

The procedure for making an amendment local law is the same as the procedure for making a local law. The procedure for making local laws is set out in section 3.12 of the Act and Regulation 3 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996.

 

In terms of section 3.12(4) of the Act Council is to consider any submissions made and may make the local law as proposed or make a local law that is not significantly different from what was originally proposed. A decision to make a local law has to be supported by an absolute majority of the Council. 

 

If Council resolve to make the proposed Amendment Local Law then the process required under section 3.12(5) and (6) of the Act needs to be carried out.  Section 3.12(5) requires that the local law be published in the Government Gazette and a copy be provided to the Minister. Section 3.12(6) requires that after the local law has been published in the Government Gazette, the City must give local public notice stating the title of the local law, summarising the purpose and effect of the local law and advising that copies of the local law may be inspected at or obtained from the City offices.

 

In accordance with section 3.14 of the Act the Amendment Local Law will come into operation 14 days after publication in the Government Gazette.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

None.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

Costs associated with the advertising and gazettal of the proposed Amendment Local Law will come from the legal budget. These costs are unlikely to exceed $2,000 and there are sufficient funds in the legal budget for this purpose. Making and implementing the proposed Amendment Local Law should not have any other financial implications for the City.

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

Abovementioned expenses will not impact on the City’s Long-term Financial Plan.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The proposal aligns with the City of Busselton Strategic Community Plan 2013 as follows:

 

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

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

The proposed Amendment Local Law does not involve any significant changes from current practices and is therefore considered low risk with no risks identified as “medium” or greater.

 

CONSULTATION

 

The proposed Amendment Local Law was advertised publicly in both local and state wide newspapers for a minimum of 6 weeks in accordance with the requirements under section 3.12(3)(a) of the Act. No public submissions were received.

 

The proposed Amendment Local Law was also given to the Minister for Local Government and Communities for consideration and comment.  Except for minor drafting changes, the Department of Local Government and Communities, who responded on behalf of the Minister, did not require any variations to the proposed Amendment Local Law.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

Section 55 of the Cemeteries Act provides local governments with the heads of power to make local laws that are necessary or convenient for the purposes of this act. In terms of Section 55(1)(p) a local law may provide that contravention of a local law constitutes an offence and provide for penalties not exceeding a fine of $500 and, if the offence is a continuing one, to a further fine not exceeding $20 for every day or part of a day during which the offence has continued.

 

Clause 9.1 of the Cemeteries Local Law, which was made in accordance with the provisions of Section 55(1)(p) of the Cemeteries Act, specifies the further fine for a continuing offence as “not exceeding $50 for every day or part of a day during which the offence has continued”. The amount of $50 (instead of $20 as prescribed under the act) is a typographical error and clearly inconsistent with the relevant provisions of the Cemeteries Act.  In order to rectify this error the amount of $50 in clause 9.1 of the Cemeteries Local Law must be replaced with $20. No other amendments to the local law are required as a consequence of this change.

 

The proposed amendment is consistent with the undertakings provided by the City to the JSC. It is therefore recommended that Council resolve to make the proposed Amendment Local Law.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The proposed Amendment Local Law will achieve consistency between the relevant provisions of the Cemeteries Local Law and the Cemeteries Act and avoid disallowance of the Cemeteries Local Law by Parliament.

 

OPTIONS

 

Cognisant of the undertakings given by Council to the JSC to effect the proposed amendment and given the matter has previously been considered by Council and obtained unanimous support, it is considered that Council have no other option than adopting the Officer Recommendation.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

If Council resolve to make the proposed Amendment Local Law, the local law will be gazetted and will come into operation 14 days after publication. The timeframe for completion of the gazettal process is approximately thirty days from the date of the Council resolution.

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

ABSOLUTE MAJORITY DECISION OF COUNCIL REQUIRED

That the Council:

 

1.    Resolves to make the City of Busselton Cemeteries Amendment Local Law 2016 in accordance with section 3.12(4) of the Local Government Act 1995.

 

2.    Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to carry out the processes required to make the City of Busselton Cemeteries Amendment Local Law 2016 in accordance with section 3.12(5) and section 3.12(6) of the Local Government Act 1995.

 


Council

21

27 July 2016

10.2

Attachment a

Proposed Cemeteries Amendment Local Law 2016

 

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1995

CEMETERIES ACT 1986

City of Busselton

Cemeteries Amendment Local Law 2016

Under the powers conferred by the Local Government Act 1995, the Cemeteries Act 1986 and under all other powers enabling it, the Council of the City of Busselton resolved on [insert date] to make the following local law.

1. Title

This is the City of Busselton Cemeteries Amendment Local Law 2016.

2. Commencement

This local law commences on the 14th day after the day on which it is published in the Government Gazette.

3. Principal Local Law

This local law amends the City of Busselton Cemeteries Local Law 2015 as published in the Government Gazette of 10 December 2015.

4. Clause 9.1 amended

Clause 9.1 of is amended by deleting “$50.00” and replacing it with “$20.00”.

--------

Dated: [insert date]

The Common Seal of the City of Busselton was affixed by authority of a resolution of the Council in the presence of—

 

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­_______________________________________

GRANT DOUGLAS HENLEY

 Mayor

 

 

 

_______________________________________

MICHAEL STEPHEN LEE ARCHER

Chief Executive Officer

----------------------

 


Council                                                                                      31                                                                        27 July 2016

10.3           Policy and Legislation Committee - 21/06/2016 - POLICY: LEASES OF CITY LAND AND BUILDINGS

SUBJECT INDEX:

Leasing

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Finance and Corporate Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Property Services

REPORTING OFFICER:

Director, Finance and Corporate Services - Matthew Smith

Property Management Coordinator - Sharon Woodford-Jones

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Finance and Corporate Services - Matthew Smith

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Draft Leases of City Land and Buildings Policy  

 

This item was considered by the Policy and Legislation Committee at its meeting on 21 June 2016, the recommendations from which have been included in this report. 

 

PRÉCIS

 

There is currently no formal Council policy that covers the leasing of City owned and controlled land. City officers have prepared a policy which seeks to guide leasing practices to ensure consistency and transparency. This report outlines the rationale behind that policy and seeks its endorsement and adoption.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The City’s property portfolio comprises a mixture of land and buildings consisting of freehold ownership and reserves vested by management order or leased from the Crown on a long term basis to the City.  The City leases property to a variety of lessees, including individuals, not for profit organisations, sporting and community groups, agencies and organisations providing essential services as well as commercial entities.  Prominent examples of buildings and land currently part of this portfolio are the Busselton Community Resource Centre – a public building comprising a mixture of office premises and meeting rooms for occasional hire and the Locke Estate – 16 campsites leased to community groups for specific purposes.  There are numerous ovals and sporting facilities as well as buildings leased to not for profit organisations for a variety of purposes.  The City also have existing leasehold arrangements with commercial lessees on the Busselton foreshore and as the Busselton and Dunsborough foreshores redevelopment progresses, more commercial and/or mixed use ventures are expected. 

 

A number of policies exist which impact on the use of land and buildings such as the Commercial Hire Sites Policy and the Trading in Public Places Policy but there is no policy which deals specifically with the granting of exclusive possession for a fixed term in the form of a lease.  The same can be said of the approach to ongoing management of lessees and licensees and the method of assessing requests for renewal.

 

A uniform and transparent approach to leasing City owned or managed land and buildings will give clear direction and guidance to all those involved and affected.  Council decisions have generally established a consistent approach and a move towards standardisation of terms and conditions; the proposed Leasing Policy (the Policy) seeks to capture and reinforce this. 

 


 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

In accordance with Section 2.7(2)(b) of the Local Government Act 1995 (LGA) it is the role of the Council to determine the Local Government’s policies.  The Council has proposed to do this on a recommendation of a Committee it has established in accordance with Section 5.8 of the Act.

 

The Land Administration Act 1997 (WA) governs management of Crown Land.  The City is responsible for the care, control and management of land reserved by the Minister for Lands under the Land Administration Act 1997.  The City manages land in accordance with Management Orders made under section 46 of the Act which may include a power to lease or licence the whole or a part of the land.  Any proposal to lease or licence land may not proceed without the prior written approval from the Minister. 

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

Policy 019 Building Insurance deals with the provision of insurance by the City and requirements for reimbursements due from lessees of City buildings.

 

The Building Asset Management Plan is a framework for determining the extent to which existing buildings (which would include leased buildings or buildings constructed on leased land) should be maintained.  It will be referred as a guide when assessing and negotiating the maintenance provisions in a lease and, in certain circumstances, could impact on the term to be granted.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

There are financial implications associated with individual leases.  However, there are not any additional financial implications for the draft policy as it largely reflects the existing practices of the City in relation to leasing.

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

Nil

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The adoption of this policy is consistent with the following Strategic Community Plan objectives:

 

§ Key Goal Area 2 - Infrastructure assets are well maintained and responsibly managed to provide for future generations

 

§ Key Goal Area 6 – A Council that engages with its community and makes responsible decisions, respecting communities’ needs and aspirations, and in particular Strategic Community Objective 6.2 “Governance systems that deliver responsible, ethical and accountable decision making”

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the Officer Recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk assessment framework. No risks were found where the residual risk, once controls have been identified, were considered to be ‘medium’ or greater.

 


 

CONSULTATION

 

Whilst there has been no specific consultation with the community in relation to the proposed Leasing Policy, it reflects the Council’s general approach to leasing and lease management and in the main seeks to formalise this.  The policy also endeavours to address some of the concerns that have been expressed by some groups associated with relatively recent community group lease renewals regarding the duration of the lease and security of tenure.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

There are many variables associated with the leasing of land and buildings. The Policy proposed is designed to encompass the majority of issues encountered and provide comprehensive guidance and consistency of approach. 

 

The Policy therefore includes the following:

 

Leasing principles

 

The Policy contains a standard set of principles to be applied when assessing a proposal from either a potential not for profit or commercial lessee.  The criteria and factors for consideration are not designed to be exhaustive but will guide Council and officers in the assessment of the appropriateness of a lease and any specific terms and conditions applicable in the circumstances.  Matters such as overall community benefit and the improvement to sporting, recreational and cultural amenity will feature in this process.  Detailing the factors that may be relevant to a decision provides the framework for both the form of a request for a lease and its assessment. 

 

Criteria

 

Potentially, there are a wide range of issues that Council will want to consider when deciding whether to enter into a lease and the Policy therefore identifies those that could apply depending on the type of lessee, the duration of the lease and the nature of the proposed use.   The Policy reflects that certain criteria will apply in every case regardless of the type of lessee but also identifies those that are specifically relevant to not for profit/community organisations and commercial lessees. 

 

The Duration of a Lease

 

The policy distinguishes between commercial and non-commercial lessees and provides that the term of a lease to a not for profit, sporting or community organisation will generally be for a period of 5 years with an option (exercisable by the lessee) of the grant of a further 5 years.  This is reflective of the term of the majority of the City’s existing community group leases.  The length of term is intended to ensure a level of certainty of tenure for community groups to enable forward planning and associated expenditure, while ensuring the City can still review arrangements every 10 years to ensure the intended community benefit is still being achieved.  

 

There may, however, be occasions where a community group is well established and/or has made a significant capital investment to a building in which case a longer term might be justified.  The Policy provides for this and also states that the overall benefit to the community which the lessee provides will be a factor in determining whether a longer term lease should be granted.

 

The Policy provides for the ability for the City to grant a longer term via a 10 year initial term plus a 10 year option.  In these circumstances, it is intended that the 10 year option would provide the City as lessor with the opportunity to review the lease after 10 years and make minor changes to leased area or terms that might be necessary for the benefit of the community while still giving the community group lessee the guarantee of up to a 20 year lease term.

The policy also provides for longer term for leases that relate to the provision of emergency and essential services.

 

The duration of a commercial lease is for more variable and dependent on the situation and individual negotiations. 

 

CONCLUSION

 

The policy is designed to provide a framework for leasing and to guide Council and officers in decision making.  It is intended to provide a balance between the needs of the community and the City’s responsibilities for the upkeep, appropriate usage and protection of City land and property assets. The principles in the policy are largely reflective of the established approaches and practices of the City in relation to leasing of property.  It is recommended that the Council adopt the Leasing Policy.

 

OPTIONS

 

Council can decide not to adopt the proposed Leasing Policy or to make changes to the policy.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

The Leasing Policy is made upon adoption by Simple Majority resolution of Council.  The City’s Policy Manual will be updated to include it within 14 days of the resolution.

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 


That the Council adopts the Leases of City Land and Buildings Policy:

 

 

Leases of City Land and Buildings

V1 Draft

 

1.            PURPOSE

The City’s land and buildings are an important resource for the community and should be managed in a manner that reflects the goals and aspirations of the City’s Strategic Community Plan to ensure there is a good range and quality of services and facilities available to the community.

 

The purpose of this policy is to provide a framework and methodology to facilitate responsible and effective utilisation of City owned and controlled land and buildings in a consistent manner that achieves maximum community benefit.

 

2.            SCOPE

This policy applies to any grant of a right of exclusive of land or buildings within the City of Busselton district, being either land owned outright by the City of Busselton or land owned by the Crown and managed by the City.  It does not cover licences for occasional or short term hire or non-exclusive use of Council property (such as the hire of rooms or halls for a day or the hire of sporting grounds for limited periods). 

3.            DEFINITIONS

 

A Lease is an agreement in which the Landlord (or Lessor) agrees to give the Tenant (or Lessee) the exclusive right to occupy land for a specific term.

 

A Licence is a contractual right for the Licensee to carry out a permitted activity on land or within a building without the right of exclusive occupation. 

4.            RELEVANT LEGISLATION AND POLICY

The Land Administration Act 1997 (WA) governs leases on Crown Land.  The City is responsible for the care, control and management of land reserved by the Minister for Lands under the Land Administration Act 1997.  The City manages land in accordance with management orders made under section 46 of the Act which may include a power to lease or licence the whole or a part of the land.  Any proposal to lease or licence land may not proceed without the prior written approval from the Minister. 

 

The Local Government Act 1995 governs all systems and operations of local governments in Western Australia. The City is bound by specific conditions under this Act with regard to the disposal of property.  Section 3.58 of the Act provides that a local government can only dispose of property by public auction, public tender or by undertaking the local public notice procedure set out in section 3.58(3).  In this context, disposing of property means to ‘sell, lease or otherwise dispose or, whether absolutely or not’, but does not include licensing.

 

However, there are a number of exemptions to these requirements set out in regulation 30 of the Local Government (Functions & General) Regulations 1996.  These include:

 

·    Where property is to be disposed to not for profit, charitable, benevolent, religious, cultural, educational, recreational or sporting organisations; and

·    If the property is to be occupied for a period of less than two (2) years and the agreement does not give exclusive possession.

The City of Busselton Strategic Community Plan 2013 sets out the community goals, aspirations and objectives for the next ten (10) years.  It is reviewed every four (4) years. Any proposals for leasing or licencing property within the City of Busselton will be required to fit within the key goals and objectives outlined in the plan. 

 

The Building Asset Management Plan is a framework for determining the approach to building maintenance (which includes leased buildings or buildings constructed on leased land).  Where relevant, it may guide the maintenance provisions in a lease and, in certain circumstances, could impact on the term to be granted.

5.            LEASING PRINCIPLES

 

5.1          The provision of benefits to the community through leasing

 

Leasing should support the development of healthy communities and, where appropriate, promote positive social, economic and environmental outcomes. Factors that may be taken into account in assessing a report to lease include, but are not limited to, the following:

Community

 

·    Consideration of benefits to the community;

·    Promotion of public health and wellbeing;

·    Improvement of sporting, recreational and cultural facilities;

·    Protection of public land values; and

·    Any other impacts on social, economic and environmental outcomes.

 

Commercial

·    Attracting investment and enhancement of an amenity (e.g. Busselton and Dunsborough foreshores);

·    Creation of employment;

·    Promotion of tourism;

·    Economic return; and

·    Impacts on social, economic and environmental outcomes

5.2          Governance that meets ethical and statutory standards

 

Consideration must be given to the purpose of the City entering into a lease and whether it provides for the effective control and management of the land, building and/or facility.

 

The following are factors that may be relevant to Council’s assessment of a proposal:

 

·    The ability, in terms of experience and competence, of the prospective tenant to fund, resource and manage the lease over the lease term;

·    The potential opportunities for future utilisation of the asset;

·    The existence of any statutory restrictions or implications for heritage or conservation value of the asset;

·    The extent and current use of the land proposed to be leased and the impact on adjoining land;

·    Whether the purpose of the lease and activities proposed meet the objectives of Council strategies and initiatives;

·    Whether the proponent proposes a capital works programme that is compatible with the authorised purpose and the Council’s vision for the land or facility;

·    The overall financial viability of the proposal;

·    The outcome of any consultation processes if considered necessary;

·    Any potential risks to the City and/or the Community of entering into the arrangement; and

·    Whether the proposal achieves the highest and best use of the land or facility.

6.            LEASES TO NOT FOR PROFIT, SPORTING AND COMMUNITY ORGANISATIONS

 

6.1          Criteria

 

In addition to the generic governance factors listed in section 5.2, the following are criteria that should be applied to the assessment of a proposed lease.  The outcome of that assessment would assist in determining the terms and conditions of the lease.

 

·    The aims and objectives of the organisation as expressed in its Constitution;

·    The history and experience in the area of activity expressed in the aims and objectives;

·    The length of time the organisation has been active in the district and/or its connection with the community;

·    The services offered to the community;

·    Whether there are other organisations nearby offering the same or similar services and the demand for such services;

·    The costs and expenses Council would incur for maintenance and other outgoings if it did not lease the land or building;

·    Whether the organisation is able to generate an income from the premises and if so whether that income is used for the leased premises only or the services to the local community;

·    Financial viability and the potential to be self-funded through membership and social activities;

·    The ability to obtain insurance for public liability, building and contents;

·    The ability to provide at least one year’s accounts and any other financial information considered appropriate;

·    Good governance practices including annual general meeting and appropriate policies and procedures;

·    The ability to enter into regular communication with the broader community where appropriate; and

·    A program of social and/or community activities and events for members, the broader community and visitors to the district.

7.            DURATION OF LEASE

 

7.1          Not for Profit, Sporting and Community Organisations

 

The usual or standard length of lease term for leases to not for profit, sporting and community organisations would generally be for a period of five (5) years with an option for the lessee to extend the term by a further five (5) years subject to being in compliance with lease obligations.  By offering a five (5) year term with a five (5) year option the intention is to find the balance between the need for the community group lessee to have security of tenure and thus be able to effectively run its services and facilities for the benefit of the community and the obligation on the City to ensure that community resources are utilised in an appropriate and effective manner.  A review of tenure arrangements every ten (10) years enables the City to ensure that community land continues to be effectively and appropriately used and sufficient community benefit is being achieved and provides an opportunity to review lease terms to ensure they are current.

There may be circumstances where it would be appropriate to offer a lease term to a not for profit, sporting or community organisation which is longer than five (5) years with a five (5) year option.  In those circumstances lease terms would usually not exceed twenty-one (21) years, which is usually the maximum period for which a reserve vested for community purposes can be leased in accordance with the usual terms of a reserve management order.  The factors which would support the granting of a community group lease for a longer overall term than ten (10) years in total include:

·    The record of the relevant community group and in particular whether it has an established history of providing quality services and/or facilities to the community from the leased land;

·    Whether the community group has paid for or substantially contributed to the construction of the buildings and/or facilities on the leased land and/or whether they have made or it is proposed that they will make a significant capital investment in those buildings and/or facilities;

·    The extent of the membership of the community group and/or the number of persons utilising the services and/or facilities on the leased land; and

·    The quality of the governance of the community organisation and its compliance history and/or demonstrated capacity to comply with lease obligations.

The City may elect to grant a longer term in the form of up to a ten (10) year lease with up to a ten (10) year option.  An option in these circumstances may be subject to additional criteria that could enable the City to review such things as the leased area and/or rent and other terms to ensure that they are appropriate to meet the needs and best interests of the community at that time, while not altering the fundamental nature of the lease. 

There are circumstances in which community groups may be given leased terms which are less than ten (10) years.  This will be appropriate in the circumstances where a shorter or different lease term is consistent with the business plan or overall management requirements of a larger facility such as in the case of the Busselton Community Resource Centre and the ArtGeo Old Court House Cultural Complex.

7.2          Renewal of Lease to Not for Profit, Sporting and Community Organisations

 

The following factors are relevant when the City is considering whether or not to grant a renewal of an expiring lease to a not for profit, sporting or community organisation:

 

·    The extent of compliance by the lessee throughout the term, including whether the lessee has properly maintained the premises as required and/or completed any required works;

·    Whether the lessee has demonstrated good governance practices throughout the term of their lease;

·    Whether demand by other groups for access to land or premises has increased or decreased and whether it is appropriate for one organisation to continue to have exclusive use; and

·    The level of community benefit the lessee provides.

The principles and factors referred to in paragraph 7.1 are also relevant in considering the length of term granted where a community group lease is renewed.

 

7.3          State Government Agencies and Providers of Essential Services

 

Leases to State government agencies or organisations that provide essential services will generally be granted a longer term that is reflective of the nature of the services and facilities that these organisations provide.  The Lessee in such circumstances will generally take full responsibility under the lease for the construction and ongoing maintenance of the facility and associated outgoings and other costs.

 

Organisations within this category currently include St John’s Ambulance, the Volunteer Marine Rescue Service, the Department of Child Protection and Family Protection and the Department of Fire and Emergency Services (DFES). The nature of the service provided and the level of capital investment will be taken into consideration when determining the duration of a lease, noting that generally leases of reserve land generally cannot exceed twenty-one (21) years in length.

 

7.4          Commercial Leases

 

The term of Commercial leases will be negotiated on a case by case basis. 

8.            RENT AND OUTGOINGS

 

8.1          Not for Profit, Sporting and Community Organisation

 

Generally the City will charge a nominal rent, established each year as part of the fees and charges schedule, in relation to leases to not for profit, sporting and community organisation.  Leases of this type will generally require the lessee to meet the full cost of the building and facilities leased including construction, maintenance, utilities and insurance.

 

Where a building or facility is provided by the City and the City retains responsibility for maintenance and other outgoings, rents should be sufficient to meet or substantially contribute to the cost of such maintenance and outgoings including insurance.  The rent should also be sufficient to meet or contribute to the funding required for ongoing management in accordance with the relevant building asset management plan.

 

8.2          Commercial Leases

 

Rent and other payments associated with commercial leases will be negotiated on a case by case basis.

 

9.            FORM OF COMMUNITY GROUP LEASE

 

The City maintains a standard form Community Group lease that deals with a range of usual leasing matters such as payment of rent and outgoings, rent reviews, insurance requirements and payment of building insurance, permitted use, maintenance and repair, rights of access of other groups and other statutory and miscellaneous obligations.  The City’s standard community group lease will be used for all leases to not-for-profit, sporting and other community organisations.

 

Policy Background

Policy Reference No. -

Owner Unit – Property Services

Originator – Property Management Coordinator

Policy approved by – 

Date Approved –

Review Frequency – As Required

Related Documents –

 

History

 

Council Resolution

Date

Information

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Council

37

27 July 2016

10.3

Attachment a

Draft Leases of City Land and Buildings Policy

 


 


 


 


 


 

 


Council                                                                                      45                                                                        27 July 2016

11.             Planning and Development Services Report

11.1           AMENDMENT 22 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME 21 - TO REZONE LOT 41 (182) GEOGRAPHE BAY ROAD QUINDALUP FROM R12.5 TO R20 - CONSIDERATION FOR INITIATION

SUBJECT INDEX:

Town Planning Scheme Amendments

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Development Services and Policy

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Development Services and Policy

REPORTING OFFICER:

Manager, Development Services and Policy - Anthony Rowe

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Location of Subject Land

Attachment b    Scheme Amendment Map  

  

PRÉCIS

 

The City has received a request by the owner of the land located at 182 Geographe Bay Road, Quindalup to rezone the land from R12.5 to R20 for the purpose of accommodating four dwellings, rather than the maximum of two permissible with the existing zoning. Having considered the site and its context, officers are broadly supportive of the proposal.

 

The Council is requested to consider initiating the proposed Amendment for advertising. 

 

BACKGROUND

 

The City has received a request to consider rezoning the land located at 182 Geographe Bay Road to facilitate four dwellings instead of two dwellings as currently provided for by the Scheme.  To facilitate this will require an amendment to Scheme 21.

 

The subject land is as Lot 41 (182) Geographe Bay Road, Quindalup.

 

The site is 2,259 m2 in area, is vacant and largely cleared of vegetation.  It is zoned ‘Residential’ in Scheme 21 and coded R.12.5.  It is located in the Quindalup Special Character Area.

 

The present Quindalup Special Character Area policy and the minimum lot size required in the R12.5 coding limits development of the site to two dwellings.  The current policy however, allows if the original lot exceeds 2,400m2 three or more dwellings may be developed at the R12.5 density.  Given the average lot size required in R12.5 is 800m2, a lot above 2,400m2 would yield 3 dwellings.

 

The owner is proposing that it would be orderly and proper planning to re-code the land to R20 (average lot size 450m2) to enable 4 dwellings to be accommodated.

 

The proposal is to amend the Quindalup Special Character Area provision, at clause 1. (b) to read (addition proposed in bold) -

 

 (b)         The local government may only approve the development of three or more grouped

dwellings at a density not exceeding R12.5 on lots with a minimum area of 2,400m2,

except for Lot 41 on Diagram 23175, House 182 Geographe Bay Road, Quindalup , where the development of a maximum of four dwellings

may be approved.

 

The proposal also involves amending the Scheme map so that the R20 code applies to the lot.

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

The active statutes affecting this application include -

 

·    Planning and Development Act 2005;

·    Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015; and

·    City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21.

 

Planning and Development Act 2005

 

The Planning and Development Act 2005 (P&D Act) 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.

 

Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015

 

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 justifying this choice.  This Amendment is deemed to be a ‘standard’ amendment.

 

City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21.

 

The City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21 allocates the spatial arrangement of the area by the Scheme Map.  The Scheme text describes land uses, the residential densities (identified on the Map) by reference to the R–Codes or a development standard in certain areas, and it prescribes the development standards for works associated with land uses.

 

The Scheme establishes Special Character Areas which describe special controls that act in conjunction with the Scheme and the R-Codes.  The Quindalup Special Character Area is identified in the Scheme (at Schedule 4).

The pertinent provision is cl.1b in Schedule 4 which provides:

 

 (b)         council will only permit the construction of grouped housing development of three or more dwellings at a density not exceeding R12.5 on lots with a minimum area of 2,400m2

 

The Scheme also provides at cl. 5.3 (Special Application of Residential Design Codes) some limited circumstances that enable lots to be created less than indicated by the R-Codes classification shown on the Scheme map.  These provisions do not apply to the Special Character Areas such as Quindalup.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

·    State Planning Policy 3.1 Residential Design Codes of Western Australia

·    State Planning Policy 2.6  - Coastal Management

·    City of Busselton Local Planning Strategy (Draft, advertised 2015)

·    City of Busselton Local Planning Policy 3 – Special Character Areas and Visual Management Policy

 

State Planning Policy 3.1 Residential Design Codes of Western Australia

 

The Residential Design Codes (‘R-Codes’) address development standards as well as assigning density by prescribing the minimum and average lot sizes for the coded categories, ranging from R2 at the lowest through to R80 at the highest (note that there are denser codes, but the permissible density only increases for multiple dwellings – i.e. flats/apartments – but not for single houses or grouped dwellings – i.e. houses, villas, townhouses).

 

In areas coded R12.5 the R-Codes prescribe a minimum site area per dwelling of 700m2 and an average of 800m2.  In areas coded R20 it prescribes a minimum site area per dwelling of 350m2 and an average of 450m2.  The area taken by internal driveways servicing grouped dwellings are counted in the average of the site area, but not the minimum.

 

In the development of Lot 41 an internal driveway will be required. 

 

State Planning Policy 2.6 - Coastal Management

 

The purpose of this Policy (SPP2.6) is to provide guidance for decision-making within the coastal zone including managing development and land use change.  The policy in summary requires development to be setback 170m from the  ‘horizontal shoreline datum’ if not within an ‘infill’ area.

 

The subject land, whilst in a coastal location and only around 120m from the HSD, is clearly infill development.  The proposal is consistent with SPP 2.6.

 

City of Busselton Local Planning Strategy

 

The purpose of the Local Planning Strategy (LPS) is to set out the long term form (25 years) of the City and guide progressive amendments to the City’s development control framework; within the next ten years.  The LPS identifies the Busselton City Centre and the Dunsborough Town Centre as focal activity centres in the area.  The town of Dunsborough is planned to have an ultimate population of 20,000 people, to be accommodated through both consolidation and expansion of its urban area.

 

The Local Planning Strategy identifies urban/residential consolidation at the Dunsborough Town Centre and for an area extending up to Elmore Road; which is specifically identified for Urban Consolidation (medium+ density).  The area to the east of Elmore Road, including the subject land, is to be retained as low density.

 

City of Busselton Local Planning Policy 3 – Special Character Areas and Visual Management - 3B Quindalup Special Character Area Provisions

 

The Quindalup Special Character Area extends from Caves Road to Geographe Bay Road from east of Elmore Road through to Toby Inlet.

 

The background provided in the policy explains its reason:

 

Increasing pressures for higher density residential and further tourist developments in recent years have prompted the City to act (1993) to preserve the highly valued character of the Quindalup Strip.  Concerns with regard to the loss of special character have been particularly evident in the significant level of community reaction received to proposed re-zonings and subsequent developments within the Strip.

 

The subject land is in Precinct 2 within the Quindalup Special Character Area.

 

The description for Precinct 2 is an area “of a mixed blend of old and new housing styles”.  In other words there is no homogeneous built form.  The primary character elements are the building setbacks and the street side vegetation. Accordingly, the development controls in Precinct 2 describe a building set back of 10m from the street front and other provisions describe maintaining a heavily vegetated street line.

An important development control in the context of this amendment proposal is cl 3.3.2(d) in the Quindalup Special Character Area -

 

 (d)      A Residential Development Density of R12.5 will apply to all Group Housing developments involving three or more dwellings (i.e. minimum lot size of 2,100m²).

 

This Development Control suggests that when the policy originated, notwithstanding the ‘policy background’, a higher density in Sector 2 was envisaged to provide 3 dwellings from 2,100m2 instead of that described in the Scheme - 3 dwellings from 2,400m2 (using present day R-Codes lot sizes at R12.5).

 

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 Officer recommendation is consistent with community objective 5.2 of the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2013, which is: ‘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.  The implementation of the Officer Recommendation will involve adopting the Amendment for advertising. In this regard, there are no significant risks identified.

 

CONSULTATION

 

There is no requirement under the Planning and Development Act 2005 to advertise a scheme amendment prior to it being initiated by the Council.

 

As a standard amendment the Council’s decision to initiate the amendment and to confirm it as a standard amendment will cause it to be advertised for a period of 28 days.  As a preliminary requirement the proposed amendment will be referred to the EPA for 21 days.  The proposal is considered straightforward and does not affect a known EPA interest.  It is unlikely the EPA would require a formal environmental assessment.

 

Preliminary consultation with the State Department of Planning indicated broad support for the Amendment, subject to explicit coding (R20) being illustrated on the Scheme Map.  It should be noted, however, that the Department’s role in this respect is advisory only, and decision-making power rests with the Western Australian Planning Commission and Minister for Planning (although Department officers have some delegation from the Commission).

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

The City of Busselton Local Planning Policy 3 – Special Character Areas and Visual Management -3B Quindalup Special Character Area Provisions was created by the City in 1993 in response to a then perceived community desire to maintain the perception of the area at a low density.  It established a future development requirement for an average lot size of 800m2 and a 10m setback.  This was reflective of a low density expectation at the time.

 

The perception is an important element of consideration.  The Policy does not seek to place controls in the intensity of development at the site, ie open space to be retained.  Aerial photos indicate most lots have buildings (houses and outbuildings) distributed in no particular order (other than the front setback). The subject land has numerous buildings adjoining its side boundaries.  The development of the subject land would also not restrict any particular views or interfere with any consistent placement of buildings generally in the immediate area (the front set back will be retained).  The perception of low density, as it contributes to the locality character, is ostensibly determined from ones view from and along the street.  It is from this perspective that the fit of the amendment is to be compared, with the conscious purpose by which the Policy was created.

 

Orderly and proper planning

 

The Policy has not been substantially reviewed since its introduction, but in the period between then and now, the perception/expectation of what constitutes low density development and the public’s perception of what constitutes a high amenity environment has changed.

 

The 2015 draft Liveable Neighbourhoods, as an example, now identifies any coding less than R40 (average 220m2) to be low density – this is a higher density than current community expectations or even that presently marketed, but it is indicative of the trend.  Lots of 300m2 now represent the most common new allotment size created in Perth and now lots of 260m2 are not unusual.  The expectation of low density is heading toward smaller lot sizes.

 

In the context of the District, lots at 300m2 (R-Coded as R30) are considered to be ‘medium’ density and lots with an average size of 450m2 (R-Coded as R20 or less) are effectively a low density classification.

 

Since 2009, and since the Quindalup Special Character Area Provisions were introduced in 1993,  there have been 35 lots created in the area that are less than 700m2 and 33 of those lots are less than 550m2 in area.   This is notwithstanding the policy’s prescribed average lot size of 800m2 and a minimum of size of 700m2.

 

If the current Scheme policy was literally applied to the subject land, it could be developed as either one dwelling on a lot of 2,259m2, or two dwellings each having a lot of 1,129m2; a very low density outcome in the present context. 

 

The proposed amendment would result in four dwellings and would yield an average lot size of 569m2, this still a low density outcome and also a low density outcome compared to lots approved since 2009.

 

The draft local planning strategy whilst it recognised that the area west of Elmore is identified for medium + density as a consolidation of the urban area, the area east of Elmore is to be retained as existing urban which is to say increasing the urban density will not be proactively pursued, but it remains under a general recognition that consolidation will be necessary, if the Dunsborough township population targets are to be achieved.

 

The proposed amendment is considered to achieve both a contemporary expectation of low density and a more efficient use of the land, than a literal interpretation that the current policy may apply.  The proposed amendment is considered consistent with the principle of orderly and proper planning.

 


 

The appearance of land and buildings

 

All development in the Quindalup Special Control Area is subject to planning approval and notwithstanding the Quindalup Special Character Area Policy is somewhat dated; the objective to maintain a sense of openness and low density is clear and can still be used to guide the future development that would follow the amendment of the Scheme.

 

The setback of 10m along Geographe Bay Road and the street side vegetation are the notable character elements in the locality.  Other than this, there is no homogenous built form that might be identified to guide a future compatible character. 

 

The amendment will retain that the 10m set back will apply to the subject land.  Only one dwelling will face the street, as the frontage width needs to accommodate the access to the three other dwellings. No additional requirements are required to guide the future form of building on the subject land other than its maximum development of four dwellings as provided in the proposed amendment. 

 

Spot Rezoning

 

The proposed amendment is a ‘spot rezoning’ affecting only the subject land, rather than a comprehensive review that may apply to an area rather than a specific location.   There are persuasive arguments that can be made for ‘spot rezoning’

 

The advantage of ‘spot rezoning’ is it is responsive to opportunity, owner initiated, and can create a mix of development forms.  Its weakness is a lack of certainty and variations are often acceptable up to a point as a proportion of overall development; but after this point the variation may become the dominant character.  Determining this point can be subjective, uncertain, and once reached its adherence can be perceived as unfair for anyone who may seek a similar variation after that point. 

 

Comprehensive approaches, alternatively apply to areas rather than specific locations.   They can also seek a mix of development and promote choice by applying variable ratios, averages and minimums, but in doing so suffer the same problem as a spot zoning;  that at some point when too many have applied for the minimum, the next applicant would see their restriction as unfair.

 

A ‘comprehensive approach’ can have value where a mix is undesirable, i.e. where there is a particular homogeneous character to be protected, but otherwise the approach can be inflexible, often only achieves the lowest common denominator as its minimums represent site value optimisation and the only development pursued by the market place. It is slow to adapt to contemporary expectations.

 

Generally ‘spot rezonings’ can be acceptable where they are within the extent of a conscious purpose.  In this instance the spot zoning can be seen to align a formal development control affecting the subject land with that which has occurred since 1993 (35 lots). 

 

The outcome the proposed amendment would provide, remains within the conscious purpose of the locality, to maintain the perception of a low density environment.  This is because from public view points the street set back will be retained, only one dwelling will face the street, and the lots whilst not directly visible from the street, are sufficient in size to provide space between buildings and a sense of a low scale; that may be glimpsed from the street.

 


 

Infrastructure

 

There are no infrastructure restrictions that may affect the consideration of this proposal.  The subject land is serviced by two sewer junctions and has the capacity to be developed for more than one dwelling.

 

The subject land is an infill site and has access to mains water, power and the telecommunications network.

 

A proposal for four dwellings at the subject land is below the threshold for any specific traffic study.  Geographe Bay Road in the locality is not at capacity and it is not expected that the proposal would have any noticeable or adverse impact upon the road network.

 

CONCLUSION

 

Since the local planning policy for Quindalup was prepared there have been 35 allotments created in the area as a variation on the policy.  The amendment will provide certainty for the future development of the lot; that is comparative to accepted variations on the policy and the development that has occurred since 2009.

 

The proposed amendment will result in a more efficient use of the land but at the same time it remains within a contemporary expectation of low density and the conscious purpose of the local planning policy to retain the perception of the area as low density.

 

The proposal warrants proceeding to 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 modification(s) as required.

 

Officer assessment has not revealed any substantive issue or reasonable grounds that would support any of these options and it is considered that option 3 could be more appropriately considered following public consultation.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

The implementation of the Officer Recommendation would include advising the applicant of the Council resolution and referring the proposal to the Environmental Protection Authority, which will occur within one month of the resolution.


 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council:

 

a)         In pursuance of Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2005, adopts draft Amendment No. 18 to the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21 for public consultation for the purpose of:

 

i.          Rezoning Lot 41; and

 

ii.         Amending the Scheme map accordingly.

 

b)        In accordance with regulation 35(2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, it is the opinion of the Council that the draft Amendment is a ‘standard amendment’, for the following reason(s):

 

i.          The draft Amendment will have minimal impact on land in the Scheme area that is not the subject of the amendment; and

 

ii.         The draft Amendment will have no significant environmental, social, economic or governance impacts on land in the Scheme area.

 

c)         That, as the draft Amendment is consistent with Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2005, and Regulations made pursuant to that Act, that upon preparation of the necessary documentation the draft Amendment be referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). Upon receipt of a response from the EPA stating that the draft Amendment is not required to be subject to a formal environmental assessment, it be advertised for public consultation for a period of 42 days.  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.

 


Council

47

27 July 2016

11.1

Attachment a

Location of Subject Land

 

Location of Subject Land at Lot 41 Geographe Bay Road, Quindalup


Council

47

27 July 2016

11.1

Attachment b

Scheme Amendment Map

 


Council                                                                                      51                                                                        27 July 2016

11.2           DISPOSAL OF RESERVE 44384 (LOT 5016 (75) FORD ROAD, GEOGRAPHE) FOLLOWING CONSULTATION

SUBJECT INDEX:

Development/Planning Applications

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Development Services and Policy

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Development Services and Policy

REPORTING OFFICER:

Planning Officer - Stephanie Izzard

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Proposed Amalgamation and 'Exchange' Plan  

  

PRÉCIS

 

The Council is asked to provide its final support for the disposal of Reserve 44384 into private ownership. This matter has previously been considered by the Council at its meetings held on 10 July 2013 and 23 July 2014 where on both accounts it was resolved to support the disposal. This matter is brought before the Council for a final time as a resolution of the Council is required following the conclusion of consultation on the disposal of the reserve to finalise the disposal process. 

 

 BACKGROUND

 

This matter has previously been presented to the Council on the 10 July 2013 and again on the 23 July 2014. The matter was initially presented to the Council to obtain in principle support of the disposal of the reserve so that Officers could commence the disposal process.

 

Once in principle support was obtained from the Minister for Lands the matter was again presented to the Council on 23 July 2014 to obtain consent from the Council to commence advertising of the proposed disposal of the reserve and agree to the requirements for the disposal. At this meeting the Council resolved as follows:

 

1.         To dispose of Reserve 44384 to Mr Clark at 5% of the unimproved value of the land, with all costs of disposal and transfer to freehold being met by Mr Clark.

2.         That the valuation of Reserve 44384 accepted by the Minister of Land’s for the disposal of Reserve 44384 into the City’s ownership is considered a true indication of the unimproved value at the time of proposed disposition to Mr Clark.

3.         To seek the Minister of Land’s approval to dispose of Reserve 44384.

4.         That the transfer to Mr Clark in fee simple will be conditional upon:

a)        Mr Clark providing an upfront payment of $15,000 for the City to use to meet any costs associated with the disposal of Reserve 44384 and transfer in fee simple to Mr Clark, any unspent funds will be returned to Mr Clark;

b)         Mr Clark entering into a legal agreement with the City providing for:

i)    Amalgamation of Reserve 44384 with the northern portion of Lot 9500;

ii)   Ceding at no cost to the City a 10 metre wide strip along the southern boundary of Lot 9500;

iii) Engaging by Mr Clarke of a suitably qualified agent to manage the subdivision process;

iv) Transfer of Reserve 44384 into the sole ownership of Mr Clark;

v)   Indemnifying the City for costs that may be borne by the City; and

vi) Acknowledging that the legal agreement and transfer of Reserve 44384 into Mr Clark’s ownership is subject to public consultation and resolution of Council to support the method of disposal under Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995.

4.         To undertake community consultation of no less than 14 days inviting submissions regarding the intent of the City to dispose of Reserve 44384 to Mr Clark at the value of 5% of the unimproved value.

5.         To include the Rezoning of Reserve 44384 from ‘Recreation Reserve’ to ‘Residential R20’ in the next omnibus amendment to the new Local Planning Scheme No. 21.

 

A copy of the proposed amalgamation and ‘exchange’ outlined in the Council’s resolution above is provided at Attachment A. The reports previously presented to the Council on this matter and which more fully explain the background and context of the decision the Council is now being asked to make can be provided to Councillors on request.

 

Since this report was presented to the Council a legal agreement has been entered into between the City and Mr and Mrs Clark to facilitate the transfer of the reserve into their private ownership and enforce the conditions of the transfer imposed as part of the resolution of the Council provided above.

 

It is also noted that the rezoning of Reserve 44384 from “Reserve – Recreational” to “Residential” with a density of R20 was included as part of the Omnibus Amendment endorsed by Council at its meeting held on 9 March 2016 but as the Amendment is awaiting final endorsement by the Minister for Planning the zoning change has not yet occurred.

 

To facilitate the disposal of the reserve, the site has been purchased by the City from the Crown using the funds paid by Mr Clark to the City to facilitate the disposal of the Reserve. Subsequently, the City has also undertaken consultation on the disposal of the reserve in accordance with the Local Government Act 1995.

 

Following the conclusion of the advertising period this report is presented to the Council to outline the outcomes of this consultation period and obtain final endorsement before the reserve can be officially disposed of and transferred into the private ownership of Mr and Mrs Clark.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Reserve 44384 was vested to the local government by order, under the then Land Act 1996 with a designated purpose of “Public Recreation.”

 

The relevant Act in this matter is the Planning and Development Act 2005. Section 152 is the mechanism by which land, through the subdivision process, is vested to the Crown for public purpose/recreation. The authority to cancel or revoke a reserve and approve crown land to be transferred into fee simple is by the Minister for Lands (referred herein as ‘the Minister’) under Sections 50 and 51 of the Land Administration Act 1997.

 

The Crown Land and Administration & Registration Practice Manual July 2013 outlines the process for the disposal of surplus reserves/land created under Section 152 of the Planning and Development Act 2005. The Crown Land Administration and Registration Practice Manual states that funds from the disposal of reserves “should only be spent on capital improvements to recreation land in the vicinity of the land sold.” The requirements for the disposal of reserve under the manual are summarised below:

·        The local government seeks and obtains the Minister’s in-principle support to dispose the unwanted reserve;

·        Community consultation is undertaken (30 days informing the value and application of the proceeds) and considered by Council;

·        The Minister’s approval is sought and provided;

·        The land is transferred fee simple to the local government; 

·        The disposal to the local government is on the basis of 5% of unimproved market value, as advised by the Valuer General; and 

·        The Department of Lands is advised of the disposition of the proceeds.

 

Once the disposal of Reserve 44384 is approved and transferred to the ownership of the City, the provisions of the Local Government Act 1995 apply.

 

Broadly the procedure is consistent between the two documents.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

Development Control Policy 2.3: Public Open Space in Residential Area is the authority for the areas and attributes of land required as the provision of Public Open Space in residential areas. In residential areas it is typically a minimum of 8 - 10% of the gross subdivisible area that is to be given up, free of cost by the subdivider, and vested in the Crown under section 152 Planning and Development Act 2005) as a Reserve for Recreation. Note that land that is not developable by virtue of its environmental constraints does not form part of the gross subdivisible area and nor can it form part of the 8 – 10 % public open space allocation.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The applicant has paid the City $15,000 to cover the cost of the transfer of land as well any fees associated with the transfer. A portion of these monies has already been used to finance the purchase of the reserve from the Crown into the ownership of the City.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The recommendation of this report reflects Community Objective 5.2 of the Strategic Community Plan 2013, which is; “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 identifies ‘downside’ risks only.

 

Given the current condition and use of the land, the absence of community concern during the public advertising, and the fact the purpose of disposal as an ‘exchange’ was clearly indicated in that advertising, an adverse community concern about the disposal of the land, as a reputational risk, is low.

 

It should be noted that even if Reserve 44384 is transferred to the ownership of Mr Clark prior to the City completing the omnibus amendment to rezone Reserve 44384 from ‘Reserve for Recreation’ to

‘Residential’, the agreement with Mr Clark indemnifies the City from any potential injurious affection claim. 

 

CONSULTATION

 

The disposal of the reserve into the private ownership of Mr and Mrs Clark was advertised in accordance with the requirements of clause 3.58 Disposing of Property of the Local Government Act 1995. The disposal of the reserve was advertised for 14 days ending on 25 May 2016 and was advertised via a sign on site, notice in the local newspaper and on the City’s website, as well as a notice being displayed at the City’s Customer Information Centre and libraries.

Following the conclusion of the advertising period no submissions were received.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

As outlined in previous Council reports on the matter, Reserve 44384 is surplus public open space. The reserve is low lying and prone to inundation and relatively small, making it have little purpose as a recreation reserve. It has therefore been previously resolved by the Council to support the disposal of Reserve 44384.

 

This report finalises the process for the disposal of the reserve into private ownership and fulfill the requirements of the legal agreement entered into between the City and Mr and Mrs Clark.

 

CONCLUSION

 

It is recommended that the disposal of Reserve 44384 be finalised in accordance with the provisions outlined within the legal agreement entered into between the City and Mr and Mrs Clark.

 

OPTIONS

 

The Council could decide to retain the land in question, however, the land does not appear to provide any benefit to the community and that would clearly contrary to the expectations that have arisen from the previous two decisions made by the Council.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

The timeline for completion of this matter in relation to the transfer of the reserve into the private ownership of Mr and Mrs Clark is expected to be six to twelve months. Resolution of the zoning of the land, to designate it within a Residential zone will be subject to the timings of the Omnibus Amendment.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council resolve:

 

1.   To dispose of Reserve 44384 to Mr Clark at 5% ($4,000) of the unimproved value of the land, once the requirements of the legal agreement entered between the City and Mr Clark have been met.

 

2.   Authorise and sign the subdivision application to the Western Australian Planning Commission for the amalgamation of existing Lot 9005 and Lot 5016 (Reserve 44384). This application shall include the ceding of a 10 metre wide POS and drainage/landscape buffer to the City along the southern portion of the lot. 

 

3.   Once the transfer is complete, return any unspent funds from the $15,000 upfront payment made by Mr Clark to the City, to meet the costs associate with the transfer, back to Mr Clark.

 

4.   The $4,000 paid for the land to be used on capital improvements to recreation land in the vicinity of the site.

 


Council

53

27 July 2016

11.2

Attachment a

Proposed Amalgamation and 'Exchange' Plan

 


Council                                                                                      61                                                                        27 July 2016

11.3           SCHEME AMENDMENT 10 -  TRANSPORTABLE AND PREFABRICATED BUILDING CONTROLS

SUBJECT INDEX:

Town Planning Schemes and Amendments

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Development Services and Policy

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Development Services

REPORTING OFFICER:

Manager, Development Services and Policy - Anthony Rowe

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Ministerial Decision 27 April 2016  

  

PRÉCIS

 

On 25 November 2015 the City sought the Minister’s approval to amend Scheme 21 to introduce controls over ‘prefabricated buildings’, including the requirement for planning approval and the introduction of a development standard.

 

The City has since received the Minister’s decision (27 April 2016) to decline the City’s proposal for the control of ‘prefabricated buildings’, but as an alternative the Minister has offered new definitions and control over development meeting the description of Re-purposed Dwellings or Second–hand dwellings.

 

Council’s approval is sought to advertise a modified Scheme Amendment – Amendment 10 (AMD21/0010) incorporating the recommendations of the Minister made on 27 April 2016.

 

BACKGROUND

 

Council’s consideration is requested to the Minister’s offer to modify Scheme Amendment AMD21/0010 (18 December 2015) and proceed directly to public consultation. 

 

As background, Council resolved on 25 November 2015 to seek the Minister’s approval to amend its Scheme and introduce controls for transportable homes.  The Amendment was to include a new definition for prefabricated buildings incorporating transportable homes.  This would require that for all prefabricated buildings a planning approval would be required, across the whole of the District, and that it would be assessed against new development standards to be introduced into the Scheme (at Part 5).  It also provided discretion to consult with the community as part of the decision-making process.

 

It was also resolved by Council to include in the Amendment a prohibition on transportable buildings and prefabricated building constructions within the Port Geographe Development Plan Area.

 

On 3 May 2016, the City received the Minister’s decision (27 April 2016) to decline the City’s Amendment 10 prefabricated buildings, and this included the request to make transportable buildings/prefabricated buildings in the Port Geographe area a ‘prohibited’ classification of development.

 

Whilst the Minster has declined the City’s proposal (25 November 2015), the Minister has instead offered to the City the opportunity to introduce new definitions for Re-purposed Dwellings and Second–hand dwellings with associated development controls, and make it a requirement for such development to have planning approval prior to relocation.  It will remove development proposals meeting the description of either a Re-purposed Dwelling or a Second–hand dwelling from the current exemption given to Single houses that avoids, as a class of development, their need to obtain a planning approval.

The Minister’s offer is a substantive change to the City’s advertised draft amendment, and it will require the modified amendment to be re-advertised.

 

A copy of the Minister’s letter dated 27 April 2016 is attached (Attachment A).

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015

 

In the time between the Council’s decision to amend Scheme 21 and forwarding the Amendment to the Minister for approval, the new Regulations (Planning and Development Regulations (Local Planning Schemes) 2015, were gazetted.

 

The new Regulations provide procedures for Scheme amendments and importantly set timeframes around the process steps.  They establish 3 classes of amendment: Basic; Standard; and Complex.

 

Basic – Advertising not required.

Standard - Advertising required, 28 days.

Complex - WAPC approval prior to Advertising, 42 days.

 

The City’s Amendment 10, which commenced prior to the new Regulations, is required to proceed as a Standard amendment.

 

The minimum advertising period for a ‘standard’ amendment is 28 days.  The City does not need to seek WAPC approval prior to advertising this amendment if it is modified in accordance with the Minister’s direction.

 

Deemed Provisions Schedule 2

 

The new Regulations also introduced Deemed Provisions which prevail over any provision in a local government town planning scheme.

 

The Planning and Development Act 2005 at s.257B provides that the Deemed Provisions cannot be changed on an individual basis.  They can only be changed by amending the Regulations.

 

The Deemed Provisions exempt a single house and associated developments from requiring planning approval where they meet the Deemed-to-Comply provisions of the R-Codes.  The only exception is if a single house is located in an area identified in the Scheme as a Special Control Area.

 

The Minister’s proposal is to introduce a new land use for Re-purposed Dwellings and Second–hand dwellings so that proposals for such would not be included in the definition of a single house and therein not be exempt from requiring planning approval.

 

R- Codes

 

The R-Codes prescribe design controls for areas zoned ‘Residential’, as shown on a Scheme map.  The R-Codes provisions may also apply to other zones in the Scheme, where residential development is permissible.

 

The R-Codes is arranged as a series of Objectives, and under each is listed Deemed to Comply criteria (the proposal meets the Objective and is permitted) or Design Principles (only where deemed to comply criteria is not met are these guidelines used for a planning judgement).

The R-Codes provide a limited opportunity for a local government to vary the Deemed to Comply criteria but this is subject to WAPC approval.  The items that can be varied are restricted and presently do not address simple but important factors that contribute to a consistent character.

 

Factors that contribute to a consistent character not presently facilitated in the R-Codes include:

a)      building height minimum - for a consistent mass and proportion;

b)     required roof form, and pitch; and

c)      required façade elements including building articulation on the lot, verandahs, eaves, parapets and building colours.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

The City does not have a Local Planning Policy addressing transportable or prefabricated buildings.

 

In terms of statutory interpretation a Local Planning Policy does not override an exemption provided by the Scheme such as to exempt single houses from the need to obtain planning approval.  Further, single houses in R-Coded areas, by virtue of the deemed provisions, do not require planning approval if they meet the Deemed to Comply requirements of the R-Codes (exemption).

 

An exception to this exemption is provided where the proposal is to be located in an area identified by the Scheme as a Special Control Area.  The Port Geographe Development Plan Area is identified as a Special Control Area in Scheme 21, and in turn it refers to the City’s Urban Centres Policy (LPP4) which includes Port Geographe.  This Local Planning Policy includes the general residential area within the Port Geographe Development Plan area and lists masonry as a ground level construction material.

 

Notwithstanding that planning approval is required in the Port Geographe Special Character Area, and that there is a construction material identified in a local planning policy, the conventions and the weighting in the statutory hierarchy still apply to making a planning assessment.

 

The masonry ‘requirement’ must be read in context with the overall Desired Character in LPP4 and the Scheme’s principal assessment considerations - Matters to be Considered.

 

The Planning and Development Act 2005, the Planning Regulations and the Local Planning Schemes are crafted to achieve practical outcomes.  This is reflected to the term “to have due regard”, which is imposed in all Schemes by the Deemed Provisions, as the Procedure for dealing with applications for development approval.

 

In planning law the practical and objectives-based approach generally prevails over an inflexible adherence to a development standard where discretion exists.  For this reason a specific restriction on a construction material for reason of external appearance, even if it is supported in a Local Planning Policy or the Scheme, is not a binding requirement if an acceptable appearance can be achieved another way.

 

Other Special Control Areas include Quindalup, Yallingup, Old Dunsborough, Adelaide Street and Eagle Bay.  Each of these Special Control Areas also have a Local Planning Policy describing the appearance of new development, but as with Port Geographe, a practical approach must be taken in exercising a planning judgement.

 

In the Special Control Areas, the City has the authority to require a planning application for single houses and apply development standards that can ensure a proposal is compatible with the ‘appearance’ of other buildings found in its locality.  Outside of the Special Control Area however, single houses are determined by the requirement of the R - Codes and do not need planning approval if meeting the Deemed to Comply provisions.

There are two aspects for planning consideration, one is the reasonable development standards that can be practically applied within the Special Control Areas; the other being whether Deemed to Comply provisions can also be varied to include reasonable development standards that can be practically applied to affect residential areas outside of the Special Control Areas.

 

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 amendment is considered to be consistent with the following community objectives of the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2013 –

 

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

 

RISK ASSESSMENT

 

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the Officer Recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk assessment framework.  The assessment identified ‘downside’ risks only, rather than upside risks as well. 

 

The implementation of the Officer Recommendation will involve modifying Amendment 10 and re-advertising it to canvass community opinion.  In this regard, there are no significant risks identified.

 

CONSULTATION

 

Advice has been received from the Minister requesting modification of the amendment.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

The Council had initiated the Amendment following the placement of a second-hand building in Port Geographe and community concern that it detracted from the character of the locality.  Whilst the development proposal was subsequently revised to achieve a broadly acceptable outcome, it nonetheless exposed a weakness in development controls across the City, and also in the R–Codes.  It was found there was not sufficient control to ensure a residential development was compatible with its setting, particularly in areas outside of Special Control Areas.

 

The City also recognised that its efforts to encourage renewal of older and less attractive areas could create a supply of poor condition houses to then be available for relocation to other areas in the City nearby.  This could give rise to the situation that had occurred in Port Geographe being repeated in other areas of the City.

 

Since the second-hand building was proposed at Port Geographe, the City has exercised an increased level of control to ensure the compatibility of new development.  This has been achieved by two things - the Deemed provisions introduced 23 August 2015 maintained the ability for a Special Control Area to require a planning approval; and the Local Planning Policy was amended to require planning approval for residential development in the “titled areas” at Port Geographe.  This has given the City the ability to assess applications and ensure their compatibility with the setting.

The resultant Amendment sought to establish a definition for prefabricated buildings, including transportable homes, and require building proposals captured by the definition to obtain planning approval, and in turn to be assessed against a new development standard that would ensure a compatibility with the setting.

 

It was, however, recognised (including in the Council report of 25 November 2015) that the Amendment may not be supported by the Minister.

 

“It should be noted, that the planning direction set out in the amendment appears to be inconsistent with current planning direction at a State level (proposed Regulations) and so it is considered quite likely that the amendment will not be supported by the Minister.”

 

At around the time of the new Regulations being introduced, a number of local governments were already concerned about the exemption to be provided to single houses.  They made a petition to the Minister requesting controls (prohibitions) to prevent the occurrence of ‘mining dongas’ or similar being installed as single houses in their residential areas.

 

Also around this time the housing industry was promoting the adoption of prefabricated buildings or components as innovations that will improve construction speed and reduce cost.  The housing industry is actively seeking to ensure there is no restriction on building construction materials.

 

The Minister’s response, to the concerned local governments, was not to accept a prohibition on construction materials but to instead offer a new definition of Re-purposed dwellings and a new definition of Secondhand dwellings; both being separate to that of a Single house.  This avoids the deemed exemption provided for a Single house, and requires development that meets the description of the new definition to have planning approval prior to development.  This in turn provides that to gain planning approval, consideration against development standards to ensure compatibility with its setting can be made.  This Minister’s response can be seen to navigate between the concerns of the petition by local government whilst also supporting the housing industry in not restricting construction materials on ‘new’ buildings. 

 

The Minister’s definition for Re-purposed dwellings captures many forms of building attempted by the City’s definition of prefabricated building.  It will address dongas, shipping containers, railway carriages, caravan park homes and the like.  The Minister’s definition for Secondhand dwellings will also address the attempt to transfer a dwelling from one area to another.  Both definitions provide an ability to control the appearance of the development.

 

The Minister did not reject the City’s proposed development standard in his decision and the Minister’s approach to Re-purposed dwellings and Secondhand dwellings will enable the City to apply the ‘development standard’ that it had proposed for Prefabricated Buildings.  The Minster also requested the City consult with the Department of Planning prior to readvertising the Amendment.  The City in response submitted a modified development standard to the Department of Planning; replacing the word prefabricated building with Re-purposed dwelling and Secondhand dwelling.  The City received confirmation from the Department of Planning, on 15 June 2016, that the modified development standard is supported.

 

In accordance with the Minister’s direction the development standard to be proposed/advertised by the City would now appear as:

 

“The local government shall not grant planning approval for development of a pre-fabricated building Re-purposed dwelling and Second-hand dwelling unless it is satisfied that the development will be consistent with the character of the locality in which development is proposed, the maintenance of the amenity of the locality in which development is proposed and the objectives, policies and other provisions of the Scheme which apply to the land where development is proposed. The local government may, if it considers it appropriate to do so, advertise an application for development of a pre-fabricated building Re-purposed dwelling and Second-hand dwelling pursuant to clause 10.4 of the Scheme.”

 

Seeking variations to the R Codes

 

(To be treated separate, but undertaken concurrently, in responding to the Minister’s direction made on 27 April 2016)

 

The Minister’s definitions for Re-purposed dwelling and Secondhand dwelling, do not control new modular or new transportable buildings and this still leaves open a potential for community concern.

 

The City has recently received an application for a modular home that is R-Codes compliant and exempt from planning approval, but arguably discordant with the character of other homes in its locality.  Discordant features are often thought to be elements that are comparably too large. That is the focus of the R-Codes, whereas discordant elements can also be comparatively too small.  Discordant features in this case are a building height that is comparatively low, a roof form that is flat in an area of pitched roofs (exacerbating the low comparative height), and an orientation narrow on the block where as other houses are oriented across the block (presenting an incompatible bulk).

 

Whilst a discordant building form is frequently associated with transportable and modular type houses, it is recognised that in situ constructed houses can also be discordant in their setting. 

 

Better controls in the R-Codes can ensure compatibility to the setting for all development and this is really the key to alleviating community concern about discordant buildings of all types, rather than a narrow focus on construction materials or methodology. 

 

The R-Codes are presently under review with an objective to achieve more consistency and simplicity, but complex considerations to address character are unlikely to be supported and equally the expansion of Special Control Areas as a means to circumvent exempting single houses from planning approval is unlikely to be supported.

 

Simple and easily found Deemed to Comply requirements, with accompanying Design Principles, could satisfy both better character outcomes and the desire to provide certainty, particularly, if WAPC approval is required as a safeguard.  Furthermore, development that did not accord with the quantitative Deemed to Comply criteria would then be subject to planning discretion Design Principles and negotiation to achieve an acceptable fit in the locality.  This would still provide flexibility for innovation and variety.

 

Simple (additional) character elements would include: a specified minimum building height; a required roof form and pitch; specified building orientation; and façade articulation including required features – such as verandahs, balconies, eaves, and parapets. 

 

It is recommended that the City pursue the Minister’s support to enable additional character elements to be added to the R-Codes for Deemed to Comply consideration.  The suggested modification of Amendment 10 does not address all the City’s initial concerns and therefore it is relevant that the City in response should pursue this.  If the Minister was prepared to support this it would however require a state wide change to the R-Codes as part of the overall review and this would take considerable time.  The Minister’s offer to introduce Re-purposed dwelling and Secondhand dwelling is on the other hand comparatively immediate and it is a benefit over the current arrangement.  For this reason it is recommended the City proceed with the Minister’s offer, but separately and not dependent upon Amendment 10, pursue the Minister’s support to enable additional character elements to be added to the R-Codes for Deemed to Comply considerations.

 

Too many definitions

 

Notwithstanding the Minister’s approach to create two new definitions (land use classifications) Re-purposed dwelling and Secondhand dwelling, the City is concerned about the approach in general that has seen the number of land-use definitions expand in number.  This has tended to arise as a reactionary approach rather than a coherent vision to achieve a practical and easy to use planning assessment system.  It adds administrative complexity, difficult for the community to follow, and leads to inconsistency of outcomes across land use types (note that just in the City’s Scheme, there are well over 1,000 zoning/land-use combinations possible).

 

The City would prefer an approach closer to that used successfully in many other jurisdictions, where fewer definitions are used (generic) and outcome based development standards are applied.

 

For instance, as identified earlier, an in situ constructed building can be as discordant with its setting as a Re-purposed dwelling and Secondhand dwelling.  Simple (additional) character elements should apply to all dwelling types in a residential area, if a particular character outcome for a locality is to be achieved; instead of applying standards inconsistently i.e. to only one dwelling type.

 

The Department of Planning was recently seeking comments for use in refining the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.  Comments were due on 18 July 2016 and City has indicated a concern regarding the recent proliferation of land use classifications and the need for a coherent vision to guide the development of the State’s planning framework. 

 

CONCLUSION

 

The Minister has rejected the City’s proposal Amendment 10, but has offered a compromise to define Re-purposed dwellings and Secondhand dwellings.

 

The Minister’s approach on Re-purposed dwellings and Secondhand dwellings is an improvement over the City’s current controls.  Whereas outside of the City’s Special Control Areas, where a single house is exempt from planning approval, the Minister’s approach would provide the City with control over some of the most obvious examples of buildings that are a cause for community concern i.e.  mining dongas, railway carriages and relocated dilapidated buildings.

 

The compromise, however, still leaves the potential for discordant buildings to occur in established areas and possible community concern.

 

The community concern could be alleviated by also introducing simple controls (addressing character elements) into the R - Codes as Deemed to Comply with accompanying Design Principles.  Development that did not meet the Deemed to Comply requirements would be assessed for innovation and fit in its setting.

 

This has not been previously requested by the City and it is provided partly in response to the Minister’s direction.

 

It is therefore recommended that separately to accepting the Minister’s offer 27 April 2016, the City also opens the opportunity to pursue the inclusion of simple character controls into the R-Codes.

 

OPTIONS

 

Determine not to proceed with Amendment 10 – not accept the Minister’s compromise.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

The implementation of the Officer Recommendation will involve advertising of a modified Scheme Amendment, the receipt of submissions and report to Council.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council resolves –

 

1.    Pursuant to Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2005, to adopt Amendment 10 to the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme 21 for community consultation, as follows:

 

1a           Inserting into Schedule 1 the following:

 

i.      Repurposed dwelling — means a building or structure not previously used as a single house, which has been repurposed for use as a dwelling;

 

ii.     Second-hand dwelling — means a dwelling that has been in a different location, and has been dismantled and transported to another location, but does not include a new modular or transportable dwelling.

 

1b           Inserting in to Table 1 (Zoning Table).

 

i.       “Repurposed dwelling”, as a separate land use.

 

ii.     “Second-hand dwelling”, as a separate land use

 

1c            Amending the Table 1 (Zoning Table) to make a Re-purposed dwelling or Secondhand dwelling a 'D’ use in any zone in which a single house is a 'P' use or 'D' use and 'X' use in the zones where a single house is not permitted.

 

1d           Inserting as a new clause 5.9, with subsequent clauses being renumbered accordingly, of the following:

 

Re-purposed dwelling and Second-hand dwelling

The local government shall not grant planning approval for development of a Re-purposed dwelling or Secondhand dwelling unless it is satisfied that the development will be consistent with the character of the locality in which development is proposed, the maintenance of the amenity of the locality in which development is proposed and the objectives, policies and other provisions of the Scheme which apply to the land where development is proposed. The local government may, if it considers it appropriate to do so, advertise an application for development of a Re-purposed dwelling or Secondhand dwelling pursuant to clause 64 Schedule 2 Development (local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

 

2.            That the City write to the Minister:

 

2.1          Advising that the City will proceed to modify the amendment in accordance with his request dated 27 April 2016, but notwithstanding this, the City indicates its concern that the Minster’s solution will not apply to new modular or transportable dwellings, and the potential remains for buildings to occur that are discordant with an established character of an area.

 

2.2          To reiterate that the City supports the adoption of innovations in house construction techniques that reduce the costs and improve function and affordability, but this need not be at the expense of the character of a locality.

 

In this regard the City requests the R -Codes review give consideration to simple character controls, to be made available at Part 7 of the R - Codes, for specific areas to be identified by local government and agreed by the WAPC that address a minimum building height for a consistent mass and proportion; that specify a required roof form and pitch; that specify an orientation; and that specify a façade articulation including features providing such as verandas, balconies, eaves, parapets and building colours.  

 

 


Council

63

27 July 2016

11.3

Attachment a

Ministerial Decision 27 April 2016

 


 


 


Council                                                                                      69                                                                        27 July 2016

11.4           ENVIRONMENT STRATEGY REVIEW

SUBJECT INDEX:

Environment Plans

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Environmental Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Environmental Planning

REPORTING OFFICER:

Manager, Environmental Services  - Greg Simpson

Senior Natural Resource Management / Environment Officer - Will Oldfield

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Revised Environment Strategy  

  

PRÉCIS

 

This report presents the outcomes of a review of the 2004 Environment Strategy, one of the City’s key guiding documents for managing environmental issues since 2004.

 

The revised Environment Strategy will provide direction on how the City will meet the environmental aspirations of the community, as set out in the Strategic Community Plan and guide the City’s future activities in environmental management and sustainability.  This report recommends that the revised Environment Strategy (Attachment A) be advertised inviting comment and submissions from the public, before being subject of further Council consideration.

 

BACKGROUND

 

In March 2004, Council resolved to endorse an Environment Strategy for the City. Over the past twelve years the Environment Strategy has guided the City’s role in the management of local environmental issues. The 2004 Environment Strategy has assisted with incorporating sound environmental management as an organisational value and core business activity, while creating a positive organisational culture. The Strategy has also enhanced working relationships with the community in general, particularly with environmental community groups.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

As part of its many functions and operations, the City must have regard to the following environmental legislation:

         -     Environmental Protection Act 1986

         -     Contaminated Sites Act 2003

         -     Wildlife Conservation Act 1950

         -     Rights in Water and Irrigation Act 1914

         -     Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2007

         -     Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Commonwealth)

         -     National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007 (Commonwealth)

 

A number of changes have been made to environmental legislation since Council’s endorsement of the Environment Strategy in 2004. This review ensures that the City’s Environment Strategy remains consistent with environmental legislation.

 

The Town Planning framework and Local Environmental Planning Strategy guides development and integrates environmental conservation, preservation and protection of key natural assets through the planning and development process and is a significant component of the City’s implementation of environmental management at a strategic level.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

In March 2011, Council resolved (resolution C1103/070) to adopt Environment Policy 030, to guide the City’s commitment to continuous improvement in environmental management towards creating a sustainable balance between environmental, social and economic values throughout the District. Environment Policy 030 is included with this report as Appendix 1 in Attachment A

 

The following other key environmental related plans have also been endorsed by Council:

-              Local Environmental Planning Strategy

-              Biodiversity Incentives Strategy

-              Corporate Energy Action Plan

-              Local Water Action Plan

-              Waste Management Strategy (draft)

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

There are no financial implications associated with the officer recommendation seeking Council endorsement to advertise the revised Environmental Strategy for public comment.

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

The revised Environment Strategy guides the approach towards ensuring the City’s natural environment is cared for and enhanced for the enjoyment of the community and visitors through the development and implementation of management plans, programmes and associated on-ground works, much of which will be accomplished utilising available resources and within the City’s current ten-year financial plan.

 

While the revised Environment Strategy is expected to have a ten year life, the strategic actions within the document will be reviewed every three years. Council may wish to implement a range of initiatives in environmental management and sustainability during the life of the revised Environment Strategy and any actions requiring additional resources will be evaluated and if considered appropriate by the Council, incorporated into the City’s ten-year financial plan and annual budget development process.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The review of the Environment Strategy is relevant to Key Goal Area 5 – Cared for and Enhanced Environment and Community, and 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 implications of not 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

Environmental/ Reputational risk arising from inadequate management of natural environs.

Strategic Plan developed in consultation with the community and implementation of actions to manage use, access and protection of environmental and heritage values.

Minor

Possible

Medium

 

CONSULTATION

 

The preparation of the revised Environment Strategy has involved consultation with the community and other stakeholders. A range of consultation activities were undertaken to ensure the community and key stakeholders were given the opportunity to provide input during the preparatory consultation process.

 

The following consultation activities were undertaken as part of the preparation of the strategy:

·    Workshops with key stakeholders including environment groups and agencies;

·    Meetings with the City Environmental Reference Group;

·    Workshop with City Staff;

·    South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council briefing; and

·    Councillor briefing and workshop.

 

This report recommends that the revised Environment Strategy be advertised to the wider community for the purpose of seeking public comment and submissions.  Notices about the consultation process will appear in the local paper and submissions from the community and stakeholders will be invited through the City’s ‘Your Say Busselton’ website.

 

Government agencies and other stakeholders that may have an interest in the revised Environment Strategy will be notified directly about the consultation period

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

Development of the revised Environment Strategy

The Strategic Actions listed within the Environment Strategy have been developed around the information generated from the consultation sessions and those actions still considered relevant previously listed within the 2004 Environment Strategy. The key environmental issues to be considered in the revised Environment Strategy were grouped into common themes and from that the strategic actions generated.

The process of analysis looked at whether -

·    the suggested actions were supported by Policy and Best Practice;

·    it was consistent with Community Strategic Plan and any known community expectations;

·    they were existing high priority works;

·    there was a strong community benefit;

·    the action could be achieved at reasonable cost for a sustainable outcome;

·    there was opportunity to leverage funding or partner with others; and

·    there was a level of environmental risk.

 

Utilising the above criterion as part of the screening process, the Strategic Actions identified in the revised Environment Strategy are considered robust, worthwhile and appropriate towards ensuring the City’s natural environment is cared for and enhanced.

 

Revised Environment Strategy themes

All the information that the City has received during the development phase has been analysed and sorted into the following five key themes –

 

BIODIVERSITY

Protected species, native vegetation, phytophthora dieback, coastal management, weed control and recreation, contaminated sites, and fire management,

WATER

Wetlands and waterways, water quality, stormwater, water sensitive urban design

COMMUNITY

Community engagement,  Education, Ecotourism, Community group support (for groups working on City land)

SUSTAINABILITY

Climate change, energy use, water use and waste management.

GOVERNANCE

Manage resources and funds available to achieve best practice environmental outcomes

 

Revised Environment Strategy theme format

The revised Environment Strategy does not include extensive background information, as most of the environmental background information is readily available in the previous 2004 Environment Strategy and the Local Environmental Planning Strategy. The above five themes identified within the revised Environment Strategy each contains the following -

Scope and context

describes what the chapter focusses on and why it is important

Vision and objectives

these are defined for each chapter/theme

 

Previous achievements

provides a record of environmental achievements by the City, particularly since 2004 when the current environment Strategy was adopted

Strategic actions

These are the core of the document and describe the strategic actions the City will take during the term of the Strategy

 

The Strategic Actions listed in the revised Environment Strategy are set out in a table under the following headings -

Stage of implementation

Some projects already started, others are new and some are ongoing activities. This column indicates the status of the activity at the time of producing the strategy.

Implementation method

This indicates the type of activity that will/can be used to implement the action- for example it could be through a new policy or plan, or though community engagement projects

Responsibility

As this is a whole of organisation document this column indicates business units that may be involved in driving the action.

 

Flagship projects

The revised Environment Strategy guides ongoing environmental management for the City and introduces a number of new initiatives to create a positive presence for the City in the environment and sustainability fields. Strategies with the highest priority and most beneficial activities are proposed as ‘flagship projects’, which are intended to be creative and generate positive community interest and can be promoted to the broader community. Example key priority flagship projects have been outlined in Appendix 2 of Attachment A.

 

The flagship projects are intended to focus on opportunities for the community and visitors to the District to interact with the natural environment. Some flagship projects may be included on the City’s events calendar, provide places where community and visitors can experience the natural environment, such as Busselton’s wetlands, and provide more support to community individuals/groups that have a desire to be involved in caring for the environment on land that the City manages.

 


 

CONCLUSION

 

The revised Environment Strategy has been prepared following extensive consultation with key stakeholders and community and it is recommended that this Strategy be advertised for public comment before being further considered by the Council.

 

OPTIONS

 

The Council may resolve not to advertise the revised Environment Strategy for the purpose of public advertising or may require certain aspects within the Strategy to be amended prior to advertising.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Subject to Council supporting the officer recommendation, the revised Environment Strategy will be advertised for public comment. Public submissions received following the public advertising process will be included in a report together with a recommendation seeking Council’s adoption of the revised Environment Strategy, by December 2016.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council endorses the revised Environment Strategy (Attachment A) for consultation purposes and advertises the Strategy inviting comments and submissions from the public.

 


Council

81

27 July 2016

11.4

Attachment a

Revised Environment Strategy

 

                                                                                                               

 

City of Busselton

Environment Strategy 2016-2021

 

 

 

DRAFT

For community consultation purposes

July 2016

 

 

 


 

 

Contents                                                                                       

 

1.      INTRODUCTION.. 4

1.1.       Strategic Community Plan. 4

1.2.       Environmental Themes. 4

1.3.       Implementation. 5

1.4.       Implementation Tools. 5

1.5.       Assumptions that sit behind the Strategy. 6

1.6.       Link to Local Environmental Planning Strategy. 7

1.7.       Monitoring and Reporting. 7

2.      BIODIVERSITY. 8

2.1.       Scope and context. 8

2.2.       Vision. 9

2.3.       Objectives. 9

2.4.       Previous achievements. 10

2.5.       Strategic actions. 12

3.      WATER RESOURCES. 13

3.1.       Scope and context. 13

3.2.       Vision. 14

3.3.       Objectives. 15

3.4.       Previous achievements. 15

3.5.       Strategic actions. 16

4.      COMMUNITY. 17

4.1.       Scope and context. 17

4.2.       Vision. 18

4.3.       Objectives. 18

4.4.       Previous achievements. 18

4.5.       Strategic actions. 19

5.      ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY. 20

5.1.       Scope and context. 20

5.2.       Vision. 20

5.3.       Objectives. 20

5.4.       Previous achievements. 20

5.5.       Strategic actions. 22

6.      GOVERNANCE AND RESOURCING.. 23

6.1.       Scope and context. 23

6.2.       Vision. 23

6.3.       Objectives. 23

6.4.       Previous achievements. 23

6.5.       Strategic actions. 24

7.      ACTIONS AND STRATEGY TABLES FOR ALL THEMES. 25

7.1.       Actions and Strategies Table - BIODIVERSITY. 25

7.2.       Actions and Strategies table - WATER. 27

7.3.       Actions and Strategies Table - COMMUNITY. 29

7.4.       Actions and Strategies table - ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY. 31

7.5.       Actions and Strategies table - GOVERNANCE AND RESOURCING.. 32

APPENDIX 1 - ENVIRONMENT POLICY. 33

APPENDIX 2 - FLAGSHIP PROJECTS. 35

Project Plan 1. 35

Project Plan 2. 36

Project Plan 3. 37

APPENDIX 3 - Best practice tools for environmental management. 38

APPENDIX 4 - Informing documents and References. 40

Federal/State/Local Objectives Concerning Biodiversity. 40

Federal/State/Local Objectives Concerning Water. 44

Federal/State/Local Objectives Concerning Community. 46

Federal/State/Local Objectives Concerning Land. 47

Federal/State/Local Objectives Concerning Sustainability. 49

 

 

 


 

1.  INTRODUCTION

 

The Environment Strategy aims to provide opportunities and solutions to protect and care for the environment.  Environmental considerations are an integral part of all decision making and planning processes and the City’s integrated planning framework ensures this Environment Strategy integrates and aligns with other City strategies, plans and programmes and identifies with community objectives through transparent, accountable community engagement and reporting processes.

 

The release of this Strategy represents outcomes of a major review of the actions and achievements of the 2004 Environment Strategy. This strategy is one of the City’s key guiding documents for managing natural assets.

 

1.1.  Strategic Community Plan

The City has an important role in environmental management and protection of natural areas and this commitment is a key pillar of the City’s vision: 

A vibrant and cohesive community that protects its natural environment, meets the needs of its population and ensures that future development maintains the City’s unique character, lifestyle and community values

 

A key goal towards this vision and guiding the Environment Strategy is that the ‘environment is cared for and enhanced as the City’s key asset’, through the achievement of the following community objectives:

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

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

Ø Environment and climate change risks and impacts are understood and managed

 

1.2.  Environmental Themes

The Environmental Strategy provides the City’s response to local environmental pressures under 5 key environmental themes, being: Biodiversity, Water, Community, Sustainability and Governance. The Environment Strategy focuses on the major environmental issues under each theme, to guide the development and implementation of environmental actions and strategies.


 

1.3.  Implementation

The City recognises the necessity for contemporary social, cultural and economic perspectives in environmental management to generate local economic, social and cultural benefits to the community. The City will work closely with the community to implement the strategic actions. Strategies with the highest priority and most beneficial activities will be developed as flagship projects. Example key priority flagship projects have been outlined in Appendix 2.

 

The following criterion guides the identification of priority strategic actions for implementation:

·    Level of risk to key environmental assets 

·    Legislative requirements

·    Maintenance of momentum on existing projects

·    Commitments to the community

·    Opportunities to work with other stakeholders

·    Availability of resources

 

1.4.  Implementation Tools

Environmental management will be incorporated into the diverse activities the City is responsible for and implemented through multiple tools to achieve strategic outcomes.

 

Tools

Explanation/example

Policy or planning development

A strategic method to address environmental issues that may be affected by other City business, such as development. The creation and implementation of a policy may resolve complex ecological issues, such as retention of remaining habitat meeting certain criteria for protection of endangered species.

 

Management

The recognition that an action of some kind is required to address a threat or problem. Management methods may be varied and will depend on the issue. For example, preparation of a management plan for a foreshore area with recommendations for action.

 

Evidence based science, trials as evidence for decision making

 

City undertakes scientific research trial or project to determine a management outcome and or obtain evidence to support management decisions. The City may partner with other organisations to undertake the trial. For example monitoring of water quality; possum habitat and/or trialling weed control methods for revegetation projects.

 

Community engagement and leadership

Community engagement to address a human induced threat to the environment is a recognised tool for implementation because most environmental ‘issues’ or problems requiring management stem from a human induced cause. Lack of education or understanding for the impacts of the activity on an environmental system can often result in the generation of an environmental problem, then requiring future management. By increasing education/engagement and training, the City can help manage environmental threats.

 

On-ground works

On-ground works is a practical way to address a direct threat or environmental issue. Such activities often help to engage the community and or might address a specific threat or need. Often grant money can be sourced to undertake this form of management. Staff resources are also required to administer these and to continue to manage them after implementation to ensure ongoing success.

 

Partnerships or consultation

Working closely with other groups/organisations can be a way to expand capacity and manage resources. Funding bodies often look for partnership projects because they garner wider scientific expertise to support management actions, engage a broader cross section of the community and establish best practice outcomes. 

 

Resourcing

Applying for additional resources, and funds to develop new projects or to support an existing idea, project or concept. This might involve applying for grants or finding sponsorship projects.

 

 

1.5.  Assumptions that sit behind the Strategy

This Environment Strategy and the strategic actions listed are underpinned by the following assumptions:

·    Many strategic actions will be delivered through partnerships with others.

·    Environmental risk will be considered during implementation of all projects.

·    Natural Resource Management is recognised as a long-term process. The ongoing maintenance of all activities is acknowledged as being as important as new projects because ‘protection and conservation’ are considered best practice management techniques.

·    Where possible, the precautionary principle is applied to all actions and projects.

·    Methodologies for implementation of Strategic Actions may change according to adaptive management principles/best practice dictates.

·    Strategic actions are pitched at a broad, strategic level to allow flexibility and to address economic and social values as well as environmental issues.

·    Projects and programs derived from the strategies shall be Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Timely.

 

1.6.  Link to Local Environmental Planning Strategy

The town planning framework and Local Environmental Planning Strategy guides development and integrates environmental conservation, preservation and protection of key natural assets through the planning and development process and is a significant component of the City’s implementation of environmental management at a strategic level.

 

1.7.  Monitoring and Reporting

Information will be provided to the community on progress towards implementation of strategic actions on a periodic basis.

Flagship projects will be reviewed annually in order to keep implementation of the Strategy relevant and engaging.

Whilst this document is expected to have a ten year life expectancy, the strategic actions within the document will be reviewed every three years. This ensures the strategic directions of the document, City business, local, national and international trends and the influence of evolving issues such as sustainability and climate change, are on target, relevant and align with priorities within the City’s Community Strategic Plan. At the three year review, a report will be provided to Council on opportunities for the Strategy’s future strategic direction to continue to deliver the strategic actions and Flagship projects.


 

2.  BIODIVERSITY

 

2.1.  Scope and context

For the purposes of this plan, Biodiversity is defined as the ‘richness of life’, the number and variety of organisms within the Busselton district and recognises the variability across and within ecosystems and species, as well as the threatening processes which affect the conservation of them. The City sits within a globally recognised “Biological Hotspot”, an area of such high diversity and unique species not found anywhere else in the world.

Threatening processes that affect long-term biodiversity in the City include weeds, pests, disease, vegetation clearing associated with land use and development, lack of understanding and resources, unmanaged access and human activities.. The impact of climate change on biodiversity of coastal reserves is recognised and is addressed through ongoing monitoring and appropriate management to continue to protect and enhance biodiversity values in coastal areas.

 

This chapter is focussed on strategic actions the City can implement to protected species, native vegetation, coastal management and threatening processes such as phytophthora dieback, weed control and recreation.

Management actions identified in this plan aim to recognise, conserve, protect and celebrate our rich biodiversity through implementation of a range of management tools. Coordination of appropriate strategies and actions will continue to ensure biodiversity in Busselton is maintained and, improved as greater understanding and best practice techniques are applied to determine sustainable solutions.

Biodiversity of local national, international significance are:

Flora:

·    The City has 28 declared rare flora species.

·    9 Priority 1, 20 Priority 2, 38 Priority 3 and 26 Priority 4.

·    1 Species presumed extinct.

 

Threatened Ecological Communities and Priority Ecological Communities:

·    Threatened Ecological Communities – 10

·    P1 Priority Ecological Communities – 12

·    P2 Priority Ecological Communities – 1

·    P3 Priority Ecological Communities – 1

Fauna:

 

Threatened Fauna

·    Terrestrial = 19 species

·    Marine (Turtles, Whales, Seabirds) = 18 species

 

Priority Species

·    All categories = 19 species

 

Internationally protected (various treaties)

·    30 species  (note that some of these species are also protected under the above categories)

·    Bush reserves- Ambergate reserve, Meelup Regional Park, Ruabon reserve.

·    Meelup Regional Park, Leeuwin-Naturaliste National Park, Ngari Capes Marine Park, Yelverton, Whicher and Tuart National Parks

·    Internationally recognised Wetlands: Vasse Wonnerup Wetlands (Ramsar).

 

2.2.  Vision

The City’s exceptionally high biodiversity values are recognised and protected in the long term.

 

2.3.  Objectives

·    To strategically manage natural areas under the City’s care in order to maximise the long term conservation of high priority biodiversity assets.

·    To identify and actively pursue effective methods to protect biodiversity as part of the strategic planning and land tenure framework.

·    To proactively address threats to biodiversity assets as per best practice natural resource management practices.

·    To work with the community and stakeholders to combine resources and provide opportunities to maximise successful biodiversity conservation outcomes.


 

2.4.  Previous achievements

The following is a summary of the major achievements during the term of the 2004 Environment Strategy.

·    Developed and implemented Reserves Vegetation Protection Policy (240) to provide direction for investigation of incidents of unauthorised damage vegetation on City managed land.

·    Busselton Biodiversity Strategy reviewed and adopted by Council and endorsed by WAPC in February 2011. There has been renewed interest in the program with subdivisions and rate rebate concessions steadily being processed. 689ha of bushland has been protected through 29 properties being re-zoned to Bushland Protection. 281ha of bushland has been protected through the rates concession incentive on 18 properties.

·    Strategic Ecological assessment of 52 bushland reserves funded through the South West Biodiversity Project, which led to the development of a Natural Area Management Action Plan that prioritises management actions for 2000 ha of natural areas managed by the City.

·    Western Ringtail Possum Habitat Protection Strategy completed in 2009, detailing how WRP habitat can be protected and enhanced.

·    Offset planting program initiated to manage requirements of native vegetation clearing permits.

·    Surveyed vegetation condition, and selected weed species, on all rural roadsides with support from volunteers using Roadside Conservation Committee (DPaW) methodology.

·    Assisted the South West Biodiversity Project in identifying Regional Ecological Linkages (SWREL). The SWREL mapping/information was also incorporated into the Local Environmental Planning Strategy (LEPS) and is used in the assessment of development applications.

·    Initiated a Street Tree Planting program to improve streetscape amenity and habitat values for Western Ringtail Possum in urban areas.

·    Initiated the Nature Verge program to encourage urban residents to plant local native vegetation on their verges to reduce water use, provide shade, and improve amenity and habitat values.

·    Developed and implemented management plans for the following reserves:

o Bushland Management Plans: Ambergate Reserve, Blythe Reserve, Carbanup Reserve, Creekview Reserve, Marri and Armstrong Reserves, Meelup Regional Park Management Plan, Minion Reserve, Peron Reserve, Ruabon Tutunup Rail Reserves, Vintners Ridge Reserve.

o Foreshore Reserves: Broadwater Reserve, East Busselton Reserve, Quindalup Reserve 34111, Toby Inlet, West Street Reserve, Quindalup Reserve 46, Dugalup Brook, Dunsborough Foreshore, Busselton Central East and Yallingup foreshore.

·    Locke Estate Environmental Fire Management Plan adopted by Council.

·    Fire Management Plans developed for 30 bushland reserves.

·    Planning for Bushfire protection guidelines updated in 2010 and now greater adherence is being given in planning considerations for development.  Where possible development is only being allowed in cleared areas.

·    Dieback survey completed in Meelup Regional Park, Big Rock Reserve, Ambergate Reserve and Carbanup reserves.

·    Implementation of maintenance protocols for the strategic firebreak network in order to prevent the spread of Phytophthora dieback.

 


 

2.5.  Strategic actions

 

Action No.

Strategic Action

1.1

Continue to develop and review management plans for natural areas under the City’s care, including application of fire management.

1.2

Continue improvement of planning mechanisms for the protection of biodiversity and habitat. Review and finalise the draft Western Ringtail Possum Habitat Protection and Enhancement Strategy in partnership with the Department of Parks and Wildlife’s implementation of the Western Ringtail Possum Recovery Plan.

1.3

Identify opportunities and develop a habitat strategy for enhancement and other benefits on Street verges and in City reserves.

1.4

Assess and provide recommendations for strategic approaches to control dieback through prevention, education and management.

1.5

Identify sites of high environmental value which may require conservation outcomes to be secured via changes to land tenure.

1.6

Develop opportunities to improve planning for the protection of vegetation in City reserves to balance potential conflicting values such as fire, biodiversity, public open space and amenity.

1.7

Develop initiatives to raise awareness and protect endangered fauna.

1.8

Continue to promote the opportunities for conservation through the Biodiversity Incentives Strategy, the Leeuwin Naturaliste Statement of Planning policy and the Busselton Wetlands Conservation Strategy.

1.9

Develop guidelines to encourage voluntary retention and protection of significant vegetation including habitat trees.

1.10

Develop a program to strategically address the loss of vegetation in foreshore areas.

1.11

Continue to manage weeds and feral animals on City land.

 

 


3.  WATER RESOURCES

 

3.1.  Scope and context

Human activities and land use within water catchment areas across Western Australia and in the South West have had a major impact on wetlands and waterways through vegetation clearing, pollution, water use and encroaching development. Agricultural land uses have historically had the largest effect on water catchments, wetlands and water quality, however, recent urban expansion and development is increasingly impacting on water quality in wetland environments.

The City contains a number of complex water catchments, with modified drainage networks some of which drain to coastal wetlands including the Ramsar listed Vasse-Wonnerup wetlands. Most wetlands in Busselton have been greatly affected by land clearing and land use activities. The major water courses, except for the Carbanup River, have been heavily modified as part of the rural drainage network that was constructed to reduce inundation of farm land. Poor land use practices and drainage of excess water have increased erosion and sedimentation in the drainage system, increased the loss of nutrients from the land and resulted in loss of biodiversity from the natural creeks and rivers.  Sediment and nutrient lost from the catchment is contributing to eutrophication of the City’s waterways and wetlands.

Management of water resources is very much a shared responsibility. This chapter contains strategic actions that the City will aim to achieve, however the table below illustrates the broader responsibilities of the many agencies and organisations involved in management of water.

Responsible Agency/ Organisation

Water asset

Responsibilities

Department of Water

Fresh water streams and riparian areas, Wetlands, Groundwater.

·    Water licencing (surface and groundwater extraction).

·    Management of waterways

·    Coordination of the Vasse-Wonnerup taskforce.

Geocatch

Geographe Catchment.

·    Catchment management Promoting best practices to improve water quality.

Water Corporation

Rural drains including natural waterways used for conveyance of flood water.

Mains water supply (Duns.).

Sewerage.

·    Maintenance of the drainage network to ensure rural land inundation is managed and facilitate community behaviour change for reducing water use

·    Supply potable water.

Busselton Water

Mains water supply (Busselton).

·    Ensure safe drinking water for residents and facilitate community behaviour change for reducing water use.

Department of Parks and Wildlife

Water bodies in National Parks and wetlands, Marine Parks.

·    Encouraging the conservation of natural resources and maintaining natural ecosystem function.

Department of Fisheries

Protection and regulation of aquatic fauna in waterways and ocean.

·    To manage fish stocks and ensure they are available for future generations.

·    Biosecurity - prevent the introduction of exotic and potentially harmful plants and animals to natural waterways.

Department of Agriculture and Food

Irrigation Water.

·    Extension of techniques to improve water use efficiencies in agriculture.

City of Busselton

Vasse River and Toby Inlet.

Urban stormwater drainage.

Groundwater license for watering of Sports grounds, parks and gardens.

·    Preparation and implementation of management plans for the Vasse River and Toby Inlet.

·    Construction, and maintenance of drainage in residential areas

·    Wise use of water in all public amenities.

 

The focus of this chapter is on strategic action the City can undertake or influence with respect to wetlands and waterways, water quality, stormwater and water sensitive urban design.

 

3.2.  Vision

Water assets are actively managed, protected and valued by the community.


 

3.3.  Objectives

·    To ensure proactive management of water assets within the Geographe catchment.

·    To provide opportunities for the community to engage with and learn about water assets, and practical ways to minimise impacts at the individual level.

·    To embed sustainable water management practises throughout the City’s operations.  To cultivate new ways to improve urban water management

·    To implement the urban water management planning framework

 

3.4.  Previous achievements

·    Busselton Wetlands Conservation Strategy 2005, developed in collaboration with government agencies and WAPC, to identify local wetlands considered to be most at risk from development and set incentives and protections in place to manage development around the Busselton Wetlands.

·    Busselton Wetlands Project team implementation of wetland conservation, education and tourism initiatives.

·    Development of Wetland Trails Development Plan (2007) and New River Demonstration Site concept plan (2010). Both plans are being progressively implemented.

·    Preparation and implementation of Foreshore Management plans for Toby Inlet and Dugalup Brook.

·    In partnership with Geocatch, installed stormwater retrofit systems in the Light Industrial Area and CBD of Busselton.  Installations occurred at Barlee Street, Queen Street roundabout, Coles’ car park, Albert Street bio-retention basins, College avenue living stream, Frederick Street wetland, Bunbury Street basin/wetland, Queen Street Cultural Precinct and the Busselton Community Resource Centre and the Busselton Foreshore.

·    Adoption of Stormwater Management and Drainage Infill Contributions Local Planning Policy Provisions (October 2014). The policy provisions provide a requirement for all developments to use/infiltrate water on site, or to provide a developer contribution to the City for retrofit stormwater treatment systems within the stormwater drainage network. WSUD Guidelines have been drafted to guide implementation.

·    Participation in the Vasse Estuary Technical Working Group, responsible for determining directions for management of the Vasse-Wonnerup Estuary and provided on-ground support for a variety of actions such as fish kill clean –ups.

·    Formation of the Waterways Improvement Reference Group to investigate and provide leadership on water quality issues in the Lower Vasse River on behalf of the Busselton community. This Group lobbied the State government to investigate water quality issues associated with the waterways and wetlands of the Geographe catchment. This led to significant investment by the State to support development of Vasse Geographe Strategy.

·    The City also implemented a Water Campaign in 2010 to managing corporate water use (ICLEI Water Campaign), reporting on water savings and operational initiatives to reduce water use for City buildings, parks and gardens.

 

3.5.  Strategic actions

 

Action No.

Strategic action

2.1

Prepare management plans for the Lower Vasse River and Toby Inlet, in close consultation with the local community and stakeholders.

2.2

Continue to work with all partners of the Vasse Taskforce to develop strategic and integrated approaches to management of Water Quality in the wetlands and waterways of Geographe Catchment.

2.3

Apply Water Sensitive Urban Design principles in City stormwater management programs and upgrades, addressing both water quality and volume.

2.4

Prepare and manage district water management strategies for Busselton and Dunsborough.

2.5

In partnership with other water agencies continue to raise awareness about water quality and wetland values and strategies to reduce nutrients entering waterways and wetlands through the Busselton Wetlands Initiative.

2.6

Investigate opportunities for waste treated water re-use on City land.

2.7

Develop action plans and programmes to increase water use efficiency and water quality.

2.8

Support the consolidation of reserves around the Busselton Wetlands, including through appropriate zoning of land and management of environmental values through the Busselton Wetlands Conservation Strategy.

2.9

Continue to work with other agencies on strategies to manage groundwater and salt intrusion in the region.

 


4.  COMMUNITY

 

4.1.  Scope and context

This section of the Environment Strategy addresses the establishment and continued fostering of many different community relationships to protect, enhance and celebrate our natural environment.

The City recognises the close relationship between the natural environment and the community. It is the natural environment that provides a backdrop to Busselton, Vasse, Yallingup and Dunsborough’s international recognition as beautiful and valued places to visit and live. The natural environment and surrounds of the Busselton region have been integral to the economic and industrial development of the towns and localities, and for the development and expansion of tourism in the region. This Environment Strategy recognises that with increased community use, these highly valued environmental assets are further compromised, and a balance must be established to manage community use and protect environmental values in the future.

Opportunities exist to engage, educate and encourage the community to appreciate and protect the environment, and to utilise these tools to ensure the beautiful and unique City environment is not compromised in the future by increased use, tourism, access, development and associated human induced impacts. Community engagement provides an opportunity to encourage greater appreciation and education of our natural resource values. It also provides new ways to help the local community participate in protection, enhancement and conservation of key environmental assets through on-ground projects, volunteering and natural resource management. Continuing to foster these relationships will help to promote collective ideas, implement projects and provide new ways to share and manage limited resources.

The City has a long history of engagement with other environmental agencies, departments and communities. Partnering with others can also encourage new innovations around community engagement, tourism and education across jurisdictions and responsibilities.

The City acknowledges the existing hard work and dedication of community groups already working on natural resource management on City owned reserves, wetlands, rivers and foreshores. Existing community groups working in natural resource management help to achieve annual successes in revegetation, weed control, education, dieback management and fire planning. The City recognises engagement and partnership with the community will help to ensure our natural assets are protected and improved for the long-term.


 

4.2.  Vision

An engaged and empowered community that positively contributes to the conservation, protection and enhancement of our natural environment for the long-term benefit of all.

 

4.3.  Objectives

·    To develop and maintain effective relationships with the natural resource management community.

·    To provide support and resources to assist community groups and individuals to protect and enhance the natural environment.

·    To provide opportunities for the community to celebrate and appreciate the natural environment through positive experiences that encourage environmental stewardship.

 

4.4.  Previous achievements

·    Initiation of Community Environment Grant scheme, to support NRM community group activities on City reserves from 2006-2011. This funding was replaced by the Community Bids scheme which has an NRM component.

·    Establishment of the Environmental Reference Group which reviews implementation of the Environment Strategy and acts as a sounding board for environmental issues within the City district.

·    Friends of Reserve Strategy, endorsed by Council in 1999, to support NRM group activities.

·    Building community Environmental Awareness through Geocatch newsletter, Council for Community local newspaper and Bay to Bay Newsletter. Supported many awareness raising projects through the Community Environment Grants (i.e. brochures, displays, signage, events) and community forums. 

·    Assist landowners with dieback management and feral animal control.

·    In partnership with the South West Biodiversity Project the City;

o Identified biodiversity values of City’s reserves and prioritise management recommendations which culminated in the Natural Areas Management Action Plan.

o Updated vegetation mapping for the revision of the Biodiversity Incentives Strategy.


 

4.5.  Strategic actions

 

Action No.

Strategic action

3.1

Support and build capacity of volunteers to undertake bush care and other biodiversity conservation initiatives. Develop and implement an NRM and Community Engagement Strategy to support community involvement in managing City lands.

3.2

Develop and implement the NRM Community Group Manual to manage new and existing NRM volunteers.

3.3

Continue to support community environmental groups to access funding and resources for strategic and on-ground environmental projects.

3.4

Create a Strategic communication plan for undertaking environmental awareness with community in partnership with other agencies.

3.5

Provide support for event organisers with regards to environmental management.

3.6

Develop community programs to raise awareness and facilitate behaviour change in all areas of environmental sustainability.

3.7

Support, coordinate and promote environmental initiatives and projects to the community.

3.8

Work within the City Aboriginal Reconciliation Plan process to discuss proposed projects and management of natural areas.

3.9

Work with others to enhance ecotourism opportunities around Western Ringtail Possum and other endangered flora and fauna.

3.10

Provide and support community programs for habitat enhancement and protection of threatened species.

3.11

Support partnerships with universities and community interest groups (citizen science) to study environmental initiatives of relevance to the City.

 


5.  ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

 

5.1.  Scope and context

Environmental sustainability is a state in which the demands placed on the environment can be met without reducing its capacity to allow all people to meet their needs, now and in the future. For the City, this means committing to managing resources appropriately for the benefit of current and future generations.

The City continues to monitor and report energy, water and waste use in line with local, national and international aspirations and targets, and work with the community and stakeholders to develop new and innovative ways to reduce the environmental impact of our operations and services. Environmental sustainability is finding effective ways to engage with and empower the community to reduce their own resource consumption and to make the city a more sustainable place to live and appreciate.

Being environmentally sustainable also requires adapting to a changing climate and responding to the challenges of a coastal environment. Looking forward, the City will need to build its capacity for resilience and work with stakeholders and residents in futureproofing our communities and environment.

 

It needs to be noted that broader community sustainability matters are generally not within the scope of this strategy.

 

5.2.  Vision

An empowered local community and organisation that strives for an environmentally sustainable future, for all, and in perpetuity.

 

5.3.  Objectives

·    To embed sustainability practices in City’s core business.

·    To reduce the organisation’s use of non-renewable resources.

·    To empower a resilient local community in making sustainable decisions for the future.

·    To proactively plan for a changing climate.

 

5.4.  Previous achievements

·    Energy Action Plan reviewed and endorsed by Council in August 2014. The City joined the Cities for Climate Change Program (CCP) in June 2008. Achieved Milestone 1 (energy audit), Milestone 2 (setting of emissions reduction goals) and Milestone 3 (drafting of a corporate Energy Action Plan) of the CCP program. The CCP Australia Program and its milestone framework support ended on 30 June 2009 when the Federal Government discontinued its funding. However, the City resolved to continue basing its climate change mitigation work on the CCP framework due to its past success with other local governments across Australia.

·    Implementation of a Water Action Plan. The City commenced a Water Campaign Program in June 2008. Achieved Milestone 1 (water audit), Milestone 2 (setting of water consumption and quality goals) and Milestone 3 (drafting of corporate Water Action Plan) of the Water Campaign. Implementation of the Water Action Plan is ongoing.

·    Designed and incorporated sustainably sourced geothermal energy to heat the Geographe Leisure Centre and the pool to reduce building energy use.

·    Installation of solar powered and wind powered street lighting.

·    LED lighting upgrades for all City facilities to improve lighting and reduce energy use across City infrastructure.

·    Annual Greenhouse gas emissions reporting in City Annual Report to continue to monitor emissions savings and new projects.

·    Green waste stockpiled and mulched 2 times a year.  A local composting company takes most of the material and a proportion is retained for use by residents at no charge.

·    Installation of weighbridge at Dunsborough Waste Facility to monitor waste streams and assess new methods for reduction, recycling and reuse of waste. Design of new lined cell for Dunsborough Waste Facility. Conversion of Busselton landfill site to transfer station.

·    School education programmes on waste issues and action they can take on recycling, saving energy, reducing land fill and reducing waste.

·    A Coastal Scoping study completed in 2007 provided guidance and direction for high priority studies and works required in Geographe Bay.  This and subsequent studies has led to development of coastal infrastructure such as Abbey and Quindalup Boat ramp upgrades and parking. Coastal protection works have been completed at Busselton and Dunsborough Foreshore, the Locke Estate and some experimental low key work has occurred at Norman Road in Broadwater.

·    The City is involved in the Peron Naturaliste Partnership (PNP) looking at coastal adaptation strategies for coastal towns between Cape Peron and Cape Naturaliste. The PNP has delivered the Coastal Adaptation Decision Pathway Project and a Coastal Community Adaptation Awareness plan.


 

5.5.  Strategic actions

 

Action No.

Strategic action

4.1

Continue to implement and review City’s Energy Action Plan.

4.2

Continue to implement and review City’s Water action plan to agreed targets.

4.3

Continue to implement and review City’s waste reduction strategy.

4.4

Develop a Corporate Sustainability Policy for the City.

4.6

Implement the findings of the Coastal Adaptation Decision Pathway Project and a Coastal Community Adaptation Awareness Plan developed by the Peron Naturaliste Partnership.

4.7

Develop and promote a strategic position on coastal risk areas through the PNP. Support the development of tools for community living in coastal risk areas.

4.8

Continue to support the Green Taskforce to reduce corporate emissions for energy water and waste.


6.  GOVERNANCE AND RESOURCING

 

6.1.  Scope and context

As a large local government in the South West region, the City recognises the significance of the attractive, unique environment of Geographe Bay and surrounds as a destination of choice for many local, national and international visitors to visit and as a place to live. The City recognises good environmental management requires appropriate resourcing across the organisation, to achieve best practice outcomes in the environment across all disciplines.  Training and resourcing are regularly reviewed and appropriately managed to ensure the organisation maximises its opportunities and capabilities to service the community and protect the natural values of the region.

The organisation supports innovation, proactivity, critical review and adaptive management techniques within core business. The City recognises that environmental initiatives need to be adequately and appropriately delivered to protect and enhance the significant environmental values within the district.

The focus of this chapter is how the City as an organisation can continue to provide effective and appropriate resources and opportunities to manage these expectations successfully into the future.

 

6.2.  Vision

A resilient, resourceful and accountable organisation that seeks partnerships with its stakeholders to achieve mutual environment benefits.

 

6.3.  Objectives

·    To seek creative and innovative funding solutions and resourcing opportunities

·    To consider partnerships as adding value to our core business

·    To strategically and proactively plan according to environmental priorities

·    To communicate and consult with our stakeholders

·    To be a leader in sustainable environmental management

 

6.4.  Previous achievements

·    Preparation and implementation of the Reserve Vegetation Protection Policy

·    Provided training for relevant staff on Dieback management, tree decline and treatment, acid sulphate soils, vegetation management and sustainability practices.

 

6.5.  Strategic actions

 

Action No.

Strategic action

5.1

Investigate opportunities for increasing and improving sustainable future development.

5.2

Generate productive partnerships with private sector and community groups to resource environmental projects for community benefit.

5.3

Develop and implement environmental training for the organisation.

5.4

Develop an environmental offset strategy.

 

 


7.  ACTIONS AND STRATEGY TABLES FOR ALL THEMES

 

7.1.  Actions and Strategies Table - BIODIVERSITY

Action

No.

 

Strategic Actions

Current stage of implementation

Implementation tool/s for management

 

Who is responsible

1.1

Continue to develop and review management plans for natural areas under the City’s care, including application of fire management.

Ongoing

Management, Community engagement and leadership.

Internal

1.2

Continue improvement of planning mechanisms for the protection of biodiversity and habitat. Review and finalise the draft Western Ringtail Possum Habitat Protection and Enhancement Strategy in partnership with the Department of Parks and Wildlife’s implementation of the Western Ringtail Possum Recovery Plan.

To be reviewed

Planning or Policy development.

Internal

1.3

Identify opportunities and develop a habitat strategy for enhancement and other benefits on Street verges and in City reserves.

Ongoing

Planning development, On-ground works, Management.

Internal

 

1.4

Assess and provide recommendations for strategic approaches to control dieback through prevention, education and management.

Review and develop

Policy and Planning development, On-ground works, Community engagement and leadership, Evidence based science.

Internal

1.5

Identify sites of high environmental value which may require conservation outcomes to be secured via changes to land tenure.

New

Planning and Policy development, Management.

Internal

1.6

Develop opportunities to improve planning for the protection of vegetation in City reserves to balance potential conflicting values such as fire, biodiversity, public open space and amenity.

New

Partnerships

Policy and Planning development, Community engagement and leadership.

Internal

1.7

Develop initiatives to raise awareness and protect endangered fauna.

Ongoing

Management, On-ground works, Planning and Policy Development.

Internal

1.8

Continue to promote the opportunities for conservation through the Biodiversity Incentives Strategy, the Leeuwin Naturaliste Statement of Planning policy and the Busselton Wetlands Conservation Strategy.

Ongoing

Community engagement and leadership, Policy and planning Development.

Internal

1.9

Develop guidelines to encourage voluntary retention and protection of significant vegetation including habitat trees.

Ongoing

Policy and planning Development.

Internal

1.10

Develop a program to strategically address the loss of vegetation in foreshore areas.

Ongoing

Management, On-ground works, Planning and Policy Development.

Internal

1.11

Continue to manage weeds and feral animals on City land.

Ongoing

Natural area management, On-ground works.

Internal

 


 

7.2.  Actions and Strategies table - WATER

Action

 

Strategic action

Current stage of implementation

Implementation method

Responsibility

2.1

Prepare management plans for the Lower Vasse River and Toby Inlet, in close consultation with the local community and stakeholders.

Under development

Partnerships, Policy and Planning Development, Management and On-ground works.

Internal and External  stakeholders

 

2.2

Continue to work with all partners of the Vasse Taskforce to develop strategic and integrated approaches to management of Water Quality in the wetlands and waterways of Geographe Catchment.

Ongoing

Partnerships, Policy and Planning Development, Management and On-ground works.

Internal and external stakeholders

2.3

Apply Water Sensitive Urban Design principles in City stormwater management programs and upgrades, addressing both water quality and volume.

Ongoing

Policy and Planning development, On-ground works.

Internal

2.4

Prepare and manage district water management strategies for Busselton and Dunsborough.

New

Policy and Planning development, Partnerships, Management.

Internal and external stakeholders

2.5

In partnership with other water agencies continue to raise awareness about water quality and wetland values and strategies to reduce nutrients entering waterways and wetlands through the Busselton Wetlands Initiative.

Ongoing

Management, Partnerships with others, Community engagement and leadership.

Internal and External stakeholders

2.6

Investigate opportunities for waste treated water re-use on City land.

Ongoing

Policy and Planning development, Management.

Internal

2.7

Develop action plans and programmes to increase water use efficiency and water quality.

Ongoing

Policy and Planning development, Management and On-ground works.

Internal

2.8

Support the consolidation of reserves around the Busselton Wetlands, including through appropriate zoning of land and management of environmental values through the Busselton Wetlands Conservation Strategy.

Ongoing

Policy and Planning development.

Internal

2.9

Continue to work with other agencies on strategies to manage groundwater and salt intrusion in the region.

Ongoing

Policy and Planning development, Management and On-ground works.

Internal

 


 

7.3.  Actions and Strategies Table - COMMUNITY

Actions reference

 

Action strategy

Current stage of implementation

Implementation method

Responsibility

3.1

Support and build capacity of volunteers to undertake bush care and other biodiversity conservation initiatives. Develop and implement an NRM and Community Engagement Strategy to support community involvement in managing City lands.

In development

Policy and Planning development, Management, Community engagement and leadership.

Internal

3.2

Develop and implement the NRM Community Group Manual to manage new and existing NRM volunteers.

In development

Policy and Planning development, Management, Community engagement and leadership, Resourcing.

Internal

3.3

Continue to support community environmental groups to access funding and resources for strategic and on-ground environmental projects.

Ongoing

Community Engagement, Management.

Internal

3.4

Create a Strategic communication plan for undertaking environmental awareness with community in partnership with other agencies.

New

Policy and Planning and Development, Partnerships, Resourcing.

Internal and external stakeholders

3.5

Provide support for event organisers with regards to environmental management.

New

Management, Community engagement and leadership.

Internal

3.6

Develop community programs to raise awareness and facilitate behaviour change in all areas of environmental sustainability.

New

Community engagement and leaderships.

 

3.7

Support, coordinate and promote environmental initiatives and projects to the community.

New

Community engagement and leadership, On-ground works.

Internal

3.8

Work within the City Aboriginal Reconciliation Plan process to discuss proposed projects and management of natural areas.

New

Community engagement and leadership, Partnerships.

Internal

3.9

Work with others to enhance ecotourism opportunities around Western Ringtail Possum and other endangered flora and fauna.

Ongoing

Community engagement and leadership, Partnerships.

Internal and External stakeholders

3.10

Provide and support community programs for habitat enhancement and protection of threatened species.

Ongoing

Community engagement and leadership, Management, Resourcing, On-ground works.

 

Internal, partnerships with external stakeholders

3.11

Support partnerships with universities and community interest groups (citizen science) to study environmental initiatives of relevance to the City.

Ongoing

Policy and Planning development, partnerships and consultation, Resourcing, Evidence based science.

Internal and external stakeholders

 


 

7.4.  Actions and Strategies table - ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

Actions reference

 

Action strategy

Current stage of implementation

Implementation method

(refer p9-10)

Responsibility

4.1

Continue to implement and review City’s Energy Action Plan.

Ongoing

Management, Partnerships, Policy or Planning development.

Internal

4.2

Continue to implement and review City’s Water action plan to agreed targets.

Ongoing

Management, Partnerships, Policy or Planning development.

Internal

4.3

Continue to implement and review City’s waste reduction strategy.

Ongoing

Management, Partnerships, Policy or Planning development.

Internal

4.4

Develop a Corporate Sustainability Policy for the City.

 

New

Policy or Planning development, Management.

Internal

4.5

Implement the findings of the Coastal Adaptation Decision Pathway Project and a Coastal Community Adaptation Awareness Plan developed by the Peron Naturaliste Partnership.

New

On-ground works, Management, Partnerships.

Internal

4.6

Develop and promote a strategic position on coastal risk areas through the PNP. Support the development of tools for community living in coastal risk areas.

New

Policy and planning development, Community engagement and leadership.

Internal

4.7

Continue to support the Green Taskforce to reduce corporate emissions for energy water and waste.

Ongoing

Community engagement and leadership, Management.

Internal

 


 

7.5.  Actions and Strategies table - GOVERNANCE AND RESOURCING

Actions reference

 

Action strategy

Current stage of implementation

Implementation method

Responsibility

5.1

Investigate opportunities for increasing and improving sustainable future development.

New

Policy and Planning development.

Strategic Planning/ Environmental planning

5.2

Generate productive partnerships with private sector and community groups to resource environmental projects for community benefit.

 

Ongoing

Resourcing, Partnerships.

 

5.3

Develop and implement environmental training for the organisation.

 

New

Management, Evidence based Science.

Environmental Planning

5.4

Develop an environmental offset strategy.

 

 

New

Policy.

Environmental and Strategic planning

 

 


APPENDIX 1 - ENVIRONMENT POLICY

 

030

Environment Policy

V2 Current

 

1.         PURPOSE

 

The City will undertake its activities and ensure its decision-making considers the impacts on the environment and identifies measures to adequately to actively manage them. The City will therefore obtain adequate levels of information required to properly assess proposals, activities and works programmes to achieve acceptable environmental standards and statutory compliance. 

 

The City will demonstrate a commitment towards continuous improvement in environmental management and progress towards creating a sustainable balance between environmental, social and economic values in the City.

 

2.         SCOPE

 

Decisions and activities will have regard to relevant environmental legislation and will be based upon recognised best practice environmental management standards. The most up to date information on environmental impacts, and their management, will be used to assess the acceptability of proposals and activities. Where applicable it will be the responsibility of the proponent to provide sufficient information to enable this to occur.

 

Where information is not available, the Precautionary Principle will be used by the City and the Council to assist in decision-making and advice will be sought from relevant government agencies or other recognised experts with suitable qualifications and experience on the environmental issues being considered.

 

3.         POLICY CONTENT

 

Implementation of the policy will be achieved through the following activities:

 

Manage natural areas under City ownership, management or control to retain and enhance their environmental values and functions by:

 

·    Implementing the Environment Strategy and adopted Management Plans;

·    complying with all environmental legislation; and,

·    conforming to best practice management standards.

 

Establish effective working relationships and partnerships with the community and other stakeholders to undertake environmental management activities;

 

Provide the opportunity for active stakeholder involvement, ownership and participation through:

 

·    the provision of clear and consistent information to stakeholders;

·    consultation with the broader community where applicable; and

·    participation in the City Environmental Reference Group.

 

Ensure that City activities do not lead to unacceptable environmental impacts and are undertaken in accordance with current best practice standards. This will be achieved by:

 

·    good governance and sound decision making;

·    providing opportunities for staff training;

·    placing the onus on the proponent of any proposals, activities and work programs to identify and assess environmental impacts and propose measures to manage these or modify the proposal; and

·    ensuring stakeholders are aware of the City’s activities and how potential environmental impacts are being managed.

 

Plan, design, operate and conduct operations in a manner that minimises waste and the demand on natural resources and energy.

 

Policy Background

 

Policy Reference No. – 30

Owner Unit – Environmental Planning

Originator – Environment Strategy Consultant

Policy approved by – Council

Date Approved – 9 March 2011

Review Frequency – As required

Related Documents – Environment Strategy

Background/History – Policy updated 2011 after adoption in 2004 as part of the Environment Strategy

 

Council Resolution

Date

Information

C1103/070

9 March 2011

Policy updated after adoption in 2004 as part of the Environment Strategy

Version 2


APPENDIX 2 - FLAGSHIP PROJECTS

The following Flagship Projects have been provided as examples to illustrate potential for future plans.

 

Project Plan 1

Operational Action/strategy

Relates to: Community Theme:

3.4       Create a Strategic communication plan for enhancing local community environmental awareness in partnership with other agencies .

3.5       Provide support for event organisers with regards to environmental management.

3.6       Develop community programs to raise awareness and facilitate behaviour change in all areas of environmental sustainability.

 

Intent of project:

Community Environmental Events. Promote events calendar to inform community of events/activities. E.g. (Meelup moon walk, Possum night stalks, Wildflower show, Birdlife Australia.) Develop a framework for assessment and promotion of environmental activities. Assist groups to ensure the events run according to environmental best practice. Link with organisations that can promote and deliver environmental activities and agreed outcomes.

 

Project Name

COMMUNITY MEETS ENVIRONMENT

 

What do we want to achieve with this project?

What are the key outcomes?

 

What are the main challenges/Obstacles with this kind of project

 

Who are the key stakeholders that would have a vested interest in a successful outcome for this project?

Which of these stakeholders can most influence our key decision makers?

What benefits can these stakeholders derive from the achievement of this priority project?

How could we involve these stakeholders in this project?

Achieve?

·      Greater community appreciation for our natural assets

·      More engaged community (visitors and local)

·      Reduced environmental footprint for events

·      Coordination – central repository for all information /events environmental

·      Pop-up events such as art at the wetlands, ballet by the bay etc.

·      Resources

·      Attracting new audiences

·      Volunteer fatigue

·      Wildlife care groups

·      Conservation awareness groups

·      GBTA

·      Art Geo

·      Tour operators

 

·      Additional attractions for tourists

·      Winter program to extend visitor stays during off peak times

 

Outcomes

·      Increased attendance for environmental activities

·      Coordinated effort

·      Seasonal variety and continuity of environmental events.

 

 

·      GBTA - Tourists

·      City webpage

·      Existing community groups

·      Naturalists Club

·      State agencies

·      Develop a network and promote regularly.

·      Half day seminars on managing environmental tourist attractions of Busselton for tour operators

Project Plan 2

Operational Action/strategy

 

Relates to Sustainability theme:

3.6       Develop community programs to raise awareness and facilitate behaviour change in all areas of environmental sustainability.

4.1       Continue to implement and review City’s Energy Action Plan.

 

Sustainable Initiative workshop

Engagement with community on reduction of energy water and waste use in residences as part of the Energy Action plan community actions and engagement with external partners such as Geocatch.

Project Name

COMMUNITY SUSTAINABILITY INITIATIVES

 

What do we want to achieve with this project?

What are the key outcomes?

 

 

What are the main challenges/Obstacles with this kind of project

 

Who are the key stakeholders that would have a vested interest in a successful outcome for this project?

Which of these stakeholders can most influence our key decision makers?

 

What benefits can these stakeholders derive from the achievement of this priority project?

How could we involve these stakeholders in this project?

Achieve

·      Engage new home buyers

·      Engage existing home owners/renters

·      Linking the environment and sustainability

·      More resources allocated to this

·      Culture of best practice and a benchmark

·      Efficiency

·      Resourcing limitation

·      Buy-in from stakeholders and level of importance

·      Energy Reference Group

·      General public

 

·      Target audience – BUILDERS

·      Community partnerships

·      Community gardens

·      Geographic locations

·      Geocatch

Outcomes

·      Sustainability Initiatives workshops

·      Efficient new builds

·      Efficient retro builds

 

·      Provision of incentives for less waste to landfill *

·      Energy Reference Group

·      Sustainability champions

 

·      Worm farms

·      Bins

·      Verges/native plants 

 

* measured by number of participants less waste to landfill

Project Plan 3

Operational Action/strategy

Relates to Water themes:

2.3       Apply Water Sensitive Design principles in to City Stormwater management programs and upgrades, addressing both water quality and volume.

2.5       In partnership with other water agencies continue to raise awareness about water quality and wetland values and strategies to reduce nutrients entering waterways and wetlands through the Busselton Wetlands Initiative.

 

IN PARTNERSHIP WITH WATER AGENCIES

Undertake initiatives to encourage living drain projects for increased habitat and changing perceptions.

 

Project Name

LIVING DRAINS

 

What do we want to achieve with this project?

What are the key outcomes?

 

 

What are the main challenges/Obstacles with this kind of project

 

Who are the key stakeholders that would have a vested interest in a successful outcome for this project?

Which of these stakeholders can most influence our key decision makers?

What benefits can these stakeholders derive from the achievement of this priority project?

How could we involve these stakeholders in this project?

Achieve?

·      Ecological linkages

·      Better water quality

·      Better looking water ways

·      Better/more recreational spaces

·      Education

·      Maintain drainage function

·      Community ownership of environmental assets

·      Current management practices

·      Land tenure

·      Resources

·      Water Corporation

·      Busselton water

·      Geocatch/DOW

·      GLCN

·      Green Army

·      SWCC

 

·      Cut maintenance costs

·      Good PR

·      Nutrient reductions

·      Leverage funding from other sources

Outcomes

·      Ecological linkages, (Possums/Birds)

·      Water quality

·      Aesthetics

·      Recreation

·      Education, resource (demonstration)

·      Inspiration

·      Maintain drainage function

·      “Living Drains”

·      Current management practices/minds

·      Vesting/owners

·      Cost of implementation

·      On-going management conflict

·      Cut maintenance costs

·      Public relations

·      Nutrient reductions (offsets)

·      Lever future funding management approach

·      Direct engagement in project

 


APPENDIX 3 - Best practice tools for environmental management

Four best practice environmental tools are:

·    Conservation. Conservation is ‘doing no harm’ to intact natural functioning systems and environments. It is the cheapest and most effective way to manage the environment. Conservation recognises that some environmental systems are not being adversely affected by threatening processes, and should be maintained without interference. Conservation methods may involve exclusion and installation of barriers. Areas that require protection are often the most pristine and valued environmental assets within a district. Ironically these areas are often the places people want to visit or utilise. Management considerations must balance environmental conservation and human use to conserve and maintain ecosystem function.

·    Protection. This management method considers techniques to safeguard areas that are less impacted by environmental threats. Methods such as treating a susceptible area of vegetation against dieback on a regular basis to prevent an infestation from occurring would be a form of protection for the environment. Protection methods are often long-term and ongoing and may be perceived as being costly, as the outcome might not be a radical change in the condition of the environment. Protection methods are however critical to ensure more intensive methods are not required in the future. Resource allocations for protection projects are critical ‘insurance policies’ for the environment.

·    Management. Management methods are applied once environmental threats have been identified and conservation or protection methods will not prevent further degradation. Management techniques are ongoing and assist with protection or conservation of key values, but usually involve a more long-term program to help to control or keep in check an existing threat. Management options are expensive and are seen as ‘Band-Aids’ to environmental management, as they rarely address the core problem or threat and rarely result in the restoration of the original environment. However, the City recognises that management techniques are necessary and acknowledges that resources need to be committed to management to keep threatening processes at an acceptable level. Weed control and planting are ongoing tools used for environmental management. While management methods seldom result in a ‘restored’ environment they are proactive and effective tools to engage the community and to maintain natural values in a given area.

·    Enhancement. Areas that have been identified as not adversely affected by threatening processes (I.e. areas set aside for conservation), can be modified in small ways to make these areas accessible without impacting them. This might involve providing formalised access to an attractive view in a nature reserve. The other way that enhancement may occur is through selective and strategic management, such as returning a native animal back to an area where it used to reside in order for that animal to help restore the natural processes. E.g. So that the flora will germinate naturally. Enhancement projects need to be carefully considered to prevent them causing further problems.

 

These environmental tools will be applied where appropriate to assist implementation of the strategic actions of the strategy.

 


APPENDIX 4 - Informing documents and References

These documents are tools to provide relevant background information on each theme.

Federal/State/Local Objectives Concerning Biodiversity

 

Level of Government

Environment strategies/ Plans

Relevant Objectives

Further reference

How this relates to the environment strategy/action?

Federal

 

 

Australia’s Biodiversity Conservation Strategy 2010-2030

·    Mainstreaming biodiversity in community.

·    Increasing Indigenous peoples engagement.

·    Enhancing strategic investments and partnerships.

·    Building ecosystem resilience in a changing climate by: protecting diversity, maintaining and re-establishing ecosystem functions, reducing threats to biodiversity.

·    Getting measurable results through:

o improving and sharing knowledge, delivering conservation initiatives efficiently.

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/publications/australias-biodiversity-conservation-strategy

 

The City’s Environment Strategy acknowledges the intention of these objectives to achieve best practice outcomes. Principles of adaptive management are paramount and should be applied by those undertaking biodiversity management in the future.

State

State of the Environment report 2007

 

At a national level, Western Australia has eight of 12 Australian biodiversity hotspots.

 

At a global level, the South West is recognised as one of the world's 34 biodiversity hotspots.

 

WA currently has 362 threatened plants, 199 threatened animals and 69 threatened ecological communities.

 

Recovery plans have been developed for less than one-third of threatened species and ecological communities.

 

There is ongoing loss and degradation of biodiversity in WA.

Knowledge about many species and ecosystems and some threats to biodiversity remains inadequate.

http://www.epa.wa.gov.au/AbouttheEPA/SOE/2007/Pages/default.aspx

 

Region has a number of threatened species and ecological communities- Western Ringtail Possum, Carnaby’s and other cockatoo species, plus threatened flora and several threatened communities. The City‘s plan aims to implement recovery plans in partnership with other organisations and increase opportunities for protection of endangered species.

Regional

WA Bush Forever 2000

General information about determining viable and sustainable reserve areas based on threat analysis and influence of size.

http://www.bushlandperth.org.au/bush-forever-overview

 

Provides a background and framework for long-term vegetation management and impact of most likely threats.

Regional

Local Government Guidelines for Bushland Management in the Perth and Coastal South-West NRM Regions of Western Australia 2009

Provide local government officers direction in prioritising management actions for natural areas and to ensure that management of these areas is in line with biodiversity principles.

 

Guidelines developed to assist local government environmental officers to holistically plan management actions by ensuring that reserves are prioritised for management according to their biodiversity values, the threats that may impact upon them and that the finite resources are used to achieve best long-term outcomes.

http://pbp.walga.asn.au/Publications/LocalGovernmentGuidelinesforBushlandManagement.aspx

 

Guidelines for community engagement, prioritising reserves for future management, relate to City strategy actions.

 

Local Government Biodiversity Planning Guidelines 2004

Strategy guides the development of a local planning policy for biodiversity conservation; an action plan for managing biodiversity on Local Government land; a strategy to provide incentives for conservation on private land; and amendment of the local planning strategy and town planning scheme.

http://pbp.walga.asn.au/Publications/LocalGovernmentBiodiversityPlanningGuidelines.aspx

Plan assists with environmental planning.

 

State Local Planning Policy 2.6, and Guidelines

Recommendations for generic coastal planning and management, including specific objectives and pro forma for coastal management plans.

http://www.planning.wa.gov.au/publications/1168.asp

 

Coastal management and planning documents are informed by this document. Management plans include this information.

Local

 

City

Environment Strategy 2004

All objectives are relevant.

http://www.busselton.wa.gov.au/Environment-Waste/Environmental-Planning/Environment-Strategy

Previous plan helps to inform the new Environment Strategy, some original recommendations still outstanding, intent of plan is the same as new plan.

City

Local Environmental Planning Strategy 2011 (City)

Helps guide development and environmental protection for the City for over 30 years. Vision to accommodate its current and future populations in environmentally sustainable communities characterised by settlements that recognise and embrace the physical and environmental features. Areas of environmental and cultural significance will be identified and protected by the City’s planning framework, which will result in land use and development being environmentally sensitive.

See City website

Links planning policy with environmental values. Relates directly to policy decisions the City undertakes and therefore informs the Environment Strategy and implementation.

 

Peron Naturaliste Partnership (Alliance)

Network of other organisations and local governments committed to monitoring, identifying and managing coastal assets in relation to the impacts of climate change.

http://peronnaturaliste.org.au/

Provides valuable baseline data on coastal reserves, assets and provides recommendations and action planning and policy on future coastal asset management that affects biodiversity.

 

South West Catchments Council Coastal Action Plan 2015

Identifies coastal nodes in the City that are of high environmental and community value and lists potential management actions for protecting, conserving or enhancing these areas.

http://www.swnrmstrategy.org.au/get-involved/coastal-action-plan/

Identifies many of the coastal areas in Busselton of high value requiring coastal management. This information can be used to assist with the Environment Strategy implementation.


 

Federal/State/Local Objectives Concerning Water

 

Level of Government

Environment strategies/Plans

Relevant Objectives

Further reference

How this relates to the environment strategy/action?

Federal

Department of Environment Annual Report 2013-2014

Reports such as this provide a snapshot/baseline of water, a finite resource, in Australia.

http://www.environment.gov.au/about-us/publications/annual-report-2013-14-environment

General knowledge and understanding about water cycles and statements about how water is managed federally can assist with planning water management at the City.

Federal

Ramsar Convention- wetlands of international importance

The City works closely with Federal and state agencies with managing Ramsar wetlands in and around Busselton.

http://www.ramsar.org/about/wetlands-of-international-importance

 

The Vasse-Wonnerup Estuary in Busselton is recognised as a Ramsar wetland. The City works closely with a number of agencies to manage, study and protect this internationally significant water body.

State

Rights in Irrigation and Water Act WA and subsidiary legislation

The Act relates to rights in water resources, to make provision for the regulation, management, use and protection of water resources, and for related purposes.

http://www.slp.wa.gov.au/legislation/statutes.nsf/main_mrtitle_844_homepage.html

The Department of Water has powers to regulate surface and groundwater use and to permit the interference with bed and banks of a waterway to construct a dam or a crossing.

State

 

Environmental Protection Act WA and subsidiary legislation

The Act provides for an Environmental Protection Authority, for the prevention, control and abatement of pollution and environmental harm, for the conservation, preservation, protection, enhancement and management of the environment and for matters incidental to or connected with the foregoing.

https://www.slp.wa.gov.au/legislation/statutes.nsf/main_mrtitle_304_homepage.html

 

The Department of Environmental Regulation is responsible for implementing the powers of the Act. The Act covers such matters as-

·    Licencing of polluting processes, batching plants

·    Clearing of native vegetation

·    Controlled waste sites

·    Rural landfill

·    Noise

·    Unauthorised discharges

 

Local

ICLEI Water Campaign

Launched in 2000, the overarching ICLEI Water Campaign promotes the development of local water action plans to achieve tangible improvements in local water quality, conservation and access. A wide range of local initiatives have been taken in different regions across the world.

http://www.iclei.org/details/article/water-campaign.html

 

 

 

The City is part of the ICELI water reporting and reducing program for corporate water responsibility.

http://www.busselton.wa.gov.au/Environment-Waste/Environmental-Planning/Environmental-sustainability/Water-Campaign.

Local

Independent Review of the Current and Future Management of Water Assets in the Geographe Catchment 2014 (Prof Barry Hart for City)

Review was to strategically investigate issues, roles and responsibilities for managing water bodies such as lake, rivers and streams in the Busselton area. It has been long recognised that water in Busselton is polluted and requires a coordinated management approach. This document identified key roles and responsibilities.

Document available in-house

Document was delivered in November 2014. The report has been instrumental in the State government forming a Taskforce to investigate waterways and wetland management across the catchment.

Local

Water Quality Improvement Treatment Trials In The Lower Vasse River 2014

Documents relating to the City’s efforts to improve water quality in the Lower Vasse River. 2014. Such work is ongoing.

http://www.busselton.wa.gov.au/files/sharedassets/public/ecm/envplan/waterqualvasse/discussion_document_-_final_jan_2014.pdf

City works with government agencies and Geocatch to improve water quality.

 

Busselton Wetlands Conservation Strategy

Guiding sustainable use and wise management of biodiversity and environmental values of the Busselton wetlands.

http://www.planning.wa.gov.au/publications/756.asp

 

Supports planning strategies at the City and provides guidance for management of public lands where wetlands are present.


 

Federal/State/Local Objectives Concerning Community

 

Level of Government

Environment strategies/Plans

Relevant Objectives

Further reference

How this relates to the environment strategy/action?

 

Major actions

 

 

 

Local

 

 

 

 

 

A Guide to Managing Volunteers in WA Local Government (LGIS, 2012)

Legal responsibilities, volunteer insurance and OSH requirements.

 

Broadly relevant to managing community groups and for the development of a specific NRM community group manual.

 

City Friends of Reserves Strategy 1999

 

Outdated manual to provide information to individuals and groups that work on City managed land on NRM issues Provides framework for working with community groups.

http://www.busselton.wa.gov.au/Environment-Waste/Environmental-Planning/Community-participation-and-awareness

Managing community groups working on NRM is core business.

 

NRM community Group Manual 2015

Manual to provide information to individuals and groups that work on City managed land on NRM issues Manage community involvement, insurances, training and obligations etc.

Plan not published yet, under development

Guide for management of community volunteer groups.

 

City Environment Strategy 2004

All of this document.

http://www.busselton.wa.gov.au/Environment-Waste/Environmental-Planning/Environment-Strategy

 

This document was reviewed and a gap analysis undertaken to ensure actions from previous strategy were updated and considered.

 


 

Federal/State/Local Objectives Concerning Land

 

Level of Government

Environment legislation/strategies/Plans

Relevant Objectives

Further reference

How this relates to the environment strategy/action?

Federal

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act)

The EPBC Act enables the Australian Government to join with the states and territories in providing a national scheme of environment and heritage protection and biodiversity conservation. The EPBC Act focuses Australian Government interests on the protection of matters of national environmental significance, with the states and territories having responsibility for matters of state and local significance.

https://www.comlaw.gov.au/Series/C2004A00485

 

EPBC Act influences the management of land in WA and links to many state regulations and documents.

State

Biosecurity and Agriculture Management Act 2007, which contains the Western Australian Organism List (WAOL).

Considers agricultural weeds and pests and ongoing management.

http://www.slp.wa.gov.au/legislation/statutes.nsf/main_mrtitle_2736_homepage.html

 

Agricultural weeds and pests can and do affect management of the land and industry, increased costs for control and management or eradication. Such problematic flora and fauna can also be environmental weeds and pests and may greatly impact on environmental management activities especially in prone areas such as catchments, drains and bushland reserves.

 

Environmental Protection Act 1986, Contaminated Sites Act 2003, Environmental Protection Regulations 1987 and Environmental Protection, Clearing of Native Vegetation 2004

Various legislation and regulations relating to clearing and land management.

 

http://www.der.wa.gov.au/about-us/legislation

Link to a number of documents provided here and listed adjacent.

Environmental governance for land use and management.

 

Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act

Issues relating to waste management and contamination which the City must address.

http://www.slp.wa.gov.au/legislation/statutes.nsf/main_mrtitle_2758_homepage.htm

l

Waste legislation required for management of local government business such as waste disposal. These may impact on soils and nature reserves and are also concerned with illegal dumping, a common occurrence in environmental management.

 

Bush Fires Act 1954, and associated:

·    Fire and Emergency Services Act of 1998

·    Fire Brigades Act 1942

·    Bush Fires Act 1954

·    Emergency Services Levy Act 2002

Fire management is complex and various Acts in place to assist with long-term protection and hazard reduction.

http://www.slp.wa.gov.au/legislation/agency.nsf/dfes_menu.htmlx

 

Fire management is important in regional areas such as the City and guidelines and recommendations can affect long-term management of bushland reserves and vegetated remnants.

 


 

Federal/State/Local Objectives Concerning Sustainability

 

Level of Government

Environment strategies/Plans

Relevant Objectives

Further reference

How this relates to the environment strategy/action?

Federal

 

 

 

 

 

Sustainable Australia Report 2013 (Australian Government)

Broad overarching document that addresses the state of Australia in terms of sustainability and provides some recommendations on future sustainable priorities.

http://www.environment.gov.au/sustainability/publications/sustainable-australia-report-2013-conversations-future

Many of the recommendations are broad but address local government programs and these can broadly be applied to the Environment Strategy.

State

 

 

 

 

 

Western Australian State Sustainability Strategy 2003

Broadly identifies initiatives for considering sustainability across corporate objectives.

http://www.nrm.wa.gov.au/nrm-in-wa/key-publications/wa-state-sustainability-strategy.aspx

 

Some initiatives may be useful to consider during Strategy implementation.

 


Council                                                                                      123                                                                     27 July 2016

11.5           DA16/0273 - HOLIDAY HOME (6 PEOPLE) - 67 LINDSAY DRIVE, YALYALUP

SUBJECT INDEX:

Planning/Development Applications

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Development Services and Policy

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Statutory Planning

REPORTING OFFICER:

Planning Officer - Justin Biggar

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil

  

PRÉCIS

 

The Council is asked to consider an application seeking approval for a Holiday Home (6 People) at Lot 222 (67) Lindsay Drive, Yalyalup (“the site”).

 

The proposal has been placed before Council due to location of the holiday home in a non-preferred area as identified in Planning Policy 7C – Holiday Home Provisions.

 

In assessing the merits of the application the requirements of the above mentioned policy have been given due regard together with other relevant statutory planning considerations contained within the Scheme.

 

It is considered that the proposal is consistent with the relevant planning framework and it is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The application for a Holiday Home was received 11 April 2016.  The site is located in a non-preferred area for holiday homes as per Planning Policy 7C – Holiday Home Provisions

 

The applicant was aware of this restriction and provided a number of rationales in support of the application.

 

The application was referred to adjoining landowners for comment with two submissions received, both indicating support.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

The key statutory environment is set out in the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21 Scheme, as modified by the Deemed Provisions set out in Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development Regulations 2015.

 

In accordance with Table 1 – Zoning Table and Clause 5.17 – Bed and Breakfast and Holiday Homes of the Scheme a “Holiday Home (Single House)” which proposes to accommodate 9 or less people is a discretionary (“D”) land use within the “Residential” zone. This means that the use is not permitted unless the local government has exercised its discretion by granting approval.

 

When determining an application for a discretionary (“D”) land use the local government is required to take into consideration the matters set out in Clause 67 of the Deemed Provisions – Matters to be considered by Local Government.

Those matters which are considered to be particularly relevant to this application are as follows:

(b)       the requirements of orderly and proper planning including any proposed local planning scheme or amendment to this Scheme that has been advertised under the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 or any other proposed planning instrument that the local government is seriously considering adopting or approving;

(g)       any local planning policy for the Scheme area;

(n)       the amenity of the locality including the following —

(ii)       the character of the locality;

(iii)      social impacts of the development;

 

A Holiday Home is also required to be registered, and maintain its registration, under the City of Busselton Holiday Homes Local Law 2012.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

Local Planning Policy 7C – Holiday Home s

 

The City’s Holiday Home framework (Planning control, local law-registration) was adopted on 12 December 2012 and became effective on 26 December 2012, with a phased introduction through the first half of 2013. 

            

The Local Planning Policy 7C – Holiday Home s identifies areas where holiday homes will be generally supported and identifies servicing requirements for holiday homes. The Policy divides all Residential and Rural Residential zoned lots into two areas, being Area 1 and Area 2. Within Area 1, holiday homes are broadly supported within the “Residential” and “Rural Residential” zones, but within Area 2 holiday homes are broadly supported only in the “Rural Residential” zone. 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

There are no direct financial implications arising from the officer recommendation in this report.

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The recommendation in this report reflects Community Objective 2.2 of the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2013 – ‘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 identifies ‘downside’ risks only, rather than ‘upside’ risks as well, and risks are only identified where the residual risk, once controls are identified, is ‘medium’ or greater.   There were no such risks identified.

 

CONSULTATION

 

A consultation period of 14 days was undertaken with adjoining landowners notified of the proposal.

 

Two submissions were received from 48 Lindsay Drive and 71 Lindsay Drive, both indicating support.

 


 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

Broader Context:

The City of Busselton has traditionally been a holiday home destination with holiday homes making an important contribution to the local economy.  Holiday homes may be a second home and rented to offset some costs or rented as a property investment.  Holiday homes often go through transitions from a second home that is then rented occasionally, before facilitating the owner’s transition to permanent residency in the City of Busselton.  

 

The site is the former family home of the applicant who has relocated to Perth for work purposes.  They wish to retain the home to maintain the ability to visit Busselton.

 

Policy Context:   

Planning Policy 7C outlines the criteria when considering an application for a holiday home in the City of Busselton.

 

As assessed against the requirements of policy, the proposal is considered to meet all relevant criteria with the exception of the preferred area requirement.

 

There are two major considerations informing the preferred area component of the holiday home policy - housing affordability and tourism amenity.  

 

Tourism Amenity:

Holiday homes are considered appropriate in areas of high tourism amenity and close proximity to key attractions such as the beach, town centre and/or rural areas and not preferred in inaccessible, residential areas.

 

Although located outside the preferred area, Willow Grove are considered to satisfy these requirements.  With a low R5 residential density and large lot sizes (2000sqm – 10,000sqm), the site is more rural than residential in character with close proximity to native bushland in the Rob Breeden Reserve.

 

With ready access to both Vasse and Bussell Highway via Blum Boulevard, the site is considered to enjoy proximity and easy access to key tourism attractions, including the Busselton City Centre and foreshore.

 

Housing Affordability:

The building of dwellings for the sole purpose of letting as holiday homes could be considered to have a detrimental impact on housing affordability within the City, with younger and less wealthy homebuilders squeezed out of the market by more established buyers.

 

The rationale for excluding residential suburban areas from the holiday home preferred area was to decrease this potential pressure on house prices.

 

As highlighted above, Willow Grove is an established residential area with a relatively high barrier to entry in terms of cost.  The housing affordability rationale for preferred areas is not considered relevant in relation to this particular location.

 

Scheme Context:

The proposal is considered to satisfy the requirements of Clause 67 of the Deemed Provisions - Matters to Be Considered by Local Government, specifically those highlighted above, being (b) (g) and (n).

Clause G of the Matters to Be Considered, which refers to “any local planning policy for the Scheme area,” has been addressed above.

 

Due to the nature of the holiday home, the small number of people proposed (6), the size of the lot and supportive neighbour comments received during the referral process, it is not considered the proposal will have a detrimental impact on amenity and that approval is consistent with the requirements of orderly and proper planning.

 

CONCLUSION

 

It is recommended that the Council approve the application with appropriate conditions.

 

If Council is supportive of the recommendation, the Council may wish to reconsider the non-preferred area component of Planning Policy 7C particularly in relation to suburbs such as Willow Grove.

 

OPTIONS

 

The Council could:

 

1.    Refuse the proposal, setting out reasons for doing so; or

2.    Apply additional or different conditions.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

The proponent and those who made a submission will be advised of the Council decision within two weeks of the Council meeting.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council resolve:

 

1.    That application DA16/0273 submitted for development at Lot 222 (67) Lindsay Drive, Yalyalup is generally consistent with Local Planning Scheme No. 21 and the objectives and policies of the zone within which it is located.

 

2.    That Development Approval is issued subject to the following conditions:

 

General Conditions:

1.    The use hereby approved shall be in accordance with the Approved Plan dated (attached),            including any conditions placed thereon by the City of Busselton.

 

2.    The use hereby approved shall at all times comply with the definition of Holiday Home (Single House) as provided in Schedule 1 of the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21, as follows:

 

   ‘Holiday home (single house)’ means a single house (excluding ancillary accommodation),              which may also be used for short stay accommodation for hire or reward for no more than 12 people (but does not include a bed and breakfast, chalet development, guesthouse, rural             tourist accommodation or tourist accommodation).

   Notwithstanding the above interpretation, the approved use is restricted to a maximum of 6        people.

 

3.    Advertising signage associated with the approved use shall be no greater than 0.2m2, located within the subject site.

 

4.    A minimum number of 2 car parking bays shall be provided on site.

 


Council                                                                                      127                                                                     27 July 2016

11.6           CONSOLIDATED PARKING SCHEME AMENDMENTS

SUBJECT INDEX:

Minor Parking Scheme Amendments

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Environmental Services

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Ranger and Emergency Services

REPORTING OFFICER:

Manager, Environmental Services  - Greg Simpson

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Designated Parking Stalls Port Geographe Boatramp Carpark

Attachment b    Designated Parking Stalls and Two Hour Time Limit Cammilleri Street

Attachment c    Designated No Parking Road and Verge Fairbairn Road  

  

PRÉCIS

 

The purpose of this report is to seek Council's endorsement of proposed amendments to the City’s Consolidated Parking Scheme, to –

 

1)      establish a parking area in the Port Geographe boat ramp carpark for the Busselton Volunteer Marine Rescue Group tow vehicle and boat trailer;

 

2)      car parking stalls and two hour parking times for a section of Cammilleri Street (eastern side) between Kent Street and Fairbairn Road; and

 

3)      no stopping/parking areas along the south side and a small section along the north side of Fairbairn Road between Brown and Cammilleri Street.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The City’s Consolidated Vehicle Parking Scheme (the Scheme) is periodically reviewed and amended from time to time, thereby ensuring that the Scheme remains current. The most recent changes to the Scheme were endorsed by Council in October 2014.

 

The following are proposed as amendments to the Scheme:

 

1.    Designated vehicle parking stalls - Port Geographe Marina car park

The Busselton Volunteer Marine Rescue Group provide essential marine rescue and associated services to the community and regularly launch their vessels from the boat ramp at the Port Geographe Marina. The Busselton Volunteer Marine Rescue Group has requested parking stalls be designated within the Port Geographe boat ramp car park, in close proximity to the boat ramp, for sole use by the tow vehicle and boat trailer used by the Busselton Volunteer Marine Rescue Group when launching their rescue boat at the marina. This proposed amendment is included as Attachment A.

 

2.    Car parking stalls with 2 hour parking times - Cammilleri Street, between Kent Street and Fairbairn Road

The City has received a number of requests for parking controls on the eastern side of Cammilleri Street, between Kent Street and Fairbairn Road. This report recommends the establishment of car parking stalls and two hour parking times for a section of Cammilleri Street (eastern side) between Kent Street and Fairbairn Road. This proposed amendment is included as Attachment B.

 

3.    No parking/no stopping area - Fairbairn Road, between Cammilleri and Brown Streets

The City has received a number of requests to introduce parking controls on the southern side of Fairbairn Road between Cammilleri and Brown Streets to improve public safety. This report recommends the introduction of no parking and no stopping areas on the southern side of Fairbairn Road between Cammilleri and Brown Streets, with a small no stopping area introduced on the northern side of Fairbairn Road near its intersection with Cammilleri Street. This proposed amendment is included as Attachment C.

 

It should be noted that other changes to parking controls are being considered in other locations, most notably in Dunsborough Town Centre, Yallingup Townsite and Albert Street, Busselton; but they will be subject of further consultation before being presented for further Council consideration.

 

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

The City designates and polices parking and traffic restrictions under the powers of the Parking Local Law 2011. The designation of parking stalls, stations and areas occurs under Part 2 of the Local Law, and the Consolidated Vehicle Parking Scheme (a large series of plans identifying the location and type of parking restrictions in detail) is adopted pursuant to Part 2 as a means to identify these designations. Designations are given practical effect through on-ground signage and line marking, as well as the issue of local public notice as required by the Local Law.

 

Where the Council makes a determination to establish or amend a parking stall, parking stations and parking areas under Parking Local Law 2011, the CEO must give local public notice of, and erect signs to give effect to, the determination.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

Local Planning Policy 8A: Car Parking Provisions outlines the requirements for the provision of vehicle parking facilities associated with development, which includes consideration of special purpose parking dependent on the nature of the development and includes minimum provision of taxi pick-up bays, motorcycle bays and bicycle parking facilities.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

Resources required for implementation of the local law, that is to mark parking bays and or zones with paint and installing signs on posts, are provided for within the City’s overall operational budget and can be achieved without any effect on other operational areas.

 

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

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

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The recommendation of this report reflects Community Objective 2.2 of the Strategic Community Plan 2013, which is; “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 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

Public Health and Reputational Risk – inadequate vehicle parking control affecting pedestrian safety.

Implementation of parking management.

Minor

Possible

Medium

 

CONSULTATION

 

In preparing this report City staff have consulted with the Busselton Volunteer Marine Rescue Group and the Port Geographe Marina management, Salvation Army Op Shop staff, and businesses and residents in Fairbairn Road, between Cammilleri and Brown Streets.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

Comments regarding each proposal are set out below.

 

1.      Designated vehicle parking stalls - Port Geographe Marina car park

The allocation of dedicated parking stalls for the Busselton Volunteer Marine Rescue Group at the Port Geographe boat ramp car park will ensure that vehicle parking is available in close proximity to the launching facility, to enable launching of the rescue boat in a timely manner, particularly on those days when there is a high demand for vehicle parking. Note that there will be as advisory only, as the Local Law does not recognize Marine Rescue vehicles as a separate ‘class’ of vehicles.

 

2.      Designated car parking stalls with 2 hour parking times - Cammilleri Street between Kent Street

         and Fairbairn Road

Cammilleri Street experiences significant vehicle traffic flow and vehicle parking particularly on the eastern side (immediately south of Kent Street) has been observed to encroach on the foot path and brick paved areas. The footpath is sufficiently wide to enable the establishment of vehicle parking stalls and separate pedestrian access.

 

New stalls have been marked to trial car parking along a section of footpath and to delineate the pedestrian footpath. The existing concrete footpath has been marked to create parking stalls and the brick paved area between the building and the existing concrete footpath is being used for pedestrian traffic. This report recommends that Council formalise these arrangements.

It should be noted that when this work was done ‘one-hour’ parking limit signs were erected, but never reflected in the adopted parking scheme. As it is not practicable or necessary to enforce one hour parking limits in this area, a two hour limit is proposed.

 

3.      No parking/no stopping area - Fairbairn Road, between Cammilleri and Brown Streets

Currently vehicle parking occurs along both sides of Fairbairn Road between Cammilleri and Brown Streets and this practice is currently reducing trafficable road width, particularly near the Fairbairn/Cammilleri Street intersection.

 

The following proposed parking controls for Fairbairn Road are recommended:

 

I.     Install “No Stopping on Roadway” signage on the south side of Fairbairn Road from Brown Street to the commencement of the paved brick footpath surface opposite the premises number 2 Fairbairn Road;

 

II.    Install “No Stopping Road or Verge” signage adjacent to the paved brick footpath surface opposite the premises number 2 Fairbairn Road, extending to Camilleri Street and immediately adjacent on the opposite side (northern side) of Fairbairn Road.

 

CONCLUSION

 

It is recommended that the Council adopt the officer recommendation and amend the Consolidated Parking Scheme.

 

OPTIONS

 

Council may resolve not to support the Officer recommendation to designate additional parking bays and no parking/no parking areas as proposed or may amend the proposal.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

Where the Council makes a determination to establish or amend a parking stall, parking stations and parking areas under the Parking Local Law 2011, the CEO must give local public notice of, and erect signs to give effect to, the determination. Subject to Council endorsement of the officer recommendation local public notice will be advertised and appropriate signage erected prior to 30 September 2016

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council determines pursuant to the City of Busselton Parking Local Law 2011, changes to the  Consolidated Parking Scheme to include -

 

1.             Two parking stalls within the Port Geographe boat ramp car park for sole use by the Busselton Volunteer Marine Rescue Group (Attachment A);

 

2.             Car parking stalls with 2 hour parking time limits on the eastern side of Cammilleri Street, between Kent Street and Fairbairn Road (Attachment B);

 

3.             No stopping on roadway and no stopping road or verge areas along Fairbairn Road between Brown and Cammilleri Streets (Attachment C); and

 

4.             Gives notice of that determination as required by the City of Busselton Parking Local Law 2011.

 


Council

129

27 July 2016

11.6

Attachment a

Designated Parking Stalls Port Geographe Boatramp Carpark

 


Council

129

27 July 2016

11.6

Attachment b

Designated Parking Stalls and Two Hour Time Limit Cammilleri Street

 


Council

131

27 July 2016

11.6

Attachment c

Designated No Parking Road and Verge Fairbairn Road

 


Council                                                                                      139                                                                     27 July 2016

11.7           DA14/0561 - PROPOSED EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRY - LOT 61 (NO.1958) CAVES ROAD, NATURALISTE

SUBJECT INDEX:

Planning/Development Applications

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

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

BUSINESS UNIT:

Development Services and Policy

ACTIVITY UNIT:

Development Services and Policy

REPORTING OFFICER:

Senior Development Planner - Andrew Watts

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment a   Location Plan

Attachment b    Revised Proposal

Attachment c    Original vs Revised Extraction Area Proposals

Attachment d   Schedule of Submissions  

  

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

Name/Position

Mike Archer, Chief Executive Officer

Item No./Subject

11.7 - DA14/0561 - Proposed Extractive Industry - Lot 61 (No.1958) Caves Road, Naturaliste

Type of Interest

Impartiality Interest

Nature of Interest

The proponent of the application being a distant relative.

 

PRÉCIS

 

The Council is asked to consider application DA14/0561 seeking approval for an extractive industry (sand mining) on Lot 61, Caves Road, Naturaliste (“the site”). This follows the City’s earlier deferral of consideration at its 22 June 2016 meeting – with consideration deferred to this month.

 

The proposal has been placed before Council due to the history of extractive industry proposals for this property and also given the number and nature of submissions received as a result of the consultation process.

 

It is considered that the extractive industry proposed in this location is consistent with the relevant planning framework and is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The City received an application (DA14/0561) for an extractive industry (sand) at Lot 61, Caves Road, Naturaliste.

 

The site is located on the corner of Caves and Vidler Roads.  It is zoned ‘Agriculture’, is located within a Landscape Value area and has a total size of 54.3 Ha (see Attachment A). The site currently accommodates the ‘Empire Retreat’ tourist development – and the owner of that development is also the applicant for this application. Access for the purposes of the extraction operation is to be via Vidler Road.

 

The application was advertised for public comment and was also referred to relevant agencies. Both public and agency referral submissions raised various issues and concerns with the proposal and these concerns were subsequently presented to the applicant for consideration and response prior to a recommendation being presented to Council.

 

The original proposal was for a total of 1,000,000m3 of sand to be removed from the site, which the application stated would be removed at an average rate of 50,000 tonnes per year over a 20 year period, however it was also advised that if a major contract is won then 100,000 tonnes may be removed within a 3 month period.

 

The applicant subsequently revised the proposal by reducing the total volume of material to be extracted to 350,000m3, increasing the distance between the extraction site and sensitive premises. Further to this the applicant has advised that they are removing from the proposal providing for any significant increase in extraction volumes over short periods for major contracts.

 

The application for planning consent as revised is Attachment B. A plan showing a comparison of the original and proposed extraction areas is Attachment C.

 

The subject site has had a history of applications for extractive industry being considered by Council with an application being refused by Council on 13 July 2005 due to the following reasons:

 

(a)          The proposed sand pit conflicts with Council Policy in that it is within 500 metres of residences and the residents who are opposing the sand pit are likely to be adversely affected by dust/noise.

(b)          The proposed sandpit is practically surrounded by established or about to be established high-grade tourist resorts.

(c)           The cartage requirements of the pit would drastically increase the danger to motorists in their use of Vidler Road.

(d)          Council at its Meeting of 14 February 2001, determined that no sand pits would be permitted in this area in the future.

 

It should be noted that the current Council is not bound by this earlier resolution, and that a Council cannot bind a future Council in this matter. Furthermore, the relevant policy framework was modified a number of years ago to allow extractive industry in this area, and more broadly in the western part of the District.

 

The application was previously presented to Council for the meeting of 22 June 2016. At that meeting the Council resolved:

 

That this item be deferred for further consideration until the next Council meeting on 27 July 2016.

 

The reason given by Council for deferring consideration of this item was:

 

Some property owners in the vicinity of the proposal have complained that they were not given enough notice that this was coming to council this week. The extra month will provide them with the opportunity to consider the matter and alleviate any claims it is being rushed through council.

 

The officer comments and recommendation in this report are the same as that presented to Council for consideration on 22 June 2016, with the exception that an alternative officer recommendation presented to Council following a site inspection by Councillors and staff on the day prior to the 22 June meeting has been incorporated into the officer recommendation in this report. Whilst at present there is no sensitive land use on the land adjoining the southern boundary within 300 metres of land where extraction is now proposed, there is a current approval for sensitive land uses in that area. The alternative recommendation would encourage extraction activity in the southern-most part of the site to occur within the next 12 months, when, despite the approval that is in place, there is unlikely to be any sensitive land-use actually in occupation (given the timeframes likely to be associated with further approvals and construction, should that development proceed).

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT

 

The key statutory environment is set out in the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21 (‘the Scheme’), which classifies ‘Extractive Industry’ as development requiring planning consent and an ‘A’ use within the Agricultural zone.  The ‘A’ permissibility means that the proposed land use can be approved at the reasonable discretion of the City, following a compulsory consultation process as outlined in clause 10.4 of the Scheme.

 

RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES

 

The assessment of the proposed extractive industry is guided by a number of policies which relate to the zoning and proposed use of the land.  The key policy implications are outlined below.

 

Local Rural Planning Strategy

The site is contained within the ‘Naturaliste’ Precinct in the Local Rural Planning Strategy. The Strategy recognizes that from an economic perspective that there are commercial sand extraction resources in the area.

 

The precinct vision is to ‘Retain and conserve the natural environment, landscape values and character of the area in balance with limited tourist development.'

 

The objectives of the precinct are ‘To ensure that the planning in this precinct is consistent with the LNRSPP and Scheme provisions.’

 

Agricultural Zone - Objectives and Policies

The objectives and policies of the Agriculture zone seek to preserve the agricultural potential of rural land and to only permit development for other purposes where other suitable land is not available and where the rural amenity will not be adversely impacted. 

 

Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge Statement of Planning Policy

The LNRSPP places a very high priority on the protection of Prime Agricultural Land with the overriding criterion being to ensure the predominant use of land will be agriculture.  Other uses, including uses of interspersed lands with lesser agricultural potential, will be compatible with and not jeopardise, agricultural use of adjoining Prime Agricultural Land. The LNRSPP requires that development of mineral and basic raw material resources will be subject to programmed rehabilitation which will be recommended as a condition of any Planning Consent granted. The proposal is consistent with this policy.

 

Local Planning Policy 5A: Extractive Industries

The Extractive Industry Policy recognises that extractive industries have the potential for incompatibility with other land uses.  It also recognises that this is particularly the case west of Bussell Highway where sensitive land uses such as tourist accommodation and tourist-oriented land uses are most often located.  The Policy only supports extractive industries where land use conflicts can be avoided or minimised.

 

The Local Planning Policy requires the advertising of all Extractive industry Proposals to involve advising all landowners within 1.0km of the site.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

There are no identifiable significant financial implications to the City arising from the staff recommendation in this report.

Long-term Financial Plan Implications

 

Nil

 

STRATEGIC COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

 

The recommendation of this report reflects Community Objective 5.2 of the Strategic Community Plan 2013, which is; “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 identifies ‘downside’ risks only, rather than ‘upside’ risks as well. Risks are only identified where the individual risk, once controls are identified, is medium or greater. No such risks have been identified.

 

CONSULTATION

 

The proposal was referred to landowners within one kilometre of the proposed extractive industry and to relevant Government agencies.  It was also advertised in the local newspaper. 36 submissions were received — seven from Government agencies or service providers, 29 from surrounding landowners. All public submissions received broadly objected to the proposal.

 

Subsequent to being provided with details of the issues raised in submissions the applicant revised the proposal. As revisions to the proposal were made in response to addressing issues raised in submissions the revised proposal has not been re-advertised. The exception to this being that the revised proposal was referred to Main Roads WA due to a reduction in proposed peak traffic volumes and significant works having been undertaken to Caves Road and its intersection with Vidler Road subsequent to comment being made on the original proposal.

 

A schedule of submissions is at Attachment D.

 

Agency comment

 

The Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) had no specific comments regarding this proposal. It did, however, advise that sand is a scarce and important resource in the South West region and that supplies of it are needed for affordable development and infrastructure projects. It has also been requested that the City notify the Geological Survey of Western Australia of all extractive industry applications to assist/contribute towards their database.

 

The Department of Water (DoW) recommends that any approval for the proposed extractive industry should include the following conditions:

 

•           the extractive industry will not intercept the water table;

•           there will be no dewatering of the extraction area permitted; and

•           no standing water will occur at the end of mining / post rehabilitation.

To protect water resources against potential contamination, the following specific conditions are also recommended to be applied:

 

•           there will be no additional storage of hydrocarbons on-site,

•           on-site refuelling of equipment will be from a mobile service vehicle carrying appropriate spill prevention and clean-up equipment; a

•           no major repairs or maintenance will take place on site.

 

The Department of Parks and Wildlife (DPaW) advised the Lot 61 subject of the proposal borders two lots which are subject to the DPaW “Land for Wildlife” program, which aims to encourage landholders to conserve nature and wildlife on properties. DPaW note that the proposed extractive industry site is generally cleared of native vegetation but is within close proximity to potential Western Ringtail Possum and Black Cockatoo habitat trees. The proponent should ensure that these trees are not impacted by the proposed extraction works.

 

DPaW has also mentioned the requirements of the Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge Statement of Planning Policy and the need to comply with landscape protection requirements. DPaW recommends that all final contour and batter slopes should be no steeper than 1 vertical to 6 horizontal.

 

Main Roads referral response to the original proposal requested that a condition of approval should be applied for upgrades to be made to the intersection of Vidler and Caves Roads, including right turn widening. As a result of a revised proposal that reduces peak truck movement numbers and with recent improvements made to the Vidler Road intersection with Caves Road, Main Roads has revised their comments to advise that they have no objection to the proposal and that the intersection upgrades recently undertaken by Main Roads are sufficient to cater for the proposal without any further works being necessary.

 

The Department of Environment and Regulation (DER) had no specific comments other than to advise that if clearing of native vegetation or screening and washing of sand is proposed, approval from DER may be required for these activities.

 

Public Comment

 

29 public submissions objected to the proposal. The main issues raised in public submissions related to proximity to houses and tourist accommodation, noise, dust, traffic and landscape amenity issues. These issues are discussed in more detail within the officer comment section of this report.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

 

There are seen to be a number of key issues affecting the consideration of this proposal. These issues are outlined below:

 

1.    Environmental Impact;

 

2.    Traffic Impact and Management;

 

3.    Noise and Dust Emissions;

 

4.    Landscape Impact; and

 

5.    Basic Raw Material Supply

 

Environmental Impact

The extraction site is predominantly clear of vegetation however if native vegetation clearing is required, that clearing may require approval of the Department of Environment Regulation.

 

In accordance with the Extractive Industry Policy, however, it is necessary for a rehabilitation and environmental management plan to be provided and approved.

The extractive industry policy requires that only 2ha can be worked at any one time. Further to this, it is required that worked areas commence rehabilitation prior to commencing extraction on the next cell.

 

Given the role of the DER in the clearing permit process, the environmental responsibility of the City involves approving a suitable Environmental Management Plan and associated Rehabilitation Plan.

 

Traffic Impact and Management

Access and the additional trucks movements the proposal would place on Vidler & Caves Roads and safety concerns was raised as an issue by most submitters during the consultation process. Both roads are currently sealed, with Caves Road being under the management of Main Roads WA. Main Roads’ referral response to the original proposal requested that a condition of approval if granted was for upgrades to be made to the intersection of Vidler and Caves Roads including right turn widening. As a result of a revised proposal that reduces peak truck movement numbers and with recent improvements made to the Vidler Road intersection with Caves Road, Main Roads has revised their comments to advise that they have no objection to the proposal, and that the intersection upgrades recently undertaken by Main Roads are sufficient to cater for the proposal without any further works being necessary.

 

Noise and Dust

There are a number of controls within the Extractive Industry Policy which aim to control the impact of extractive industries on amenity. Noise and dust generated from extractive industry are the primary concerns which require addressing in this regard.   As mentioned in the Background section of this report, there are a number of sensitive land uses located within the general proximity of the site. The primary controls in this case are setback requirements and noise/dust management plans.

 

Clause 6.2.1 of the Extractive Industry Policy states that “No extractive industry operations to be located within 500m of any tourist accommodation/attraction, where the owners of such object to the proposal”. The owners of the nearby Yallingup Lodge tourist development which is within 500m of the site of the original proposal objected. There was also objection submitted on behalf of the owners of Lot 4 Hemsley Road, which adjoins the subject site and upon which Tourist Accommodation was approved as part of developments for DA13/0739, at the Council meeting of 23 April 2014. The nearest part of the approved development (Chalets) would be approximately 100m to the original proposed extraction area. No physical construction of development for DA13/0739 has commenced and with the Development Approval due to expire in May 2017, to date no building permit application has been submitted, so it is unclear if development for DA13/0739 will proceed. 

 

With the revised proposal modifying the proposed extraction area layout a 500m buffer from all existing tourist developments will be achieved and the distance to the nearest existing sensitive premises will be approximately 370m to a house on adjoining Lot 6. The distance to the development site for DA13/0739 is approximately 200m.

 

The policy provides for setbacks between extractive industry and dwellings in 6.2.1, stating “No extractive industry is to be located within 500m of a residence where the owner or resident of such objects to the proposal”. In this instance the owners of Lot 24 Drummond Glen have objected to the original proposal, however the revised proposal achieves a setback of greater than 500m to the house on Lot 24.

 

Notwithstanding Clauses 6.2.1 and 6.2.2 of the policy discussed above, the policy guides that the extraction of sand could be located less than 500m but no closer than 300m from a sensitive landuse dependent on the nature and scale of the development and suitable dust and noise management. The revised proposal is located approximately 370m from the nearest sensitive premises, being a house on Lot 6 Caves Rd.

Furthermore, in terms of setbacks, clause 6.2.5 of the Extractive Industry Policy is also applicable, requiring the following to be addressed; “Policy Areas 2 and 3: Where an extractive industry is approved within 1km of a residence or tourist accommodation or attraction, additional conditions to reduce amenity impact from noise and dust may be imposed, including operating times.

There are a significant number of residences and tourist based operations within 1km of the proposal, which includes almost all of the objections received. The noise and dust management plan which has been submitted to the City, as per requirements of the Extractive Industry Policy, proposes a number of management measures. This includes installation of noise and particulate monitoring equipment. The noise targets identified for compliance within the management plans are as set out in the State noise regulations (i.e. the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997). Also, operating and haulage hours are in accordance with the provisions outlined by the Policy, which does not allow work on the weekends or public holidays.

 

Having assessed the noise and dust management plan, officers are of the view that the plan is technically sound. It is also important that distance alone is not a protection of amenity. Other measures will be applied in combination to maintain the amenity for neighbouring residents. Note that does not mean there will be no impact on the amenity of the locality, but rather that the impacts will not be unreasonable, provided they are managed in accordance with the noise and dust management plan that has been provided by the applicant.

 

In summary on the issue of amenity, it is considered that the noise and dust management plan which the applicant has submitted are of an appropriate standard and meet the requirements of the Extractive Industry Policy. The management plan, in conjunction with a rehabilitation plan, will manage the amenity concerns raised.

 

Landscape Impact

The issue of amenity at a localised level has been addressed above. In regards to the potential impact on the greater area, it is necessary to consult the landscape provisions of the Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge Statement of Planning Policy. Lot 61 is largely classified as ‘General Character’ with the rear section of the site mapped as ‘Natural Landscape Significance’ and the front part of the site being ‘Travel Route Corridor’. The Extraction area appears to be confined to ‘General Character.’ General character is classified as the lowest level of significance within the policy and is the designation given to areas which do not fall into higher levels of importance.  The western section of the site is classified as ‘Natural Landscape Significance’; this is the highest level of landscape value in the policy. It is to be noted that this section of the site is not proposed to be subject to extractive industry. It is important to note that the proposal does not fall within an area that may be viewed from an identified ‘travel route corridor’. The policy requires that extractive industries are to be subject to programmed rehabilitation, which will be recommended as a condition of any consent granted. On this basis, given that the area mapped ‘Natural Landscape Significance’ is not affected and with the implementation of a suitable rehabilitation plan, the proposal will not result in a significant impact on landscape values.

 

Basic Raw Material Supply

The supply of basic raw materials, including sand, is a significant issue across the region and is a relevant planning consideration – although primarily at the policy and strategy development level, rather than as a significant factor in the determination of individual applications. In assessing individual applications the City should be primarily concerned with ensuring that the impacts of proposals, in terms of environmental, traffic, amenity and/or landscape values, will be effectively managed.

 


 

CONCLUSION

 

It is accepted that sand is an important resource and finding such accessible resources is becoming increasingly difficult.

 

A number of submissions regarding the proposal have been received, concerning a range of issues, and the applicant has responded to these issues satisfactorily. 

 

Officers are satisfied that the road network is satisfactory to accommodate this proposal, and haulage time will be restricted to avoid a potential to conflict with school bus travel times.

 

OPTIONS

 

The Council could:

 

1.    Refuse the proposal, setting out reasons for doing so.

2.    Apply additional or different conditions.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

The proponent and those who made submissions will be advised of the Council decision within two weeks of the Council making a determination.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council resolve:

 

1)    That application DA14/0561 submitted for an Extractive Industry at Lot 61 Caves Road, Naturaliste is considered by Council to be consistent with the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21 and the orderly and proper planning of that locality.

 

2)    That Development Approval is issued for the proposal referred to in 1. above subject to the following conditions:

 

General Conditions:

1.    The development hereby approved is permitted to operate for five years from the date of this Decision Notice or until 350,000 cubic metres volume of material has been extracted, whichever is sooner, except that extraction activity and bulk earthworks associated with land within 250 metres of the southern lot boundary shall be completed within 12 months of the date of this Decision Notice.

 

2.    The site shall be rehabilitated in accordance with an approved Rehabilitation Plan by the expiry date of this planning consent and shall be operated in a manner consistent with all associated detailed plans, including but not limited to the Noise Management Plan and Dust Management Plan.

 

3.    The development hereby approved shall be limited to: the extraction of sand from the site; screening of material; associated drainage works; and rehabilitation works.  At no time shall any processing, crushing or blasting works be carried out.

 

4.    Working hours within the pit area and transportation of materials shall be restricted to the hours between: 7.00am and 6.00pm Mondays to Fridays; 7.00am and 12.00pm Saturdays for rehabilitation works only; and at no time on Sundays or public holidays.

5.    No more than 2 hectares shall be worked at any one time; this area shall then be rehabilitated in accordance with the approved details pursuant to Condition 7.3 concurrently with the extraction of the following 2 hectare area.

 

6.    The lowest level of excavation shall always be a minimum of at least 1 metre above the maximum water table level.

 

7.    The minimum setback from all boundaries shall be 20 metres.

 

Prior to Commencement of Any Works Conditions:

8.    The development hereby approved, or any works required to implement the development, shall not commence until the following plans or details have been submitted to the City and have been approved in writing:

8.1.     A Noise Management Plan. The plan is to be prepared using the prescribed standards       for noise emissions as set down in the Environmental Protection (noise)                 Regulations         1997.

8.2.     A Dust Management Plan. This plan is to be prepared using the DEC guidelines “A               Guideline for Managing The Impacts of Dust and Associated Contaminants             From Land Development Sites, Contaminated Sites Remediation and Other      Related Activities (DEC 2011).

8.3.     A Rehabilitation Plan, incorporating, at a minimum, the following:

·    Embankments not to be steeper than 1 in 6;

·    Contour ripping the bottom and sides of the pit area;

·    Spreading of stockpiled topsoil;

·    Spreading of stockpiled branches and undergrowth;

·    Seeding with an appropriate agriculture seed mix, and / or planting native species of trees,

·    Shrubs and ground covers;

·    Topsoil is to be stockpiled and re-established;

·    Reuse of timber;

·    Staging of rehabilitation process.

8.4.     A Drainage Management Plan, incorporating the installation of detention and silt /            nutrient stripping ponds. The measures incorporated into the Plan shall be             implemented prior to     the commencement of excavation and maintained at all        times.

8.5.     A Dieback Hygiene Management Plan addressing the issue of dieback spread from, or      to, the property by transfer of the disease by plant and vehicles, and the material            being transported.  All operations related to the extractive industry shall be carried               out in accordance with the approved Plan.

8.6.     A Traffic Management plan, incorporating, at a minimum, the following:

·    Road signage to be erected along the transport route.  The installation of the       signs shall be completed by the City of Busselton for which fees are payable;

·    Truck operating hours that avoid conflict with school bus services;

·    A maximum of 30 laden truck movements departing the property on any                given day.

 

Prior to Occupation/Use of the Development Conditions:

9.    The development hereby approved, or any works required to implement the development, are subject to the following bonds (accompanied by an executed legal agreement with the City at the full cost of the owner) which shall be paid to the City within 2 months of the date of this planning consent:

a.         A road maintenance bond of $20,000.00 in the form of an unconditional bank guarantee to ensure that the surrounding road network is maintained to the satisfaction of the City for the term of the extractive industry.  Those portions of public roads affected by the activities            related to the approval shall be maintained to a standard acceptable to the City at the          applicant’s cost; such bond may be utilised for road maintenance purposes where              necessary as a result of the operation;

b.         A performance bond to the value of $5,000.00 in the form of an unconditional bank          guarantee to ensure that the impacts on surrounding properties as a affected by the              activities related to the subject Extractive industry are managed to a standard acceptable to the City;

10.  The crossover to be constructed to a sealed and drained standard to the specifications    and satisfaction of the City. Existing access off Vidler Rd to be sealed and drained for a minimum of 20m from the edge of seal on Vidler Road into Lot 61.

On-Going Conditions:

11.  The works undertaken to satisfy Condition(s) 7.1-7.6 shall be subsequently maintained for the life of the development including:

11.1     The approved Rehabilitation Plan shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

11.2     All operations related to the extractive industry shall be carried out in     accordance with the approved Dieback Management Plan.

11.3    The approved Dust Management Plan shall be implemented and carried out in accordance with the approval details.

11.4    The approved Noise Management Plan shall be implemented and carried out in accordance with the approval details.

11.5    The approved Traffic Management Plan shall be implemented and carried out in accordance with the approval details.

11.6    The approved Drainage Management Plan shall be implemented and maintained at all times.

 

 


Council

141

27 July 2016

11.7

Attachment a

Location Plan

 


Council

203

27 July 2016

11.7

Attachment b

Revised Proposal

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 



 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

213

27 July 2016

11.7

Attachment c

Original vs Revised Extraction Area Proposals

 


Council

219

27 July 2016

11.7

Attachment d

Schedule of Submissions

 

 

Submission. No

ADDRESS

NAME

Nature of Submission

Officer Comment

GOVERNMENT SUBMISSIONS

1

 

Main           Roads Western Australia

Main Roads referral response to the original proposal requested that a condition of approval should be applied for upgrades to be made to the intersection of Vidler and Caves Roads, including right turn widening. As a result of a revised proposal that reduces peak truck movement numbers and with recent improvements made to the Vidler Road intersection with Caves Road, Main Roads has revised their comments to advise that they have no objection to the proposal and that the intersection upgrades recently undertaken by Main Roads are sufficient to cater for the proposal without any further works being necessary.

  Noted.

2

 

Department   of Parks and Wildlife

Advise that Lot 61 subject of the proposal borders two lots which are subject to the DPaW “Land for Wildlife” program, which aims to encourage landholders to conserve nature and wildlife on properties. DPaW note that the proposed extractive industry site is generally cleared of native vegetation but is within close proximity to potential Western Ringtail Possum and Black Cockatoo habitat trees. The proponent should ensure that these trees are not impacted by the proposed extraction works.

 

DPaW has also mentioned the requirements of the Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge Statement of Planning Policy and the need to comply with landscape protection requirements. DPaW recommends that all final contour and batter slopes should be no steeper than 1 vertical to 6 horizontal.

Noted. Applicant indicates that there is no proposal to clear vegetation that would require a clearing permit.

 

Officer report has made comment regarding the compliance of the proposal with the Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge Statement of Planning Policy. Recommended conditions in the officer report address the gradient of finished contours and slopes.

3

 

Department   of Water

The Department of Water (DoW) recommends that any approval for the proposed extractive industry should include the following conditions:

 

•           the extractive industry will not intercept the water table;

•           there will be no dewatering of the extraction area permitted; and

•           no standing water will occur at the end of mining / post rehabilitation.

To protect water resources against potential contamination, the following specific conditions are also recommended to be applied:

 

•           there will be no additional storage of hydrocarbons on-site,

•           on-site refuelling of equipment will be from a mobile service vehicle carrying appropriate spill prevention and clean-up equipment; a

•           no major repairs or maintenance will take place on site.

Noted. Conditions have been included in the officer recommendation to address the issues raised by Dept of Water.

 

 

4

 

Department   of Environment Regulation (DER)

The Department of Environment and Regulation (DER) had no specific comments other than to advise that if clearing of native vegetation or screening and washing of sand is proposed, approval from DER may be required for these activities.

 

Noted. The applicant will be responsible for submitting the relevant application/s to DER should those activities be proposed.

5

 

Department   of Mines and Petroleum

No specific comments regarding this proposal, however, advise that sand is a scarce and important resource in the South West region and that supplies of it are needed for affordable development and infrastructure projects. It has also been requested that the City notify the Geological Survey of Western Australia of all extractive industry applications to assist/contribute towards their database.

The applicant has applied for DER approval and if DER approval is obtained would be required to comply with its conditional requirements.

6

 

Water Corporation

Raises no concerns with the application.

Noted.

7

 

Western Power

Western Power does not have any specific comments at this time to the above proposal.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Noted.

PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS

 

8 - 33

 

26 submissions from surrounding landowners raising a variety of concerns

 Concerns raise the following topics:

 

·      Traffic impacts and management, including conflicts with school buses.

·      Environmental impacts

·      Noise

·      Dust

·      Visual landscape impact

·      Incompatibility with surrounding residential and tourist landuses

·      Operating times

·      Previous decisions of Council

 

 

 

 

The issue of traffic has been assessed by City staff and referred to Main Roads WA for comment prior to an officer recommendation being developed. Subsequent to the original proposal the applicant has submitted a revised application which reduces both the total volume of material to be extracted and has committed to not entering into any large contracts requiring a significant volume of materials to be extracted within a short time period, which prevents the possibility of increased number of truck movements also. Conditions of approval can also place limits on numbers of truck movements. Traffic management requirements include prevention of conflict with school bus operating times.

 

Dust, noise and environmental impacts such as preventing the spread of dieback can be addressed by recommended conditions requiring management plans to addressing these issues to be submitted, approved and implemented. It should be noted that the revised proposal that has been submitted by the applicant for consideration

 

It is considered that the proposal can comply with the Leeuwin Naturaliste Statement of Planning Policy which relates to protection of visual landscape amenity in the area.

 

Permitted hours of operation can be prescribed by conditions of approval.

 

Past decision of Council in regard to extractive industry applications for the subject property will be a matter for consideration by Council.. 

 

 

34.

 

T Koroveshi on behalf Yallingup Spa and Lodge

Object.

 

The following issues have been raised:

 

1.     Proximity of extractive industry to the Yallingup Spa Retreat is less than the 500m to a sensitive premises such as Tourist Development which is stated with the City Extractive industry Policy. 

 

2.     Concern with impact of noise and dust generated by the proposal.

 

3.     Inconsistency with Scheme 21 due to  Incompatibility of the proposal with surrounding landuses.

 

4.     Inconsistency with Local Rural Planning Strategy. The subject land is located within Precinct 7 – Naturaliste under this document. The precinct vision reads as follows:

“Retain and conserve the natural environment, landscape values and character of the area in balance with limited tourist development.”

 

5.     No promotion or mention of mining in the Leeuwin Naturaliste Statement of Planning Policy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.     The revised proposal results in greater than 500m separation being achieved to Yallingup Spa Retreat and other tourist developments.

 

2.     Noise and dust are to be addressed by the submission, approval and implementation of appropriate management plans to control impacts.

 

3.     The Council will have to determine whether or not the revised proposal can be operated in a manner that is compatible with the surrounding landuses, with the approval and implementation of appropriate management plans to control impacts on surrounding land. 

 

4.     With management plans and rehabilitation the proposal may be consistent with the Local Rural Planning Strategy

 

5.     The proposal is for an extractive industry which is not the same as mining. The proposal with appropriate management may be able to be undertaken while appropriately respecting the protection of natural, tourist and rural landscape values. 

35.

 

Mt Duckworth Community Association

Objection based on issues relating to noise, dust, truck movements, inconsistency with the Leeuwin Naturaliste Statement of Planning Policy past operation of extractive industry at the site and past decisions of Council. 

 

Please see comments above in respect to these issues raised in previous submissions. 

36.

 

M Swift & Associates on behalf of the ower of Lot 4 Hemsley Road, Naturaliste

Object.

 

Concerned with the impact of the proposal (including noise and dust) on surrounding residential and tourist landuses and more specifically the existing dwelling and tourist development proposal approved on the adjoining  Lot 4 by Council on 23 April 2014. Due to proximity of the extraction site to proposed tourist development it will not be possible even with conditions to comply with the City’s Extractive Industry Policy and achieve suitable separation between the incompatible landuses.