COB-RGB

 

 

 

 

 

Council Agenda

 

 

 

29 January 2020

 

 

 

 

 


ALL INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN VARIOUS FORMATS ON REQUEST

city@busselton.wa.gov.au

 

 


CITY OF BUSSELTON

MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA – 29 January 2020

 

 

 

TO:                  THE MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS

 

 

NOTICE is given that a meeting of the Council will be held in the Council Chambers, Administration Building, Southern Drive, Busselton on Wednesday, 29 January 2020, commencing at 5.30pm.

 

Your attendance is respectfully requested.

 

 

DISCLAIMER

Statements or decisions made at Council meetings or briefings should not be relied on (or acted upon) by an applicant or any other person or entity until subsequent written notification has been given by or received from the City of Busselton. Without derogating from the generality of the above, approval of planning applications and building permits and acceptance of tenders and quotations will only become effective once written notice to that effect has been given to relevant parties. The City of Busselton expressly disclaims any liability for any loss arising from any person or body relying on any statement or decision made during a Council meeting or briefing.

 

 

 

Mike Archer

 

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

 

17 January 2020


CITY OF BUSSELTON

Agenda FOR THE Council MEETING TO BE HELD ON 29 January 2020

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

ITEM NO.                                        SUBJECT                                                                                                                              PAGE NO.

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

2....... Attendance. 5

3....... Prayer. 5

4....... Application for Leave of Absence. 5

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

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

7....... Question Time For Public. 5

8....... Confirmation and Receipt Of Minutes. 5

Previous Council Meetings. 5

8.1          Minutes of the Council Meeting held 11 December 2019. 5

8.2          Minutes of the General Electors Meeting held 2 December 2019. 6

Committee Meetings. 6

8.3          Minutes of the Airport Advisory Committee held 11 December 2019. 6

9....... RECEIVING OF Petitions, Presentations AND DEPUTATIONS. 6

10..... QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN (WITHOUT DISCUSSION). 6

11..... Items brought forward for the convenience of those in the public gallery. 6

12..... Reports of Committee. 7

12.1        Airport Advisory Committee - 11/12/2019 - BUSSELTON MARGARET RIVER AIRPORT - AIRPORT OPERATIONS UPDATE. 7

13..... Planning and Development Services Report. 13

13.1        AMENDMENT NO. 44 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO. 21 - 'RSLWA HUB' CAUSEWAY ROAD, BUSSELTON - CONSIDERATION FOR INITIATION FOR ADVERTISING.. 13

14..... Engineering and Work Services Report. 26

14.1        RFT22/19: BUSSELTON COASTAL ADAPTATION WORKS 2019/2020. 26

14.2        RFT15-19 PROVISION OF SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE TO THE BUSSELTON JETTY. 34

14.3        RFT25-19 BUSSELTON SENIOR CITIZENS CENTRE UPGRADE AND EXPANSION.. 38

14.4        KING STREET ROAD AND FOOTPATH UPGRADE. 44

14.5        RFT14-19 DESIGN AND TECHNICAL SERVICES – BUSSELTON ENTERTAINMENT ARTS AND CULTURAL HUB. 51

15..... Community and Commercial Services Report. 60

15.1        SPORT & RECREATION FACILITIES STRATEGY. 60

15.2        MARKETING AND EVENTS REFERENCE GROUP OUTCOMES. 103

16..... Finance and Corporate Services Report. 107

16.1        LAND TENURE OF CROWN LAND ASSOCIATED WITH ARTGEO COMPLEX. 107

16.2        RESPONSE TO MOTION - GENERAL MEETING OF ELECTORS 2 DECEMBER 2019 - PERFORMING ARTS CENTRE. 113

16.3        RESPONSE TO MOTION - GENERAL MEETING OF ELECTORS 2 DECEMBER 2019 - BUSSELTON TOURIST BUREAU.. 117

16.4        RESPONSE TO MOTION - GENERAL MEETING OF ELECTORS 2 DECEMBER 2019 - WEATHER STATION.. 122

17..... Chief Executive Officers Report. 125

17.1        COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN.. 125

18..... Motions of which Previous Notice has been Given.. 149

19..... urgent business. 149

20..... Confidential Matters. 149

21..... Closure. 149

 


Council                                                                                      4                                                                  29 January 2020

 

1.               Declaration of Opening and Announcement of Visitors

 

2.               Attendance 

Apologies

 

Approved Leave of Absence

 

Nil

3.               Prayer

 

4.               Application for Leave of Absence  

Cr Hick has foreshadowed she will request a Leave of Absence for the Ordinary Council Meeting to be held on 26 February 2020.

 

Cr Cronin has foreshadowed he will request a Leave of Absence for the Ordinary Council Meeting to be held on 26 February 2020.

 

5.               Disclosure Of Interests

 

6.               Announcements Without Discussion

Announcements by the Presiding Member 

 

7.               Question Time For Public

Response to Previous Questions Taken on Notice 

 

Public Question Time For Public

 

8.               Confirmation and Receipt Of Minutes 

Previous Council Meetings

8.1             Minutes of the Council Meeting held 11 December 2019

Recommendation

That the Minutes of the Council Meeting held 11 December 2019 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

 

8.2             Minutes of the General Electors Meeting held 2 December 2019

Recommendation

That the Minutes of the General Meeting of Electors held 2 December 2019 be noted.

 

Committee Meetings

8.3             Minutes of the Airport Advisory Committee held 11 December 2019

Recommendation

That the Minutes of the Airport Advisory Committee Meeting held 11 December 2019 be noted.

 

9.               RECEIVING OF Petitions, Presentations AND DEPUTATIONS

Petitions

Presentations

Deputations

 

10.             QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN (WITHOUT DISCUSSION)

 

11.             Items brought forward for the convenience of those in the public gallery


Council                                                                                      12                                                                29 January 2020

12.             Reports of Committee

12.1           Airport Advisory Committee - 11/12/2019 - BUSSELTON MARGARET RIVER AIRPORT - AIRPORT OPERATIONS UPDATE

STRATEGIC GOAL

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

5. TRANSPORT Smart, connective and accessible

5.1 Public transport services that meet the needs of the community.

SUBJECT INDEX

Commercial Services

BUSINESS UNIT:

Commercial Services

REPORTING OFFICER:

Manager, Commercial Services - Jennifer May

AUTHORISING OFFICER:

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

NATURE OF DECISION

Noting: the item does not require a decision of Council and is simply for information purposes and noting

VOTING REQUIREMENT:

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS:

Nil

 

This item was considered by the Airport Advisory Committee at its meeting on 11 December 2019, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council receives and notes the Airport operations report.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report provides an overview on the Busselton-Margaret River Airport (BMRA) operations and activities for the financial year reporting period 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2019 and subsequent activities up to the current date.

 

BACKGROUND

Following the completion of the airside, landside civil, freight hub and services construction activities in late 2018, staff focus has been directed on airline engagement, leasing opportunities and general operations.

 

During the 2018/19 financial year reporting period, the BMRA has seen an increase in the overall passenger numbers compared to the same period for 2016/17 and 2017/18 financial years as highlighted in the table below. This is mainly due to the slight increase in fly in-fly out passengers (FIFO) flying on the Virgin Australia flights.

                                  

 

Total Arriving & Departing Passengers

 

2016/17

2017/18

2018/19

July

1779

1898

2163

August

2043

2301

2204

September

1840

1890

1996

October

1925

2125

2345

November

2640

2501

2047

December

2039

1804

2038

January

1857

1830

2432

February

2079

1911

2134

March

2386

2464

2497

April

1800

1949

2253

May

2260

2434

2262

June

2021

1988

2125

TOTAL

24669

25095

26496

 

                         

                                                                                                    

The total number of departing FIFO services from BMRA is currently 10 flights per week utilising the F100 aircraft.

 

A total of 4106 aircraft movements were recorded for the period 1 July 2018 – 30 June 2019, an increase from the numbers reported for the same period in 2017/18 (3656) and a decrease from 2016/17 (4645). Increases in 2017/18 to 2018/19 can be attributed to additional Busselton Aero Club flight training and RFDS services.

 

                            

 

There have been increases in Emergency Services airport usage for Helitac Firefighting, RFDS, SLSWA and Search & Rescue during this reporting period. The largest increased use of the BMRA is by military aircraft with the introduction of Jet A1 fuel available. The table below includes all approved training flights for emergency services as well as emergency flights. The City does not restrict training flights for emergency services, FIFO operators and military operations.

 

                        

                            

 

Carpark

In May 2019 the new carpark became operational with the closure of the unsealed long term FIFO carpark.

 

The new car park is available 24/7 for patrons and is equipped with credit card / EFTPOS facilities and CCTV throughout for security.

 

Carpark usage and revenue has remained steady throughout the financial year and patronage has remained steady with the recent move to the new car park.

 

Hangar Leases

Following the expiration of the existing aircraft hangar leases (north and central), leases have been executed with McDermott Aviation for two hangers for the provision of aerial fire-fighting services, Helistar Aviation for two hangers to provide services on behalf of Surf Life Saving WA and Busselton Aero Club for the storage of training aircraft.

 

Hangar hire agreements have also been taken up by Busselton Aero Club and another private operator with seven of the 12 hangers now occupied.

 

City officers will continue to liaise with emergency services and aircraft owners to secure interest in the existing hangars and new general aviation precinct.  To date no aircraft operators have committed to signing a hangar lease within the new GA precinct with unfavourable current market conditions for capital investment deterring proponents entering into formal leases.

 

International Alternate Airport

In March 2019 BMRA was designated as an alternate international airport by the Department of Infrastructure, Regional Development and Cities.

City officers have developed an MOU for airlines to use the BMRA as an alternate international airport and will continue to build ongoing working relationships with these airlines.

 

Qantas Pilot Training Academy

Following a national Expression of Interest (EoI) process, BMRA was not selected as the site for either of the two Qantas Pilot Training Academies which were announced in September 2018 and May 2019.

 

 

Proposed Aerofest 2020

Officers are currently in consultation with Busselton Aero Club and CASA on the proposed Aerofest 2020 to be held at BMRA on 1 March 2020. The Aero Club expect visitor numbers to exceed the 5000 who visited the last Aerofest in 2016.

 

A range of air displays similar to previous events are being finalised including the following:

 

§  RAAF

§  Civil aircraft

§  Parachuting

§  Formations

§  Electric aircraft

§  Streamer cutting

§  Helicopters

§  Aerobatics

 

This event will assist to showcase the airport redevelopment in particular the general aviation precinct opportunities for local and visiting aircraft operators.

 

Noise Management Plan (2019) Non-Compliance Reporting

BMRA is currently operating under the Noise Management Plan (statement 1088) approved in January 2019 by the Minister for Environment; Disability Services; Electoral Affairs.

 

Under the Noise Management Plan (NMP) the City is required to submit its annual compliance report to the Office of Environmental Protection Authority prior to 22 September 2019 for the reporting period of 23 June 2018 to 22 June 2019. During this reporting period five (5) out of an available twelve (12) CEO approved non-conforming activities (section 3.3.3 Approval for Non-Conforming Activity of the NMP) have been used.

 

No CEO approvals have been used in the current reporting period.

 

Corporate Event

The Airport team are currently liaising with an event organiser to hold a private corporate event with Lexus Asia at the BMRA in November 2019. Lexus Asia are requesting to use the southern apron to display vehicles and conduct vehicle test drives for a selection of invited clients only. The event will take place for 3-4 hours on Friday 15 November and coincide with the WA Gourmet Escape.

 

Commencement of RPT Services

At a press conference held 4 October 2019 the City and Jetstar announced the commencement of direct Melbourne – Busselton flights. Services will commence on 25 March 2020 and comprise of three flights per week, Monday, Wednesday and Saturday with aircraft arriving from Melbourne at 9.05am and departing at 9.35am. The initial fare sale price started at $89 one way and was available for the first five days. Jetstar have responded that they “have seen a terrific response from customers since the route went on sale with strong demand for seats from the local community and visitors from the east coast.” In less than a week Jetstar sold more than 3,000 sale fares and close to 5,000 seats overall.

 

The Airport team now have a considerable project to deliver, including terminal expansions, construction of the new arrivals hall, implementation of security screening and baggage handling equipment, as well working with industry and businesses to ensure a cafe/kiosk, car hire and tourism services are available at the airport. Work has already begun with tenders for the procurement of security screening and baggage handling systems being issued on the 9 October (closing 31 October) and expected issue of tenders for terminal expansion (design and construct contract) and the arrivals hall (design and construct contract) by 16 October 2019. 

OFFICER COMMENT

FIFO passenger numbers and aircraft movements through the BMRA have increased in comparison to previous years, Officers expect FIFO passenger numbers to remain in line or slightly above budgeted forecasts for the remainder of the 2019/20 financial year.

 

The period has seen operational improvements, maintenance, scheduled inspections and staff training taking place including:

·      Annual Aerodrome Technical inspections completed.

·      Development of BMRA social media presence (Facebook, Instagram)

·      Air BP aviation fuel quality control and Airport Reporting officer refresher training

·      Obstacle Limitation surface rectifications

·      Expansion of wildlife mitigation program

 

The Airport team are now planning the next phase of Airport expansion for the commencement of Jetstar services in March 2020.

 

Statutory Environment

The BMRA operates in accordance with the following: Aviation Transport Security Act 2004, Aviation Transport Security Regulations 2005, CASA MOS 139, Council’s Transport Security Plan and City policies and procedures.

 

Relevant Plans and Policies

There are no relevant plans or policies to consider in relation to this matter

Financial Implications

Airport revenue for the 2018/2019 financial year was $1,127,024 compared to the amended budget of $1,167,100. The reason for revenue being less than expected is due to $111,000 in contributions towards airport marketing activities from surrounding local governments and tourism associations not being received as the contributions were pending an executed agreement with an airline.  Excluding this, the actual revenue received of $1,127,024 is greater than the projected budget ($1,056,100) by $70,924. 

 

Other notable revenue sources exceeding budget include; Airport hangar lease income by $10,087, Airport passenger fees by $13,560 and Airport landing fees by $12,123. The graph below shows the landing fees invoiced by Avdata for the financial year 2018/19 in comparison to the same period for 2016/17 and 2017/18.

 

                               

                    

Airport expenditure less depreciation for 2018/19 financial year is $522,215 compared to the amended budget amount of $519,650. There are no financial implications associated with the officer recommendation.

 

Stakeholder Consultation

Consultation with Department of Transport, South West Development Commission, Government agencies, airport stakeholders, Aviation Marine Security (AMS), Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), Air Services Australia, Virgin Australia Regional Airline, the Busselton Aero Club, Albany, Esperance, Geraldton Airports and Australian Airports Association has been occurring on a regular basis concerning many topics and issues relating to the Airport.

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management framework, with risks assessed taking into account any controls already in place. No risks of a medium or greater level have been identified.

 

Options

The Council may choose not to accept the officer report.

CONCLUSION

The airport team is looking forward to an exciting 2019/20 year with the commencement of RPT services and with airside, landside and freight hub development works completed the importance of maintaining a compliant aerodrome. Officers will continue to provide a high level of customer service ensuring the airport is operating safely and security is maintained throughout.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Not applicable.

 

 

 

  


Council                                                                                      21                                                                29 January 2020

13.             Planning and Development Services Report

13.1           AMENDMENT NO. 44 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO. 21 - 'RSLWA HUB' CAUSEWAY ROAD, BUSSELTON - CONSIDERATION FOR INITIATION FOR ADVERTISING

STRATEGIC GOAL

1. COMMUNITY: Welcoming, friendly, healthy

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

1.2 A community with access to life-long health and education opportunities.

SUBJECT INDEX

Local Planning Scheme 21 Amendments

BUSINESS UNIT

Strategic Planning

REPORTING OFFICER

Senior Strategic Planner - Helen Foulds

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

NATURE OF DECISION

Legislative: to adopt legislative documents e.g. local laws, local planning schemes, local planning policies

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Subject Land Parcels

Attachment b    Proposed Scheme Amendment Map  

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council:

1.         In pursuance of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, initiates Amendment No. 44 to the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme 21 for community consultation, for the purposes of:

(a)       Rezoning Lot 69 (No. 10) Rosemary Drive and Lot 100 (No. 15) Southern Drive, Busselton from “Residential” to “Special Use No. 30” and to recode the Lots from “R30” to “R-AC3”;

(b)       Rezoning Lot 48 (No. 26) and Lot 49 (No. 28) Causeway Road from “Tourism” to “Special Use No. 30” and include a residential density code of “R-AC3”;

(c)       Inserting the following particulars in ‘Schedule 5 – Special Uses’ of the Scheme:

No.

Description of Land

Special Use

Conditions

30

Lot 48 (No. 26) Causeway Road, Busselton;

Lot 49 (No. 28) Causeway Road, Busselton;

Lot 69 (No. 10) Rosemary Drive, Busselton; and

Lot 100 (No. 15) Southern Drive, Busselton.

The following land uses are ‘P’ Permitted:

a.   Aged Persons Home;

b.  Club Premises;

c.   Community Purpose;

d.  Grouped & Multiple Dwellings;

e.  Consulting Rooms;

f.   Residential Building.

The following land uses are “D” Discretionary:

a.   Medical Centre;

b.  Reception Centre; and

c.   Office.

 

1.     Development is limited to a total plot ratio of 2.0.

2.     Notwithstanding Clause 4.8 of the Scheme and the ‘R-AC3’ density code, a maximum building height of 4 storeys (to maximum height of 15m above natural ground level) is applicable to development on the site.

3.     Development within 10m of a lot boundary, which abuts land that is zoned Residential, is limited to 2 storeys (to maximum height of 9m above natural ground level).

4.     All other development controls are to be as per ‘R-AC3’ under State Planning Policy 7.3: Residential Design Codes Volume 2 - Apartments.

(d)       Amending the Scheme Map accordingly.

2.         Pursuant to Regulation 35(2) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations), determine that Amendment No. 44 is a ‘standard amendment’ in accordance with r.34(b) of the Regulations as it is:

(a)       an amendment relating to a zone or reserve that is consistent with the objectives identified in the Scheme for that zone or reserve;

(b)       an amendment that is consistent with a Local Planning Strategy for the Scheme that has been endorsed by the Commission; and

(c)       the amendment would not result in any significant environmental, social, economic or governance impacts on land in the Scheme area.

3.         That, as the Amendment is in the opinion of the Council consistent with Part V of the Act and Regulations made pursuant to the Act, that upon preparation of the necessary documentation, the draft Amendment be referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) as required by the Act, and on receipt of a response from the EPA indicating that the draft Amendment is to not be subject to formal environmental assessment, be advertised for a period of 42 days, in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.  In the event that the EPA determines that the draft Amendment is to be subject to formal environmental assessment, this assessment is to be prepared prior to advertising of the draft Amendment.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Council is requested to consider initiating Scheme Amendment No. 44 over Lot 69 Rosemary Drive, Lots 48 and 49 Causeway Road and Lot 100 Southern Drive, Busselton (in total, the subject land) by rezoning these parcels to ‘Special Use’ zone and applying conditions to guide future development.

 

The Amendment is intended to essentially support the redevelopment of the Returned and Services League (RSL) across these sites by allowing for a specific combination of complementary community, business and residential uses that align with the RSL’s service charter.

 

The Amendment is recommended to be adopted for the purposes of public advertising.

 

BACKGROUND

The applicant has advised that the current Returned and Services League of Australia WA (RSL) building is not equipped for the current needs of the RSL and requires significant upgrades. This Amendment will facilitate redevelopment of the site for a multipurpose centre by co-locating services between the RSL and other organisations that provide services to ex-service personnel and families.

 

Whilst the core purpose of the RSL will remain unchanged, the organisation is evolving as the needs of each generation of service personnel change.  In response, this amendment seeks to allow uses that provide complementary services that support the operations of the RSL to ensure its on-going capacity to meet the needs of the community.

 

The RSL has expressed interest in redeveloping the subject sites to cater for:

·    Club facilities (including bar facilities);

·    Administration (offices);

·    Consulting rooms for ex-service personnel organisations and affiliates (legacy, defence force recruiting etc.);

·    Café;

·    Apartments (mix of short stay and permanent accommodation);

·    Aged care; and

·    Ancillary uses which complement the day to day operations of the RSL and affiliated organisations.

 

Proposed Scheme Amendment No. 44 seeks to rezone four parcels of land to ‘Special Use’ zone to facilitate redevelopment for the RSL.  The land subject to the Amendment covers a total area of 5,436m2 and involves the rezoning of the following land parcels:

·    Lot 69 (No. 10) Rosemary Drive, Busselton, currently zoned “Residential – R30” and contains the current Busselton RSL WA sub-branch;

·    Lot 48 (No. 26) and Lot 49 (No. 28) Causeway Road, Busselton, both being vacant and zoned “Tourism”; and

·    Lot 100 (No. 15) Southern Drive, Busselton, owned by the City of Busselton, zoned “Residential – R30” and originally developed with a dwelling that has since been converted into offices.

 

The land parcels are identified at Attachment A, with the proposed Scheme Amendment Map at Attachment B.

 

The RSL has approached the owner(s) of the adjoining Lots 48 and 49, being the vacant lots at the corner of Causeway Road and Southern Drive, with a view to entering into a joint venture or lease arrangement to facilitate the overall development. These owners are supportive of the proposed Amendment.

 

Lot 100 Southern Drive was considered to be ‘surplus to the needs’ of the City, now that the Administration Building has been completed.  The City subsequently issued an Expression of Interest for the ‘sale’ or ‘lease’ of ‘Finance House’ on Lot 100 in mid-2018, the process resulting in a month by month lease being issued (for a minimal figure) to ‘CinefestOZ’ for use of the building.  The RSL expressed interest in incorporating Lot 100 into its overall re-development proposal and, although no final arrangement has been entered into, opportunity remains for the City to either sell Lot 100 or to enter into a joint venture arrangement with the RSL and owner(s) of Lots 48 and 49.

 

At the time of writing this report, however, interest had been expressed from the Bunbury Regional Community College (BRCC) for a lease to use the building on Lot 100 for educational purposes.  Before setting any leasing arrangements with the BRCC, certain compliance requirements under the Building Code for use of ‘Finance House’ for educational purposes must be addressed. A development application must also be submitted and assessed for the ‘change of use’ required, with advertising to then take place by an approved means.

 

The proposal to rezone the subject land does not diminish the ability for ‘Finance House’ to be leased to BRCC for educational purposes.  The RSL has been informally consulted on this matter and advised that, while the inclusion of ‘Finance House’ could have advantages to a major redevelopment over the site, it is yet to be confirmed in the development of the concept design.  It is recommended in this instance that the proposed Amendment be progressed and that the inclusion of Lot 100 within Amendment No. 44 be revisited at such time as the proposal is returned to the Council following advertising and more information is known surrounding BRCC’s intentions.  If at that time it is decided to remove ‘Finance House’/Lot 100 from the Amendment, this can be achieved via a modification.

 


 

The proposal has been accompanied by a Transport Impact Statement (TIS), which has identified projected traffic volumes on an assumed development outcome of 50 residential apartments, 200m2 office space and 150m2 function room (although it should be noted that the final development outcome may comprise these land uses or a combination of other land uses).  The net increase in traffic is estimated to be 220-270 vehicles per day, an increase from approximately 100-150 trips per day currently generated by the existing RSL.

 

The TIS acknowledges that access to the site could be provided from Southern Drive and Rosemary Drive, as well as the service road that runs alongside Causeway Road.  Access to the site via Southern Drive might offer the most logical access, given the location of the City’s Administration Building, although the works associated with the ‘Eastern Link’ will include the provision of a roundabout at the Rosemary Drive intersection, improving both traffic flow and safety performance.

 

The TIS, in taking into account the proposed ‘Eastern Link’ works, has concluded that the proposal will not significantly affect the surrounding road network, which has been designed to accommodate this scale of traffic.

 

Conclusions made by the TIS include:

·    A waste management plan should be prepared at the time of a formal development application being lodged; and

·    There is expected to be no adverse effects from the land use development proposal on road safety.

OFFICER COMMENT

Scheme Amendment No. 44 proposes to rezone the subject lots to ‘Special Use’, allowing for a specific combination of complementary community, business and residential uses that align with the RSL’s service charter.

 

This current proposal is not intended to provide a formal design, at this stage, for the redevelopment of the site, but to provide instead the means to facilitate such redevelopment of the RSL, with other community organisations, to offer improved services to the area.  A future development application can adequately address management, operations, scale and design of any formal proposal.  What these amendment controls propose is a guide for the design of the future development, in addition to the standard requirements of the Residential Design Codes (the R-Codes).

 

The following information has been proposed to be inserted into ‘Schedule 5 – Special Uses’ of the Scheme:

No.

Description of Land

Special Use

Conditions

30

As identified on the Scheme map

The following land uses are ‘P’ Permitted:

a.   Aged Persons Home;

b.  Club Premises;

c.   Community Purpose;

d.  Grouped & Multiple Dwellings;

e.  Consulting Rooms;

f.   Residential Building;

g.   Serviced Apartments.

The following land uses are “D” Discretionary:

a.   Medical Centre;

b.  Reception Centre; and

c.   Office.

The following land uses may be permitted only where ancillary, subsidiary or incidental to the predominant use for which the approval is sought:

a.   Tavern; and

b.  Restaurant/Café.

1.     The objective of this Special Use zone is to facilitate the operations of the Returned and Services League (RSL) as an organisation which provides a range of services and facilities to support ex-veterans and their families. The RSL also supports the operations of affiliated organisations which provide community benefit.

2.     Council may approve incidental or ancillary uses to those listed where the use is consistent with the objective of this Special Use.

3.     Development is limited to a total plot ratio area of 2.0.

4.     Notwithstanding Clause 4.8 of the Scheme and the R-AC3 density code, a maximum building height of 4 storeys (to maximum height of 15m) is applicable to development on the site.

5.     Development within 10m of a lot boundary which abuts land zoned Residential, is limited to 2 storeys (to maximum height of 9.0m).

6.     All other development controls are to be as per RAC-3 under State Planning 7.3 Residential Design Codes Volume 2 (DesignWA).

 

The mix of uses and proposed permissibilities suggested allows for a combination of complementary community, business and residential uses that align with the RSL’s service charter, whilst avoiding retail and commercial uses considered inappropriate outside the City’s core CBD area.  There is no intent to promote or to encourage the development of retail or business offerings that are more suitably located within the City Centre.  The sites are set back from Causeway Road, having the benefit of the service road, and the list of uses proposed will not encourage a ‘shop-front’ appearance, thus reducing the likelihood of any potential commercial strip along Causeway Road.

 

In the case of ‘commercial-only development’, proposed conditions 3, 4 and 5 would apply during any formal assessment process.  If there is no residential component proposed at the time of assessment (for instance, in the case of a staged construction, should the Club Premises be applied for in isolation to any residential use), condition 6 would not specifically apply, although, the R-Codes would be referenced as a guide for any development application, together with the “Matters to be considered” clause of the Deemed Provisions (Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015).

 

The following comments are provided in response to a preliminary assessment of the proposed conditions for Special Use Zone No. 30:

1.   Objective

The conditions of the Special Use zone should provide guidance to the development of the land within the specified area. The introduction of an objective should not be necessary to guide development within the subject land, nor is it necessarily appropriate to control development in this way.  Business decisions, such as the amalgamation of the lots to form a single development area or entering into joint venture arrangements, should be made separate to the directions of the Scheme and the planning framework.  This ‘condition’ is therefore recommended to be removed.

2.   Incidental and ancillary uses

Reference to ancillary, subsidiary or incidental uses within column 3 ‘Special Use’ and column 4 ‘Conditions’ of the table are not necessary and should be removed.  The Scheme, at clause 3.3.3, adequately guides what could be considered as ancillary, subsidiary and incidental to the predominant use of the site.


 

3.   Plot ratio

In mixed use developments building bulk and scale is controlled by setting a maximum plot ratio, which is the ratio of the gross ‘plot ratio area’ of buildings on a development site to the area of land in the site boundaries.  For instance and in simple terms, a plot ratio of 1.0 on a 1,000 square metre lot could equate to a two-storey building with 500 square metres on each floor, so a total floor area of 1,000 square metres.

A plot ratio of 2.0 is proposed to apply for all development within the site, both residential and non-residential, ensuring an appropriate scale of all built form, complementing, not dominating, surrounding development.

4.   Building height

With respect to building height, the Scheme currently allows for 3 storey development across the site.  Given the existing Scheme entitlements, the applicant proposes controls to allow redevelopment up to four storeys fronting Causeway Road to complement the nearby City Administration Building and to allow for a consistent and complementary scale of built form along this section of Causeway Road leading into the City Centre.

Note that the recommendation proposes a clarification that the height controls relate to height above natural ground level, including any fill or similar required – that change reflects the normal basis on which building height is determined in the WA planning system. The City’s Administration Building, at its highest point, is around 14 metres above natural ground level (from ground floor to building apex, in the three storey portion of the building, is 13 metres, with the maximum level of fill, relative to the site prior to development of the current building, being around one metre).

5.   Development adjacent to boundaries

Development at the interface with adjoining residential development (within 10 metres of a neighbouring residential lot) would be restricted to two (2) storeys, with a maximum height of 9 metres.  The R-Codes require that development is to satisfy the relevant ‘Acceptable Outcomes’ for solar access, which may well preclude development, even at this height, unless carefully designed.

Some concern is held by officers in respect to proposed condition 5 given the potential for a 9m high wall within 10m of a boundary and the potentially adverse effects this might have on neighbouring residential properties.

In comparison, a R30 dwelling may be constructed up to one side boundary with a maximum height of 3.5m and an average of 3.0m for two-thirds the length of boundary. The Amendment, if initiated by the Council for public consultation, will be sent directly to neighbouring landowners as part of the consultation process, and all comments received will be addressed and referred back to the Council with recommendations at the time of considering final adoption.

6.   R-AC3 density code

The ‘R-AC3’ density code has been chosen to be consistent with the mixed use development in the City Centre. The application of this density code will require any mixed use development (i.e. containing commercial and residential uses) to be designed in a way that is responsive to the site constraints and surrounding development.

 

Prior to the Amendment document being advertised, a number of modifications to the proposed Table are therefore recommended.  These include the removal of conditions 1 and 2, as detailed above.

 

Further corrections to the proposed amending text include:

1.    including a specific description of the land parcels contained within Special Use Zone No. 30;

2.    removing the use class ‘Serviced Apartments’, as this use does not currently exist in the Scheme;

3.    correcting the title of State Planning Policy 7.3 at condition 6 (column 4); and

4.    a number of minor editing corrections.

 

The abovementioned corrections and modifications have been implemented within the ‘Officer Recommendation’.

 

The possibility of an arrangement (either by way of a joint-venture agreement or amalgamation of lots) not going ahead between the respective landowners should be considered in the event that the Amendment is successful.  Should this be the case, the list of uses, being predominately residential in nature or community/consulting-type services, would be considered appropriate in this location given the proximity to the City Centre and position along a major traffic route. 

 

Bushfire Prone Area

Small portions of the subject land have been identified as ‘bushfire prone’ on the ‘Map of Bush Fire Prone Areas’ as developed by the Office of Bushfire Risk Management (OBRM).  This map acts as a trigger to determine whether bushfire protection planning and building requirements apply.  A large portion of Lot 100 and Lot 48 are included within a bushfire prone area, along with the very easterly corner of Lot 10.

 

In accordance with State Planning Policy 3.7: Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas (SPP 3.7), all strategic planning proposals within a designated bushfire prone area must be accompanied by either a Bushfire Hazard Level assessment, a BAL Contour Map, and/or a BAL assessment.

 

The applicant has advised that an assessment of the bushfire risk will be addressed as part of the preparation of a Development Application.  Given the separation of the future development site from bushfire hazards, and the maintained areas within the general proximity to the site, it is expected that the site will be determined to have a Bushfire Hazard Level of ‘Low’, in which case a full Bushfire Management Plan will not be necessary. 

 

The Scheme Amendment will be forwarded to the Department of Fire and Emergency Services for comment, at which time it is anticipated that a Bushfire Hazard Level assessment will possibly be requested.  The City has received advice from a category 3 level bushfire assessment practitioner that any such request could be accommodated easily and readily.

Statutory Environment

The key statutory environment is set out in the Planning and Development Act 2005 (Act), the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (Regulations) and the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21 (LPS21).  Each is discussed below under appropriate subheadings.

 

Planning and Development Act 2005

The 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 Regulations, which came into operational effect on 19 October 2015, identify three different levels of amendments – basic, standard and complex.  The resolution of the local government is to specify the level of the subject amendment and provide an explanation justifying this choice.  The Amendment is considered to be a ‘standard amendment’ for reasons outlined in part 2 of the ‘Officer Recommendation’.

 

Local Planning Scheme No. 21

The proposal is consistent with the provisions of the ‘Special Use’ zone as defined by the Scheme, the objectives of which are to facilitate special categories of land uses that do not sit comfortably within any other zone and enable specific conditions to be imposed associated with that special use.

Relevant Plans and Policies

The key policies relevant to the proposal are:

 

1.    State Planning Policy 3.0: Urban Growth and Settlement.

2.    State Planning Policy 3.7: Planning for Bush Fire Prone Areas/Guidelines for Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas 2015.

3.    State Planning Policy 7.0: Design of the Built Environment.

4.    State Planning Policy 7.3: Residential Design Codes Volume 2 – Apartments.

5.    City of Busselton Local Planning Strategy.

6.    City of Busselton Local Tourism Planning Strategy.

 

State Planning Policy 3.0: Urban Growth and Settlement

State Planning Policy 3.0: Urban Growth and Settlement (SPP 3.0) sets out the principles and considerations which apply to planning for urban growth and settlements in Western Australia.  The objectives of this policy include to:

·    build on existing communities with established local and regional economies, concentrate investment in the improvement of services and infrastructure, and enhance the quality of life in those communities; and

·    manage the growth and development of urban areas in response to the social and economic needs of the community and in recognition of relevant climatic, environmental, heritage and community values and constraints.

Key requirements for sustainable communities identified by SPP 3.0 as they relate to this Scheme Amendment are:

·    variety and choice in the size, type and affordability of housing to support a range of household sizes, ages and incomes, and which is responsive to housing demand and preferences; and

·    access for all to employment, health, education, shops, leisure and community facilities by locating new development so as to be accessible by foot, bicycle or public transport, rather than having to depend on access by car (whilst recognising the convenience of car travel for some trips and the limited potential to provide alternatives in rural and remote locations).

 

Principles for planning of ‘Liveable Neighbourhoods’ require the safe and convenient access to services and facilities designed for all users, including users with disabilities.

 


 

State Planning Policy 3.7: Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas (SPP 3.7) and Guidelines for Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas

SPP 3.7 directs how land use should address bushfire risk management in Western Australia.  It applies to all land which has been designated as ‘bushfire prone’ by the Fire and Emergency Services Commissioner as highlighted on the ‘Map of Bush Fire Prone Areas’.  The accompanying Guidelines for Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas provide supporting information to assist in the interpretation of the objectives and policy measures outlined in SPP 3.7, providing advice on how bushfire risk is to be addressed when planning, designing or assessing a planning proposal within a designated bushfire prone area.

 

State Planning Policy 7.0: Design of the Built Environment (SPP 7.0)

Lead policy that elevates the importance of design quality across the whole built environment. It includes 10 principles for good design and establishes the framework for integrating design review as a part of the evaluation process.  A Development Application will be considered against the following principles:

 

1. Context and Character

Good design responds to and enhances the distinctive characteristics of a local area, contributing to a sense of place.

2. Landscape Quality

Good design recognises that together landscape and buildings operate as an integrated and sustainable system, within a broader ecological context.

3. Built Form and Scale

Good design ensures that the massing and height of development is appropriate to its setting and successfully negotiates between existing built form and the intended future character of the local area.

4. Functionality and Built Quality

Good design meets the needs of users efficiently and effectively, balancing functional requirements to perform well and deliver optimum benefit over the full life-cycle.

5. Sustainability

Good design optimises the sustainability of the built environment, delivering positive environmental, social and economic outcomes.

6. Amenity

Good design provides successful places that offer a variety of uses and activities while optimising internal and external amenity for occupants, visitors and neighbours, providing environments that are comfortable, productive and healthy.

7. Legibility

Good design results in buildings and places that are legible, with clear connections and easily identifiable elements to help people find their way around.

8. Safety

Good design optimises safety and security, minimising the risk of personal harm and supporting safe behaviour and use.

9. Community

Good design responds to local community needs as well as the wider social context, providing environments that support a diverse range of people and facilitate social interaction.

10. Aesthetics

Good design is the product of a skilled, judicious design process that results in attractive and inviting buildings and places that engage the senses.

 


 

State Planning Policy 7.3: Residential Design Codes Volume 2 – Apartments (SPP 7.3)

Provides planning and design standards for residential apartments (multiple dwellings) in areas coded R40 and above, within mixed use development and activity centres.  SPP 7.3 builds upon the principles established in SPP 7.0 providing design parameters for apartment development. These policies represent a significant shift in the way in which development is assessed, with applications to be reviewed under performance criteria, as opposed to prescriptive development controls. The intention is to provide a flexible framework which incentivises excellence in building design.

 

The City will assess any future Development Application for the residential component of the site against the objectives and requirements of SPP 7.3.

 

Local Planning Strategy (LPS)

The LPS sets the long term broad planning direction for the whole of the District of the City of Busselton and provides the strategic rationale for decisions related to the progressive review and amendment of LPS21.  The draft LPS was adopted for final approval by the Council in September 2016 and was endorsed, subject to modifications, by the WAPC on 10 December, 2019.

 

An objective of Theme 1 (Settlement and Community) is for expansion and improvement of community facilities to meet the needs of a growing and increasingly diverse population.  Strategies associated with this theme are to support and pro‐actively plan for urban consolidation and redevelopment in areas close to the Busselton City Centre and the development of new and improved community facilities to meet the needs of a growing and increasingly diverse population.

 

The LPS actively supports this proposed form of development close to the Busselton City Centre.  A desirable diversification in the types of housing choice and availability for those affiliated with the RSL service charter could also result from this Amendment.

 

Local Tourism Planning Strategy (LTPS)

The LTPS was adopted by Council on 8 December 2010 and was noted by the WAPC in 2013. It provides a planning policy framework for decisions that affect the tourism industry in the City and recognises the importance of preserving, protecting and growing strategic tourism opportunities.

 

The LTPS identifies Lots 48 and 49 Causeway Road as tourist zoned land where alternative zonings may be considered, given it is a small site offering limited potential (to a future tourism venture).

Financial Implications

There are no direct financial implications associated with the officer recommendation.

Stakeholder Consultation

If the Council resolves to initiate the Amendment, the relevant documentation will be referred to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for formal assessment under Part IV of the Environmental Protection Act 1986.  Should the EPA resolve that the Amendment does not require formal assessment, the document will be advertised for 42 days in accordance with the Regulations.

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management framework, with risks assessed taking into account any controls already in place.  No risks of a medium or greater level have been identified. 


 

Options

As an alternative to the officer recommendation, the Council could:

1.    Resolve to decline the request to initiate the 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.    Resolve to seek further information before making a decision.

3.    Resolve to initiate the Amendment subject to further modification(s) as required (and justified).

It is not considered that any of the above-mentioned options would be warranted in this instance.

CONCLUSION

Officers are of the view that the proposal is generally consistent with the aims and objectives of the State and local planning policy framework.  It is recommended that Amendment 44 be adopted by the Council for public consultation.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The implementation of the officer recommendation will involve advising the applicant of the resolution of the Council and commencing the process to advertise the Amendment, which will occur within one month of the decision date.


Council

24

29 January 2020

13.1

Attachment a

Subject Land Parcels

 


Council

25

29 January 2020

13.1

Attachment b

Proposed Scheme Amendment Map

 

 


Council                                                                                      33                                                                29 January 2020

14.             Engineering and Work Services Report

14.1           RFT22/19: BUSSELTON COASTAL ADAPTATION WORKS 2019/2020 

STRATEGIC GOAL

3. ENVIRONMENT Valued, conserved and enjoyed

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

3.2 Natural areas and habitats are cared for and enhanced for the enjoyment of current and future generations.

SUBJECT INDEX

Coastal Adaptation

BUSINESS UNIT

Engineering and Facilities Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Manager, Engineering and Technical Services - Daniell Abrahamse

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Manager, Engineering and Technical Services - Daniell Abrahamse

NATURE OF DECISION

Executive: substantial direction setting, including adopting strategies, plans and policies (excluding local planning policies), tenders, setting and amending budgets, funding, donations and sponsorships, reviewing committee recommendations

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Published Under Separate Cover  Confidential Attachment A - Confidential RFT22/19 Tender Recommendation Report, Evaluations and Panel Consensus Score Sheet  

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council:

1.    Pursuant to RFT22-19 Busselton Coastal Adaptation Works 2019/20, accept the tender from BCP Contractors Pty Ltd as the most advantageous tenderer (Successful Tenderer), subject to minor variations to be negotiated in accordance with Regulation 20 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 (FG Regs);

 

2.    Delegates power and authority to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and agree with the Successful Tenderer minor variations in accordance with Regulation 20 of the FG Regs, subject to such variations and the final terms not exceeding the overall project budget;

 

3.    Subject to resolutions 1 and 2, acknowledges that the CEO is authorised to enter into a contract with the Successful Tenderer for supply of the relevant goods and services.

 

4.    Endorse the requested budget amendment outlined in Table 1 below resulting in no change to the budgeted cash position:

 

Table 1:

Cost Code

Description

Current Amended Budget ($)

Change ($)

Resulting Proposed Amended Budget ($)

Revenue

 

 

 

 

510-C2523-1215-0000

Capital Grants – Broadwater Beach Coastal Protection Stage 2 of 4

(150,000)

150,000

0

Expenditure

 

 

 

 

510-C2523-3280-0000

 

Proposed Contractor Costs – Broadwater Beach Coastal Protection Stage 2 of 4

300,000

(90,000)

210,000

Reserve

 

 

 

 

102-9103

Transfer from Climate Adaptation Reserve

(150,000)

(60,000)

(210,000)

 Net Total 

$0

$0

$0

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Council is requested to consider the tenders received in response to Request for Tender RFT 22/19: Busselton Coastal Adaptation Works 2019/2020 (the RFT).

 

The City of Busselton invited tenders on 13 November 2019 (via the TenderLink portal) for coastal adaptation works required at two sites along Geographe Bay in the City of Busselton:

(a) Broadwater Beach; and
(b) Wonnerup Beach (also known as Baudin Reserve).

 

The scope of works includes construction of geotextile sand container groynes, refurbishment of a rock groyne, sand nourishment and other items in accordance with the specification and drawings (as detailed in the RFT), at Broadwater Beach and Wonnerup Beach.

 

BACKGROUND

Over the last 50 years, more than 50 coastal protection structures have been installed to protect infrastructure along the Geographe Bay foreshore. These include low-profile rock groynes, rock revetments, timber groynes, granite training walls for various regional outlets, and recently constructed geotextile sand container (GSC) groynes.

 

The City of Busselton manages the ongoing protection of the coastal assets, including maintenance of the existing coastal protection structures, sand nourishment, and construction of new coastal protection structures including groynes and seawalls.

 

As part of the management of the coastal protection assets, the City undertakes annual beach monitoring of the sandy coastline. This monitoring includes photo monitoring, oblique aerial photography, beach surveys and coastline movement. 

 

The understanding gained through the beach monitoring allows for greater confidence in predicting the impact of future events on various assets, and thus facilitates the selection of appropriate adaptation strategies. The RFT to undertake coastal adaptation works required at the two sites is directly as a result of the annual beach monitoring process.

 

The project scope of works for the two sites includes construction of geotextile sand container groynes, refurbishment of a rock groyne, sand nourishment and other items in accordance with the specification and drawings, as summarised below.

 


 

Broadwater Beach 

 

Background

Erosion at Broadwater beach has been observed at rates of up to 10m/year since the installation of the Abbey Beach groyne field in the late 1990’s. This has resulted in the loss of up to 150m of foreshore reserve since 1999. The area affected by this erosion extends 1.2km to the east of the groyne at Holgate Road. Current rates of erosion have eased to 2-4m/year. The dual-use path has been realigned at Alan Street, yet valuable foreshore woodland habitat within the Broadwater reserve remains under threat due to narrow and eroding buffers, and substantial areas of dense peppermint trees are vulnerable to coastal erosion within 2-3 years. 

 

Scope of Works for Broadwater Beach

The scope of works for Broadwater beach involves: 

•       Refurbishing the Holgate Road groyne with a reduced length (to provide a supply of sand to Broadwater beach and increase long term sand transport rates);

•       Constructing a new smaller GSC groyne to the west of Holgate Road groyne (to ensure shortening the groyne does not expose another section of the dual-use path to erosion); and

•       Sand nourishment of Broadwater beach.

 

Wonnerup Beach (Baudin Reserve)

 

Background

Wonnerup Beach is immediately downdrift of Port Geographe Marina, constructed in c.1997, which traps littoral material and high volumes of seagrass wrack each year on the western beach. Historically, this has resulted in high rates of coastal erosion that have damaged Layman Road and required coastal protection works. Historic coastal protection works have included the progressive construction of a rock seawall in front of the Wonnerup townsite since 2001, a series of low-profile ironstone rock groynes c.2003, and two geotextile sand containers groynes to the east in 2017. The intent of the works is to provide protection to Layman Road and the houses to the south and east of Layman Road.

 

Stage 1 of the works at Wonnerup was completed in 2018/19 and involved the maintenance of four rock groynes.

 

Scope of Works for Wonnerup Beach

The scope of works for Wonnerup Beach (Baudin Reserve) is limited to Stage 2 and involves: 

•       Construction of two smaller GSC groynes to the east of the rock groyne field; and

•       Construction of a larger GSC groyne adjacent to an existing smaller groyne which is to be removed and the GSCs reused.

OFFICER COMMENT

The RFT was issued as a Public Tender on 13 November 2019 (via the TenderLink portal). The closing time and date for lodgement of a response was 2.00pm (AWST) on Tuesday 3 December 2019. The invitation to tender was advertised in the ‘West Australian’ newspaper on Saturday 16 November 2019. The City received three compliant tender submissions from the following companies:

 

·    BCP Contractors Pty Ltd

·    Cape to Cape Excavations Pty Ltd

·    Natural Area Holdings Pty Ltd

 


 

Assessment Process

In accordance with the City’s procurement practices and procedures, tender assessments were carried out by a tender evaluation panel comprising City officers and an independent evaluation panel member with relevant skills and experience.

The tender assessment process included:

·    Assessing tenders received against relevant compliance criteria. The compliance criteria were not point scored.  Each submission was assessed on a Yes/No basis as to whether each criterion was satisfactorily met. All tenders were deemed compliant.

·    Assessing tenders against the following qualitative criteria (weighted as indicated in the table below):

 

 

Criteria

Weighting

(a)

Relevant Experience

20%

(b)

Local Content

5%

(b)

Key Personnel Skills and Experience

15%

(c)

Tenderer’s Resources

10%

(d)

Demonstrated Understanding

10%

 

A scoring and weighting system was used to assess the tenders against these qualitative criteria.

 

Each tenderer was scored against each of the qualitative criteria, with higher scores attributed depending on the extent to which each tenderer was able to appropriately satisfy each criteria. The tendered prices were then assessed together with the weighted qualitative criteria and the tenders scored and ranked to determine the most advantageous outcome to the City, based on principles of best value for money.  That is, although price was a consideration, the tender containing the lowest price will not necessarily be accepted by the City and nor will the tender ranked the highest on the qualitative criteria.

 

Summary of Assessment Outcomes

The outcome of the evaluation panel’s assessment was as follows:

 

Rank

Company

Summary

1.

BCP Contractors Pty Ltd

The submission, addressed all five of the qualitative criteria in detail, for a summary of this see below:-

·    Relevant Experience

The tenderer submitted a summary of five similar type projects. Four of these were done in Busselton.

·    Local Benefit

The tenderer demonstrated to a high degree numerous contributions to the local economy (over and above the use of local contractors).

·    Key Personnel skills and experience

The tenderer provided detailed resumes of nine (9) key staff members that will be directly involved in delivering the project brief.

 

·    Tenderers Resources

The tenderer provided a very detailed list of all their resources, i.e. plant and equipment, materials, personnel, finances and contingency measures if required  to successfully deliver the project brief

·    Demonstrated Understanding

The tenderer provided a very detailed breakdown of their construction methodology, construction staging, project timeline, key hold points, critical risks for the project, and methodologies for latent conditions, project execution plan and specific scope of works.

2.

Cape to Cape Excavations Pty Ltd

The submission, also addressed all five of the qualitative criteria in detail, for a summary of this see below:-

·    Relevant Experience

The tendered submitted a summary of five similar type projects. Four of these were done in Busselton. However it must be noted that these projects were also listed by BCP – as the employee that was working on these projects is now employed by Cape to Cape Excavations.

·    Local Benefit

The tenderer advised that the company has been based in Dunsborough since 1996. The tenderer also advised that they support a number of community groups.

·    Key Personnel skills and experience

The tenderer provided detailed resumes of five (5) key staff members that will be directly involved in delivering the project brief. Limited necessary experience to successfully deliver the project brief is demonstrated.

·    Tenderers Resources

The tenderer provided a very detailed list of all their resources, i.e. plant and equipment, materials and personnel to successfully deliver the project brief.

·    Demonstrated Understanding

The tenderer provided a very detailed breakdown of their construction methodology.

3.

Natural Area Holdings Pty Ltd

The submission only addressed four of the five qualitative criteria in detail, for a summary of this see below:-

·    Relevant Experience

The tenderer submitted a detailed summary of three (3) similar type projects completed, as per the project brief.

·    Local Benefit

Nil, as the tenderer is a Perth based company.

·    Key Personnel skills and experience

The tenderer provided details of the company that currently employs eighty three (83) full time staff members. The tenderer however only submitted detailed resumes of four (4) key staff members that will be directly involved with the project.

 

·    Tenderers Resources

The tenderer provided a very detailed list of all their resources, i.e. plant and equipment, materials, personnel, finances and contingency measures if required to successfully deliver the project brief.

·    Demonstrated Understanding

The tenderer provided a very detailed breakdown of their proposed construction methodology, construction staging, indicative project timeline, and key hold points, critical risks for the project and methodologies for latent conditions.

Statutory Environment

The contract value is greater than $500,000, therefore, in accordance with section 5.43(b) of the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act), read with Delegation 3J, the tender is required to go before the Council.

 

In terms of section 3.57 of the Act, a local government is required to invite tenders before it enters into a contract of a prescribed kind under which another person is to supply goods and service. Part 4 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996:

·    requires that tenders be publicly invited for such contracts where the estimated cost of providing the required goods and/or service exceeds $150,000; and

·    under Regulations 11, 14, 18, 20 and 21A provides the statutory framework for inviting and assessing tenders and awarding contracts pursuant to this process.

 

With regard to the RFT, City officers have complied with abovementioned legislative requirements.

 

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

 

Relevant Plans and Policies

The City's purchasing policies, regional price preference, occupational health and safety, asset management, engineering technical standards and specifications were all relevant to the RFT, and have been adhered to in the process of requesting and evaluating tenders.


 

Financial Implications

The project/procurement for the Busselton Coastal Adaptation Works 2019/2020 Broadwater Beach and Wonnerup (Baudin Reserve) will be funded as follows:

 

1.   Baudin/Wonnerup Groynes $278,000 (cost code 510 C2526 3280 0000); and

 

2.   Broadwater Beach Coastal Protection Stage 2 of 4 with an original project value of $300,000 (cost code 510 C2523 3280 0000). This budget figure was based on the premise that the project is funded, $150,000 from the Climate Adaptation Reserve and $150,000 from the Department of Transports Coastal Adaptation Grant – for the 2019/2020 round of funding.

 

The City was advised by the Department of Transport that the grant for $150,000 was unsuccessful. Taking this into account the current overall budget available for the project is $428,000, made up from $278,000 (Baudin/Wonnerup Groynes) and $150,000 (Broadwater Beach Coastal Protection Stage 2 of 4), thus leaving a shortfall of $60,000.

 

Officers are recommending a budget amendment that will increase the draw down from the Climate Adaptation Reserve for Broadwater Beach Coastal Protection Stage 2 of 4 (cost code 510 C2523 3280 0000) from $150,000 to $210,000.

 

Subject to the Council adopting the above-mentioned budget amendment, this will result in an overall available budget of $488,000, made up as follows:

 

·    Baudin/Wonnerup Groynes $278,000 (cost code 510 C2526 3280 0000); and

 

·    Broadwater Beach Coastal Protection Stage 2 of 4 $210,000 (cost code 510 C2523 3280 0000).

 

Planned Amendment Item

Officers propose that the 2019/2020 adopted budget (as amended), be further amended to reflect the following funding change, shown in Table 1.

 

Table 1:

Cost Code

Description

Current Amended Budget ($)

Change ($)

Resulting Proposed Amended Budget ($)

Revenue

 

 

 

 

510-C2523-1215-0000

Capital Grants – Broadwater Beach Coastal Protection Stage 2 of 4

(150,000)

150,000

0

Expenditure

 

 

 

 

510-C2523-3280-0000

Proposed Contractor Costs – Broadwater Beach Coastal Protection Stage 2 of 4

300,000

(90,000)

210,000

Reserve

 

 

 

 

102-9103

Transfer from Climate Adaptation Reserve

(150,000)

(60,000)

(210,000)

 Net Total 

$0

$0

$0

 


Stakeholder Consultation

The RFT was advertised in the ‘West Australian’ newspaper on 16 November 2019 and uploaded to TenderLink on 13 November 2019. The closing time and date for lodgement of a response was 2.00pm (AWST) on Tuesday 3 December 2019. Officers have undertaken reference checks of the preferred tenderer.

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the Officer's recommendation has been

undertaken using the City's risk assessment framework, with the intention being to identify risks which, following implementation of controls, are identified as medium or greater. There are no such risks identified, with the preferred tenderer assessed as being capable of delivering the services to a suitable service level and in line with the agreed cleaning schedule.

Options

The Council may consider the following alternate options:

 

1)    To award the tender to an alternative tenderer/s. In the view of the Officers, this could result in the tender being awarded to a tenderer that is not most advantageous to the City.

2)    To not award the tender. This would mean going back out to tender, resulting in significant delays to the contract award and potential significant delays to the delivery of the Busselton Coastal Adaptation Works.

For the reasons provided in this report, the abovementioned options are not recommended.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that Council accept the tender of BCP Contractors Pty Ltd as the most advantageous to the City, subject to minor variations to be negotiated by the CEO, not exceeding the overall project budget.  A budget amendment is also requested.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The selection of the Successful Tenderer can be made immediately after the Council has endorsed the officer recommendation, subject to successful negotiation in accordance with the officer recommendation.

 


Council                                                                                      43                                                                29 January 2020

14.2           RFT15-19 PROVISION OF SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE TO THE BUSSELTON JETTY

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

6.4 Assets are well maintained and responsibly managed.

SUBJECT INDEX

Tenders

BUSINESS UNIT

Facilities Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Facilities Maintenance Coordinator - John Farrier

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Manager, Engineering and Technical Services - Daniell Abrahamse

NATURE OF DECISION

Executive: substantial direction setting, including adopting strategies, plans and policies (excluding local planning policies), tenders, setting and amending budgets, funding, donations and sponsorships, reviewing committee recommendations

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Published Under Separate Cover  Confidential RFT15-19 Evaluation & Recommendation Report  

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council:

1.    Pursuant to RFT15-19 Provision of Scheduled Maintenance to the Busselton Jetty, accept the tender from Shorewater Marine as the most advantageous tenderer (Successful Tenderer), subject to minor variations to be negotiated in accordance with Regulation 20 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 (FG Regs);

 

2.    Delegates power and authority to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and agree with the Successful Tenderer minor variations in accordance with Regulation 20 of the FG Regs, subject to such variations and the final terms not exceeding the overall project budget;

 

3.    Subject to resolutions 1 and 2, acknowledges that the CEO is authorised to enter into a contract with the Successful Tenderer for supply of the relevant goods and services.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City’s objective with request for tender RFT15-19 ‘Provision of Scheduled Maintenance to the Busselton Jetty’ (the RFT) is to engage a suitably experienced Contractor for all scheduled and reactive maintenance, structural upgrades and replacements to the Busselton Jetty and associated infrastructure (i.e. the Interpretive Centre and the Underwater Observatory) for a period of 5 years. 

 

BACKGROUND

Following the major refurbishment of the Busselton Jetty in 2012, Disley Civil Engineering (DCE) developed a document known as the 50-year Maintenance Plan, which was produced as a guide to maintaining and prolonging the life of the Jetty, Interpretive Centre (IC) and Underwater Observatory (UWO).

 

In June 2019, and in accordance with the City’s asset management plan, the City undertook a detailed assessment of the Jetty structure in order to compare the actual structural integrity against the predictions in the 50-year plan.  As a result of this review, a 5-year maintenance plan was produced, forming the basis for the request for the RFT.

 


 

The RFT invited suitably qualified and experienced contractors to make submissions to enter into a contract for all scheduled and reactive maintenance, structural upgrades and replacements to the Busselton Jetty and associated infrastructure (i.e. the IC and the UWO) in accordance with the Specification.  The scope of works includes all structural works above and below the water line.

OFFICER COMMENT

The RFT was issued as a Public Tender on Saturday 19 October 2019 and closed on Thursday 14 November 2019. The invitation to tender was advertised in the ‘West Australian’ newspaper. The City received four compliant tender responses from the following contractors:

 

·    Franmarine Underwater Services Pty Ltd

·    Shorewater Marine

·    Total AMS Pty Ltd

·    SMC Marine PTY Ltd

 

Assessment Process

In accordance with the City’s procurement practices and procedures, tender assessments were carried out by a tender evaluation panel comprising City officers with relevant skills and experience. The tender assessment process included:

 

·    Assessing tenders received against relevant compliance criteria. The compliance criteria were not point scored.  Each submission was assessed on a Yes/No basis as to whether each criterion was satisfactorily met. All tenders were deemed compliant.

·    Assessing tenders against the following qualitative criteria:

 

Criteria

Weighting

Relevant Experience

25%

Local Content

5%

Key Personnel Skills and Experience

10%

Tenderer’s Resources

5%

Demonstrated Understanding

20%

Occupational Health and Safety

5%

 

A scoring and weighting system was used to assess the tenders against these qualitative criteria.

 

The extent to which a tender demonstrated greater satisfaction of each of the qualitative criteria resulted in a greater score. The tendered prices were then assessed together with the weighted qualitative criteria and the tenders scored and ranked to determine the most advantageous outcome to the City, based on principles of best value for money.  That is, although price was a consideration, the tender containing the lowest price will not necessarily be accepted, nor will the tender ranked the highest on the qualitative criteria.

 


 

Summary of Assessment Outcomes

The outcome of the evaluation panel’s assessment was as follows:

 

Rank

Company

Summary

1.

Shorewater Marine

Very detailed, very specific, the evaluation panel could not fault the submission provided.  Scored very highly in all criterion.

2.

SMC Marine Pty Ltd

Comprehensive in detail, scored highly in most criterion. 

3.

Franmarine  Underwater Services Pty Ltd

Average submission and score

4.

Total AMS Pty Ltd

Average submission and score

Statutory Environment

The contract value is greater than $500,000, therefore, in accordance with section 5.43(b) of the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act), read with Delegation 3J, the tender is required to go before the Council.

 

In terms of section 3.57 of the Act, a local government is required to invite tenders before it enters into a contract of a prescribed kind under which another person is to supply goods and service. Part 4 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996:

 

·    requires that tenders be publicly invited for such contracts where the estimated cost of providing the required goods and/or service exceeds $150,000; and

·    under Regulations 11, 14, 18, 20 and 21A provides the statutory framework for inviting and assessing tenders and awarding contracts pursuant to this process.

With regard to the RFT, City officers have complied with abovementioned legislative requirements.

Relevant Plans and Policies

The City's purchasing policies and its occupational health and safety, asset management and engineering technical standards and specifications were all relevant to the RFT, and have been adhered to in the process of requesting and evaluating tenders.

Financial Implications

The project/procurement for the RFT will be funded from the City of Busselton’s Jetty Maintenance Reserve, and is catered for in the existing budget and LTFP.  It should be noted that the budget figure reflects the value of maintenance works to the Jetty that the City is unable to carry out using internal resources. The allocated budget in FY 19/20 is $1.7m.

 

Shorewater Marine have been recommended for the award of the contract, and have submitted a tender price within the City’s approved budget funding. The budget estimate for the total contract, including all extension options, is as follows:

 

Financial Year

Estimated Maintenance works

·    19/20

·    $1,375,797

·    20/21

·    $955,209

·    21/22

·    $138,024

·    22/23

·    $340,004

·    23/24

·    $593,783

·    Total

·    $3,402,817

The 5-year maintenance plan highlights the fact that the Jetty structure is not deteriorating at the forecasted rate as laid out in the DCE 50-year Maintenance Plan, and that the majority of capital replacements can be delayed until 2030, therefore the budget estimate is considerably lower than anticipated. 

 

The RFT is a 5-year program of works, with the forecast spend for years 6-11 (Financial Year 2024/2025 – 2029/2030) expected to realign closer with the cumulative budget forecast in the 50-year Maintenance Plan.

 

Financial Year

Estimated Maintenance works

·    24/25

·    $1.242m

·    25/26

·    $371,000

·    26/27

·    $283,000

·    27/28

·    $938,000

·    28/29

·    $273,000

·    29/30

·    $4.398m

·    Total

·    $7.505m

Stakeholder Consultation

The RFT was issued as a Public Tender on Saturday 19 October 2019 and closed Thursday 14 November 2019. The invitation to tender was advertised in the ‘West Australian’ newspaper.

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City's risk assessment framework, with the intention being to identify risks which, following implementation of controls, are identified as medium or greater. There are no such risks identified, with the preferred tenderer assessed as being capable of delivering the services to a suitable service level and in line with the proposed schedule.

Options

The Council may consider the following alternate options:

 

1)    To award the tender to an alternative tenderer/s. In the view of the Officers this could result in the tender being awarded to a tenderer that is not most advantageous to the City.

2)    To not award the tender. This would mean going back out to tender, resulting in significant delays to the contract award and potential significant delays to the provision of scheduled maintenance to the Busselton Jetty.

For the reasons provided in this report, the abovementioned options are not recommended.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that Council accept the tender of Shorewater Marine as the most advantageous to the City, subject to minor variations to be negotiated by the CEO, not exceeding the overall project budget. 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The selection of the Successful Tenderer can be made immediately after the Council has endorsed the officer recommendation, subject to successful negotiation in accordance with the officer recommendation.

14.3           RFT25-19 BUSSELTON SENIOR CITIZENS CENTRE UPGRADE AND EXPANSION

STRATEGIC GOAL

1. COMMUNITY: Welcoming, friendly, healthy

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

1.3 A community with access to a range of cultural and art, social and recreational facilities and experiences.

SUBJECT INDEX

Tenders

BUSINESS UNIT

Major Projects and Facilities

REPORTING OFFICER

Manager Major Projects and Facilities - Eden Shepherd

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Manager, Engineering and Technical Services - Daniell Abrahamse

NATURE OF DECISION

Executive: substantial direction setting, including adopting strategies, plans and policies (excluding local planning policies), tenders, setting and amending budgets, funding, donations and sponsorships, reviewing committee recommendations

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Published Under Separate Cover  Confidential Attachment - Evaluation & Recommendation report CONFIDENTIAL  

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council:

 

1.    Pursuant to RFT25-19 Busselton Senior Citizens Centre Upgrade and Expansion, accept the tender from Devlyn Australia Pty Ltd as the most advantageous tenderer (Successful Tenderer), subject to minor variations to be negotiated in accordance with Regulation 20 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 (FG Regs);

 

2.    Delegates power and authority to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and agree with the Successful Tenderer minor variations in accordance with Regulation 20 of the FG Regs, subject to such variations and the final terms not exceeding the overall project budget;

 

3.    Subject to resolutions 1 and 2, acknowledges that the CEO is authorised to enter into a contract with the Successful Tenderer for supply of the relevant goods and services.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City’s objective with request for tender RFT25-19 ‘Busselton Senior Citizens Centre Upgrade and Expansion’ (the RFT) is to engage a suitably experienced Contractor for the upgrade and expansion of the Busselton Senior Citizens Centre including:

 

·        Extension of the main hall

·        Reconfiguration of the dining room, library, office and toilets

·        Roof upgrade

·        Services upgrade (electrical, mechanical, hydraulic and telecommunications)

 


 

BACKGROUND

The Busselton Senior Citizens Centre (the Centre) is located on Lot 73 Peel Terrace, Busselton, which is freehold land owned by the City. In 2007, the City entered into a lease over the Centre which expires on 5 August 2023. The Centre currently has around 800 members. Based on the predictions of the Age Friendly Project, that by 2026 the population aged 65 and over will have trebled, and assuming a similar membership, it was identified that the Busselton Senior Citizens could increase their membership by over 200 new members a year.  

 

The City has been working in consultation with the Busselton Senior Citizens in the development of this project.  Below is an outline of key project milestones:

 

·    The City of Busselton Strategic Plan 2010-2020 identified a need to provide for an increasing aged population and introduced a strategic priority to ‘prepare a strategy to assist the aged.’

·    Funding was obtained from the South West Development Commission (SWDC) and the Department for Local Government and Communities (DFLGC) to undertake research and consultation to understand the needs of the 60-plus age group and develop a strategy.

·    In 2011, the Age Friendly Communities Project was undertaken involving workshops and surveys with seniors, age care providers and carers.

·    In October 2012, after a further 12 months of demographic forecasting, research and consultation with agencies, community groups and other government departments, the City of Busselton Social and Aging Plan 2012-2020 was adopted by Council.

·    In 2014, options to expand the current Centre or relocate and build a larger facility were presented to Council as part of the Long Term Financial Plan review.

·    In the 2016 review of the Long Term Financial Plan, Council identified the expansion of Senior Citizens Centre services for future inclusion, further to broader consultation as part of the Community Strategic Plan and more detailed planning.

·    On 27 July 2016, Council agreed to support the expansion of the Centre on the current site, subject to further research and planning.

In September 2017, Lotterywest agreed to contribute to the project and the Busselton Senior Citizens presented concept designs and budget cost estimates for the expanded facility to Council. The upgrade and expansion of the Centre was identified as a capital works project for the 2019-2020 financial year. 

 

In consultation with the Busselton Senior Citizens, the Major Projects team has finalised the Detailed Design of the Centre and is now progressing the Construction phase of this project.


 

OFFICER COMMENT

The RFT was issued as a Public Tender on Thursday 21 November 2019 and closed Tuesday 17 December 2019. The invitation to tender was advertised in the ‘West Australian’ newspaper and the ‘Busselton Dunsborough Mail’. The City received five (5) compliant tender responses from the following contractors:

 

 

Company

1.

Civilcon Constructions Pty Ltd

2.

Devlyn Australia Pty Ltd

3.

Hacer Pty Ltd T/A Smith Constructions WA

4.

Pindan Contracting Pty Ltd

5.

ProLiving Pty Ltd

 

Assessment Process

In accordance with the City’s procurement practices and procedures, tender assessments were carried out by a tender evaluation panel comprising City officers with relevant skills and experience. The tender assessment process included:

 

·    Assessing tenders received against relevant compliance criteria. The compliance criteria were not point scored.  Each submission was assessed on a Yes/No basis as to whether each criterion was satisfactorily met. All tenders were deemed compliant.

·    Assessing tenders against the following qualitative criteria:

Criteria

Weighting

Relevant Experience

30%

Local Benefit

5%

Respondent’s Resources

10%

Demonstrated Understanding

15%

 

A scoring and weighting system was used to assess the tenders against these qualitative criteria.

 

The extent to which a tender demonstrated greater satisfaction of each of the qualitative criteria resulted in a greater score. The tendered prices were then assessed together with the weighted qualitative criteria and the tenders scored and ranked to determine the most advantageous outcome to the City, based on principles of best value for money.  That is, although price was a consideration, the tender containing the lowest price will not necessarily be accepted, nor will the tender ranked the highest on the qualitative criteria.

 


 

Summary of Assessment Outcomes

The outcome of the evaluation panel’s assessment was as follows:

 

Rank

Company

Summary

1.

Devlyn Australia Pty Ltd

Limited local experience, however equivalent project experience in terms of scope of this project.

Local benefit criteria has been addressed. Supports local not-for-profit organisations and trains apprentices.

Good range of equipment and staff resources.

Excellent, detailed response to demonstrated understanding.  Site establishment provided and risks identified. Able to achieve program requirements.

2.

Hacer Pty Ltd T/A Smith Constructions WA

Very good range of commercial experience having worked throughout the region.

Local benefit criteria has been addressed. Supports local not-for profit organisations and trains apprentices.

Good range of equipment and staff resources

Detailed program provided.

3.

Pindan Contracting Pty Ltd

Extensive experience across a broad range of community projects throughout WA and notably locally.

Local benefit criteria has been addressed but not met.

Very good range of resources.

Good detailed response to demonstrated understanding.  Program provided. Able to achieve program requirements.

4.

Civilcon Constructions Pty Ltd

Good relevant experience.

Local benefit criteria has been addressed but not met.

Good range of plant and equipment, good approach traineeship.

Good outline of construction methodology, lacking detail relevant to the project. Good detailed program provided.

5.

ProLiving Pty Ltd

Some relevant experience.

Local benefit criteria has been addressed. Supports local not-for profit organisations.

Good range of equipment and staff resources.

Very generic response to demonstrated understanding.


Statutory Environment

The contract value is greater than $500,000, therefore, in accordance with section 5.43(b) of the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act), read with Delegation 3J, the tender is required to go before the Council.

 

In terms of section 3.57 of the Act, a local government is required to invite tenders before it enters into a contract of a prescribed kind under which another person is to supply goods and service. Part 4 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996:

 

·    requires that tenders be publicly invited for such contracts where the estimated cost of providing the required goods and/or service exceeds $150,000; and

·    under Regulations 11, 14, 18, 20 and 21A provides the statutory framework for inviting and assessing tenders and awarding contracts pursuant to this process.

With regard to the RFT, City officers have complied with abovementioned legislative requirements.

Relevant Plans and Policies

The City's purchasing policies and its occupational health and safety, asset management and engineering technical standards and specifications were all relevant to the RFT, and have been adhered to in the process of requesting and evaluating tenders.

Financial Implications

The project/procurement will be funded from the 2019/2020 Capital Budget - $1,163,450.

 

Devlyn Australia Pty Ltd, recommended for award of the contract, has submitted a lump sum tender price within the City’s approved budget funding. The lump sum fee for the contract is $879,088.

 

It is recommended that the remaining budget of $284,362 be allocated to investigate and implement other priority projects for the Centre that have previously been removed from the project due to budget concerns. These variations may include a sprung floor for the new hall and toilet refurbishment.

Stakeholder Consultation

The RFT was issued as a Public Tender on Thursday 21 November 2019 and closed Tuesday 17 December 2019. The invitation to tender was advertised in the ‘West Australian’ newspaper and the ‘Busselton Dunsborough Mail’.

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer's recommendation has been

undertaken using the City's risk assessment framework, with the intention being to identify risks which, following implementation of controls, are identified as medium or greater. There are no such risks identified, with the preferred tenderer assessed as being capable of delivering the services to a suitable service level and in line with the agreed cleaning schedule.


 

Options

The Council may consider the following alternate options:

 

1)    To award the tender to an alternative tenderer/s. In the view of the Officers this could result in the tender being awarded to a tenderer that is not most advantageous to the City.

2)    To not award the tender. This would mean going back out to tender, resulting in significant delays to the contract award and potential significant delays to the Busselton Senior Citizens Centre upgrades.

For the reasons provided in this report, the abovementioned options are not recommended.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that Council accept the tender of Devlyn Australia Pty Ltd as the most advantageous to the City, subject to minor variations to be negotiated by the CEO, not exceeding the overall project budget. 

 

It is recommended that the remaining budget of $284,362 be allocated to investigate and implement other priority projects for the Busselton Senior Citizen’s Centre that have previously been removed from the project due to budget concerns. 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The selection of the Successful Tenderer can be made immediately after the Council has endorsed the officer recommendation, subject to successful negotiation in accordance with the officer recommendation.

 


Council                                                                                      50                                                                29 January 2020

14.4           KING STREET ROAD AND FOOTPATH UPGRADE

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

6.4 Assets are well maintained and responsibly managed.

SUBJECT INDEX

Request for Quotation

BUSINESS UNIT

Operation and Works Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Manager, Operation and Works Services - Matthew Twyman

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Manager, Engineering and Technical Services - Daniell Abrahamse

NATURE OF DECISION

Executive: substantial direction setting, including adopting strategies, plans and policies (excluding local planning policies), tenders, setting and amending budgets, funding, donations and sponsorships, reviewing committee recommendations

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Published Under Separate Cover  Confidential RFQ72/19 Evaluation and Recommendation Report  

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council:

 

1.    Pursuant to RFQ72-19 King Street Road and Footpath Upgrade and, subject to resolution 2, accepts the quotation from Leeuwin Civil Pty Ltd (Successful Respondent) as the most advantageous quotation;

 

2.    Delegate power and authority to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and agree with the Successful Respondent minor variations and the final terms and conditions of the contract, subject to such variations not exceeding the overall project budget.

 

3.    Subject to resolutions 1 and 2, authorises the CEO to enter into a contract with the Successful Respondent for supply of the relevant goods and services.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City’s objectives with this Request for Quote RFQ72-19 King Street Road and Footpath Upgrade (the RFQ) is to upgrade the existing road with stormwater drainage and road reconstruction.

 

The Scope of Works can be summarised as:

·    Demolition and clearing;

·    Bulk and detailed earthworks/civil works;

·    Stormwater drainage;

·    Road construction;

·    Concrete kerbs and pram ramps;

·    Landscaping, including reticulation;

·    Concrete footpath.

 

 


 

BACKGROUND

King Street is used as one of the main thoroughfares to Geographe Bay beach, the foreshore, Geographe Bay Yacht Club and to obtain direct access to Lou Weston ovals. Large numbers of pedestrians walk to and from Bussell Highway and recent traffic counts indicate 1,300 motor vehicles per day use this route.

The existing drainage is not able to cope with peak winter rainfall and has deteriorated due to age.  An upgrade to the capacity and infrastructure condition is require to meet the City’s stormwater drainage requirements.  The existing road is at condition rating 7 (1 being new), with the existing seal being 30 years old with uneven surfaces, poor fall to drainage pits and numerous patches and minor asphalt overlays.

The key reconstruction strategies for King Street include:

·    Removal of a Western Power pole to make way for a 2.5m wide footpath 600m from Bussell Highway to Geographe Bay Road.

·    Installation of additional stormwater drainage storage cells and pipeline.

·    Road reconstruction between Thomas Street and Dorset Street, including new kerb and footpath.  Asphalt overlay to the road surface between Dorset Street and Bussell Highway.

·    Widening the intersection from King Street onto Bussell Highway is designed to allow left and right lane turning to ease traffic congestion onto Bussell Highway.

·    Median islands with below ground reticulation for landscaping, exposed aggregate infill and flush kerb allowing water retention in these areas.

·    New signage and line marking is incorporated into this design along with red asphalt in the median, improving the visual appearance and aiding driver understanding of the road environment.

Images providing an overview of the works are provided below.

    

  

 


 

OFFICER COMMENT

The RFQ was issued to local (South West Region) WALGA Preferred Contractors on 11 November 2019 and closed on 13 December 2019. The RFQ was released to local contractors only on the WALGA procurement platform. The City received three compliant RFQ responses from the following contractors:

 

·    Leeuwin Civil Pty Ltd

·    BCP Contractors Pty Ltd

·    Cowara Contracting Pty Ltd

 

The City did not receive a response from Geographe Civil Pty Ltd.

 

Assessment Process

In accordance with the City’s procurement practices and procedures RFQ assessments were carried out by an RFQ evaluation panel comprising City officers and an independent evaluation panel member with relevant skills and experience. The RFQ assessment process included:

 

·          Assessing submissions received against relevant compliance criteria. The compliance criteria was point scored.  Each submission was scored 1 – 5 (5 being high) as to whether each criterion was satisfactorily met. All Quotes were deemed compliant.

·          Assessing the quotes against the following qualitative criteria:

 

Criteria

Weighting

Local benefit

5%

Demonstrated Understanding

20%

Price

75%

A scoring and weighting system was used to assess the submissions against these qualitative criteria.

The extent to which a quote demonstrated greater satisfaction of each of the qualitative criteria resulted in a greater score. The Contractor prices were then assessed together with the weighted qualitative criteria and the quotes scored and ranked to determine the most advantageous outcome to the City, based on principles of best value for money.  That is, although price was a consideration, the contractor containing the lowest price will not necessarily be accepted, nor will the contractor ranked the highest on the qualitative criteria.


 

Summary of Assessment Outcomes

The outcome of the evaluation panel’s assessment was as follows:

 

Rank

Company

Summary

1.

BCP Contractors (BCP)

BCP presented the highest price of the three quotes provided.

BCP provided a detailed but generic Construction methodology for each component of the project. BCP also understood Water Corporation sewer tie-ins providing a Provisional Sum. BCPs Gantt chart shows a staged plan to meet delivery timeframes.

2.

Leeuwin Civil (LC)

LC presented the lowest price of the three quotes.

LC provided a site specific construction methodology, however their Gantt chart program indicated a start date ahead of City expectation. Understanding of traffic management and safety requirements was provided.

3.

Cowara Contractors (Cowara)

Cowara presented the second highest price of the three quotes provided.

The company is based outside of the City of Busselton district and did not receive a regional price preference deduction.   A number of Cowara employees and subcontractors are however involved in local community groups.

Cowara provided site specific construction methodology, planning to work two sections of road at the same time to meet their program. Understanding of QA, traffic management and indigenous heritage requirements.

Statutory Environment

The Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 (WA) (Regulations) and the City's Purchasing Policy 239 (Purchasing Policy) provide the statutory procurement framework for procurement of the relevant goods and services. 

 

Regulations

In terms of Regulation 11(1) of the Regulations, unless an exemption applies, tenders are to be publicly invited before a local government enters into a contract for another person to supply goods or services if the consideration under the contact is, or is expected to be, more, or worth more, than $150,000 (Tender Threshold). Regulation 11(2)(b) stipulates that tenders do not have to be publicly invited if the supply of the goods or services is to be obtained through the WALGA Preferred Supplier Program even if the consideration under the resulting contract exceeds the Tender Threshold.

 


 

All three respondents are (and had at all relevant times been) WALGA Preferred Suppliers as contemplated under Regulation 11(2)(b). The relevant WALGA Preferred Supplier panel is Program Contract Number: CO17/18 Preferred Supplier Arrangement for Road Building Contractors, Materials and Related Services A.16 Road Building Minor and Major Works.

 

Therefore, although the contract price for the goods and services will exceed the Tender Threshold, the City would be exempt from the requirement under Regulation 11(1), i.e. to publicly invite tenders for these goods and services.

 

Purchasing Policy

In terms of Section 5.27 of the City’s Purchasing Policy, the City can make purchases from WALGA Preferred Suppliers for amounts over $150,000 in reliance on the exemption to the requirement for a public tender, provided that three quotes must be sought. The process under RFQ72-19 King Street Road and Footpath Upgrade complies with this requirement as quotations have been obtained from three suppliers.

 

Relevant delegation

The contract value is greater than $500,000, therefore, in accordance with section 5.43(b) of the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act), read with Delegation 3J, the quote must be accepted by the Council.

Relevant Plans and Policies

The City's purchasing policies and its occupational health and safety, asset management and engineering technical standards and specifications were all relevant to RFQ72-19, and have been adhered to in the process of requesting and evaluating RFQs.

Financial Implications

All quotes received were in excess of the available budget allowance of $682,329.  As such the City proposes to save costs and utilise its existing term contract RFT23/16 Asphalt and Spray Sealing Services to complete the supply and laying of asphalt for the project.

 

While Leeuwin Civil Pty Ltd has submitted a lump sum price in excess of the project budget, removal of the supply and laying of asphalt from the scope and resultant savings will reduce this excess.  The City will further negotiate to bring delivery of the project within approved budget funding.

Stakeholder Consultation

The RFQ was issued to four (4) WALGA Preferred Suppliers (South West Region) on November 11 2019. The closing time and date for lodgement of a response was 2.00pm (AWST) on Friday 13 December 2019.

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management framework, with risks assessed taking into account any controls already in place. There are no such risks identified, with the preferred contractor assessed as being capable of delivering the services to a suitable service level and in line with the agreed site management planning.


 

Options

The Council may consider the following alternate options:

 

1)    To award the RFQ to an alternative contractor. In the view of the Officers this could result in the RFQ being awarded to a contractor that is not most advantageous to the City.

2)    To not award the RFQ. This would mean going out to tender, resulting in significant delays to the contract award and to the delivery of the project.

For the reasons provided in this report, the abovementioned options are not recommended.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that Council accept the quote of Leeuwin Civil Pty Ltd as the most advantageous to the City, subject to minor variations to be negotiated by the CEO, not exceeding the overall project budget. 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The selection of the Successful Respondent can be made immediately after the Council has endorsed the officer recommendation, subject to successful negotiation in accordance with the officer recommendation.

 


Council                                                                                      52                                                                29 January 2020

14.5           RFT14-19 DESIGN AND TECHNICAL SERVICES – BUSSELTON ENTERTAINMENT ARTS AND CULTURAL HUB

STRATEGIC GOAL

1. COMMUNITY: Welcoming, friendly, healthy

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

1.3 A community with access to a range of cultural and art, social and recreational facilities and experiences.

SUBJECT INDEX

Tenders

BUSINESS UNIT

Major Projects and Facilities

REPORTING OFFICER

Manager Major Projects and Facilities - Eden Shepherd

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Manager, Engineering and Technical Services - Daniell Abrahamse

NATURE OF DECISION

Executive: substantial direction setting, including adopting strategies, plans and policies (excluding local planning policies), tenders, setting and amending budgets, funding, donations and sponsorships, reviewing committee recommendations

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Published Under Separate Cover  Confidential RFT14-19 BEACH Architect - Evaluation and Recommendation Report for Council FINAL

Attachment b    Published Under Separate Cover  Confidential APPENDIX A RFT14-19 BEACH Architect - Evaluation Panel Consensus Scoresheet

Attachment c    Published Under Separate Cover  Confidential APPENDIX B RFT14-19 BEACH Architect - Tender Evaluation Sheet  

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council:

1.    Pursuant to RFT 14/19 Design and Technical Services - Busselton Entertainment, Arts and Cultural Hub, accept the tender from Kerry Hill Architects Pty Ltd as the most advantageous tenderer (Successful Tenderer), subject to minor variations to be negotiated in accordance with Regulation 20 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 (FG Regs);

 

2.    Delegates power and authority to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and agree with the Successful Tenderer minor variations in accordance with Regulation 20 of the FG Regs, subject to such variations and the final terms not exceeding a lump sum contract price of $1,979,440;

 

3.    Subject to resolutions 1 and 2, acknowledges that the CEO is authorised to enter into a contract with the Successful Tenderer for supply of the relevant goods and services;

 

4.    Endorse the removal of Stage 2 from the overall project scope of works to allow further investigation into the viability of other potential sites for the establishment of a creative industries hub component in proximity to the Cultural Precinct; and

 

5.    Endorse the project to progress through to detailed design and contract documentation noting the next hold point will be the recommendation for award of the project builder.

 

 


 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City’s objectives with request for tender RFT14-19 Design and Technical Services - Busselton Entertainment, Arts and Cultural Hub (BEACH) (the RFT) is to appoint a suitably qualified and experienced architect and sub-consultants to deliver the BEACH project. The project was originally envisaged in two stages with Stage 1 fully funded, including all the operational requirements for a performing arts centre and Stage 2, to accommodate a creative industries hub, not currently funded.

 

Project objectives include providing for the Capes region an iconic venue of quality, contemporary design and the latest technologies that will:

 

·    Enrich the lives of our community and its visitors by increasing the spectrum of quality arts and culture events; provide opportunities for our significant creative industries sector and a home for local artistic, cultural and educational groups;

·    Create new markets for business in the performing arts, conventions, conferences and trade shows;

·    Diversify the events offered by the City and fill the gap in indoor venues with capacity of around 1,000 to service the winter and shoulder seasons;

·    Enliven the Cultural Precinct, connecting key spaces of the CBD and foreshore, providing an economic catalyst for extended trading and business viability;

·    Provide a wide range of employment opportunities, from entry level to professional in hospitality, catering, events, marketing, administration and the arts; and

·    Attract artists, creators and researchers to explore and exchange ideas, incubate creative industries and new talent.

 

Stage 1 of the BEACH project is to deliver a traditional theatre and accompanying convention space with operational flexibility to hold events, small to large functions and conference facilities. The analysis of market demand identified an optimal seating capacity greater than 600 for the theatre and 300 or greater when used in banquet style for conference/convention markets. Ideally, the flexibility in the auditorium also needs to enable an increase to at least 800 capacity with circa 500 standing to be an attractive venue for a broad range of music events.

 

Stage 2 of development is currently scoped to form part of the overall BEACH facility including a creative industry hub and additional function area. It is recommended Stage 2 be removed from the BEACH scope of works to allow further investigation and viability for other potential sites within the Busselton Cultural Precinct.

 

BACKGROUND

The BEACH will be a first-class dedicated performing arts, entertainment and convention centre capable of hosting major events and a hub for the region’s burgeoning creative industry. The BEACH will be an iconic landmark performance space with a minimum 600-seat capacity theatre and conference and convention facilities accommodating a minimum 450 people. The building will be flexible in design utilising the latest technology to host large indoor events, adding to the viability of the South West touring circuit and the opportunity to increase visitation to the region as a destination for conferences, trade shows and conventions.

 

The establishment of a dedicated convention, entertainment and performing arts venue in Busselton is the third pillar of a regional growth strategy alongside the Busselton Foreshore Development and Busselton Margaret River Airport upgrade. In tandem, these projects are set to increase interstate and international tourism, expanding from traditional intrastate visits to a more lucrative, higher spend business, incentive and exhibition travel market; particularly international markets; realising greater economic returns for one of the most highly tourism dependent regions nationwide.

 

Development of such a facility has been consistently identified as a key local priority project over several iterations of the City’s Strategic Community Plan and contained in the South West Blueprint (February 2015) as a regional priority project in support of the South West region creative industries sector and the City of Busselton’s own brand as “Events Capital WA”, by provision of a large capacity indoor venue to expand and support the regional events program into winter months.

 

The City of Busselton Economic Development Strategy identifies development of a performing arts and convention centre in the Busselton CBD as a key project that will support tourism growth and the concept of ‘quality of place’. The Strategy talks to strengthening economic sectors through “clustering”; increasing offerings such as hospitality and entertainment in a precinct which attracts people and increases vibrancy, leading to increased viability / profitability and generating a critical mass required for ancillary offerings, such as public transport to and from the precinct, which also adds value to surrounding enterprises.

 

Significant work has already been undertaken with regards to the formation of a performing arts and conference venue for Busselton, including the Pegasus Performing Arts and Creative Industries Feasibility Report undertaken in 2008 and the joint Capes Regional Arts and Cultural Facilities Needs Assessment in 2012. The reports verify that there is strong justification for provision of a performing arts and convention centre in Busselton to support a growing creative industries and events sector as a regional economic driver.

 

The City allocated funding in the 2016/17 and 2017/18 budgets to commission further studies. Lawrence Consulting and Studio Evans Lane were contracted to conduct a Market Demand Analysis and Economic Impact Assessment (November 2016) to ascertain projected demand and subsequently determine the most viable option for size and capacity for the new facility. This body of work informed an initial concept design of a highly flexible multi-purpose centre with seating capacity of several configurations for up to 625 theatre style and 650 banquet style seating for convention and conference use. This work, plus two further Economic Assessments based on optimal and conservative operating scenarios, informed the business case which secured Federal Funding of $10.35m towards the Stage 1 development of the BEACH.

 

The Council-endorsed location for the BEACH is on vacant land at lots 43 and 44 Queen Street (Ordinary Council Meeting on 25 May 2016 - C1605/127, as noted below), which is owned freehold by the City of Busselton, gifted to the City by the State in 2010:

 

That the Council:

1.         Reconfirms its commitment for the development of a Performing Arts and Convention Centre (PACC) within the Cultural Precinct;

2.         Endorses Lots 43 and 44 Queen Street as the preferred site for the PACC; and

3.         Endorses continued liaison with the Department of Parks and Wildlife for the acquisition of Lot 450 Queen Street for future needs and completion of the Cultural Precinct.

 

The project incorporates development onto adjacent lots 468 (the ArtGeo Gallery site) and lot 310 (the Weld Theatre site). Development of the BEACH will activate the only remaining vacant site within the recently redeveloped Busselton Cultural Precinct and consolidate the City’s urban centre. It will significantly enliven the precinct and complete an all-important link between the redeveloped world class Busselton Foreshore currently in the final stages of a $72m redevelopment, and Central Business District.

 

The development of this facility has consistently been identified in cultural planning and in consultation for the City of Busselton Community Strategic Plan as a high community priority. As such, feasibility reports, project planning and stakeholder engagement, including formation of the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre Working Group (BPACC Working Group), has occurred over a number of years to ensure viability, support and long term sustainability for the centre.

On 31 July 2019, Council resolved (C1907/131) that it:

 

1.         Accepts the Federal Government’s funding offer of $10.35m for the design and development of the BEACH;

2.         Amends the Long Term Financial Plan as part of its 2019 review to enable construction to be undertaken from 2020/21;

3.         Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to enter into a grant agreement with the Federal Government; and

4.         Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to actively seek State Government funding opportunities.

OFFICER COMMENT

The City of Busselton issued the RFT on 26 September 2019. The RFT closed on 29 November 2019. Advertising was not required as the RFT resulted from an Expression of Interest (EOI) which shortlisted the five prospective tenderers who were privately invited via Tenderlink to respond to RFT14-19.

 

The City issued the RFT to the following contractors:

 

·    Box Architects Pty Ltd (ACN 607 404 044)

·    Kerry Hill Architects Pty Ltd (ACN 069 583 731)

·    Peter Hunt Pty Ltd (ACN 008 895 823) atf the Peter Hunt Architect Unit Trust

·    Willow Digital Pty Ltd (ACN 606 612 088)

·    With Architecture Studio Pty Ltd (ACN 169 698 373)

 

All tenders were compliant.

 

Assessment Process

In accordance with the City’s procurement practices and procedures, tender assessments were carried out by a tender evaluation panel comprising City officers and an independent evaluation panel member with relevant skills and experience.

The tender assessment process included:

·    Assessing tenders received against relevant compliance criteria. The compliance criteria were not point scored.  Each submission was assessed on a Yes/No basis as to whether each criterion was satisfactorily met. All tenders were deemed compliant.

·    Assessing tenders against the following qualitative criteria:

 

 

Criteria

Weighting

(a)

Concept Design

45%

(b)

Demonstrated Understanding

40%

(b)

Key Personnel Skills and Experience

15%

 

A scoring and weighting system was used to assess the tenders against these qualitative criteria.

 

The extent to which a tender demonstrated greater satisfaction of each of the qualitative criteria resulted in a greater score. The tendered prices were then assessed together with the weighted qualitative criteria and the tenders scored and ranked to determine the most advantageous outcome to the City, based on principles of best value for money.  That is, although price was a consideration, the tender containing the lowest price will not necessarily be accepted, nor will the tender ranked the highest on the qualitative criteria.

 

The evaluation panel made a series of value judgements based on the capability of the tenderers to complete the requirements including the cost affordability and risk of all conforming tenders submitted. The tendered price has been considered along with related factors affecting the total cost to the City including the lifetime operating costs of goods to ensure the best value for money outcome.

 

A comparative price schedule for professional fees and project budgets is provided below.

 

Tenderer

Indicative Professional Fees Lump Sum

Forecast project budget

Peter Hunt Architect

$1,599,250

$29,806,952

Willow

$1,762,500

$22,281,575

Box Architects

$1,835,236

$21,311,331

With Architecture Studio

$1,920,000

$29,728,158

Kerry Hill Architects

$1,979,440

$22,587,000

While it’s acknowledged Kerry Hill Architects have submitted a higher lump sum for professional fees, relevant officers feel comfortable that through negotiations to reduce the scope, the project will successfully achieve the budget. A summary of findings from a review of professional fees is included below. 

The Regional Price Preference Policy did not apply to this tender.

 

Summary of Assessment Outcomes

The ranked outcome of the evaluation panel’s assessment was as follows:

 

Rank

Company

1

Kerry Hill Architects Pty Ltd

2

Willow

3

Box Architects Pty Ltd

4

Peter Hunt Architects

5

With Architecture Studio Pty Ltd

 

Based on the outcome of the evaluation matrix and combined reviews the evaluation panel concluded to seek further reviews from external consultants for Kerry Hill Architects Pty Ltd and Studio Evans Lane who ranked in positions 1 and 2 post evaluation. Members of an internal BEACH working group (which includes Councillor representation) were briefed on the assessment outcomes.  The following consultants also reviewed the tender submissions, focusing on their respective field of expertise.

 

Company

Scope

Background

Peter Mould

Design Review

Peter has advised and consulted with a number of

agencies on design, strategy and procurement issues. These have included Federal and State

Government agencies, Local Government, and the private sector. He is currently a member of

the Design Advisory Panels in NSW, Victoria, South Australia, the City of Sydney, the Sydney

Opera House, Transport NSW, and the UNSW. He regularly sits on design juries for competitions and projects in Australia and internationally.


 

Extent Heritage Advisors

Heritage Review

Extent are a highly skilled team of heritage professionals that deliver a single point of service for heritage assessment and management across all corners of Australia and the Asia Pacific.

Ralph & Beattie Bosworth Pty Ltd (RBB)

Independent cost review

RBB provide a professional consultancy service to the construction industry. Services include cost planning, progress payments and bills of quantities and span commercial, government, retail and residential sectors. For further information look our Services and Projects pages.

 

The summary of assessment outcomes is presented below. 

 

1.         Kerry Hill Architects Pty Ltd

·    Concept design – Highest performing and very comprehensive design concept that achieves a distinctive, high quality design with optimal configuration for the performing arts centre.  Quality of design of previous projects and capability of team has been confirmed through independent design review and reference checks.

·    Qualitative criteria – Highest performing against all qualitative criteria.  The team will provide the City with a diverse international design team with direct experience working on award winning theatre projects and unmatched capability of consultancy areas required for the design

·    Price - $1,267,000 over the total project budget.  Independent review by the City’s Quantity Surveyor has confirmed there are opportunities to reduce scope of scheme without compromising design outcome. The gross floor area (GFA) is the highest of all submissions by approximately 1,000m2 so if this was able to be reduced, then the City’s budget should be able to be achieved.  This reduction in scope is expected to have a corresponding reduction on professional fees.

·    Heritage – Independent review has confirmed the KHA proposal provides an important contemporary contrast to the Weld Theatre and ArtGeo without conflicting or dominating them.  Interventions proposed to ArtGeo are recommended for review due to degree of impact to roof and north elevation.

·    Design Review – KHA recommended as superior design for response to context, sophistication of design, integrated approach to materials and form, street activation, spaces with higher amenity and quality, innovation in project delivery and alignment of program with project brief.

 

2.         Willow

·    Concept design – Good response to project vision and objectives with limited response to how the design promotes the unique qualities of the region. Design shows angular roofing of striking and memorable design with cranked external screens, however detail for how these elements will be executed to achieve light weight structure not provided. Wagon seating and its operation whilst appearing to provide good functional outcome has limited or no precedents in Australia. 

·    Qualitative criteria – Second highest performing against all qualitative criteria. Studio Evans Lane/Willow will provide a good international and interstate design team. However, there is limited experience working in Western Australia.

·    Price – $961,575 over the total project budget. Willow are conscious their estimate exceeds the budget and have proposed value engineering options. The GFA rate of $3,641/m2 proposed by Willow is achievable if strict control on the design is maintained.

·    Heritage – The Willow approach to the heritage buildings maintains their current uses, and is therefore safer in terms of impact on heritage fabric. However it challenges them architecturally with a bold contemporary screened and angular new building.

The concept design could be said to achieve the interface with the heritage buildings with more success. Although its dramatic and creative expression could be regarded as potentially overbearing.

·    Design Review – Submission considered of a high quality, responding comprehensively to the brief. Willow proposal considered very much of its time and likely to date more quickly. The long-term maintenance of the fabric is also a concern in terms of dust collection, cleaning and longevity.

 

3.         Box Architects Pty Ltd

·    Concept design – Box Architects Pty Ltd submitted a stripped back scheme using material references and massing and elevation to link to adjacent heritage items. Not all briefed items are included within the submission, missing key issues such a staff space and a joint green room.

·    Qualitative criteria – Third highest performing against all qualitative criteria. Their office is based in Victoria with no indication provided how the team will service the project.

·    Price – $8,669 under the total project budget. GFA rate of $4,247/m2 proposed by Box Architects is achievable.

 

4.         Peter Hunt Architects

·    Concept design – Scheme achieves a good standard of design. The concept is significantly over budget, it is difficult to see how the concept provided can be delivered without drastically altering the scope. There is no ground floor interface with Marine Terrace/foreshore, however there is a good first floor function space with views to the jetty and bay.

·    Qualitative criteria – Fourth highest performing against all qualitative criteria. Their recent experience with Red Earth in Karratha is valuable where lessons learned can be applied. They also have good local knowledge and a multi skilled team. Marshall Day are a strong addition to the team with superior experience in theatre design.  Hocking Heritage have previous experience working on the Weld, Courthouse Complex and ArtGeo.

·    Price – $8,486,952 over the total project budget. The GFA rate of $5,090/m2 is on the high end of our expectations and in comparison to the other submissions.

 

5.         With Architecture Studio Pty Ltd

·    Concept design – With Architecture have provided a good response to the criteria, the design addresses some aspects of the vision and objectives but not others. The design is modern and urban but may be considered to be out of scale with adjacent heritage buildings. The proposal does not reinforce characteristics of the region or local context.

·    Qualitative criteria – Fifth highest performing against all qualitative criteria. Strong international and local design team. They have relevant experience in building highly flexible events spaces. Their sub consultant list appeared in complete with no cost consultant nominated. 

·    Price –$8,408,158 over the total project budget. In comparison to the other submissions GFA rates. RBB believes DCWC’s GFA rate of $7,223/m2 (excl. regional loading) to be very high.

 

Statutory Environment

The contract value is greater than $500,000, therefore, in accordance with section 5.43(b) of the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act), read with Delegation 3J, the tender is required to go before the Council.

 


 

In terms of section 3.57 of the Act, a local government is required to invite tenders before it enters into a contract of a prescribed kind under which another person is to supply goods and service. Part 4 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996:

 

·    requires that tenders be publicly invited for such contracts where the estimated cost of providing the required goods and/or service exceeds $150,000; and

·    under Regulations 11, 14, 18, 20 and 21A provides the statutory framework for inviting and assessing tenders and awarding contracts pursuant to this process.

With regard to the RFT, City officers have complied with abovementioned legislative requirements.

Relevant Plans and Policies

The City's purchasing policies and its occupational health and safety, asset management and engineering technical standards and specifications were all relevant to the RFT and have been adhered to in the process of requesting and evaluating tenders.

Financial Implications

The overall project budget is $21,320,000. This budget is comprised of the following funding streams, shown in Table 1 below:

 

Table 1

City of Busselton Contributions

Cash

$10,350,000

Internal Project Management

$500,000

Landscaping Works – Parks & Garden

$120,000

Total

$10,970,000

Funding Grant RGF

Design & Construction

$10,350,000

Total Budget

$21,320,000

 

The current budget includes an allocation of $500,000, the project expenditure for financial year 2019/20 is expected to be $1,010,265, including professional fees for design and technical services. The shortfall in the current budget will be funded from the Performing Arts and Convention Centre reserve with the sale of the Old Library Building located at Lot 309, 23 Prince St Busselton.

Stakeholder Consultation

The RFT15-19 was issued as a Public Tender on Saturday 26 September 2019 and closed on 29 November 2019. Advertising was not required as the RFT resulted from an Expression of Interest (EOI) which shortlisted the five prospective tenderers. 

 

As outlined in the Background section of this report, extensive consultation has occurred in relation to the BEACH project.

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City's risk assessment framework, with the intention being to identify risks which, following implementation of controls, are identified as medium or greater. There are no such risks identified, with the preferred tenderer assessed as being capable of delivering the services to a suitable service level and in line with the agreed program of works.


 

Options

The Council may consider the following alternate options:

 

1)    To award the tender to an alternative tenderer/s. In the view of the Officers this could result in the tender being awarded to a tenderer that is not most advantageous to the City.

2)    To not award the tender. This would mean going back out to tender, resulting in significant delays to the contract award and potential significant delays to the delivery of the Busselton Entertainment, Arts and Cultural Hub project.

For the reasons provided in this report, the abovementioned options are not recommended.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that accept the tender from Kerry Hill Architects Pty Ltd as the most advantageous tenderer, subject to the negotiation of minor variations by the CEO, not exceeding a lump sum contract price of $1,979,440.  It is further recommended that Stage 2 of the project scope of works be removed to allow for further investigation as to the viability of other potential sites for a creative industries hub.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The selection of the Successful Tenderer can be made immediately after the Council has endorsed the officer recommendation, subject to successful negotiation in accordance with the officer recommendation.

  


Council                                                                                      60                                                                29 January 2020

15.             Community and Commercial Services Report

15.1           SPORT & RECREATION FACILITIES STRATEGY

STRATEGIC GOAL

1. COMMUNITY: Welcoming, friendly, healthy

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

1.3 A community with access to a range of cultural and art, social and recreational facilities and experiences.

SUBJECT INDEX

Sport and Recreation Strategy

BUSINESS UNIT

Community and Commercial Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Senior Sport and Recreation Project Officer - Brendan McNally

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

NATURE OF DECISION

Advocacy: to advocate on its own behalf or on behalf of its community to another level of government/body/agency

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Draft Sport and Recreation Strategy 2020-2030

Attachment b    Forecast Statement 2020-2030  

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council endorses the Draft Sport and Recreation Strategy 2020-2030 (Attachment A) to be advertised for public comment for a period of 45 days.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Over the past 12 months, significant consultation and analysis has been undertaken to inform the development of a comprehensive Sport and Recreation Facilities Strategy (2020-2030) (SRFS) for the district.  The SFRS was developed to direct future planning and guide the allocation of municipal resources and external funding applications over the next ten years.  As a key focus area within the City of Busselton’s Strategic Community Plan 2017 (Review 2019) and Corporate Business Plan (2019-2023), the SFRS makes recommendations on a schedule of prioritised community projects that informs the City’s Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP).  This report provides an overview of the SFRS and recommends the Council endorses it to be advertised for public comment.

 

BACKGROUND

In February 2007, the then Shire of Busselton endorsed (C0702/030) a Leisure Services Plan for the district, and in 2013 an interim review was undertaken. Since this time, Council has endorsed (C1304/088) the City of Busselton Active Open Space Planning Recommendations and Hierarchy of Active Open Spaces (2013) and over the past decade approximately $23M has been invested into new sport and recreation infrastructure.

 

On 11 April 2018, a briefing session was held with Council to provide an overview of the current provision of sporting spaces, gaps, drivers of demand, emerging trends, and challenges that the levels of population growth has presented, including equitable provision of sport and recreation facilities and infrastructure to meet the community’s growing needs.

 

The briefing identified the need to develop a detailed sport and recreation facilities strategy to ensure capital funding was allocated to prioritised projects, rather than to short-term reactive projects that may meet the wants of some groups but not necessarily consider the needs of the entire district.

 

Subsequently, in 2018/19 a Senior Sport and Recreation Project Officer was employed for a three (3) year period to specifically facilitate the development of a strategy, the SRFS, and commence implementation of the priorities.

 

At a Council briefing held on 23 January 2019, Councillors were briefed on the scope, methodology and proposed outcomes of the SRFS along with endorsing six (6) initial guiding principles to guide its development.

 

These principles included:

·    Engagement

The City will engage with the community.

·    Accessible  

The City will work towards ensuring people of all abilities have the same opportunities to access the buildings and other facilities of the City of Busselton

·    Responsible delivery and management – social, economic, environmental

The City will ensure that facilities are delivered and maintained in a socially, economically and environmentally accountable way.

·    Sustainable Clubs & Facilities

The City is committed to sustainable Clubs & Facilities by working in partnership to fund, construct, maintain, renew and activate (leasing/booking/programming) facilities via a consistent and justifiable method to ensure maximised use.

·    Shared use, Multi-Purpose

The City will plan, support and encourage multi-functional/flexible/co-located facilities (shared use) where practical, to ensure facilities are operating efficiently and at maximum capacity.

·    Standards of provision – “Quality facilities”

The City will plan, develop and support the construction, maintenance and renewal of facilities across the City via a consistent, justifiable and transparent method e.g. pavilions, change rooms/canteens, playing surfaces, lights, storage, fencing, amenities etc.

Further to this, over the past 12 months, significant targeted consultation has been undertaken with key stakeholders and the sport and recreation community to inform the development of the SRFS. In addition to this, a comprehensive review of current facilities, reports, master plans and strategies, industry trends (sport, recreation and health), demographics, and Federal and State Government policies in relation to health and physical activity was undertaken; resulting in the development of a comprehensive strategy to guide the development of sporting facilities for the next 10 years.

OFFICER COMMENT

Since the development of the Leisure Services Plan (2007), the City of Busselton has experienced significant changes in terms of population growth and demographic profile, in addition to the vast changes in trends within the sport and recreation industry.  As such, a comprehensive district level strategic review of sport and recreation facilities is now required to ensure investment into sport and recreation infrastructure and service delivery is well planned, resourced and meets the needs of the community now and into the future.

 

The development of the SRFS will assist in guiding future decisions with regards to sport and recreation infrastructure provision.  This will be achieved through the provision of a well-considered plan for current and projected future infrastructure demand, and the development of a hierarchy of facilities within the City, with consideration towards the sustainability of sport, clubs and associations to ensure facilities meet the changing demographics and trends within in the sport and recreation environment.

 

The City of Busselton’s SRFS is an important connector between the City’s Strategic Community Plan 2017 (Review 2019) and the allocation of City funding and resources to achieve the strategic objective of improved sport and recreation services and facilities.


 

The objectives of the SRFS are to:

·    Develop a long term strategy to inform, guide and underpin the planning and provision of indoor and outdoor community sporting and recreation facilities to meet existing and future needs;

·    Identify, investigate and validate the facility needs of the community;

·    Provide a schedule of prioritised community projects that informs the City of Busselton’s Long Term Financial Plan;

·    Identify gaps and opportunities around assisting residents to participate and clubs to operate in a sustainable manner;

·    Provide a robust foundation for the review of City of Busselton’s Developer Contribution Plan 1 - Community Facilities;

·    Inform community expectations around short, medium and long term facility development; and

·    Develop a hierarchy of facilities at regional, district, sub-district and local catchments.

 

A comprehensive needs analysis and targeted engagement process was undertaken in developing the SRFS to better understand the needs and desires of a range of users including sporting associations, participants, volunteers and parents.

 

The SRFS is a priority action within the City of Busselton’s Corporate Business Plan (2019-2023) and provides a realistic and achievable schedule of prioritised community projects that informs the LTFP. Limited resources, land, and availability of external funding means the City cannot deliver all of the desired community infrastructure immediately.  As such, the proposed timing of projects considers these constraints.

 

Over the next 10 years, it is recommended that approximately $37M of sport and recreation projects are undertaken with some of the key projects including:

 

·    New Dunsborough Lakes Sports Park  – infrastructure for soccer, cricket and court sports

·    Dunsborough Playing Fields and Naturaliste Community Centre (NCC) Masterplan to include:

Reconfigured playing fields to accommodate the home base Aussie Rules sport

Refocused use of the NCC to cater for more sport and recreation (potential for gym, group fitness, multi-purpose room and future pool), and

Investigation of the relocation of the Dunsborough Library

·    Dunsborough and Districts Country Club (DDCC) – partner with DDCC to maximize opportunities at this site for the Dunsborough sub-district including increased space for social/leisure style activities while complementing the organized club sport activities

·    Vasse Playing Fields – development of sports field lighting, unisex change rooms and pavilion/community space

·    Geographe Leisure Centre (GLC) – redevelopment of the existing indoor 25m pool to create a dedicated program pool (to cater for learn to swim, hydrotherapy, free play) and repurpose to a dedicated 25m lap pool

·    Indoor Courts – increase the number of indoor courts within the district at the GLC or Dunsborough Lakes Sports Park

·    Bovell Sports Park – undertake concept planning and investigations for a Sports Talent Hub in partnership with the West Coast Eagles Football Club

·    Sports field floodlighting – undertake a number of sports floodlighting projects to increase usage (carrying capacity) of outdoor sporting facilities throughout the district

·    District squash facility – partner with the Busselton Golf and Busselton Squash Clubs to maximize opportunities at the Busselton Golf Club

·    Activate foreshores as complementary sports spaces, and

·    Yalyalup Community Oval – development of a community oval, change rooms and multi-purpose/community space.

There are a number of sport and recreation projects that are recommended to be considered by Council for the 10+ year timeframe including additional aquatic spaces; district 50m pool and Dunsborough sub-district aquatic space; investigations into strategic land purchases; and consideration for additional district and sub-district sport spaces in the Ambergate and Bovell areas. Progressing with additional aquatic spaces is not currently justified within this draft SRFS based on population and projected growth, with the more sustainable option in the short term being to undertake carrying capacity initiatives on the existing district aquatic space (GLC).  

 

The SRFS is a living document and while the timeframe is 10 years (2020 – 2030), periodic reviews will be undertaken to ensure planning and implementation reflects the changes in the district’s demographics and health profile, industry and sporting trends, facility guidelines, participation data (national/state/local), sporting association strategic plans, and the funding environment.

 

This report seeks the endorsement of the draft SRFS for the purposes of seeking community and stakeholder feedback and providing input into the City’s LTFP workshops. Following community engagement and consideration of feedback, a final report will be presented to Council for the endorsement of the SRFS.

Statutory Environment

The officer recommendation supports the general function of a local government under the Local Government Act 1995 to provide for the good government of persons in its district.

Relevant Plans and Policies

The officer recommendation aligns to the City of Busselton Corporate Business Plan 2019-2023, with the SRFS one of the key initiatives and actions in the plan.  It also strongly aligns with strategies contained in the Strategic Community Plan 2017 (Review 2019).

 

Financial Implications

The draft SRFS provides a schedule, at Attachment B, of prioritised community projects, including a recommended funding strategy.  This funding strategy has been modelled in a draft LTFP which shows that Council has the financial capacity to implement all of the key SRFS projects over the next 10 years, subject to final considerations around rating levels and other non SRFS priorities.

 

Given the increasingly competitive nature of external funding, the SRFS and the draft LTFP have been modelled with the aim of achieving progress without the full reliance upon external funding, by utilising new borrowings, reserves, municipal funds and other funding sources.  The SRFS recommends that resources be allocated to forward planning initiatives that will not only increase the achievability of projects but strategically target external funding opportunities that potentially provide value add to the project or cost savings to the City’s budget.

 

If Council were to support projects not prioritised in the SRFS, then the financial capability to deliver the priority projects itemised in this plan could significantly impact the current draft LTFP.


 

Stakeholder Consultation

The development of the SRFS has included extensive targeted engagement with sporting clubs and associations within the district, including participants, parents, club administrators, state sporting associations, other local government authorities and the Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries. Details of targeted engagement include:

·    Meetings with 79 sporting clubs/associations

·    Four (4) workshops, total of 74 participants, two (2) held in Busselton and two (2) held in Dunsborough

·    Community Survey through Your Say - 501 individual responses, 946 visits to the project page with 632 informed participants.

It is recommended the draft SRFS be advertised for public comment through the City of Busselton ‘Your Say’ portal and a number of targeted engagement sessions with key sporting associations to enable feedback, finalisation of the SRFS and final adoption of Council.

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management framework, with risks assessed taking into account any controls already in place. No risks of a medium or greater level have been identified.

Options

As an alternative to the proposed recommendation, the Council could choose not to accept the draft SRFS or to require changes prior to advertising for public comment.

CONCLUSION

The draft SRFS provides a long term strategy to inform, guide and underpin the planning and provision of indoor and outdoor community sporting and recreation facilities to meet existing and future needs of the district. It is the result of a comprehensive analysis incorporating demographic data, industry trends, review of relevant policies, plans and strategies, community consultation, and stakeholder engagement and feedback. Implementation of the SRFS will ensure a well-planned and implemented approach towards infrastructure development in the future.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

On endorsement, officers will prepare the City of Busselton Draft SRFS for public comment over a 4-6 week period.  


Council

65

29 January 2020

15.1

Attachment a

Draft Sport and Recreation Strategy 2020-2030

 



 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 



Council

102

29 January 2020

15.1

Attachment b

Forecast Statement 2020-2030

 


Council                                                                                      106                                                             29 January 2020

15.2           MARKETING AND EVENTS REFERENCE GROUP OUTCOMES

STRATEGIC GOAL

4. ECONOMY Diverse, resilient, prosperous

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

4.3 Events and unique tourism experiences that attract visitors and investment.

SUBJECT INDEX

Events Sponsorship

BUSINESS UNIT

Commercial Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Events Coordinator - Peta Tuck

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

NATURE OF DECISION

Executive: substantial direction setting, including adopting strategies, plans and policies (excluding local planning policies), tenders, setting and amending budgets, funding, donations and sponsorships, reviewing committee recommendations

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council:

1.    As part of the 2019/2020 Events Sponsorship Programme endorses funding allocations towards the following events, to be funded from the 2019/2020 Events and Marketing Budget:

Event

Amount

Yalambi Showjumping Classic

$2,000

*If confirmed  as CSIJ-B International Teams Event, an additional $2,000 to be supported

Busselton Pride

$4,000 (+ up to $2,000 in-kind traffic management and event fees)

Busselton Tennis Club – Junior Open

$2,000

Busselton Tennis Club – March Open

$2,000

Trans Cape Swim Run

$5,000

Junior Beetles Rugby – Junior 10’s competition

$2,000

Busselton Jetty Swim – Silver Celebration Exhibition

$2,500

Busselton Squid Fest – seed funding

$5,000

Busselton Festival of Triathlon

$55,000 (+ up to $5,000 in kind)

Totals 2019/20

$81,500 (+$7,000 in kind)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.    As part of the Events Sponsorship Programme, endorses funding allocations towards the following multi-year events, to be funded from the 2020/21-2022/23 Events Budgets:

Event

Officer Recommendation

WA Pedal Prix

2020/21 $20,000

2021/22 $19,000

2022/23 $18,000

Totals 2020/21

2020/21 $20,000

 

 


 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A meeting of the Marketing and Events Reference Group (MERG) was held on Monday 18 November 2019.  This report presents the recommendations from this meeting.

 

BACKGROUND

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 13 April 2011, Council resolved (C1104/114) to endorse the implementation of a differential rating system whereby properties rated industrial and commercial across the City would directly contribute toward the City’s continued support of tourism, marketing and event activities. The City also established a key stakeholders reference group, now known as the ‘Marketing and Events Reference Group’ (MERG), to make recommendations to Council with respect to the marketing and events budget allocations.

 

At its meeting on 22 June 2011, Council resolved (C1106/201) to introduce a 3% differential rate on ‘industrial’ and ‘commercial’ rated properties which has increased over time to 10% in 2016/2017. The proceeds from the differential rate are allocated towards funding events and marketing.

 

The 2019/20 adopted budget for marketing and events totals $993,270. This excludes budget allocations for Leavers Week, administration and events staffing.

 

A MERG meeting was held on Monday 18 November 2019, with the following key matters presented:

 

·    update on events held since the last meeting on 13 August 2019 and upcoming major events;

·    round two (2) of the Event Sponsorship Programme and associated funding applications for single year and multi-year events for consideration for 2019/20 and beyond.

OFFICER COMMENT

Supporting the development and attraction of new events throughout the year, the City’s Events Sponsorship Programme promotes the City of Busselton as an attractive event tourism destination for a range of events.  At the MERG meeting held on 18 November 2019, a range of requests for events and marketing funding were considered as outlined below.

 

Requests for Funding – Events Budget

Nine (9) requests for funding from the 2019/20 events budget were received through round two (2) of the Events Sponsorship Programme, totalling $116,500. In addition, one (1) funding request was received for a multi-year agreement to be funded from the events budget commencing 2020/21, for $25,000 per year.

 

In line with the City’s Events Policy, the City’s Events team evaluated the applications, applying the strategic funding guidelines of economic impact, strategic alliance to off-peak and cultural events, destination tourism, social benefits and environmental impact. MERG members discussed each application and recommend the following funding allocations:

 

Applications for funding through the 2019/20 Events Budget – Round 2:

 

Event

Requested

Recommendation

Yalambi Showjumping Classic

$20,000

$2,000

*If confirmed  as CSIJ-B International Teams Event, an additional $2,000 to be supported

Busselton Pride

$8,000 cash + in-kind traffic management and event fees

$4,000 cash

(+ up to $2,000 in-kind traffic management and event fees)


 

Busselton Tennis Club – Junior Open

$3,000

$2,000

Busselton Tennis Club – March Open

$3,000

$2,000

Trans Cape Swim Run

$5,000

$5,000

Junior Beetles Rugby – Junior 10’s competition

$15,000

$2,000

Busselton Jetty Swim – Silver Celebration Exhibition

$2,500

$2,500

Busselton Squid Fest – seed funding

$5,000

$5,000

Busselton Festival of Triathlon

$55,000

$55,000

(+ up to $5,000 in-kind)

Totals 2019/20

$116,500

$81,500 (+$7,000 in kind)

 

Application for multi-year funding commencing in 2020/21:

 

Event

Requested

Officer Recommendation

WA Pedal Prix

2020/21 $25,000

2021/22 $25,000

2022/23 $25,000

2020/21 $20,000

2021/22 $19,000

2022/23 $18,000
Supported

Totals 2020/21

2020/21 $25,000

2020/21 $20,000

Statutory Environment

The officer recommendation supports the general function of a local government under the Local Government Act 1995 to provide for the good government of persons in its district.

Relevant Plans and Policies

The officer recommendation is in line with the City’s Events Policy which provides event organisers with information on the event application and approval process and event sponsorship guidelines. 

 

Financial Implications

At its 31 July 2019 meeting, Council resolved (C1907/130) to include an allocation of $993,270 in the 2019/20 Marketing and Events Budget, with a split of $693,270 for events and $300,000 for marketing. Funds committed from the round one (1) of the 2019/20 Events Sponsorship Programme and multi-year agreements totals $666,875. However, with notification of the cancellation of two (2) events funded in round one (1) (Tour of Margaret River ‘Gran Fondo’ $2,500 and Aerofest 2020 $10,000), a balance of $38,895 remains for round two (2).

 

Of the $300,000 allocated to the marketing budget, $180,000 has been allocated to the Airport Marketing Reserve leaving a balance of $120,000 to be applied to marketing initiatives in the 2019/20 financial year. At the meeting on 31 July 2019, Council endorsed (C1907/124) the allocation of $10,000 cash and up to $3,000 in-kind support to CinefestOZ to support the promotion and activation of the world premiere feature film GO!. The actual total cost of in-kind support provided was $1,528, leaving a balance of $108,472 remaining in the 2019/20 marketing budget.

 


 

Event funding recommendations made by MERG for 2019/20 totals $81,500 cash and $7,000 in-kind, $49,605 over the remaining events budget.  As there are no specific marketing initiatives identified for the remainder of the year, it is recommended that the balance is funded from the marketing budget, leaving a total of $49,605 for any other marketing or event initiatives.

 

As in previous years, this amount excludes budgetary allocations for ‘local’ events such as Leavers Week, administration, and events staffing.

Stakeholder Consultation

Consultation has been undertaken with MERG members and representatives comprising the Busselton and Dunsborough Yallingup Chambers of Commerce and Industry, Margaret River Busselton Tourism Association and Busselton Jetty Inc.

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management framework, with risks assessed taking into account any controls already in place. No risks of a medium or greater level have been identified.

Options

Council may choose not to support the recommendations made by MERG and resolve not to endorse part or all of the recommendations.

CONCLUSION

MERG has been assigned by Council to make recommendations on the way in which funds raised through the ‘industrial’ and ‘commercial’ differential rate for the purposes of events and marketing are allocated.  This report contains the recommendations made at the 18 November 2019 MERG meeting which, if endorsed by Council, will result in the continuation of high quality events being held within the region, supported by successful marketing promotions. All recommendations support Council’s vision of being recognised as the ‘Events Capital WA.’

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Following Council’s decision, the outcomes will be communicated to MERG members and relevant event/marketing bodies for their information and implemented where required.   


Council                                                                                      111                                                             29 January 2020

16.             Finance and Corporate Services Report

16.1           LAND TENURE OF CROWN LAND ASSOCIATED WITH ARTGEO COMPLEX

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

6.4 Assets are well maintained and responsibly managed.

SUBJECT INDEX

Crown Land Management

BUSINESS UNIT

Corporate Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Senior Leasing and Property Officer - Ann Strang

Manager, Community Services - Maxine Palmer

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Manager Governance and Corporate Services - Sarah Pierson

NATURE OF DECISION

Executive: substantial direction setting, including adopting strategies, plans and policies (excluding local planning policies), tenders, setting and amending budgets, funding, donations and sponsorships, reviewing committee recommendations

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   ArtGeo Complex Site Plan  

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council:

1.    authorise the CEO to write to the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage to request a revision to Management Order J453422 in respect of Reserve 35361 (being part of the ArtGeo Complex) as follows:

a)    add the words “preservation of historical buildings” to the designated purpose;

b)    condition the Management Order to provide that the net income generated from commercial leasing of the site and buildings is allocated towards the aim of preservation and maintenance of the heritage buildings on the site; and

c)    any other terms or conditions reasonably required by the Minister for Lands in relation to the expenditure of such revenue.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Reserve 35361 (the Reserve) consists of both Lot 361 and Lot 453 Queen Street Busselton and forms part of the ArtGeo Complex. The City is the management body of the Reserve under Management Order J453422. The Management Order is subject to certain conditions.  Potential opportunities exist for portions of the reserve to be used for alfresco dining and other commercial activities, enhancing the vibrancy of the area while at the same time maintaining its function as a community space.  However due to the current permitted purpose under the Management Order, there are limitations on the City’s power to grant a lease or licence over the reserve.   

 

This report seeks the authority of Council for the CEO to write to the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage (DPLH) to request an expansion of the reserve purpose from ‘community and cultural purposes’ to ’community, cultural and preservation of historical buildings purposes’ which will, subject to conditions, facilitate expanded commercial activity of part of the area.  

 


 

BACKGROUND

The site known as the ArtGeo Complex is made up of Crown land, the Reserve (shown hatched yellow on Attachment A), and freehold land, Lot 468 Queen Street (shown hatched orange on Attachment A). The Reserve consists of the old court house, sergeant’s quarters, art studios and community space (Courthouse Arts Complex) and is set aside for ‘community and cultural purposes’ only.  

The building opposite the Courthouse Arts Complex on the lot owned freehold by the City is referred to as the “Agricultural Building”.

 

In February 2007, the Council resolved to adopt a management plan for the operation of the ArtGeo Complex.  The plan included management strategies in relation to staffing and volunteers, exhibition management and commercial opportunities. Council resolved (C0702/044) that the Agricultural Building be used as the main gallery and function room and that a food and refreshment venue be incorporated into the Courthouse Arts Complex, with the sergeant’s quarters felt to be a suitable location at the time.  A lease was however entered into with Acting Up for a portion of the sergeant’s quarters with the Busselton Art Society retaining their lease premises within the sergeant’s quarters.

 

In September 2009, a progress report on the management plan was presented to Council who resolved to continue with the plan and include commercial leasing of a café within the old court house.  The Council also resolved (C0909/318) to seek expressions of interests (EOI) for both the café and commercial use of part of the sergeant’s quarters. 

 

In November 2009, the outcome of the EOI was presented to Council who resolved (C0911/41) to enter into a lease of the café.  In accordance with the Commercial Tenancy (Retails Shops) Agreements Act 1985 (CTA), the lessee was offered a 3-year lease with a further 2-year option. At the time, despite the lease being commercial in nature, the Minister for Lands approved the lease as it was considered to be an incidental use to the Reserve purpose, in that it provides a place for visitors to the gallery to sit and relax during their visit. This lease expired in June 2015.

 

In May 2015, the Council resolved (C1505/135) to enter into a further 5-year lease term for the café. In October 2018, the tenants sold the business and assigned the remainder of the term of the lease to the current tenants, who changed its name to the Lockup Coffee House.  The current lease is due to expire on 30 June 2020. 

 

The City has been exploring new opportunities and ways to activate the ArtGeo Complex.  In late 2018, City officers sought EOI’s for a coffee lounge/licensed bar in the Courthouse Art Complex.  A number of informal enquiries were received but opportunities have been hampered by the current reserve purpose and limitations on the extent and type of commercial use.

 

The current tenant is also seeking to expand their offerings to include the sale of liquor.  With the lease approaching expiry, City Officers wrote to DPHL seeking feedback on their proposal and to seek in-principle approval to negotiate a new lease on expiry.  The current practice of DPLH is to require Crown land to be excised from a reserve (and a head lease granted) if it is to be used for commercial purposes. While the existing lease (granted with DPLH approval) does allow the business of a café, a change of use to permit the sale of alcohol is unlikely to be supported. 


 

OFFICER COMMENT

In order for the City to facilitate additional commercial opportunities and provide for effective management of the Reserve, the DPLH have presented the following options.

 

The first is for the City to purchase the Reserve from the State at market value.  While the Busselton Entertainment Arts and Cultural Hub (BEACH) has been considered as part of the City’s Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP), the purchase of the Reserve has not been contemplated and there are currently no funds allocated in the LTFP, or within the BEACH project, for such an acquisition. 

 

As an alternative, DPLH suggested the excision of a portion of land from the Reserve which would facilitate the grant of a head lease from the State to the City and embody consent to sublease to the café. This head lease arrangement would not be the same as the head leases negotiated on the Busselton foreshore. Reserve land excised and leased to the City to facilitate the Busselton foreshore revitalisation is a unique arrangement that would not extend to this Reserve. 

 

The State would expect to receive a commercial rent for a head lease on the Reserve, as is the case with the Dunsborough foreshore café. 

 

As it is not possible to excise part of the building, the excision and head lease would have to include the courthouse, sergeant’s quarters and studios. A commercial per-square-metre rent for this would very likely exceed the commercial rent that would be generated by a sublease of the café only, which represents only a small portion of the building.  The remainder of the building (other than the studios) operates as a heritage interpretive centre for public access.

 

The third option is for the City to seek changes to the existing Management Order.  DPLH have suggested that the Management Order could be conditioned in the same way as the Old Fire Station at 68 Queen Street, Busselton. This would require the Reserve purpose to include the words “preservation of historical buildings”.  The DPLH advised that the amendment would not provide for full commercial use of the site, but that it would provide for extended commercial use, conditional on the City applying any net income generated from commercial leasing towards the preservation of the heritage buildings on the Reserve. The City may also be required to report to the DPLH on the allocation of funds. Additionally, other reserves with this preservation purpose have not been required to be excised in the past.

Statutory Environment

Reserve 35361 consists of two lots, Lot 361, Deposited Plan 182761, Volume LR3013, Folio 834 and Lot 453, Deposited Plan 194423, Volume LR3115, Folio 243.  Both lots are Crown Land for the designated purpose of Community and Cultural Purposes only.  The City is the management body with power to lease or licence for periods up to 21 years for the permitted use, subject to the consent of the Minister for Lands.

 

The Courthouse Arts Complex was listed on the State Heritage register in 1993. There is a memorial lodged on the Certificate of Land title under the Heritage Act 2018.  As the City are the management body of the Reserve, it falls to the City to preserve and maintain the site. 

 

Pursuant to section 46 of the Land Administration Act 1997, the Minister for Lands may, with the consent of the management body vary any condition to which the care, control and management of the reserve is subject.


 

Relevant Plans and Policies

The Old Busselton Courthouse & Police Complex Conservation Management Plan December 1997 and the updated draft Conservation Management Plan prepared by Hocking Heritage Studio in March 2017 detail maintenance plans and regimes and provide policy statements as to the cultural heritage and significance of the place.

 

As detailed above, Council adopted a management plan for operation of the ArtGeo Complex – the Courthouse Arts Complex Management Plan. The officer recommendation is in alignment with this plan.

 

Financial Implications

There are no direct financial implications associated with the proposed change of reserve purpose or the conditions being applied to the management order in respect of heritage preservation. 

 

The City has actively been managing and maintaining the heritage buildings for many years and recently engaged a heritage consultant to prepare an updated Conservation Management Plan for the Courthouse Arts Complex site.  The plan, which provides guidance as to the maintenance schedule for the buildings on the Reserve, is currently in draft and will be presented to Council in the near future for adoption. 

 

If the alteration to the Management Order is supported, it is proposed that a new Reserve Account is created to meet the accounting requirements. Creation of the new reserve account would be considered during the 2020/21 financial year budget process. 

Stakeholder Consultation

City Officers have consulted at officer level with the DPLH in relation to the proposal to expand on commercial opportunities within the Reserve. Their advice and recommendations are outlined in the Officer Comment section of this report. No external stakeholder consultation was required or undertaken in relation to this matter.

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management framework, with risks assessed taking into account any controls already in place.  No risks of a medium or greater level have been identified. 

Options

Council may determine that it does not wish to support an expansion of the commercial activity on the Reserve in the manner contemplated by this report.

 

Council may wish to propose alternative means by which to activate the cultural precinct that do not involve commercial use of the Reserve.

CONCLUSION

The City is keen to expand and activate the ArtGeo Complex.  In line with this, the current café operator on the Reserve has made considerable inroads and is keen to continue to activate the ArtGeo Complex by expanding their alfresco dining.  The recommendation in this report would enable this or a future operator to expand their alfresco activity on the Reserve.  This will facilitate new opportunities and potential to activate the ArtGeo Complex and provide a valuable link between the town centre and the Busselton Foreshore.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

A request to amend the Management Order for the Reserve will be submitted to the DPLH immediately following the resolution of Council.  If endorsed by the Minister for Lands, the changes are likely to occur within 3 to 6 months.  


Council

112

29 January 2020

16.1

Attachment a

ArtGeo Complex Site Plan

 


Council                                                                                      116                                                             29 January 2020

16.2           RESPONSE TO MOTION - GENERAL MEETING OF ELECTORS 2 DECEMBER 2019 - PERFORMING ARTS CENTRE

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

6.1 Governance systems, process and practices are responsible, ethical and transparent.

SUBJECT INDEX

Motion

BUSINESS UNIT

Community and Commercial Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Chief Executive Officer - Mike Archer

NATURE OF DECISION

Executive: substantial direction setting, including adopting strategies, plans and policies (excluding local planning policies), tenders, setting and amending budgets, funding, donations and sponsorships, reviewing committee recommendations

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the following Motion carried at the General Meeting of Electors, 2 December 2019 (C1912/243), be noted by Council and no further action be taken:

 

That the City of Busselton conduct a thorough survey of the Busselton Community to ascertain if the community wants a performing arts centre, whether they are prepared to pay the construction costs for it and pay the costs to operate it, and to decide the community’s preference for the location of the proposed new Busselton entertainment centre; and that the location options include the Brown Street Council owned future parking site near the historic Butter Factory Museum.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

At the General Meeting of Electors, 2 December 2019, the following motion was carried:

 

That the City of Busselton conduct a thorough survey of the Busselton Community to ascertain if the community wants a performing arts centre, whether they are prepared to pay the construction costs for it and pay the costs to operate it, and to decide the community’s preference for the location of the proposed new Busselton entertainment centre; and that the location options include the Brown Street Council owned future parking site near the historic Butter Factory Museum.

 

This report considers that motion and recommends that Council note the motion and take no further action.

 

BACKGROUND

In 2007, the development of a Performing Arts and Convention Centre (PACC) was identified as a key priority in the City’s Community Plan. In 2008, the then Shire of Busselton commissioned a report into the feasibility of a performing arts and creative industries centre including identifying location options. 

 

In 2011, the Council (C1104/115) identified Lot 450 Queen Street in the Cultural Precinct, currently occupied by the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (DBCA), as a possible location for the PACC. In 2014, Council also considered the potential for a multi-function civic centre that could be incorporated into the design of the City’s new administration building.


 

Council considered feedback from comprehensive community consultation for this proposal and resolved (C1407/186) to progress the community’s preference of a stand-alone performing arts facility, to be developed within the Cultural Precinct and reconfirmed its commitment to Lot 450 Queen Street as the preferred site. As Lot 450 Queen Street remained (and still remains) occupied by DBCA, the Council in 2016 considered Lots 43 and 44 Queen Street as a potential alternative location for the PACC. The land, which is a vacant site that adjoins the Weld Theatre and ArtGeo Gallery, is owned freehold by the City.

 

Since being gifted to the City by the State in 2010, Lots 43 and 44 have been advertised seeking expressions of interest for commercial development. To date, the City has received no formal expression of interest for the site.  At an Ordinary Meeting of Council on 25 May 2016, Council resolved (C1605/127) to reconfirm its commitment for the development of a PACC within the Cultural Precinct and further endorsed Lots 43 and 44 Queen Street as the preferred location.

 

In 2015, a Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre Working Group (BPACCWG) was formed with membership made up of members of Council, City Officers, highly regarded individuals in the field of performing arts, and representatives of key stakeholder groups including the Busselton Repertory Club, Weld Theatre and CinefestOZ. The BPACCWG has engaged with representatives from other performing arts centres including Albany, Kalgoorlie, Bunbury and the Shire of Augusta -Margaret River to develop case studies to inform the business case for a PACC for Busselton.

 

In June 2019, as part of a funding strategy for the design and development of a dedicated PACC, to be named the Busselton Entertainment, Arts and Cultural Hub (BEACH), the City was offered $10.35M from the Federal Government’s Regional Growth Fund, to be matched by the City. 

 

Through extensive and various forms of community consultation, a PACC has been identified as a key priority and as such has been included in the City’s Strategic Community Plan in 2013, 2015, 2017 and 2019.

 

In 2013, the City purchased Lots 4-7, 10, 110, 181-182 Brown Street for $3.7M.  This was financed through the City’s City Car Parking and Access Reserve (the Reserve), cash-in-lieu funds paid by developers (i.e. a ‘restricted asset’) and a loan (of which the loan repayments are funded from the City Car Parking Reserve). The purpose of the Reserve is currently to ‘provide funding for development of public car parking, the development of infrastructure to provide for the management of public car parking and improving public transport to and within the City or for need of trip facilities.  To provide funding for the purchase of land identified as of strategic importance for future parking requirements’.

 

Utilising this land for a performing arts centre development would, to some degree, conflict with the original purpose for its acquisition – which was to secure land to meet longer terms for additional car parking for the City Centre. The thinking at the time and currently is, as demand increases, time limits on off-street parking in more central locations could be reduced, reducing the supply of ‘worker’ parking in those locations, but developing additional all-day ‘worker’ parking in this less central location.

It needs to be acknowledged, though, that a performing arts centre of the scale currently envisaged would not occupy the whole of the site (exactly how much it would occupy would depend on the design – and the design would depend to a degree on the site).

As such, some of the land would likely still be available for public car parking (although there would be some management challenges with a car park which was intended to be partly ‘worker’ parking and partly parking for shorter-term use associated with a performing arts centre).


 

OFFICER COMMENT

Given the above background, the extensive consultation undertaken over the last 12 years, and Council’s continued strategic direction for the construction of the Busselton Entertainment, Arts and Cultural Hub on Lots 43 and 44 Queen Street, officers do not recommend further community consultation in the manner outlined in the motion.

Statutory Environment

Clause 17.11 of the City of Busselton Standing Orders Local Law 2018 and section 5.33 of the Local Government Act 1995 provide for how a decision from an Electors Meeting is to be treated.

 

Relevant Plans and Policies

The development of a PACC for Busselton has been identified in the City of Busselton Strategic Community Plan (2013, reviewed 2015; 2017 and 2019) as a local priority project. The South West Regional Blueprint (February 2015) identifies the construction of a performing arts venue in the Busselton Cultural Precinct as a project of regional significance in support of burgeoning creative industries and events.  It continues to be identified as a priority project through subsequent reviews.

Financial Implications

In accepting the $10.35M Federal Government funding offer, the City is required to match the funding allocation. This is in addition to the City allocating funding for the ongoing operations. The current endorsed LTFP indicates construction commencing in the 2022/23 financial year, however in accepting the funding offer, the project will need to be brought forward with construction to be undertaken over the 2020/21 and 2021/22 financial years.

 

Upon receiving the funding offer, City officers were asked to model LTFP scenarios which considered the impact of bringing the design, construction and operations forward to reflect the funding offer. On 24 July 2019, a Council workshop was held to provide an assessment of the impact of earlier construction along with sensitivity analyses of funding options. The modelling indicated that the City can afford to construct and maintain the BEACH, provided some trade-offs and choices are made around rating levels, asset management and other expenditure. These models were provided on the assumption that the City would not receive any State Government funding.

 

From an operational perspective, financial projections indicate the BEACH will operate at an operating deficit and this has been reflected in the current draft LTFP.  Through further analysis of a market demand and economic assessment undertaken in 2017, which considered scenario-based financial forecasts based on conservative and optimal number of events/performances and attendances, and assessment of other performing art centres, more up-to-date financial projections have been made and will be included in the new LTFP. 

 

Lots 4-7, 10, 110, 181-182 Brown Street were purchased for $3.7M and were financed through the City’s City Car Parking and Access Reserve, cash-in-lieu funds paid by developers and a loan (of which the loan repayments are funded from the City Car Parking Reserve). While there is no lawful impediment to utilising the portion of the asset acquired through use of the funds that were held in the Reserve, or which would otherwise have been allocated to the Reserve, should all or most of the site be allocated to other purposes, the City would need to either return the cash-in-lieu funds or spend an equivalent sum (plus the interest that would otherwise have accrued) on land or infrastructure to meet car parking demand in the City Centre.  No such budget has been allocated to the BEACH project.


 

Stakeholder Consultation

Given the extensive consultation undertaken to date in relation to a PACC no further consultation in relation to its progression or location is considered necessary.  Key community stakeholders such as the Repertory Club and Weld Theatre have been supportive of the current proposed site.  However, moving forward, there will be a number of opportunities for stakeholder engagement and community consultation on the design and operation of the facility, and more broadly the Busselton Cultural Precinct. 

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management framework, with risks assessed taking into account any controls already in place.  No risks of a medium or greater level have been identified.

Options

As an alternative to the proposed recommendation, the Council could decide to undertake consultation as outlined in the Motion.

CONCLUSION

Since 2007, an extensive amount of community consultation has been undertaken that has seen the development of a PACC continually raised as a priority project. This has resulted in a number of investigations undertaken on the location of a PACC which has led to a number of formal Council considerations on the matter, resulting in Lots 43 and 44 Queen Street designated as the preferred site. 

While Lots 4-7, 10, 110, 181-182 Brown Street remain vacant, they were financed through the City’s City Car Parking and Access Reserve, cash-in-lieu funds paid by developers and a loan specifically for the purpose of increasing the number of car parking bays in the Busselton CBD and it is therefore not considered an appropriate location for the BEACH.

Through the City’s integrated strategic planning processes, the development and operation of the BEACH has been incorporated into the draft LTFP and re-modelling undertaken following the Federal Government’s $10.35M contribution shows the Council can afford to construct and operate it.

As a result of the extensive work undertaken on the project to date, including the considerable amount of consultation, it is not considered necessary to undertake further consultation on the location of the BEACH, or whether the community is prepared to part fund the construction and operations of the facility.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Council will note the recommendation at the Ordinary Meeting of Council 29 January 2020.


Council                                                                                      121                                                             29 January 2020

16.3           RESPONSE TO MOTION - GENERAL MEETING OF ELECTORS 2 DECEMBER 2019 - BUSSELTON TOURIST BUREAU

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

6.1 Governance systems, process and practices are responsible, ethical and transparent.

SUBJECT INDEX

Motion

BUSINESS UNIT

Community and Commercial Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Chief Executive Officer - Mike Archer

NATURE OF DECISION

Executive: substantial direction setting, including adopting strategies, plans and policies (excluding local planning policies), tenders, setting and amending budgets, funding, donations and sponsorships, reviewing committee recommendations

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the following Motion carried at the General Meeting of Electors, 2 December 2019 (C1912/244) be noted by Council and no further action be taken:

That the Council initiate proceedings to re-establish the Busselton Tourist Bureau, and that this initiative comes from Council level.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

At the General Meeting of Electors, 2 December 2019, the following motion was carried:

 

That the Council initiate proceedings to re-establish the Busselton Tourist Bureau, and that this initiative comes from Council level.

 

This report considers that motion and recommends that Council note the motion and take no further action.

 

BACKGROUND

A Regional Marketing Group (RMG) was established in 2012 as a stakeholder reference forum to discuss the merits of developing a unified tourism destination brand for the Capes region. At that point, the region was marketed by two separate local tourism associations being the Geographe Bay Tourism Association Inc. (GBTA) and the Augusta Margaret River Tourism Association Inc. (AMRTA). 

 

The RMG was established following an industry-led effort advocating a more streamlined and unified approach to regional tourism destination marketing, and was used to consult with key stakeholder organisations and to seek specialist advice on regional branding. The RMG was chaired independently by Hon Barry House MLC (Member for the South West) and included representatives from:

·    Tourism Western Australia;

·    South West Development Commission;

·    Australia’s South West Inc;

·    Augusta Margaret River Tourism Association Inc;

·    Geographe Bay Tourism Association Inc;

·    City of Busselton;

·    Shire of Augusta-Margaret River;

·    Margaret River Wine Industry Association Inc;

·    Busselton Jetty and Environment Conservation Association Inc;

·    Busselton Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc;

·    Dunsborough-Yallingup Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc;

·    Margaret River Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc; and

·    Augusta Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc.

 

The RMG appointed a market research and branding firm ‘Braincells’ to undertake research to identify the region’s character, personalities, strengths and weaknesses and ultimately develop a unified brand and sub-brands. 

 

Following a series of individual presentations on draft branding concepts, a final gathering of the RMG forum was convened on 14 February 2014 to seek broad agreement on a unified brand concept.  The brand name 'The Margaret River Region' was unanimously supported ‘in-principle’ to promote the region as a tourist destination. 

 

The RMG also endorsed a due diligence review of governance arrangements and to assess various business models that may best support implementation of a unified brand. The GBTA and AMRTA appointed consulting group Churchill Consulting to conduct this review and make recommendations. 

 

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

 

That the Council:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Subsequent to the Council resolution, Tourism Western Australia commissioned market research company TNS, to undertake an in-depth study and analysis on brand identity for the area from Busselton to Augusta, and to compare this to existing research on Western Australian destinations.  This was presented to Council on 20 August 2014.

 


 

The findings of the research supported the previous recommendation of the RMG to adopt the brand identity ‘The Margaret River Region’, due to its strong awareness and appeal, particularly in interstate and international markets.  The results of the TNS research recommended intrastate marketing efforts should retain a sharp focus on associated ‘location-based’ sub-branding, with experiences/activities nested within.

 

On 22 October 2014, Council resolved (C1410/268):

 

                That the Council:

 

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

 

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

 

3.   Continue to market and promote the City - Busselton, Dunsborough and Yallingup through the Marketing and Events Reference Group and other appropriate means as the destination of choice within ‘The Margaret River Region’.

 

Further to the review by Churchill Consulting of structural and governance arrangements, a vote in late 2014 by the association memberships saw the formation of a single tourism body, to support the implementation of a unified regional brand – the Margaret River Busselton Tourism Association (MRBTA).  

OFFICER COMMENT

The development of a unified destination marketing brand for the Capes Region was an initiative of the two local tourism associations, financially supported by Tourism Western Australia and the South West Development Commission.  Its aim was to achieve a unified marketing brand that transcends administrative boundaries of local government and entices more tourists to visit the region; resulting in increased economic activity and sustainability of businesses involved in the tourism sector.

 

Aligned to this, and supported by a comprehensive review, the two associations determined they were best able to support a unified marketing brand as a single tourism body.  In 2014 the GBTA Board President publically encouraged its membership base to vote in favour of the amalgamation of the two associations in order to build a stronger tourism organisation that would see it become one of the largest in Australia. The proposal to amalgamate the two organisations was developed in response to members’ dissatisfaction with the duplication of marketing, visitor servicing and membership initiatives across the two organisations. A large percentage of members belonged to both GBTA and AMRTA, and were represented by two brands, two websites, two visitor guides, and two maps, and by both organisations at the same trade and consumer level.  Further to this, the GBTA and AMRTA identified that the lack of a cohesive marketing strategy had diluted the region’s branding efforts and resulted in an inefficient use of resources. 

 

The MRBTA has been successfully operating since 2015, and has a leasehold on premises at the Busselton Foreshore for a term of 42 years (with the first option due in 2038).  The region’s tourism industry has seen overwhelming benefits from the amalgamation with MRBTA now servicing over 750 members.  Further to this, the amalgamation of the two entities has resulted in significant operational efficiencies for the two organisations allowing more funding to be allocated towards the marketing of the region and development of tourism product.   MRBTA has also been able to maximise funding opportunities to upgrade ‘iconic’ tourist assets such as the lighthouse settlements and caves infrastructure throughout the region.

The City has long been a supporter of the tourism industry and currently makes a financial assistance grant of approximately $160,000 per annum to support the visitor serving operations of the MRBTA in Busselton and Dunsborough, as it did to support the GBTA.  Established in prime locations including the redeveloped Busselton Foreshore and Dunsborough town centre, the Visitor Information Centres provide essential services to both tourists and residents. 

 

To re-establish a Busselton tourist bureau would be counterproductive as it would not only go against the previous researched recommendations and outcomes, it would recreate the inefficiencies brought about by having two tourism organisations effectively competing against each other in tourism operations and marketing.  Further to this, it would conflict with the desires of the tourism industry who voted in favour of the amalgamation of the tourism organisations. In addition, Council financial support for a ‘new’ building is not considered appropriate when the City already funds the MRBTA to provide visitor serving.

Statutory Environment

Clause 17.11 of the City of Busselton Standing Orders Local Law 2018 and section 5.33 of the Local Government Act 1995 provide for how a decision from an Electors Meeting is to be treated.

 

Although it has no statutory responsibilities with regard to destination marketing and branding per se, the relative significance of tourism as an economic contributor to income and employment in the Busselton district is acknowledged. 

Relevant Plans and Policies

The officer recommendation aligns to the City of Busselton’s Economic Development Strategy 2016-2026.  The Strategy identifies six key focus areas that reflects the values of the community and priorities of Government, one being ‘investment attraction and marketing’.  An outcome of this key focus area is national and international recognition of Busselton as the business and tourism hub of the Margaret River Region.

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications associated with the officer recommendation.  However, if the City was to consider the re-establishment of a new building, no doubt there would be an expectation of City funding through the marketing and events budget.

Stakeholder Consultation

No external stakeholder consultation was required or undertaken in relation to this matter.  As detailed in the Background section of this report however, the current position with respect to both a unified destination marketing brand and a single tourism body was established through extensive consultation and research. In the event that Council did seek to re-establish a Busselton tourist bureau, extensive consultation with (at least) MRBTA and Tourism Western Australia would be required.

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management framework, with risks assessed taking into account any controls already in place. No risks of a medium or greater level have been identified.

Options

As an alternative to the proposed recommendation, the Council could decide to further investigate the re-establishment of a Busselton tourist bureau. For the reasons outlined in this report, that is not recommended.

CONCLUSION

The amalgamation of the region’s two tourism associations follows years of duplicated tourism servicing and marketing. Backed by the former GBTA and AMRTA Boards, and their respective membership bases, significant support drove the establishment of the MRBTA.  The MRBTA’s primary focus is to increase visitor numbers and nights to the region, and they do so through coordinated marketing of the region by capitalising on the internationally renowned Margaret River Region brand, operation of key tourism businesses, and the servicing of three visitor information centres, two of which are located in Busselton and Dunsborough.

 

The re-establishment of the Busselton tourist bureau would be counterproductive.  It would undo the years of work that has resulted in a highly recognised tourism organisation renowned on both national and international platforms. For these reasons, it is recommended that the motion to initiate proceedings to re-establish the Busselton tourist bureau not be supported.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The officer recommendation will be implemented immediately.


Council                                                                                      124                                                             29 January 2020

16.4           RESPONSE TO MOTION - GENERAL MEETING OF ELECTORS 2 DECEMBER 2019 - WEATHER STATION

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

6.1 Governance systems, process and practices are responsible, ethical and transparent.

SUBJECT INDEX

Motion

BUSINESS UNIT

Corporate Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Manager Governance and Corporate Services - Sarah Pierson

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Chief Executive Officer - Mike Archer

NATURE OF DECISION

Advocacy: to advocate on its own behalf or on behalf of its community to another level of government/body/agency

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council

1.    Note the following Motion carried at the General Meeting of Electors, 2 December 2019 (C1912/245):

 

That the City of Busselton take the necessary steps to request that the WA Bureau of Meteorology establish an office weather station in the Busselton CBD;

 

and

 

2.    Request the CEO to write to the Bureau of Meteorology seeking the establishment of a weather station on the City of Busselton Civic and Administration Centre or at another suitable and central location.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

At the General Meeting of Electors, 2 December 2019, the following motion was carried

That the Council That the City of Busselton take the necessary steps to request that the WA Bureau of Metrology establish an office weather station in the Busselton CBD.

 

This report considers that motion and recommends that Council note the motion and to write to the Bureau of Meteorology seeking the establishment of a weather station on the City of Busselton Civic and Administration Centre or at another suitable and central location.

 

BACKGROUND

Busselton’s weather is currently recorded by the weather station at Busselton Margaret River Regional Airport, located 10.6 kilometres from the centre of Busselton (as per the Busselton GPO).  There is also a weather station at the Busselton Jetty however it only records wind.  Up until approximately 2011 there was a weather station at the Busselton Hospital.  It has been proposed that a full weather station be reinstated more centrally in Busselton.

 

It should be noted that there are other weather stations across the district; in Dunsborough at Cape Naturaliste and in Jarrahwood.

OFFICER COMMENT

It is considered reasonable that residents and visitors to and from Busselton would want to establish weather conditions as they relate to a more central point in Busselton; this is particularly so given the coastal location of the Busselton town centre and surrounds and the different weather conditions this can bring as compared to conditions at the airport, given it is 10kms from the Busselton CBD and further inland on the coastal plain. 

 

Some initial contact has been made with the WA Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) to discuss the possibility of an additional weather station.  They have advised that there are no plans for expansion of the Automatic Weather Station network in the Busselton area, and that they would not be able to provide sufficient justification (through improved forecast accuracy) for funding to install new instrumentation, given they already operate a weather station at the Busselton Airport and a wind anemometer at Busselton jetty. 

 

BOM further advised that the City is able to put in our own weather station, with the data able to be received via WOW, their Weather Observations Website.  WOW provides an online weather sharing community in Australia, enabling people to contribute real-time or automated weather observations, sightings and weather snaps.  Officers have not at this stage investigated the costs and implications associated with this.  While noting the BOM’s initial response, a more formal request to BOM is recommended, prior to the City expending additional resources. 

 

It is noted that the motion carried at the General Meeting of Electors seeks to have a station established in the Busselton CBD.  It is recommended however that the City of Busselton Civic and Administration Centre be suggested as a possible suitable, and available, location. 

Statutory Environment

Clause 17.11 of the City of Busselton Standing Orders Local Law and section 5.33 of the Local Government Act 1995 provide for how a decision from an Electors Meeting is to be treated.

Relevant Plans and Policies

There are no relevant plans or policies to consider in relation to this matter.

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications associated with the officer recommendation. 

If BOM will not fund an additional weather station, and Council was of a mind to do so, the costs could potentially be considered as a budget bid in next year’s budget.

Stakeholder Consultation

As outlined in the Officer Comment above contact has been made with the BOM, and they have not indicated support for an additional station.   

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management framework, with risks assessed taking into account any controls already in place.  No risks of a medium or greater level have been identified.

Options

As an alternative to the proposed recommendation, the Council could choose to note the motion and take no further action.

CONCLUSION

In response to a motion carried at the General Meeting of Electors, it is recommended that Council request the CEO to formally write to the BOM seeking the establishment of an additional weather station in a more central location within Busselton, outlining the reasons as stated in this report.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Upon adoption, officers will formally write to the BOM within two weeks.  


Council                                                                                      129                                                             29 January 2020

17.             Chief Executive Officers Report

17.1           COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

6.1 Governance systems, process and practices are responsible, ethical and transparent.

SUBJECT INDEX

COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN

BUSINESS UNIT

Executive Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Reporting Officers - Various

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director Finance and Corporate Services - Tony Nottle

NATURE OF DECISION

Choose an item.

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   WAEC Ordinary Election Report  

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

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

17.1.1       Tender Update report 

17.1.2       Donations, Contributions and Subsidies Fund – November and December 2019

17.1.3      Western Australian Electoral Commission Report

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report provides an overview of a range of information that is considered appropriate to be formally presented to the Council for its receipt and noting. The information is provided in order to ensure that each Councillor, and the Council, is being kept fully informed, while also acknowledging that these are matters that will also be of interest to the community. Any matter that is raised in this report as a result of incoming correspondence is to be dealt with as normal business correspondence, but is presented in this bulletin for the information of the Council and the community.

 

INFORMATION BULLETIN

17.1.1    Tender Update report 

 

2019/2020 TENDERS

Note: Information in italics has previously been provided to Council, and is provided for completeness.

 

RFT12/19 CCTV INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE PROJECT

·    Requirement – to extend City of Busselton closed circuit television surveillance capacity at the following venues to ensure ongoing community safety, asset protection and crime prevention:

(a)          Busselton Foreshore;
(b)          Naturaliste Community Centre; and
(c)           John Edwards Pavilion located in Dunsborough.
The project will involve the installation of CCTV hardware and software at Busselton Foreshore, Naturaliste Community Centre and John Edwards Pavilion and ongoing maintenance and support services for these locations.

·    A Request for Tender was advertised on 24 August 2019 with a closing date of 24 September 2019. 

·    Three submissions were received.

·    A contract was awarded by the CEO under delegated authority to Spyker Technologies Pty Ltd in December 2019.

RFT16/19 DESIGN, SUPPLY AND INSTALLATION OF BAGGAGE HANDLING SYSTEM

·    Requirement – the design, supply and installation of baggage handling systems at Busselton Margaret River Airport.

·    A Request for Tender was advertised on 9 October 2019 with a closing date of 31 October 2019. 

·    Two submissions were received.

·    A contract was awarded by the CEO under delegated authority to BCS Airport Systems Pty Ltd in November 2019.

 

RFT17/19 SUPPLY AND INSTALLATION OF SECURITY SCREENING EQUIPMENT

·    Requirement – supply and installation of the security screening equipment at Busselton Margaret River Airport.

·    A Request for Tender was advertised on 9 October 2019 with a closing date of 31 October 2019. 

·    One submission was received.

·    A contract was awarded by the CEO under delegated authority to Smiths Detection (Australia) Pty Ltd for specific security screening equipment and services (excluding a body scanner) in November 2019.

 

RFT18/19 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF TERMINAL BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS

·    Requirement – design and construct improvements to the terminal building at Busselton Margaret River Airport.

·    A Request for Tender was advertised on 16 October 2019 with a closing date of 15 November 2019. 

·    A contract was awarded by the CEO under delegated authority to Pindan Contracting Pty Ltd in December 2019.

 

RFT19/19 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF ARRIVAL HALL

·    Requirement – design and construct an arrival hall at Busselton Margaret River Airport.

·    A Request for Tender was advertised on 16 October 2019 with a closing date of 8 November 2019. 

·    The closing date was extended to 15 November 2019.

·    A contract was awarded by the CEO under delegated authority to Pindan Contracting Pty Ltd in December 2019.

 

RFT20/19 SUPPLY AND LAYING OF EXTRUDED KERBING

·    Requirement – supply and laying of extruded kerbing within the City of Busselton.

·    The CEO elected not to invite tenders, but rather to procure the services through the establishment of a panel of pre-qualified suppliers pursuant to PQS01-20 Request for Applications to Join a Panel of Pre-Qualified Suppliers – Supply and Laying of Extruded Kerbing (as detailed further below).

 

RFT21/19 SUPPLY OF CLEANING CHEMICALS AND PAPER CONSUMABLES

·    Requirement – the supply of cleaning chemicals and paper consumables to City of Busselton owned and managed facilities.

·    A Request for Tender was advertised on 26 October 2019 with a closing date of 21 November 2019. 

·    Five submissions were received and are being evaluated.

 


 

RFT22/19 BUSSELTON COASTAL ADAPTATION WORKS 2019/2020

·    Requirement – modification of the Holgate Road Groyne at Broadwater and construction of a new GSC groyne, as well as the construction of three new GSC groynes at Wonnerup.

·    A Request for Tender was advertised on 16 November 2019 with closing date 3 December 2019. 

·    Three submissions were received.

·    This item is being considered as part of this agenda.

 

RFT23/19 LOU WESTON COURTS CONSTRUCTION AND CIVIL WORKS

·    Requirement – construction of Lou Western Courts and civil works.

·    A Request for Tender was advertised on 26 October 2019 with a closing date of 12 November 2019.

·    Six submissions were received.

·    At the Council meeting on 11 December 2019 Council endorsed the recommendation that BCP Contractors Pty Ltd was the preferred tenderer (C1912/264).  Council delegated power and authority to the CEO to:

-      negotiate and agree with the Preferred Tenderer variations in accordance with Regulations 20 and 21A of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 subject to such variations not to exceed the overall project budget;          

-      negotiate and agree with the Preferred Tenderer the final terms and conditions of the contract (including rates/contract prices); and

-      subject to the above, enter into contracts with the Preferred Tenderer for supply of the relevant goods and services.

·    A contract was awarded by the CEO under delegated authority to BCP Contractors Pty Ltd in December 2019.

 

RFT24/19 LOU WESTON PAVILION CONSTRUCTION

·    Requirement – construction of the Lou Weston Pavilion.

·    A Request for Tender was advertised on 2 November 2019 with a closing date of 26 November 2019. 

·    Eight submissions were received.

·    At the Council meeting on 11 December 2019 Council endorsed the recommendation that I.C. Developments Pty Ltd T/A Innovest Construction was the preferred tenderer (C1912/265).  Council delegated power and authority to the CEO to:

-      negotiate and agree with the Preferred Tenderer variations in accordance with Regulations 20 and 21A of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 subject to such variations not to exceed the overall project budget;          

-      negotiate and agree with the Preferred Tenderer the final terms and conditions of the contract (including rates/contract prices); and

-      subject to the above, enter into contracts with the Preferred Tenderer for supply of the relevant goods and services.

·    A contract was awarded by the CEO under delegated authority to I.C. Developments Pty Ltd T/A Innovest Construction in December 2019.

 

RFT25/19 BUSSELTON SENIOR CITIZENS CENTRE UPGRADE AND EXPANSION

·    Requirement – upgrade and expansion of the Busselton Senior Citizens Centre.

·    A Request for Tender was advertised on 27 November 2019 with a closing date of 17 December 2019. 

·    Five submissions were received.

·    The value of the contract is expected to exceed the CEO’s current delegated authority under Delegation DA 1-07 (previous delegation reference LG3J) and will require Council approval.

·    This tender is being considered as part of this agenda.

 

RFT26/19 HOTEL SITE 1 PRECINCT CIVIL & LANDSCAPING WORKS

·    Requirement – civil and landscaping works to Busselton Foreshore Hotel Site 1.

·    A Request for Tender was advertised on 30 November 2019 with a closing date of 14 January 2020. 

·    The value of the contract is expected to exceed the CEO’s current delegated authority under Delegation DA 1-07 (previous delegation reference LG3J) and will require Council approval.

 

PQS01/20 SUPPLY AND LAYING OF EXTRUDED KERBING – REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS TO JOIN A PANEL OF PRE-QUALIFIED SUPPLIERS

·    Requirement – supply of laying of extruded kerbing.

·    The PQS was advertised on 4 January 2020 with a closing date of 28 January 2020. 

·    In accordance with delegation DA 1-10 (previous delegation reference LG3M) the CEO has authority to establish the panel and to accept application to join the panel.

 

17.1.2       Donations, Contributions and Subsidies Fund – November and December 2019

The Council allocates an annual budget allowance to the Donations, Contributions and Subsidies (Sponsorship Fund).  This is provided such that eligible groups and individuals can apply for and receive sponsorship to assist them in the pursuit of endeavors that bring direct benefit to the broader community.  Allocation of the funds is delegated to the Chief Executive Officer, in accordance with published guidelines and funding availability.     

 

7 applications were supported in November 2019, totaling $2,650.00 and 8 applications were supported in December 2019, totalling $2,600.00 as outlined in the table below:

 

Recipient

Purpose

Amount

Combined Churches of Busselton

Funds requested to assist with purchasing items to be included in gift hampers to be gifted to those less fortunate within the Busselton community.

$500.00

Dunsborough Art Society

Funds requested to assist with the cost of running the annual Capes Artist Exhibition

$500.00

Yallingup Steiner School

Contribution towards Year 6 graduation awards/prizes

$100.00

Wadan Warangkiny

Funding requested as a contribution towards the cost of fees for musicians Gina Williams and Guy Ghouse to visit Busselton and present two Noongar singing workshops as part of the Festival Of Busselton Program.

$500.00

Salvation Army Toy Ride

Funds requested by volunteers from the Busselton Salvation Army Branch to cover the cost of hiring umbrellas to be provided at the toy ride fundraiser following the Augusta to Busselton ride.  Funds were raised for the local Salvation Army Christmas Appeal.

$250.00

Emma Cattlin

Selected to represent WA at the National Junior Surf Titles held in Margaret River. Funds to assist with event registration costs.

$300.00


 

Surfing WA

Funds requested as a contribution towards the delivery of two CPR and first aid courses targeted for surfers who use local beaches, enabling them to provide this life saving skill at unpatrolled surf beaches within the district If necessary.

$500.00

 

November Total

 $2,650

Undalup Association

Funding requested to cover the cost of hiring a bus to transport senior carers to and from the Seniors Morning Tea event held at Wonnerup House as part of Seniors week 2019 celebrations.

$500.00

Georgiana Molloy Anglican School

Contribution towards prizes for end of year graduation awards night - $100 for Primary school and $200 for Secondary School Awards

$300.00

Jayden Tucker

Selected to represent WA at the Under 18 Mens National Softball Championships held in Blacktown, NSW. Funds to assist with travel related expenses.

$300.00

Dylan Vernon

Selected to represent WA at the National Junior Surf Titles held in Margaret River. Funds to assist with event registration costs.

$300.00

Connor Dallachy

Selected to represent WA at the Australian Junior National Ten Pin Bowling championships held in Mount Gravatt, QLD. Funds to assist with travel related expenses.

$300.00

St Georges Community Care Dunsborough

Funds requested as a contribution towards the cost of hosting their annual Christmas dinner for less fortunate members of the community

$800.00

Busselton Primary School

Contribution towards Year 6 graduation awards

$100.00

 

December Total

$2,600.00

 

17.1.3 Western Australian Electoral Commission Report

 

·    Western Australian Electoral Commission Report - Ordinary Election 19 October 2019 (Attachment A)

 


Council

148

29 January 2020

17.1

Attachment a

WAEC Ordinary Election Report

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 


Council                                                                                      149                                                             29 January 2020

18.             Motions of which Previous Notice has been Given

Nil  

 

19.             urgent business

 

20.             Confidential Matters

Nil 

 

21.             Closure