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

CITY OF BUSSELTON

MINUTES OF THE Council MEETING HELD ON 28 July 2021

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM NO.                                        SUBJECT                                                                                                                              PAGE NO.

1....... Declaration of Opening / aCKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY / ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF Visitors / DISCLAIMER / NOTICE OF RECORDING OF PROCEEDINGS. 3

2....... Attendance. 3

3....... Prayer. 4

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

5....... Disclosure Of Interests. 4

6....... Announcements Without Discussion.. 4

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

8....... Confirmation and Receipt Of Minutes. 11

Previous Council Meetings. 11

8.1          Minutes of the Council Meeting held 23 June 2021. 11

Committee Meetings. 11

8.2          Minutes of the Finance Committee Meeting held 21 July 2021. 11

9....... RECEIVING OF Petitions, Presentations AND DEPUTATIONS. 11

10..... QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN (WITHOUT DISCUSSION). 11

11..... Items brought forward.. 12

ADOPTION BY EXCEPTION RESOLUTION.. 12

12.1        Finance Committee - 21/7/2021 - LIST OF PAYMENTS MADE - MAY 2021. 12

12.2        Finance Committee - 21/7/2021 - FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENTS - YEAR TO DATE AS AT 31 MAY 2021. 12

13.1        APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL DA20/1056 - SERVICE STATION - LOT 9052 (No. 210) NORTHERLY STREET, VASSE. 12

14.1        RFT 05/21 GREEN WASTE PROCESSING TENDER 2021-26. 12

14.2        RFT 11/21: PIPELINE AND PUMP STATION - DUNSBOROUGH NON-POTABLE WATER NETWORK, MEWETT ROAD, QUINDALUP. 12

17.1        COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN.. 12

17.2        CURRENT ACTIVE TENDERS. 12

ITEMS TO BE DEALT WITH  BY SEPARATE RESOLUTION (WITHOUT DEBATE). 12

12.3        Finance Committee - 21/7/2021 - APPLICATION FOR RATE EXEMPTION - GROUP TRAINING SOUTH WEST INC. 12

16.1        COUNCILLOR KELLY HICK - REMOTE ATTENDANCE. 12

18..... Motions of which Previous Notice has been Given.. 12

19..... urgent business. 12

20..... Confidential Reports. 12

20.1        Finance Committee - 21/7/2021 - RATING DEBT RECOVERY. 12

21..... Closure. 12

 


Council                                                                                      6                                                                          28 July 2021

MINUTES

 

MINUTES OF A Meeting of the Busselton City Council HELD IN THE Council Chambers, Administration Building, Southern Drive, Busselton, ON 28 July 2021 AT 5.30pm.

 

1.               Declaration of Opening / aCKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY / ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF Visitors / DISCLAIMER / NOTICE OF RECORDING OF PROCEEDINGS

The Presiding Member opened the meeting at 5.30pm.

The Presiding Member noted this meeting is held on the lands of the Wadandi people and acknowledged them as Traditional Owners, paying respect to their Elders, past and present, and Aboriginal Elders of other communities who may be present.

 

2.               Attendance

Presiding Member:

Members:

 

Cr Grant Henley     Mayor

Cr Sue Riccelli

Cr Ross Paine

Cr Kate Cox

Cr Paul Carter

Cr Phill Cronin

Cr Jo Barrett-Lennard

 

Officers:

 

Mr Mike Archer, Chief Executive Officer

Mr Oliver Darby, Director, Engineering and Works Services

Mr Paul Needham, Director, Planning and Development Services

Mrs Naomi Searle, Director, Community and Commercial Services

Mr Tony Nottle, Director, Finance and Corporate Services

Mrs Emma Heys, Governance Coordinator

Ms Melissa Egan, Governance Officer

 

Apologies:

 

Cr Lyndon Miles (up to 5.34pm and including Item 3).

 

Approved Leave of Absence:

 

Cr Kelly Hick is an approved Leave of Absence as approved by Council on 23 June 2021 (C2106/120).

Cr Lyndon Miles (from 5.34pm and Item 4).

 

Media:

 

0

 

Public:

 

6

3.               Prayer

The prayer was delivered by Pastor Matt Stenhouse of Horizon Church.

 

4.               Application for Leave of Absence 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2107/141              Moved Councillor P Cronin, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That Cr Lyndon Miles be granted a leave of absence for the remainder of this Ordinary Council Meeting 28 July 2021 and for the Ordinary Council Meeting to be held on 11 August 2021.

CARRIED 7/0

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2107/142              Moved Councillor K Cox, seconded Councillor J Barrett-Lennard

 

That Cr Sue Riccelli be granted a leave of absence for the Ordinary Council Meeting to be held on 8 September 2021.

CARRIED 7/0

 

5.               Disclosure Of Interests

Nil

 

6.               Announcements Without Discussion

Announcements by the Presiding Member

 

Nil


 

7.               Question Time For Public

Response to Previous Questions Taken on Notice

 

The following questions were taken on notice at the 23 June 2021 Ordinary Council meeting:

 

7.1             Mr Keith Sims

 

Question

On a business case of $7 million borrowings, the rate increase was $65 per year. With Cr Miles’ recommendation, at $28 million borrowings, does that make the rate increase $260 per year?

Response

(provided by Ms Sarah Pierson, Acting Director Finance and Corporate Services)

The rate increase required to fund the cost of constructing the performing arts and convention centre as per the tendered design and price would be dependent on how Council funded the project, how much it chooses to borrow, and what other changes to the Long Term Financial Plan the Council may choose to make.  It is not possible to give an exact answer until a funding strategy has been determined. It is also relevant to note that Cr Miles did not specify that the Council would borrow $28m.

 

7.2             Mr Len Boyling

 

Question

In round figures, at this very point in time, is the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre costing an additional $1.5 million of interest and repayments?

 

Response

(provided by Ms Sarah Pierson, Acting Director Finance and Corporate Services)

Within the current Long Term Financial Plan the City has included a project budget of $28.5M for the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre.  This includes loan borrowings of $15 million.  The current projected rate increases over the life of the LTFP provide for this funding, and are projected at between 2.5% and 2.95%; and specifically 2.5% for 2021/2022. Any additional funding required to progress the project would come from a combination of sources and the quantum of any additional rating would be dependent on further funding decisions.  It is therefore not possible to assume or state any specific level of additional loan borrowing or rating, over and above current rate projections. 

 

Question Time for Public

 

7.3             Mr Keith Sims

 

Question

The rate increases in the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre (BPACC) document are calculated on principal of loan borrowings and at $37 and $18 respectively. They do not include interest or the running costs of $1.2 million. The costs which include interest and the $1.2 million operating loss equates to an increase of rates for option A [of the survey options] to $98 and option B to $88. Will the City be transparent and change the survey document information?

 


 

Response

(Mayor)

The information that was in the survey document is the additional cost over and above that which was modelled on the $28.5 million [for the project].

 

Question

(Mr Nottle, Director Finance and Corporate Services)

The figures of $98 and $88 for the two options are based on the entire borrowings. The survey focuses on the extra costs, over and above what was already budgeted for in the City’s Long Term Financial Plan. The survey explains that the $37 and $18 are over and above what the BPACC was going to cost originally.

 

Question

So you are not going to change your survey document?

 

Response

(Mayor)

The survey document has already been distributed. It does state quite clearly that the additional costs to facilitate a loan for option A or option B are $37 and $18 respectively.

 

Question

The $33 million option B [of the survey] is the City’s assumption and not a quote. The City has acknowledged that material costs are going to continue to rise. If tenders come in over $33 million, what is the Council going to do?

 

Response

(Mr Mike Archer, Chief Executive Officer)

We have received pricing on option B. We have also asked our quantity surveyors to re- price based on the prices received from the tenders. When the two were done independently, they were very close.

 

Response

(Mayor)

The outcomes of the survey are anticipated to be considered by Council in September. That will inform Council’s decision on the way forward.

 

Question

If option B [of the survey] is chosen, and comes in over $33 million, what do you do?

 

Response

(Mayor)

The Council decision will be informed by the outcomes of the community survey. I cannot pre-suppose a decision of Council on consideration of facts we do not know yet.

 

Question

What percentage of responses [to the BPACC survey] do you require to claim a mandate to go ahead with the building?

 

Response

(Mayor)

The outcomes of the survey and the feedback through the survey results will inform the decision of Council.

 


 

7.4             Mrs Michelle Shackleton

 

Question

How much input did Catalyse have into the [BPACC] survey questions? Or did the City provide Catalyse with its own questions?

 

Response

(Mayor)

The City informed Catalyse about what we were seeking and they helped to formulate the questions and the preamble as well.

 

Question

Can you confirmed how the list of the targeted 4,000 respondents [to the survey] were selected and by whom?

 

Response

(Mr Nottle)

The City provided a number of databases to Catalyse. They used those databases to make a list, which they randomized and worked their processes from there.

 

Response

(Mr Archer)

In regards to your question about independence, I can assure you that the City does not know who Catalyse has sampled as part of the random sample. We do not know who those 4,000 people are.

 

Question

Will children be able to make decisions on behalf of ratepayers, which may occur if you are sending the survey to email addresses?

 

Response

(Mr Nottle)

The survey has demographic information at the back end of the survey, including who you have in your household. There is a data cleansing process that Catalyse will go through to ensure we have not duplicated email addresses and those sorts of things, to ensure it fits within the categories that they are after.

 

Question

Will Catalyse’s report be available in full for ratepayers to read?

 

Response

(Mayor)

It will be annexed to the Council report.

 

Question

A company called Stalite Service was paid $3,480 in May for services relating to the BPACC. Can you please explain what those services were?

 

Response

(Mayor)

We will have to take that question on notice.

 


 

Question

What is the usage rate of the Undalup Room per annum since it has been completed?

 

Response

We will take that question on notice and provide that information.

 

7.5             Ms Anne Ryan

 

Question

(read out letter on behalf of Ms Christina Newton regarding spill lighting from the tower lights and permits for sports training sessions at Barnard Park and Churchill Park)

Is anyone going to respond to this lady?

 

Response

(Mrs Naomi Searle, Director Community and Commercial Services)

We have been speaking with that permit holder and some controls have been implemented so the lights do not go on as regularly and whistles are not being blown etc. That has been communicated to the person who is complaining and that person had a discussion with our Venues team.

 

Question

Your website states that the annual costs to operate the BPACC is around $1.2 million. Why has this figure been revised down from $1.5 million when all other costs are going up exponentially?

 

Response

(Mr Archer)

It is because we duplicated the asset management renewal costs and picked it up afterwards. So, we were actually double paying for things, so we have adjusted it.

 

Question

In relation to jobs [for the BPACC project], the August 2020 business case said it is expected to provide 39 direct and 6.3 indirect jobs on an ongoing basis through staffing, operations and tourism expenditure. The January 2021 business case states the project will deliver 45.3 jobs on an ongoing basis through staff, operations and tourism expenditure. It then states it is also expected to provide 17.5 direct jobs and 26.8 indirect jobs through staffing, operations and tourism expenditure, which will have a considerable impact on the local community. Why such a huge turnaround in the figures of direct and indirect staff?

 

Response

(Mrs Searle)

As part of the business case that we developed, we incorporated a creative industries hub and then also prepared a business case that excluded it. On both business cases, we commissioned a cost benefit analysis that looked at an economic impact assessment. You can find that on the YourSay website and those figures are taken directly from there.


 

Question

Based on the fact Margaret River HEART cannot open on weekends due to staff penalty rates, what will be the cost of staffing on an annual basis, including superannuation, for the 43.5 jobs?

 

Response

(Mrs Searle)

Salaries and wages in year two, being the first full year of operations, will be $1.1 million. Other employee related costs are at $20,000 and there is an estimate for penalties of just under $14,000.

 

Question

How many public facilities have been built in the past and used as a lure, at significant expense to ratepayers, for the likes of a mullti-billion dollar hotel group?

 

Response

(Mayor)

We are not building a performing arts centre to lure anyone. Any commercial venture would look at what businesses are around them. For example, the Shelter brewery on the Foreshore was built in that location because of the successful redevelopment of the Jetty and the Foreshore. There are a lot of businesses that operate in and around infrastructure that was built by the State or Local Government.

 

Question

Why doesn’t the City decline to accept the grant funding for the performing arts project and request it is to be used for a project to fix the Vasse River?

 

Response

(Mayor)

The funding obtained through the Building Better Regions is not about cleaning up an environmental area that belongs to the State Government. It is about creating opportunities in communities that would deliver jobs in regional economies.

 

Question

Why wouldn’t you lobby the Federal Government for funding for the Vasse River if you go with option C [of the BPACC survey] and hand back $10.35 million.

 

Response

(Considered as a statement and no response required to be given)

 

7.6             Mr Keith Sims

 

Question

In the document for the BPACC survey, it says the estimated additional rates per annum are above the 2.5%. So the 2.5% rate increase is nothing to do with the building, it is a normal rate increase?

 

Response

(Mr Archer)

The 2.5% accommodates building costs of about $18 million and about $10 million worth of borrowings.

 


 

Response

(Mayor)

The preamble [in the survey] mentions that it is factored in to the Long Term Financial Plan with rate rises predicted of between 2.5% to 2.95% over the next 10 years.

 

Question

That does not tell a ratepayer that you are getting a 2.5% rate increase this year and on top of it you will be paying an additional $36 for option A [of the survey].

 

Response

(Mayor)

We are saying that the extra cost would be the $37. If it is the $18, which is 1% of rates to the average ratepayer, it would be in addition to those rises. It would also depend on other funding options that are undertaken by Council. There could also be other programs or additional savings, or additional funding that is able to be obtained. These are best estimates that are put out with the survey to try and educate the community as part of the decision-making process.


 

8.               Confirmation and Receipt Of Minutes

Previous Council Meetings

8.1             Minutes of the Council Meeting held 23 June 2021

COUNCIL DECISION

C2107/143           Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor J Barrett-Lennard

 

That the Minutes of the Council Meeting held 23 June 2021 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

CARRIED 7/0

 

Committee Meetings

8.2             Minutes of the Finance Committee Meeting held 21 July 2021

COUNCIL DECISION

C2107/144           Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor J Barrett-Lennard

That the Minutes of the Finance Committee Meeting held 21 July 2021 be noted.

CARRIED 7/0

 

9.               RECEIVING OF Petitions, Presentations AND DEPUTATIONS

Petitions

 

Nil

Presentations

 

Nil

Deputations

 

Nil

 

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

Nil


 

11.             Items brought forward

ADOPTION BY EXCEPTION RESOLUTION

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

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

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

12.1        Finance Committee - 21/7/2021 - LIST OF PAYMENTS MADE - MAY 2021

12.2        Finance Committee - 21/7/2021 - FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENTS - YEAR TO DATE AS AT 31 MAY 2021

13.1        APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL DA20/1056 - SERVICE STATION - LOT 9052 (No. 210) NORTHERLY STREET, VASSE

14.1        RFT 05/21 GREEN WASTE PROCESSING TENDER 2021-26

14.2        RFT 11/21: PIPELINE AND PUMP STATION - DUNSBOROUGH NON-POTABLE WATER NETWORK, MEWETT ROAD, QUINDALUP

17.1        COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN

17.2        CURRENT ACTIVE TENDERS

CARRIED 7/0

 


Council                                                                                      14                                                                        28 July 2021

12.1           Finance Committee - 21/7/2021 - LIST OF PAYMENTS MADE - MAY 2021

STRATEGIC THEME

LEADERSHIP - A Council that connects with the community and is accountable in its decision making.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY

4.2 Deliver governance systems that facilitate open, ethical and transparent decision making.

SUBJECT INDEX

Financial Operations

BUSINESS UNIT

Financial Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Manager Financial Services - Paul Sheridan

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Manager Governance and Corporate Services - Sarah Pierson

NATURE OF DECISION

Noting: The item is simply for information purposes and noting

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   List of Payments May 2021

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 21/7/2021, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

 

The committee recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2107/145              Moved Councillor J Barrett-Lennard, seconded Councillor P Cronin

 

That the Council notes payment of voucher numbers M118788 – M118825, EF079166 – EF079828, T7559 – T7562, DD004475 – DD004508, as well as payroll payments, together totalling $6,935,157.99.

CARRIED 7/0

En Bloc

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council notes payment of voucher numbers M118788 – M118825, EF079166 – EF079828, T7559 – T7562, DD004475 – DD004508, as well as payroll payments, together totalling $6,935,157.99.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report provides details of payments made from the City’s bank accounts for the month of May 2021, for noting by the Council and recording in the Council Minutes.

 

BACKGROUND

The Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 (the Regulations) requires that, when the Council has delegated authority to the Chief Executive Officer to make payments from the City’s bank accounts, a list of payments made is prepared each month for presentation to, and noting by, the Council.

OFFICER COMMENT

In accordance with regular custom, the list of payments made for the month of May 2021 is presented for information. 

Statutory Environment

Section 6.10 of the Local Government Act 1995 and more specifically Regulation 13 of the Regulations refer to the requirement for a listing of payments made each month to be presented to the Council.

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.

Stakeholder Consultation

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

Not applicable.

CONCLUSION

The list of payments made for the month of May 2021 is presented for information.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Not applicable.


Council

20

28 July 2021

12.1

Attachment a

List of Payments May 2021

 









Council                                                                                      47                                                                        28 July 2021

12.2           Finance Committee - 21/7/2021 - FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENTS - YEAR TO DATE AS AT 31 MAY 2021

STRATEGIC THEME

LEADERSHIP - A Council that connects with the community and is accountable in its decision making.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY

4.2 Deliver governance systems that facilitate open, ethical and transparent decision making.

SUBJECT INDEX

Financial Services

BUSINESS UNIT

Financial Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Manager Financial Services - Paul Sheridan

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Manager Governance and Corporate Services - Sarah Pierson

NATURE OF DECISION

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

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Financial Activity Statement - May 2021

Attachment b    Investment Report - May 2021

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 21/7/2021, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

 

The committee recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2107/146              Moved Councillor J Barrett-Lennard, seconded Councillor P Cronin

 

That the Council receives the statutory financial activity statement reports for the period ending 31 May 2021, pursuant to Regulation 34(4) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations.

CARRIED 7/0

En Bloc

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council receives the statutory financial activity statement reports for the period ending 31 May 2021, pursuant to Regulation 34(4) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Pursuant to Section 6.4 of the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act) and Regulation 34(4) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 (the Regulations), a local government is to prepare, on a monthly basis, a statement of financial activity that reports on the City’s financial performance in relation to its adopted / amended budget.

 

This report has been compiled to fulfil the statutory reporting requirements of the Act and associated Regulations, whilst also providing the Council with an overview of the City’s financial performance on a year to date basis, for the period ending 31 May 2021.

 


 

BACKGROUND

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

·        Annual budget estimates

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

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

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

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

 

Additionally, and pursuant to Regulation 34(5) of the Regulations, a local government is required to adopt a material variance reporting threshold in each financial year. At its meeting on 27 July 2020, the Council adopted (C2007/071) the following material variance reporting threshold for the 2020/21 financial year:

That pursuant to Regulation 34(5) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations, the Council adopts a material variance reporting threshold with respect to financial activity statement reporting for the 2020/21 financial year as follows:

·        Variances equal to or greater than 10% of the year to date budget amount as detailed in the Income Statement by Nature and Type/Statement of Financial Activity report, however variances due to timing differences and/or seasonal adjustments are to be reported only if not to do so would present an incomplete picture of the financial performance for a particular period; and

·        Reporting of variances only applies for amounts greater than $25,000.

OFFICER COMMENT

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

Statement of Financial Activity

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

Net Current Position

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

Capital Acquisition Report

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

·        Land and Buildings

·        Plant and Equipment

·        Furniture and Equipment

·        Infrastructure

Reserve Movements Report

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

 

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

 

Comments on Financial Activity to 31 May 2021

The Statement of Financial Activity (FAS) for the year to date (YTD) shows an overall Net Current Position of $4.96M as opposed to the amended budget of ($12.1M). This represents a positive variance of $17.1M YTD.  This variance increased by $3.7M from $13.5M at the end of April.  

 

The following table summarises the major YTD variances that appear on the face of the FAS, which, in accordance with Council’s adopted material variance reporting threshold, collectively make up the above difference.  Each numbered item in this lead table is explained further in the report.

 

Description

2020/21
Actual YTD

$

2020/21
Amended
Budget YTD

$

2020/21
Amended
Budget

$

2020/21
YTD Bud Variance

%

2020/21
YTD Bud Variance

$

Change in Variance Current Month

$

Revenue from Ordinary Activities

 

3.96%

2,899,486

261,616

1.    Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions

5,584,461

4,010,229

4,782,445

39.26%

1,574,232

142,611

2.    Other Revenue

554,249

338,275

424,730

63.85%

215,974

42,175

3.    Interest Earnings

839,459

994,802

1,046,684

(15.62%)

(155,343)

(43,192)

Expenses from Ordinary Activities

 

 

 

 

4.    Materials & Contracts

(12,630,973)

(16,140,363)

(18,147,582)

21.74%

3,509,390

204,534

5.    Other Expenditure

(2,311,884)

(3,365,672)

(5,236,779)

31.31%

1,053,788

(239,507)

6.    Non-Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions

5,589,060

14,220,060

34,437,199

(60.70%)

(8,631,000)

(2,019,063)

Capital Revenue & (Expenditure)

 

28.16%

13,824,293

5,335,883

7.    Land & Buildings

(3,155,107)

(8,881,049)

(17,454,059)

64.47%

5,725,942

1,718,030

Plant & Equipment

(1,234,932)

(2,473,982)

(2,510,340)

50.08%

1,239,050

(9,570)

Infrastructure

(17,425,882)

(32,649,857)

(40,057,700)

46.63%

15,223,975

1,889,089

8.    Proceeds from Sale of Assets

339,756

581,500

581,500

(41.57%)

(241,744)

0

9.    Proceeds from New Loans

0

7,700,000

7,700,000

(100.00%)

(7,700,000)

0

10.  Repayment of Capital Lease

(456,815)

(521,901)

(521,900)

12.47%

65,086

2,825

11.  Advances to Community Groups

0

(200,000)

(200,000)

100.00%

200,000

0

12.  Transfer to Restricted Assets

(5,453,037)

(50,424)

(62,750)

(10714.37%)

(5,402,613)

(156,433)

13.  Transfer from Restricted Assets

2,596,074

1,556,917

2,807,074

66.74%

1,039,157

(482,408)

14.  Transfer from Reserves

9,706,572

6,139,756

34,901,501

58.09%

3,566,816

2,534,180

 

Revenue from Ordinary Activities

In total, revenue from Ordinary Activities is $2.9M, or 3.7%, ahead of budget YTD.  The material variance items contributing to this include:

 

1.     Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions

Ahead of YTD budget by $1.6M, or 39.3%, mainly due to the items listed in the table below:

Revenue Code

Revenue Code Description

Actual YTD

$

Amended Budget YTD

$

Variance
YTD
$

Variance
YTD
%

Change in Variance Current Month

$

Finance and Corporate Services

1,757,409

1,709,861

47,548

2.71%

662

10510

Governance Support Services – State Government Operating Grants

 -

18,700

(18,700)

(100.00%)

(1,700)

Each year the City takes on a disability trainee. At the time of setting the budget, it is not known where this person may be placed, so the reimbursement from the State Government is budgeted in this area. The trainee was actually placed at the GLC, with all associated actual wage costs and reimbursements allocated to this area.

10152

Other General Purpose Funding – Financial Assistance Grants

1,424,119

1,394,881

29,238

2.05%

7,310

Actual grants received are slightly higher than originally budgeted. The Grants Commission always advises the exact amounts to be received well after budget adoption.

10151

Rates Administration – Reimbursements – Legal Fees

41,855

28,996

12,859

30.72%

6,086

There has been a much higher than expected requirement for debt recovery services in relation to overdue rates.  Legal costs for this process are reimbursed by the ratepayers involved. 

10200

Financial Services – Reimbursements – Insurance

126,578

104,735

21,843

17.26%

(6,654)

The second instalment of the LGIS Contributions Assistance Package was due to be received in November, but instead a credit note received from LGIS was offset against scheme policies that were due for payment in early December, at their instruction.

10522

Occupational Health & Safety – Reimbursement – Wellness Program

7,160

22,913

(15,753)

(220.01%)

(203)

Due to COVID restrictions in the first half of the financial year a number of programs were either not able to proceed or were undersubscribed.  With the relaxing of restrictions and returning confidence, staff participation in the various Wellness activities has increased, however it is unlikely that the full budget will be achieved by year end. 


 

Community and Commercial Services

346,588

242,319

104,269

30.08%

24,031

10540

Recreation Administration – State Government Operating Grants

31,736

18,337

13,399

42.22%

(1,667)

The grant applications that have been approved by the State Government have derived approximately $30K in excess of the total amount budgeted for the year of $20K.

10541

Recreation Planning – State Government Operating Grants

14,348

 -

14,348

100.00%

14,348

The Department of Local Government, Sport & Cultural Industries awarded $14K to the City from the Community Sporting and Recreation Facilities fund (CSRFF), to develop the Master Plan for Sir Stewart Bovell Sports Park.

B1361

YCAB (Youth Precinct Foreshore) – State Government Operating Grants

30,138

13,750

16,388

54.38%

 -

Additional unbudgeted Crime Prevention Grant received from WA Police to run the Choices Program.

11151

Airport Operations – Contributions

101,000

50,000

51,000

50.50%

16,000

More contributions toward airport marketing have been received from neighbouring local governments than was originally anticipated.

10530

Events & Cultural Services Administration – Parenting Leave Reimbursements

14,655

 -

14,655

100.00%

 -

Parenting leave reimbursement was not planned at the time of the development of the 20/21 budget.

10630

Economic and Business Development Administration – Parenting Leave Reimbursements

9,059

 -

9,059

100.00%

 -

Parenting leave reimbursement was not planned at the time of the development of the 20/21 budget.

Planning and Development Services

1,029,890

1,043,297

(13,407)

(1.30%)

85,317

10820

Strategic Planning – State Government Grants

22,500

37,500

(15,000)

(66.67%)

22,500

The variation from Strategic Planning budget (Grant $37,500) is due to the total grant ($75,000) being acquitted in three instalments: the first payment was received some time ago on achievement of certain project milestones to that stage in the preparation of the ‘Coastal Adaptation Strategy’ or CHRMAP, ‘Coastal Hazard Risk Management and Adaptation Plan’. The second payment (30%) was received in May 2021 following adoption of the draft CHRMAP for advertising by the Council (OCM 24 February 2021). The final payment of 20% is due once Council adopts the final CHRMAP. Preparation of this complicated and comprehensive document has been set back several times over the past 2 years due to project requirements concerning financial modelling and Government Working Group reviews et al. As such, the City has received approval to extend the anticipated completion date for the project (this has occurred several times) until 31 March 2022. The $15,000 final grant payment will therefore not be paid until FY 21/22.

10830

Environmental Management Administration – State Government Grants

18,780

 -

18,780

100.00%

 -

Grant received in two lots in September and December, however it was budgeted to be received in June.

10925

Preventative Services – CLAG – State Government Grants

32,038

44,370

(12,332)

(38.49%)

 -

The Department of Health contribution to the mosquito program was less than expected.

Engineering and Works Services

2,450,574

1,014,752

1,435,822

58.59%

32,601

S0076

Kaloorup Road (Stage 1) – Main Roads Operating Grant

 -

267,000

(267,000)

(100.00%)

 -

Works originally budgeted to be completed by April are forecast to be complete in June, however grant acquittal and invoicing cannot be finalised until all billing has been processed and a final reconciliation of works has been completed and signed off.

11160

Busselton Jetty – Contributions

842,772

429,700

413,072

(100.00%)

 -

The second half yearly contribution was budgeted to be received in June, however it was received in April.

11162

Busselton Jetty - Underwater Observatory – Reimbursement of Utilities Charges

24,243

 -

24,243

100.00%

13,770

The City recoups both electricity and sewer service charges from Busselton Jetty Inc. Due to an administrative oversight, this item has not been budgeted, however there is a nil impact on the municipal net current position due to this income being put into the Jetty reserve.  This offsets the costs which are also put into the reserve.  YTD also contains an insurance re-imbursement of $14K for damage to the UPS during storm events in May 2020.

11300

Sanitation Waste Services  Administration – Parenting Leave Reimbursements

13,570

 -

13,570

100.00%

 -

Parenting leave reimbursement was not planned at the time of the development of the 20/21 budget.

11301

Regional Waste Management Administration – Reimbursements

95,919

20,163

75,756

78.98%

(1,833)

The contributions to the 2020/21 Southwest Regional Waste Group Project were received from 10 participating local governments in November and April, totalling $48K each time.  Only $22K was budgeted for the year, and this was spread over 12 months.

11501

Operations Services Works – Insurance Reimbursements

253,706

56,100

197,606

77.89%

23,598

Workers compensation claims totalling $254K have been received YTD. This is by nature very difficult to predict. $61K was budgeted for the year, spread evenly over 12 months.

B1401 & B9610

Old Butter Factory – Insurance Reimbursements

149,415

 -

149,415

100.00%

 -

Conservation and fire damage works now completed. Insurance claim has now been approved and paid.  Not budgeted as additional works were required for structural and fire compliance that had not been scoped at commencement of the works. Not unusual for conservation projects of this nature. Net impact after insurance claims is estimated at approximately ($30K).

M9999

Road Maintenance Bal Of Budget – Insurance Reimbursements

778,013

 -

778,013

100.00%

 -

Storm damage claims from the storm events in May 2020.

 


 

2.      Other Revenue

Ahead of YTD budget by $216K, or 63.8%, mainly due to the items listed in the table below:

Revenue Code

Revenue Code Description

Actual YTD

$

Amended Budget YTD

$

Variance
YTD
$

Variance
YTD
%

Change in Variance Current Month

$

Finance and Corporate Services

57,422

31,337

26,085

83.24%

12,489

10200

Financial Services – Sundry Income

21,971

198

21,773

10,996%

12,385

Due to workload issues and a change in staff in Planning, there was a delay in on-payment of development application fees to the Department of Planning for fees received from an applicants in April and May. This will be rectified in June.

Community and Commercial Services

48,813

5,885

42,928

729.44%

8,135

10591

Geographe Leisure Centre – LSL Contributions from other LG’s

18,132

 -

18,132

100.00%

 -

Long Service Leave entitlements accrued can be transferred between local governments. This receipt was budgeted for in June, however it was received earlier than expected.

10625

Art Geo Administration –

Sale of Artworks

6,588

 -

6,588

100.00%

(740)

The distribution of the proceeds of artwork sales on behalf of the artists is done in the month following the sales after the monthly reconciliation process.

10630

Economic and Business Development Administration – LSL Contributions from other LG’s

9,738

 -

9,738

100.00%

 -

Long Service Leave entitlements accrued can be transferred between local governments. At the time of budgeting, it was not known that the City would be employing a person for whom a LSL entitlement would be transferred.

Planning and Development Services

201,101

129,019

72,082

55.87%

4,614

10925

Preventative Services –

CLAG – Sundry Income

83,195

3,740

79,455

2124.45%

5,519

Due to the much earlier and more significant onset of the Ross River Virus threat, extra chemical applications were required. Permission was received from the Department of Health to draw extra trust funds for these purposes.

10970

Parking Control –

Parking Fines & Costs

31,535

55,000

(23,465)

(42.66%)

(3,492)

Budgeting for this is always done on a simple historical trend basis, and is never a targeted revenue source.  It is down on budget due to the enforcement team being temporarily understaffed.

Engineering and Works Services

246,912

172,034

74,878

43.53%

16,938

11107

Engineering Services Design – LSL Contributions from other LG’s

14,475

 -

14,475

100.00%

 -

Long Service Leave entitlements accrued can be transferred between local governments. At the time of budgeting, it was not known that the City would be employing a person for whom a LSL entitlement would be transferred.


 

G0030

Busselton Transfer Station – Sale of Scrap Materials

143,138

88,099

55,039

62.47%

18,745

The pricing received for scrap metal has been significantly higher than originally forecast.  As such, higher than predicted volumes have also been delivered to the recyclers to take advantage of this pricing.

 

3.      Interest Earnings

Interest earnings is $155K, or 15.6%, behind budget YTD May due to the significantly lower than forecast interest rates, as a result of the COVID pandemic induced economic downturn. The current low interest rate environment will reduce the City’s income in both the current budget period and future years.

 

Expenses from Ordinary Activities

Expenditure from ordinary activities is $4.5M, or 6.3%, less than expected when compared to the budget YTD as at May. The following individual expense line items on the face of the financial statement have YTD variances that meet the material reporting thresholds:

 

4.      Materials and Contracts

Better than budget by $3.5M, or 21.7%. The table below lists the main items contributing to this variance:

Cost Code

Cost Code Description

Actual YTD

$

Amended Budget YTD

$

Variance
YTD
$

Variance
YTD
%

Change in Variance Current Month

$

Finance and Corporate Services

1,773,420

2,209,869

436,449

19.7%

184,328

10151

Rates Administration

204,617

283,787

79,170

27.9%

1,907

The variance is predominantly due to the under spend in consultancy. This budget was for the Rating Review Project, funded by reserves. The project has been delayed due to resourcing issues in the Rates team, plus communications with the Minister regarding rates reviews that have changed the scope of the project.  Unspent funds will remain carried forward in the reserve to fund the revised project.

10200

Financial Services

40,285

74,972

34,687

46.3%

5,498

Due mainly to a reduction in bank fees that were budgeted at a higher amount, plus none of the consultancy budget has been used YTD. This will potentially be used later in the financial year in relation to adoption of new accounting standards, as well as in the Rates area to help fine tune some system functionality in the lead up to the annual rates run.

10250

Information & Communication Technology Services

1,051,695

1,239,487

187,792

15.2%

100,545

Outstanding invoices for commitments we have raised are responsible for the increase in variance, a description of the primary variances are below:

·        Software licenses –The City’s licenses still are on track to go over budget this year with the addition of some unplanned software, we are waiting on invoices for the $159,000 in commitments we have outstanding which will reduce the variance accordingly.

·        Photocopying – As mentioned in Customer Service below, the printer costs are routing through this account hence the budget overspend.

·        GIS costs – It was planned to use a new image provider at a reduced cost, unfortunately they could not provide what was agreed upon and the City continued to use Landgate at a higher cost.

 

·        Consultancy – We are underspent in consultancy this FY, unplanned projects have affected our ability to resource the projects we had initially targeted for this year. We are waiting on invoices for $37,000 of committed spend which will reduce the variance accordingly.

·        Contractors (including Contract Staff) – By end of year there will be a $100,000 underspend due to the budgeted contractor being engaged as an employee. This was originally funded from reserve.

10360

Customer Services

21,278

43,196

21,918

50.7%

2,093

·        Photocopying – The Finance team going paperless has had a significant impact on the City’s paper spend, especially for coloured paper. In addition, an arrangement has been made with the Executive Assistants for auditing of the stationery supplies in their departments, so ordering has been more closely aligned to needs rather than maintaining large stores.

·        Computer Consumables – Historically, printer cartridges etc. came from this bucket. With the adoption of more printers using a full supply contract this account is not being utilised. The City still orders some cartridges manually but the number is heavily reduced. This will be reviewed during the upcoming budget considerations for 21/22 to get a better idea of actual spend.

10500

Legal & Compliance Services

113,056

136,265

23,209

17.0%

81,515

Expenditure on various reactive legal matters have not required as much expenditure as originally anticipated.

10616, 10617 & 10618

Aged Housing

84,514

129,811

45,297

34.9%

1,458

Lower than expected maintenance costs to the end of the reporting period.  Less reactive maintenance for FY to date.

Community and Commercial Services

1,357,176

2,000,538

643,362

32.2%

(84,115)

10380

Busselton Library

55,269

106,102

50,833

47.9%

1,618

·        Non-capital Furniture & Office Equipment – Offsets an overspend in 7743 due to capitalisation of shelving/furniture purchases. (Purchase Order 49449 raised, $6,063 deposit has been paid, with the remaining funds in process of being rolled over into the 2021/22 budget).

·        Contractors (Inc Contract staff) - $8,000 underspend to offset $8,000 grant income not received (Be Connected Grant).

·        Entity Specific Consumables – The coffee machine has been disposed of, which means that there will be no expenditure, and no offset income.

10381

Dunsborough Library

21,591

33,808

12,217

36.1%

72

·        Contractors – Currently chasing up annual carpet cleaning with Facilities who have now assumed responsibility for scheduling annual carpet cleaning.

·        Other Computer costs - $1,800 networking costs no longer required.

·        Photocopying – centralised purchases have not been allocated correctly.

·        Library Resources – expenditure has increased and monies will be spent (annual expenditure patterns were delayed due to RFQ process earlier in the year).

10540

Recreation Administration

15,534

44,348

28,814

65.0%

(1,686)

The City’s application to the State Government for the 2021 & 2022 Every Club grants was successful. Grant deeds have been received and executed. It is envisaged that $15K of the $30K that has been invoiced will need to be rolled into next FY to fund the new Community and Recreation service trainee and the remaining $15K will be expended on delivering the program through workshops.


 

10541

Recreation Planning

2,930

139,750

136,820

97.9%

3,087

Timing of expenditure was awaiting the outcomes of external grant applications. During February grant deeds were finalised, however the scope of work will not be finalised with the preferred consultant until June. It is estimated that this will absorb approximately $70K of the underspend variance by EOFY.

                10590

Naturaliste Community Centre

48,927

85,491

36,564

42.8%

777

Variance primarily due to line items below:

·        Photocopying – $2.25K this budget allowance has been offset by IT as an expense within their budget.

·        Licence Fees - $4.3K underspend, likely to remain at approximately $3.5K by EOFY.

·        Contractors – $9.3K underspend, pending storage works commencing/completion at NCC in June to expend this area.

·        Holiday Program – $7.3K underspend, likely to result in $5K underspend due to reduced program this year.

·        Leisure Program Activities – $1.4K underspend, this will be expended by EOFY.

It is anticipated that there will be an overall underspend in these areas by the EOFY.

10591

Geographe Leisure Centre

270,288

329,130

58,842

17.9%

(568)

Variance primarily due to line items below:

·        Building Maintenance Services & Contractors – $21K underspend, delay in securing contractors to do works required – will know more once May EOM financials are finalised.

·        Garden Maintenance – $1.1K underspend, invoice timing.

·        Swimming Pool Maintenance/Repairs – $5K underspend likely to remain if no breakdown of equipment in June.

·        Photocopying – $8.5K this budget allowance has been offset by IT as an expense within their budget so will not be expensed.

·        Printing – $2.8K – this will be expended.

·        License Fees – $8.6K underspend, likely to be $4K underspend by EOFY due to cancelled Crossfit licence.

·        Non-Capital Furniture & Office Equipment – $9.6K underspend, pending works likely to expend this by EOFY.

·        Holiday Program – $2.3K underspend, will be expensed for items for July program.

·        Leisure Program Activities – $5.6K underspend, this will be expended by EOFY.

It is anticipated that there will be an overall underspend in these areas by the EOFY.

10600

Busselton Jetty Tourist Park

399,056

532,598

133,542

25.1%

47,056

The variance can be attributed to two outstanding monthly management fee invoices ($41,125 – runs one month in arrears), due to presentation and payment of the invoice. Other expenditure that has not occurred falling within Materials & Contracts are related to non-scheduled maintenance, garden maintenance, purchase of materials, and savings in cleaning materials and disposal of waste fees.

10625

Art Geo Administration

49,781

61,461

11,680

19.0%

3,270

Over half of the underspend in ArtGeo is due to unallocated centralised costs for printing and photocopy. The remainder is due to using in house design resources instead of outsourcing to produce signage and interpretation and therefore these underspends are offset in additional wages.


 

10630

Economic and Business Development Administration

49,177

103,922

54,745

52.7%

16,197

The budget is made up of numerous line items that have been spread throughout the year. The actual timing for these things are inherently difficult to predict, as more often than not they depend on interactions with outside third parties for development opportunities and collaborations. For example, the City budgets for advertising and marketing, but needs to wait for relevant opportunities to arise throughout the year that may not necessarily align with budget timing. A further $20,114.00 is to be invoiced (Pracsys Economics for Industry Sector Analysis) in June and a couple of smaller amounts leaving a total variance of approx. $19K by year end.

11151

Airport Operations

198,949

283,110

84,161

29.7%

(8,710)

The budget variance YTD includes the key allocations of:

·        Security screening of $45K not spent.

·        Car park design, signage, line marking, repairs and maintenance of approximately $28K.

The remainder of the variance relates to commitments for:

·        COVID screens $6,500.

·        Apron lighting repairs of approximately $3K.

·        General grounds maintenance and improvements of approximately $4K.

·        Technical inspections $5,500.

B1361

YCAB (Youth Precinct Foreshore)

37,822

52,129

14,307

27.4%

19

Operating grants forecast were not available as planned and therefore associated expenditure has not occurred. Alternative funding was sourced to run a program in Dunsborough which commenced in February and March.  Full invoicing for these activities has not as yet been received, and is also not expected to come in as high as what was originally forecast based on the grant funding.

Planning and Development Services

1,026,607

1,840,512

813,905

44.2%

58,919

10810

Statutory Planning

15,669

31,207

15,538

49.8%

2,744

Not possible to predict when consultancy services will be required in advance.  In this case, funds have been committed (heritage and traffic advice) but invoices not received.   

10820

Strategic Planning

174,859

222,222

47,363

21.3%

2,273

Estimated revenues (re-zonings, structure plans) and anticipated consultant contracts (for specialised works seen as likely to be needed for scheduled City projects) are often quite difficult to predict as they are subject to third-party intentions and initiatives, or competing demands and task allocation/prioritisation at the City.

10830

Environmental Management Administration

320,896

487,535

166,639

34.2%

(15,871)

Expenditure variance due to:

·        Timing of Barnard Park East management plans contract, due April 2021, pending completion of upgrade works;

·        Lower Vasse River sediment removal and groundwater investigations were delayed, now due May 2021; and

·        Carbunup reserve contaminated site investigations due May 2021.

Awaiting a number of significant invoices to complete contracts within early June and all outstanding payments will be reconciled prior to the EOFY.


 

10920

Environmental Health Services Administration

3,306

38,881

35,575

91.5%

(210)

There is an error in the timing of the YTD budget.  The full year for contractors is only $5K, however YTD shows $20K, as a budget credit of $15K was processed in June. The YTD variance for this whole area is actually $14,376. The reasons for this $14K underspend include the contractor allocation of $5K to implement audit outcomes being done in house, plus very minimal pre-summer assessments of sound level meters, revealing little to no faults requiring repair, due to 2020 COVID event cancellations.

10922

Preventative Services – Mosquitoes

18,774

35,532

16,758

47.2%

221

Variance is attributed to:

·        Contractors – $1,853 underspend due to reduced mosquito trapping being undertaken by contractor.

·        Consultants – No spend i.e. saving - this allocation was to create a mosquito management plan by consultants, internal staff developed the plan instead.

·        Chemicals – $8,048 funds available this has been spent as additional chemical were purchased in June and has been paid, In 2020/21, the allocation should be fully expended YTD.

·        Equipment Repairs & Maintenance – $932 saving due to mosquito trap servicing was not required, only batteries were purchased.

·        Photocopying – $300 saving as photocopying expenses have not been/needed to be allocated to this cost code.

10925

Preventative Services – CLAG

119,098

57,913

(61,185)

(105.6%)

83

Due to the much earlier and more significant onset of the Ross River Virus threat, extra chemical applications, transport, etc. were required. Permission was received from the Department of Health to draw extra trust funds for these purposes (see positive variance in Other Income section above). Full reconciliation of the CLAG budget will occur by the end of the financial year.

10931

Protective Burning & Firebreaks –Reserves

86,150

498,564

412,414

82.7%

42,912

Spring and Autumn burning mitigation programs now complete with all expenses currently being reconciled. Mechanical mitigation program of approximately $80,000 commence on Monday 3rd May with invoicing for works completed expected to be received in the month of May. All funds expected to be spent by end of FY. Awaiting a number of significant invoices to complete contracts for mitigation works in June.  Brigade payments are also being completed for works within 20/21.  All outstanding payments will be reconciled prior to the EOFY.

10942

Bushfire Risk Management Planning – DFES

155

12,738

12,583

98.8%

1,158

Awaiting final plant costings and reconciliation will be completed and submitted.

11170

Meelup Regional Park

76,255

174,575

98,320

56.3%

7,267

Expenditure variance due to timing of awarding Cultural Heritage Assessment (CHA) contract as part of the Meelup Regional Park Management Plan review. Initial request for services did not attract a suitable service provider, delaying the project. Contract for CHA awarded 20 April 2021.  $60,000 for Meelup Healthy Country Plan has been approved for relisting in 2021/22, due to timing of completion being extended.  No expenses for this will appear within the 20/21 financial year.

B1010-B1028

Bushfire Brigades – Various

113,247

139,854

26,607

19.0%

9,517

Emergency operations dependent. YTD actuals vs budget will vary according to emergency operational requirements, and are inherently difficult to predict. All brigade payments will be completed prior to the EOFY and are currently being reconciled.


 

Engineering and Works Services

8,471,040

10,082,989

1,611,950

16.0%

45,375

11160/1/2

Busselton Jetty

16,834

29,788

12,954

43.5%

2,259

$32.5K was included on the Jetty budget for Contractor costs for miscellaneous repairs and maintenance and for the replacement of small items under $5,000 as and when required. This budget is used for the replacement of bins, vandalism repairs, minor painting, jetty signage etc. YTD there has been less expenditure of this type than in prior years.   

12600

Street & Drain Cleaning

292,881

401,258

108,377

27.0%

(73,888)

Year to date expenditure for these services began tracking back to budget in May and will continue to do so in June, pursuant to pre-rainy-season drain abduction works that commenced in mid to late April. These works ensure drains are free of debris to mitigate against flooding.  This leaves $107K in ongoing works to be invoiced in the final month of June with these works ongoing. This budget is anticipated to be fully expended as at 30 June.

12620 & 12621

Rural & Urban Tree Pruning

147,521

346,500

198,979

57.4%

25,907

$247K of expenditure for rural tree pruning and for the removal of urban dead trees and debris was withheld to help offset storm damage clean-up costs incurred in relation to the May 2020 storms. In February 2021 it was confirmed that the City had secured storm claim reimbursement revenue and thus this budget was reinstated. Contractor availability meant that the Rural Tree Pruning budget will be under expended by approximately $150K come June 30. The CEO has notionally agreed that this budget can be carried over into the 2022 financial year. In the wake of the Yallingup fires a further $150K was approved to be spent on cleaning up the verges of rural single access roads. These costs were coded against the individual roads and these works will be completed by June 30.

Various

Bridge Maintenance

29,399

166,111

136,712

82.3%

7,521

Expenditure on Bridge Maintenance activities was also withheld to the value of $105K to help offset May 2020 storm damage related costs. With the storm costs now having been reimbursed, the budget has been reinstated. It is difficult to secure Contractor availability for these types of specialised works at short notice; to this end some of the budget will remain unused. $90K of this unspent budget will be carried over into 2022.

Various

Building Maintenance

1,205,451

1,302,653

97,202

7.5%

(39,654)

The year to date underspend variance associated with Building Maintenance decreased by a further $40K in May to $97K. Scheduled maintenance activities on various buildings have been in progress post the busy Easter holiday period. Expenditure has exceeded budget on some buildings while being under budget on others. Come June 30 the majority of this budget will have been outlaid.

Various

Other Infrastructure Maintenance

1,186,834

1,582,680

395,846

25.0%

(12,616)

This category encompasses the consolidation of almost 100 individual Cost Codes representing a unique array of services delivered right across the City. It includes things like: event support; boat ramp maintenance; cemetery maintenance; maintenance at the Libraries and GLC; caravan park maintenance; street lighting installation; the foreshores; the CBD’s; cycleways and footpaths etc. The $396K YTD expenditure variance to budget at the end of May is mostly attributable to timing with the budget having been evenly spread across the financial year. Urban Street lighting installations and the Rural Intersection lighting budgets are under expended to budget $118k; most of this budget will be outlaid come June 30. The Boat Ramp Contractor maintenance budget is under spent to budget by $36K with much of this not anticipated to be outlaid come June 30. The remaining budget for both Strategic Fire Breaks – Maintenance $18K and Cycleway Maintenance Busselton $22K will have been utilised come June 30.


 

Various

Waste Services

1,837,933

2,437,524

599,591

24.6%

135,195

The YTD under expenditure to budget for Waste Services Consolidated is attributable to many factors including the following:

·        $145K under expended variance to budget associated with Contamination Site Contractor costs. Environmental based costs such as testing and monitoring were not known at the time of budget preparation; investigations are ongoing.

·        $123K under expended variance to budget associated with External Waste Disposal being gate house disposal costs at the Cleanaway Dardanup landfill.  Some of this is timing pending the receipt of both the April and May monthly invoice.

·        $95K under expended variance to budget associated with Cleanaway Recycling Collection costs, will all this attributable to timing pending the receipt of the May monthly invoice.

·        $95K under expended variance to budget associated with the Dunsborough Waste Site. The green waste stock pile will now be processed in the 2022 financial year contributing to this variance.

·        $67K favourable variance associated with the postponement of the FOGO trail. These funds will net-off against the Waste Reserve with the year-end transfer of funds calculation.

Various

Roads Maintenance

945,063

437,014

(508,049)

(116.3%)

17,024

The higher than normal costs are largely associated with storm damage clean-up costs stemming from the May 2020 storm events, where there has been $403K in extraordinary Material & Contractor costs incurred against Road Maintenance. In February, the City was notified that it will be in receipt of reimbursements that effectively cover and offset against this overspend. The Road Maintenance budget is being carefully managed exclusive of storm-related costs that have been reimbursed.

Various

Reserve Maintenance

1,370,498

1,706,772

336,274

19.7%

16,587

Significant volumes of works began on the City’s POS Reserves after the Easter public holidays with greater volumes of contractor invoices starting to flow through to the City. Included in the YTD variance is a one-off non-cash stock adjustment that when excluded reduces the YTD variance by $106K leaving $230k under expended to budget YTD. This grouping is comprised of 184 separate POS areas where some are over budget while others are under budget. The following areas are under expended to Contractor budgets YTD and thus explain the YTD variance:

·        Cultural Precinct $23K

·        Eastern Link Landscaped Area $20K for maintenance post construction.  (will not be outlaid as project currently in progress)

·        Busselton Foreshore Area $73K

·        Provence Estate $34K

·        Vasse Newtown $31K

·        Vasse  Kealy $25K

5280

Transport - Fleet Management

1,438,627

1,672,689

234,062

14.0%

(32,959)

Fuel and Oil was underspent by $169,782 YTD accounting for 72% of the Fleet YTD variance. An end of year surplus is anticipated but will be less than was anticipated in the mid-year budget review as the fuel price has been on the rise. Fuel consumption across the City is now at its highest level as many large Civil works projects are now underway. Tyre purchases are underspent by $1,885 YTD and replacement parts/tooling/contractor costs are underspent $62,395 YTD. 

 


 

5.    Other Expenditure

$1.05M, or 31.3%, under the budget YTD. The main contributing items are listed below:

Cost Code

Cost Code Description

Actual YTD

$

Amended Budget YTD

$

Variance
YTD
$

Variance
YTD
%

Change in Variance Current Month

$

Executive Services

68,368

100,217

31,849

31.8%

4,374

10001

Office of the CEO

67,298

100,217

32,919

32.8%

4,631

The underspend relates to donations contributions and subsidies budget ($10K), CapeROC budget ($16K) and the CEO Discretionary Budget ($7K).

Finance and Corporate Services

745,670

886,981

141,311

15.9%

(44,074)

10000

Members of Council

433,702

499,478

65,776

13.2%

821

Timing variances exist in relation to the payment of elected member allowances and reimbursements.  The main contributors being $23K related to timing variances in payment of sitting fees, the elected members training budget underspent by $16K, and no expenditure against the Council holding account with a YTD budget of $11K.  The timing variances for expense reimbursements are difficult to predict when budgeting. 

10151

Rates Administration

87,458

105,963

18,505

17.5%

(53,280)

Budget variances are due to interim valuation invoices still to be received.

10700

Public Relations

77,412

117,972

40,560

34.4%

8,424

The underspend variance is related to a reduced payment to BASSCA this year given COVID-19 and no school exchanges, the cancelling of the Mayoral Breakfast and a reduced spend associated with functions such as the launch of Jetstar flights.

Community and Commercial Services

1,021,633

2,028,854

1,007,221

49.6%

(19,806)

10530

Events & Cultural Services Administration (formerly Community Services Administration)

484,819

649,773

164,954

25.4%

(12,480)

Funds currently committed from the 2020/21 events budget through multi-year agreements and Rounds 1 and 2 of the Event Sponsorship Program totals $380,562. In addition, $200,000 is allocated towards the development of an electronic events billboard. This leaves a balance of $205,852 in the 2020/21 events budget for any further event attraction or initiatives. This balance includes funds from cancelled events.

Of the $250,000 allocated to the 2020/21 marketing budget, $120,000 has been allocated to the Airport Marketing Reserve, $50,000 to the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre (BPACC), up to $12,000 had been allocated to update the City’s Events Strategy and up to $5,000 for the update of tourism signage, leaving a balance of $63,000 for any further initiatives. It is recommended that the remaining balance after any further allocations be transferred to the Airport Marketing Reserve.

Of the $40,000 allocated to City run events, a total of $11,684 was spent on seven Sun-Sets on the Bay events in Busselton and Dunsborough. This leaves a balance of $28,316. Pending any further initiatives, the remaining balance at the end of financial year will remain in the Marketing and Area Promotion Reserve. 

10532

BPACC Operations

11,668

50,000

38,332

76.7%

5,000

Low cost marketing materials have been developed to date and until final decisions are made regarding the project tenders, no large investments in event attraction will be made.


 

10547

Iron Man

 -

200,000

200,000

100.0%

 -

Ironman has been cancelled for this year and hence the funds will not be expended. Council have resolved (C2012/159 – 9 December 2020) to utilise the remaining budget towards an electronic billboard, however this will not likely be completed until closer to the end of the financial year.

10550

Forrest Rally

 -

12,500

12,500

100.0%

 -

Forrest Rally organisers have advised that the event will not be proceeding from 2020/2021 onwards, therefore these funds will not be expended.

10567

CinefestOZ

80,000

120,000

40,000

33.3%

 -

YTD variance is due to the sponsorship contract being varied due to a change in format as a result of COVID (C2009/110) - $80K paid in 2020/21 with the balance ($38k) carried over to be paid in addition to 2021/22 Market Yield Adjustment.

10625

Art Geo Administration

11,743

23,992

12,249

51.1%

(711)

Underspend is offset by additional wages due to in house production of marketing, promotional and interpretation work.

10630

Economic and Business Development Administration

3,440

39,346

35,906

91.3%

15,654

The budget is made up of numerous line items that have been spread throughout the year. The actual timing for these things are inherently difficult to predict, including valuations as more often than not they depend on interactions with outside third parties for development opportunities and collaborations. For example, the City budgets for marketing and promotions, but need to wait for relevant opportunities to arise throughout the year that may not necessarily align with budget timing. It should be noted that a large portion of the total annual budget ($55K) relates to cruise ship visitor servicing ($38K), which due to the effects of COVID-19 will not be spent by the end of the financial year.

10634

Business Support Program

72,522

97,988

25,466

26.0%

(1,092)

There are a number of grants that are being finalised by applicants. Once these have been completed, then the City will pay out the grant funds. There is also an amount of $19K that has not been allocated from the total annual budget that will be reflected in the variance at year end.

11151

Airport Operations

5,276

420,741

415,465

98.7%

(5,148)

Relates to marketing activities for RPT services which have not commenced due to COVID.

Planning and Development Services

152,894

158,152

5,258

3.3%

1,215

10805

Planning Administration

29,148

55,000

25,852

47.0%

5,000

This variance relates to the façade refurbishment program which is not likely to have any additional projects / work costed to it this financial year as the City has not run the program as per normal because of unusually high workloads caused by the building stimulus.

10931

Protective Burning & Firebreaks-Reserves

3,804

16,115

12,311

76.4%

(790)

Due to the limited seasonal burning opportunities, the budget for catering for the crews has not been spent as expected YTD.

10942

Bushfire Risk Management Planning – DFES

23,466

 -

(23,466)

(100.0%)

 -

This represents repayment of unspent 19/20 BRMP grant funds.

Engineering and Works Services

323,319

191,468

(131,851)

(68.9%)

(181,217)

B1223

Micro Brewery - Public Ablution

60,000

120,000

60,000

50.0%

 -

The City’s fund contribution to the construction of these ablutions is due to be paid upon receipt of invoice from the company.  Final inspection of the toilet facilities was expected late March, after which the invoice should have been forthcoming. 

G0042

BTS External Restoration Works

237,879

45,837

(192,042)

(419.0%)

(180,960)

There was an unforeseen cost increase in groundwater monitoring due to a laboratory error by our third party contractor.

The round of testing conducted in November included the sampling of over 50 groundwater bores, many of which reported “anomalous results”.  The contractor concluded that the lab had made errors in mis-labelling samples, which required re-sampling.

Although the lab did not charge us for additional testing due to their error, the City incurred extra costs when it had to re-engage the contractor to re-test several dozen bores in January.

The City’s Legal department is investigating whether compensation from the contractor can be pursued.

In May, a legal settlement payout that was made in November 2020 was re-allocated from capital per advice from the Office of Auditor General, as these costs are not capital in nature.

 

6.   Non-Operating Grants, Subsidies & Contributions

The negative variance of $8.6M is mainly due to the items in the table below. It should be noted that apart from the first two items in the table (the Locke Estate Contributions variance is due to COVID hardship deferral relief), any negative variance in this area will approximately correlate to an offsetting variance in a capital project tied to these funding sources. This can be seen in the section below that outlines the capital expenditure variances. The positive variances generally relate to budget timing, i.e. the funds are usually brought to account during the end of financial year reconciliation process, so hence are budgeted in June.

Revenue Code

Revenue Code Description

Actual YTD

$

Amended Budget YTD

$

Variance
YTD
$

Variance
YTD
%

Change in Variance Current Month

$

Finance and Corporate Services

46,678

60,000

(13,322)

(22.2%)

(4,000)

R0288

Locke Estate –

Leaseholder Contributions

46,678

60,000

(13,322)

(22.2%)

(4,000)

Community and Commercial Services

156,039

38,851

117,188

301.6%

133,039

10590

Naturaliste Community Centre – Developer Contributions Utilised

23,000

 -

23,000

100.0%

 -

10900

Cultural Planning – Donated Assets

51,000

 -

51,000

100.0%

51,000

C6025

Installation of Bird Netting – State Capital Grant

82,039

38,851

43,188

111.2%

82,039

Planning and Development Services

502,478

 -

502,478

100.0%

 -

10980

Other Law, Order & Public Safety – Donated Assets

8,231

 -

8,231

100.0%

 -

B1025

Yallingup Coastal Bushfire Brigade – Donated Assets

10,592

 -

10,592

100.0%

 -

C3223

Dunsborough Non-Potable Water Network –

Federal Capital Grant

483,655

 -

483,655

100.0%

 -

Engineering and Works Services

4,883,864

14,121,209

(9,237,345)

(65.4%)

(2,148,102)

A0023

Kaloorup Road Bridge – 3381 – Donated Asset

 -

936,000

(936,000)

(100.0%)

(936,000)

A0024

Boallia Road Bridge – 4854 – Donated Asset

 -

1,009,000

(1,009,000)

(100.0%)

(1,009,000)

A0025

Tuart Drive Bridge 0238 – Federal Capital Grant

 -

170,330

(170,330)

(100.0%)

 -

B9407

Busselton Senior Citizens – Developer Cont. Utilised

595,306

162,479

432,827

266.4%

 -

B9591

Performing Arts Convention Centre – Federal Capital Grant

 -

5,175,000

(5,175,000)

(100.0%)

 -

B9999

Donated Buildings (Micro-Brewery Public Toilets)

110,000

 -

110,000

100.0%

 -

C0059

Dunsborough Yacht Club Carpark – Developer Cont.

60,000

 -

60,000

100.0%

 -

C1026

Townscape Works Dunsborough – State Capital Grant

10,000

 -

10,000

100.0%

 -

C3116

Dawson Park (McIntyre St POS) – Developer Cont.

 -

77,467

(77,467)

(100.0%)

 -

F1022

Buayanyup Drain Shared Path – State Capital Grant

 -

293,337

(293,337)

(100.0%)

(26,667)

S0005

Ludlow Hithergreen Road - Second Coat Seal –

Main Roads Capital Grant

360,000

412,500

(52,500)

(12.7%)

(37,500)

S0048

Bussell Highway – Developer Cont. Utilised

200,000

458,337

(258,337)

(56.4%)

(41,667)

S0070

Peel & Queen Street Roundabout Service Relocation –

Developer Cont. Utilised

320,000

800,000

(480,000)

(60.0%)

200,000

S0072

Kaloorup Road - Reconstruct and Seal Shoulders – Developer Cont. Utilised

100,000

 -

100,000

100.0%

 -

S0073

Gale Road Rural Reconstruction –

Federal Capital Grant

515,811

1,258,114

(742,303)

(59.0%)

(114,374)

S0074

Causeway Road Duplication –

Developer Cont. Utilised

800,000

300,000

500,000

166.7%

 -

S0075

Local Road and Community Infrastructure Program –

Federal Capital Grant

688,143

765,951

(77,808)

(10.2%)

 -

S0076

Kaloorup Road (Stage 1) – Main Roads Direct Grant

106,800

 -

106,800

100.0%

 -

T0020

Capel Tutunup Road –

RTR Capital Grant

 -

1,307,834

(1,307,834)

(100.0%)

(118,894)

W0067

Ford Road Reconstruct and Asphalt Overlay – Main Roads Direct Grant

10,875

 -

10,875

100.0%

 -

W0121

Geographe Bay Road Quindalup –

Developer Cont. Utilised

12,000

 -

12,000

100.0%

 -

 


 

7.    Capital Expenditure

As at 31 May 2021, there is an underspend variance of 49.9%, or $22.2M, in total capital expenditure, with YTD actual at $22.3M against the YTD amended budget of $44.5M. A portion of this positive underspend variance is offset by the negative variance in Non-Operating Grants, Contributions & Subsidies discussed above, with the remainder offset by the negative variances in Transfers From Reserves related to funds held aside for these projects. The attachments to this report include detailed listings of all capital expenditure (project) items, however the main areas of YTD variance are summarised as follows:

Cost Code

Cost Code Description

Actual YTD

$

Amended Budget YTD

$

Variance
YTD
$

Variance
YTD
%

Change in Variance Current Month

$

Land

950

75,000

74,050

98.7%

(950)

10610

Property Services Administration

950

75,000

74,050

98.7%

(950)

The budget represents funds allocated for costs associated with potential strategic land purchases in the City of Busselton. To date, there have been no expenses incurred, as potential transactions have not progressed beyond informal discussions.

Buildings

3,154,157

8,806,049

5,651,892

64.2%

1,718,980

B9516

Busselton Library Upgrade

555,092

603,000

47,908

7.9%

36,350

Library works completed. Balance of funds to be directed to fit-out items.

B9300/1/2

Aged Housing Capital Improvements

64,128

179,600

115,472

64.3%

2,386

Budgeted works were proposed to separate power and drainage servicing Winderlup Court and Winderlup Villas.  Whilst the power requirements are not triggered until the new conditional land title lots are created, the intention was to progress with this anyway. The procurement process has elicited one quotation only which, even if acceptable is unlikely to generate an invoice payable in the current financial year.  As such the budgeted funds will be carried over in reserve to be utilised once appropriate contractual arrangements can be made.

B9402

Busselton Waste Transfer Station  - Buildings

18,206

 -

(18,206)

(100.0%)

(18,206)

A requirement arose for a 2.4 x 2.4 Transportable Ablution Block, and savings were identified in the budget for infrastructure that could be utilised for these purposes.  This overspend variance will be offset by the identified underspends in infrastructure.

B9407

Busselton Senior Citizens

626,400

738,128

111,728

15.1%

(917)

Works were completed in September. The savings against budget are being reviewed for potential use on roof replacement and carpark works. Works have been re-scoped based on preliminary estimates to reduce costs of roof replacement. The tender to perform these works has now been awarded, and is expected to be completed by the end of the financial year.

B9558

Churchill Park -  Change Room Refurbishment

 -

21,000

21,000

100.0%

 -

Works are scheduled to be completed before the end of the financial year. Procurement for roof sheeting is currently underway.

B9591

Performing Arts Convention Centre

1,344,449

6,362,563

5,018,114

78.9%

1,637,768

Regional Growth Fund milestones are under review pending funding extension confirmation. Design contract program extension pending. Budgeted cash flow has been reviewed, with works now pending final Council decision on the tenders.

B9596

GLC Building Improvements

62,543

450,681

388,138

86.1%

192,260

Carried over works from the prior year. Works have now been completed with reconciliation of the final progress claims expected to be completed in May.  Payment should follow shortly thereafter and is expected to fully utilise this budget.

B9607

General Buildings Asset Renewal Allocation (Various Buildings)

112,921

137,500

24,579

17.9%

11,636

This budget was assigned for various Capital works as identified as per the City’s Building Asset Management Plan. Some items of expenditure have been for undertaking maintenance as opposed to Capital renewal works. To this end, $44k in costs incurred have been moved back and recorded against Operations in the June period. These major maintenance works will still be funded from the Building Reserve, however an under-expended position to budget will result against this item.

B9608

Demolition Allocation

(Various Buildings)

 -

12,500

12,500

100.0%

2,011

Funds were initially allocated to partial demolition of the Weld Theatre by the end of the financial year, in preparation for its integration with the BPACC.  Final Council decision on this project is now pending due to further review of tenders.

B9610

Old Butter Factory

277,434

 -

(277,434)

(100.0%)

(145,885)

Conservation and fire damage works were completed early in the financial year.  A journal for $145k representing costs associated with the Wood Turners relocation to the Old Butter Factory site was processed in May and hence the end of month $277k unfavourable variance; this JNL has since been reversed back out in June bringing the variance back to its original $131k. An Insurance claim reimbursement totalling $99.4k offsets the true costs of $131k leaving a net over spent to budget of $32k come June 30. 

B9612

Churchill Park

Renew Sports Lights

181

140,000

139,819

99.9%

 -

A review of consultants work to date has been undertaken and Council has endorsed a grant application to the State Government for this site.  If the application is accepted (response expected in June), budgeted expenditure will be carried forward into the 21/22 budget year.  If not, much of this budget will be spent by the end of this this financial year.

B9711

Busselton Airport – Building

 -

15,000

15,000

100.0%

 -

Small capital works projects to be completed either prior to Jetstar flights commencing or by the end of the financial year.

B9717

Airport Construction - Existing Terminal Upgrade

3,416

39,237

35,821

91.3%

151

As per above.

B9809

Busselton Jetty Tourist Park Compliance Works

3,600

40,000

36,400

91.0%

 -

Compliance electrical works to be completed by the end of the financial year.

Plant & Equipment

1,234,932

2,473,982

1,239,050

50.1%

(9,570)

10372

Dunsborough Cemetery

 -

20,000

20,000

100.0%

 -

The budget is for maintenance trailers for the cemetery, both for grave shoring equipment and watering equipment, as well as fencing and turf upgrades. The delay in procurement of these items is due to current workloads of relevant staff and other projects taking a higher priority to date.  Suitable specifications have now been developed and quotes are being sought, however the new equipment is not expected to be delivered until August 2021.  As such, these budgeted funds will remain in reserve and be relisted to be drawn in the 21/22 budget.


 

11106

Street Lighting Installations

17,300

 -

(17,300)

(100.0%)

 -

The expenditure represents a storage container for the lighting equipment. The budget for the whole activity has been entered against one operational line incorrectly, rather than being split according to operational maintenance, capital upgrade, and one-off asset purchases such as this.

11156

Airport Development Operations

199,403

259,512

60,109

23.2%

23,592

All baggage handling system invoices have been invoiced and paid. The remaining funds will be included in the outstanding Airport Development funding balance.

11162

Busselton Jetty - Underwater Observatory

17,523

 -

(17,523)

(100.0%)

 -

In February there was $17.5K in unplanned expenditure for an Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) for the Underwater Observatory (UWO) lift.  This will be funded from the Jetty Reserve.

11401

Transport – Workshop

19,227

30,000

10,774

35.9%

 -

The hardware for upgrades to the repeater at the communications tower has been delivered.  Installation of these will be dependent upon receiving Telstra approvals, which is being worked through by Property and Leasing, but will take place in 21/22 FY.

11402

Plant Purchases (P10)

596,461

1,420,000

823,539

58.0%

 -

Underspend variances to budget YTD are due to:

·        The new generators at DWF pond and cell that were ordered in April, with delivery of one unit in June and the second in July. (carryover listed in the 21/22 budget);

·        The waste manager’s new replacement vehicle to be ordered and delivered in May;

·        A waste truck side loader that has been ordered, but delivery/payment is not expected until August (this underspend saving will be a carry-forward purchase from the Plant Reserve in the 21/22 budget);

·        The waste compactor semi-trailer purchase has been deferred indefinitely pending development of the new waste plan.

11403

Plant Purchases (P11)

46,995

202,500

155,505

76.8%

2,500

One ute ordered with delivery delayed until July and one light truck ordered in December, delivery now delayed until July. Both listed as carryovers in the 21/22 budget.

11404

Plant Purchases (P12)

8,923

114,000

105,077

92.2%

(8,923)

One light truck ordered with delivery expected in July. Listed as carryover in the 21/22 budget.

11407

P&E - P&G Smart Technologies

 -

91,663

91,663

100.0%

8,333

The annual scope of the project is currently being finalised and delivery will follow in the last quarter of 20/21.

Furniture & Office Equipment

449,887

458,088

8,201

1.8%

(176,068)

10250

Information & Communication Technology Services

262,104

407,088

144,984

35.6%

(47,182)

Some of the delayed projects (COVID impacts include consultancy availability, hardware supply chain and additional unplanned IT work) have been accelerated in the new year including the hardware refresh, phone line migration, single label domain, and online payments. It is however expected that some projects, including portions of the website build and laptop replacements will be carried over to the subsequent financial year.  The funding for these elements will also remain in reserve and be carried over to fund the expenditure when it occurs.


 

10591

Geographe Leisure Centre

71,380

20,000

(51,380)

(256.9%)

(51,620)

Pool covers worth $51K were purchased.  The overspend in this budget area is offset by forecast underspends in the GLC building upgrade area.

10900

Cultural Planning

56,000

12,000

(44,000)

(366.7%)

(44,000)

Completion of the Slippery Rocks bronze sculpture for $51K, plus $5K for the winning sculpture competition.

Infrastructure By Class

 

 

 

 

 

Various

Roads

10,876,579

14,245,367

3,368,788

23.6%

(332,156)

Major civil road construction works are now underway in many locations across the City by both the City’s two road construction teams and Contractors. The large Gale Rural Road project originally estimated at $1.437M has commenced and is nearing completion; it is estimated to come in under budget by approx. $400K; due to competitive contractor pricing. There will also an underspend associated with the Peel & Queen Street Roundabout project (S0070) valued at $1.2M as the majority of these works will be carried over into 2022.  Stage 1 Blackspot works on Kaloorup Road vales at $410k although recently started will also not be completed by June 30. These projects are contributing to the current $3.368M YTD variance.

The projects below comprise 83% of the variance.

·        S0076    Kaloorup Road (Stage 1)                                           $366,987

·        S0073    Gale Road Rural Reconstruction                             $485,860

·        S0048    Bussell Highway                                                         $554,347

·        T0020   Capel Tutunup Road                                                  $622,596

·        S0070    Peel & Queen Street Roundabout                          $771,099

TOTAL YTD underspent to budget                                       $2,800,887

Various

Bridges

4,872

4,303,489

4,298,617

99.9%

2,091,624

Although Bridge renewal works will be done on both the Bussell Highway and Yallingup Beach Road bridges this financial year it is unlikely any expenditure will be recorded due to the requirement for formal notification of completion from Main Roads and of invoices from them. Main Roads carry out these works on behalf of the City. Works on the Kaloorup, Boallia Road and Tuart Drive Bridges are now scheduled to commence in the 2022 Financial year. To this end an under expended variance to budget totalling $6.4M is anticipated come 30 June. All 5 bridge projects will represent carry overs. 

Various

Car Parks

1,222,880

1,709,053

486,173

28.4%

34,754

Car Park projects are generally progressing well although there is a $486K under expended variance to budget YTD. 54% of the YTD variance is attributable solely to the Car Parking associated with the Barnard East Development with the majority of construction to occur in 2022. Both the Baudin Memorial & Administration Building Carpark projects will start in earnest and are scheduled to be completed by June 30; they have a combined YTD variance to budget of $152K.

Various

Footpaths & Cycleways

330,241

1,316,335

986,094

74.9%

24,852

The YTD variance associated with Footpath & Cycleway projects grew by a further $24.8K to the end of May. This is primarily attributable to the Buayanyup Drain Shared Path project that is soon to commence which represents 58%, or $576K of the YTD variance. There has been a number of unforeseen complexities associated with this project. An extension to the 50% Regional Bike Network grant associated with this project has been secured and the project is scheduled to be completed by the end of July 2021.

Contributing a further $232K in combined under expenditure to budget are the Bussell Highway Footpath Sections Project and the Dunsborough Centennial Park Footpath Project where the budget for these have been earmarked and re-assigned to cover additional Queen Street Paving costs.


 

Various

Parks, Gardens & Reserves

4,688,523

10,195,699

5,507,176

54.0%

81,733

79% representing $4.373M of the YTD variance in this category is attributable to only the four projects listed below:

1.         Dunsborough Lakes Sporting Precinct (Stage 1); Civil works to begin soon but the majority of the budget to be carried over and added to Stage 2.

2.         Craig Street Groyne and Sea Wall; works progressing with progress claims anticipated in both May and June.

3.         Site Rehabilitation – Busselton; works postponed in lieu of site settling, survey and levelling.

4.         Mitchell Park Upgrade; works commenced but the contractor went into Administration with the majority of this Budget to be carried over into the 2022 Financial year.

Further to the above, in excess of $1M of the YTD variance is attributable to the numerous Public Open Space upgrade projects using Cash in Lieu of Public Open Space contributions; these works will commence in the 2022 Financial Year.

Various

Drainage

33,552

89,019

55,467

62.3%

3,396

There are only three small drainage related projects on budget this financial year.  Both the Glenmeer Ramble and Chugg Road Drainage Upgrade projects are scheduled to commence in the last quarter of the financial year.

Various

Regional Airport & Industrial Park Infrastructure

269,234

790,895

521,661

66.0%

(15,115)

The car park works have been completed but not paid at the time of this report. The most significant part of the underspend relates to noise amelioration works which is funded from grant funds held in reserve. This will be partially invoiced by the end of the financial year, but depending on construction timelines, the rest will remain on the Airport development budget for future noise amelioration.  Unspent funds will therefore remain in the reserve.

 

8.    Proceeds From Sale of Assets

YTD proceeds from sale of assets is $242K behind budget due to delays in delivery of acquisitions, and the associated transfer to auction of the vehicles being replaced. 

 

Also, aside from a significantly reduced capital replacement program in both light vehicles and heavy plant items, many existing items of plant that were due to be replaced have been retained in service to maintain operational requirements.

 

9.    Proceeds From New Loans

$7.5M of the budgeted proceeds of $7.7M are related to the planned drawdown on the construction loan for the BPACC. This project has been deferred in consultation with the Federal Government.  The tender process has been completed and Council is now reviewing its options regarding this project.  No drawdown is expected this financial year. 

 

The remaining $200K of the variance is offset by advances to community groups which have not occurred at this point in time.

 

10.  Repayment of Capital Lease

The budget was being finalised during the first COVID lockdown. As such, the timing was not set as accurately as it could have. The timing difference YTD will rectify by the end of June.

 

11.  Advances to Community Groups

No applications have been approved to date.  The $200K positive variance is offset by the non-receipt of the associated loans funds that the City would receive for these on-lending purposes.

12.  Transfer to Restricted Assets

There is a YTD variance in transfers to restricted assets of $5.4M more than amended budget.

 

At the time of budgeting it is not possible to predict what grants will be received in what timeframe, nor when they will be spent and hence potentially transferred to restricted assets beforehand. The following grants, totalling $2.5M, have been received and transferred to restricted assets for which there is no budgeted transfer and full acquittal completed:

·        Grant funding received from Federal Government for “Drought Communities Program” of $500K (attributable to CC C3223 Dunsborough Non-Potable Water Network) was received in September and another $200K received in March.  Budget projected allocation was in June as was the anticipated expenditure, hence no necessity to budget for a transfer to restricted assets;

·        $841K of the $1.6M grant for the Dunsborough Lakes Sporting Fields Development was received in March;

·        $855K 3rd instalment of the annual Roads to Recovery Grant allocation that has not been fully acquitted by YTD March;

·        $128K from the Department of Transport for the Buayanyup Drain Shared Path project.

Developer contributions, deposits and bonds are inherently hard to predict and budget for. An annual amount of $63K spread evenly over 12 months was budgeted, however over $2.9M has been received YTD, the bulk of which are for road works bonds ($2.4M).

 

13.  Transfer from Restricted Assets

YTD there has been $2.6M transferred from restricted assets into the Municipal Account. This was mainly attributable to refunds of road work bonds of $1.5M, refund of hall deposits of $28K, Busselton Jetty Tourist Park deposit refunds of $394K, $507K spent from the Dunsborough Non-Potable Water Network grant, $130K of town planning bonds, and other sundry refunds of $53K.

 

The variance to YTD budget for these items is due to majority of the transfers being forecast to occur in June.

 

14.  Transfer from Reserves

YTD there has been $9.7M transferred from reserves into the Municipal Account, compared to a budget of $6.1M. The discrepancy is caused by the earlier than expected completion of many reserve funded capital projects, most notably $2.8M of road works, with the transfers budgeted to occur in June.

Investment Report

As at 31 May 2021, the value of the City’s invested funds totalled $80.3M, no change from $82.2M as at 30 April 2021. 

 

The balance of the 11am account (an intermediary account which offers immediate access to the funds compared to the term deposits and a higher rate of return compared to the cheque account) remained constant at $7.0M.  

 

During the month of May five term deposits totalling the amount of $10.5M matured. One deposit was closed totalling $2.0M to provide funds for standard operations. Remaining deposits were renewed for a further 153 days at 0.32% on average.

 

The official cash rate remains steady for the month of May at 0.10%.  This will have a strong impact on the City’s interest earnings for the foreseeable future.

Chief Executive Officer – Corporate Credit Card

Details of transactions made on the Chief Executive Officer’s corporate credit card during May 2021 are provided below to ensure there is appropriate oversight and awareness.

 

Date

Payee

Description

$ Amount

5/05/21

OCEAN CENTRE HOTEL GERALDTON

ACCOMMODATION - TOURISM COUNCIL WA REGIONAL CONFERENCE - MAYOR G. HENLEY

$340.00

5/05/21

OCEAN CENTRE HOTEL GERALDTON

ACCOMMODATION - TOURISM COUNCIL WA REGIONAL CONFERENCE-CR K. COX

$376.50

6/05/21

THAI LEMONGRASS

COUNCILLOR DINNER 5.05.2021

$400.00

14/05/21

ZONTA CLUB DUNSBOROUGH

PEARL ANNIVERSARY LUNCH 12.06.21

$70.00

18/05/21

LG PROFESSIONALS WA

NETWORK FORUM 2021 REGISTRATION - STAFF

$400.00

 

 

TOTAL

$1,586.50

Statutory Environment

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

Relevant Plans and Policies

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

Financial Implications

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

Stakeholder Consultation

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

The Statements of Financial Activity are presented in accordance with Section 6.4 of the Act and Regulation 34 of the Regulations and are to be received by Council. Council may wish to make additional resolutions as a result of having received these reports.

CONCLUSION

As at 31 May 2021, the City’s net current position stands at $4.96M. The City’s financial performance is considered satisfactory, and cash reserves remain strong.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Not applicable.

 


Council

63

28 July 2021

12.2

Attachment a

Financial Activity Statement - May 2021

 


















Council

65

28 July 2021

12.2

Attachment b

Investment Report - May 2021

 


Council                                                                                      88                                                                        28 July 2021

13.1           APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL DA20/1056 - SERVICE STATION - LOT 9052 (No. 210) NORTHERLY STREET, VASSE

STRATEGIC THEME

ENVIRONMENT - An environment that is valued, conserved and able to be enjoyed by current and future generations.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY

1.1 Ensure protection and enhancement of environmental values is a central consideration in land use planning.

SUBJECT INDEX

Development/Planning Application

BUSINESS UNIT

Statutory Planning

REPORTING OFFICER

Senior Development Planner – Policy - Stephanie Navarro

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Manager Environmental Services - Tanya Gillett

NATURE OF DECISION

Regulatory: To determine an application/matter that directly affects a person’s right and interests e.g. development applications, applications for other permits/licences, and other decisions that may be reviewable by the State Administrative Tribunal.

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Development Plans

Attachment b    Traffic Technical Advice

Attachment c    Landscape Strategy Plans and Viewpoint Perspectives

Attachment d   Bushfire Management Plan

Attachment e    Schedule of Submissions

Attachment f    Schedule of Agency Submissions  

 

The officer recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2107/147              Moved Councillor J Barrett-Lennard, seconded Councillor P Cronin

That the Council determines:

A.        That application DA20/1056 submitted for a ‘Service Station’ at Lot 9052 (No. 210) Northerly Street, Vasse, is considered by the Council to be generally consistent with Local Planning Scheme No. 21 and the objectives of the zone within which it is located.

 

B.         That Development Approval is issued for the proposal referred to above (A) subject to the following conditions:

 

General conditions

1.         The development hereby approved shall be substantially commenced within two years from the date of this decision letter.

 

2.         The development hereby approved shall be undertaken in accordance with the signed and stamped Approved Development Plans except as may be modified by the following conditions.

 

Prior to commencement of any works conditions

3.         The development hereby approved, or any works required to implement the development, shall not commence until the following plans or details have been submitted to the satisfaction of the City and have been approved in writing:

3.1       Stormwater and groundwater management plan for the entirety of Lot 9052 to the satisfaction of DWER and the City (Advice note 7).

 

3.2       A Landscaping Plan which shall include details of a 30 metre landscaping buffer along the entire western lot boundary. Landscaping shall be of a sufficient height and density at maturity to screen the development from Bussell Highway to the satisfaction of the City.

 

The Landscaping Plan shall include a plant schedule nominating endemic species, planting distances, numbers, planting sizes, together with the anticipated height of each plant at maturity.

 

3.3       Further to Condition 3.2 above, arrangements shall be made for the 30 metre landscaping buffer to be developed by the landowner/applicant in accordance with an Approved Landscaping Plan and maintained for two summers (Advice note 8).

3.4       An exterior lighting plan which shall include the canopy, parking areas and entry/exit points (Advice note 9).

3.5       Details setting out a minimum number of 8 car parking bays to be provided on site (including 1 accessible bay). The parking areas, driveways and points of ingress and egress (including crossovers) shall be appropriately designed, constructed, drained and line marked.

3.6       Details setting out a minimum of one loading bay to be provided on site. The loading bay shall be appropriately designed, constructed, drained and line marked.

3.7       Details of the proposed bicycle parking facilities. The details shall include, as a minimum, the location, design and materials to be used in their construction.

3.8       Details of the proposed bin storage areas. The details shall include, as a minimum, the design and the materials to be used in their construction (Advice note 10).

3.9       Amended plans for the pylon signs with a maximum height of 6 metres.

3.10    Engineering drawings and specifications are to be submitted, and approved by the City and Main Roads WA, for an extension of the existing splitter island past the western driveway to prevent right turn movements into and out of this vehicle access point. 

3.11    Notification in the form of a section 70A notification, pursuant to the Transfer of Lands Act 1893 (as amended), is to be placed on the Certificates of Title of the lot advising the following:

This land is within a bushfire prone area as designated by an Order made by the Fire and Emergency Services Commissioner and is be subject to a Bushfire Management Plan. The approval of the Service Station is conditional upon the details contained within the Bushfire Management Plan (BMP) prepared by Bushfire Prone Planning dated 16 December 2020 and the accompanying Bushfire Risk Management Plan (BRMP).

A copy of the Certificate of Title with the section 70A notification registered against it, or Landgate lodgement receipt, is to be provided to the City.

 

Prior To Occupation/Use Of The Development Conditions

4.         The development hereby approved shall not be occupied, or used, until all plans, details or works required by Condition 2 and 3 have been implemented; and the following conditions have been complied with:

4.1      Crossovers are located and constructed to the City’s specifications.

4.2       The development being connected to reticulated sewerage.

4.3       The development being connected to reticulated water.

4.4      Landscaping shall be implemented in accordance with the approved Landscape Plan.

4.5       The proposed Landscaping Buffer shown on the approved Development Plans shall be vested in the Crown under Section 152 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, such land to be ceded free of cost and without any payment of compensation by the Crown.

Ongoing Conditions

5.         The works undertaken to satisfy Conditions 3 and 4 shall be subsequently maintained for the life of the development; and, the following conditions shall be complied with:

5.1      For the life of the development, any illuminated signs hereby approved shall:

a)        Not be of a light emission intensity to cause a traffic hazard or distraction to drivers on the adjacent public road or be confused with traffic signals; and

b)        Not flash, pulsate, chase, or otherwise cause a nuisance to occupiers of an adjoining site or the local area; and

c)         Not be animated; and

d)        Not be illuminated when the business is not operating.

5.2      The pylon signs shall be restricted to a maximum of 6 metres above natural ground level.

5.3      The approved Bushfire Management Plan shall be implemented and maintained in accordance with the approval details and any recommendations therein.

 

Advice Notes

 

1.         If the applicant and/or owner are aggrieved by this decision, there may also be a right of review under the provisions of Part 14 of the Planning and Development Act 2005. A review must be lodged with the State Administrative Tribunal, and must be lodged within 28 days of the decision being made.

 

2.         This Decision Notice grants development approval to the development the subject of this application. It cannot be construed as granting development approval for any other structure shown on the Approved Development Plans, which was not specifically included in this application.

 

 

 

3.         For the purposes of this condition, the term “substantially commenced” has the meaning given to it in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 as amended from time to time. Please note it is the responsibility of the applicant / owner to ensure that this development approval remains current and does not lapse.

 

4.         In accordance with the provisions of the Building Act 2011, and Building Regulations 2012, an application for a building permit must be submitted to, and approval granted by the City, prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted.

 

5.         The Applicant is advised that the food storage, retail and preparation areas are to be designed and constructed in accordance with Food Act 2008, Food Regulations 2009 and the Food Standards Code Requirements.

 

6.         The Applicant is advised that the food business is required to be registered with the City of Busselton. A Food Business Notification / Registration Form is to be submitted for approval by an Environmental Health Officer (include a detailed sketch plan of fit out of premise) prior to operating the food business.

 

7.         Further to Condition 3.1, the applicant is advised that the stormwater and groundwater management plan shall address the following:

a)        Pre-development surface and groundwater regime for the small, minor, and major events; and

b)        Post-development surface and groundwater management criteria to be applied at the sub-catchment and proposed lot scale for the small, minor, and major events; and

c)         Measures to mitigate water quantity and quality risks to the Franklin Wetland and downstream receiving environment.

 

8.         Further to Condition 3.3, the Applicant is advised that an executed Legal Agreement, prepared at the full cost of the applicant, with the City will be required to satisfy this condition.

 

9.         Further to Condition 3.4, the Applicant is advised that lighting will be required to comply with any applicable Main Roads WA requirements and is not to cause a traffic hazard or distractions.

 

10.       Further to Condition 3.8, the applicant is advised that a suitable rubbish enclosure adequate to service the development is constructed and provided in accordance with the City of Busselton Health Local Laws 1997.

CARRIED 7/0

En Bloc

 


 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council determines:

 

A.        That application DA20/1056 submitted for a ‘Service Station’ at Lot 9052 (No. 210) Northerly Street, Vasse, is considered by the Council to be generally consistent with Local Planning Scheme No. 21 and the objectives of the zone within which it is located.

 

B.         That Development Approval is issued for the proposal referred to above (A) subject to the following conditions:

 

General conditions

 

1.         The development hereby approved shall be substantially commenced within two years from the date of this decision letter.

 

2.         The development hereby approved shall be undertaken in accordance with the signed and stamped Approved Development Plans except as may be modified by the following conditions.

 

Prior to commencement of any works conditions

 

3.         The development hereby approved, or any works required to implement the development, shall not commence until the following plans or details have been submitted to the satisfaction of the City and have been approved in writing:

 

3.1       Stormwater and groundwater management plan for the entirety of Lot 9052 to the satisfaction of DWER and the City (Advice note 7).

 

3.2       A Landscaping Plan which shall include details of a 30 metre landscaping buffer along the entire western lot boundary. Landscaping shall be of a sufficient height and density at maturity to screen the development from Bussell Highway to the satisfaction of the City.

 

The Landscaping Plan shall include a plant schedule nominating endemic species, planting distances, numbers, planting sizes, together with the anticipated height of each plant at maturity.

 

3.3       Further to Condition 3.2 above, arrangements shall be made for the 30 metre landscaping buffer to be developed by the landowner/applicant in accordance with an Approved Landscaping Plan and maintained for two summers (Advice note 8).

3.4       An exterior lighting plan which shall include the canopy, parking areas and entry/exit points (Advice note 9).

3.5       Details setting out a minimum number of 8 car parking bays to be provided on site (including 1 accessible bay). The parking areas, driveways and points of ingress and egress (including crossovers) shall be appropriately designed, constructed, drained and line marked.

3.6       Details setting out a minimum of one loading bay to be provided on site. The loading bay shall be appropriately designed, constructed, drained and line marked.

 

 

3.7       Details of the proposed bicycle parking facilities. The details shall include, as a minimum, the location, design and materials to be used in their construction.

3.8       Details of the proposed bin storage areas. The details shall include, as a minimum, the design and the materials to be used in their construction (Advice note 10).

3.9       Amended plans for the pylon signs with a maximum height of 6 metres.

3.10    Engineering drawings and specifications are to be submitted, and approved by the City and Main Roads WA, for an extension of the existing splitter island past the western driveway to prevent right turn movements into and out of this vehicle access point. 

3.11    Notification in the form of a section 70A notification, pursuant to the Transfer of Lands Act 1893 (as amended), is to be placed on the Certificates of Title of the lot advising the following:

This land is within a bushfire prone area as designated by an Order made by the Fire and Emergency Services Commissioner and is be subject to a Bushfire Management Plan. The approval of the Service Station is conditional upon the details contained within the Bushfire Management Plan (BMP) prepared by Bushfire Prone Planning dated 16 December 2020 and the accompanying Bushfire Risk Management Plan (BRMP).

A copy of the Certificate of Title with the section 70A notification registered against it, or Landgate lodgement receipt, is to be provided to the City.

Prior To Occupation/Use Of The Development Conditions

4.         The development hereby approved shall not be occupied, or used, until all plans, details or works required by Condition 2 and 3 have been implemented; and the following conditions have been complied with:

4.1      Crossovers are located and constructed to the City’s specifications.

4.2       The development being connected to reticulated sewerage.

4.3       The development being connected to reticulated water.

4.4      Landscaping shall be implemented in accordance with the approved Landscape Plan.

4.5       The proposed Landscaping Buffer shown on the approved Development Plans shall be vested in the Crown under Section 152 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, such land to be ceded free of cost and without any payment of compensation by the Crown.

Ongoing Conditions

5.         The works undertaken to satisfy Conditions 3 and 4 shall be subsequently maintained for the life of the development; and, the following conditions shall be complied with:

5.1      For the life of the development, any illuminated signs hereby approved shall:

a)        Not be of a light emission intensity to cause a traffic hazard or distraction to drivers on the adjacent public road or be confused with traffic signals; and

b)        Not flash, pulsate, chase, or otherwise cause a nuisance to occupiers of an adjoining site or the local area; and

c)         Not be animated; and

d)        Not be illuminated when the business is not operating.

5.2      The pylon signs shall be restricted to a maximum of 6 metres above natural ground level.

5.3      The approved Bushfire Management Plan shall be implemented and maintained in accordance with the approval details and any recommendations therein.

 

Advice Notes

 

1.         If the applicant and/or owner are aggrieved by this decision, there may also be a right of review under the provisions of Part 14 of the Planning and Development Act 2005. A review must be lodged with the State Administrative Tribunal, and must be lodged within 28 days of the decision being made.

 

2.         This Decision Notice grants development approval to the development the subject of this application. It cannot be construed as granting development approval for any other structure shown on the Approved Development Plans, which was not specifically included in this application.

 

3.         For the purposes of this condition, the term “substantially commenced” has the meaning given to it in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 as amended from time to time. Please note it is the responsibility of the applicant / owner to ensure that this development approval remains current and does not lapse.

 

4.         In accordance with the provisions of the Building Act 2011, and Building Regulations 2012, an application for a building permit must be submitted to, and approval granted by the City, prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted.

 

5.         The Applicant is advised that the food storage, retail and preparation areas are to be designed and constructed in accordance with Food Act 2008, Food Regulations 2009 and the Food Standards Code Requirements.

 

6.         The Applicant is advised that the food business is required to be registered with the City of Busselton. A Food Business Notification / Registration Form is to be submitted for approval by an Environmental Health Officer (include a detailed sketch plan of fit out of premise) prior to operating the food business.

 

7.         Further to Condition 3.1, the applicant is advised that the stormwater and groundwater management plan shall address the following:

a)        Pre-development surface and groundwater regime for the small, minor, and major events; and

b)        Post-development surface and groundwater management criteria to be applied at the sub-catchment and proposed lot scale for the small, minor, and major events; and

c)         Measures to mitigate water quantity and quality risks to the Franklin Wetland and downstream receiving environment.

8.         Further to Condition 3.3, the Applicant is advised that an executed Legal Agreement, prepared at the full cost of the applicant, with the City will be required to satisfy this condition.

 

9.         Further to Condition 3.4, the Applicant is advised that lighting will be required to comply with any applicable Main Roads WA requirements and is not to cause a traffic hazard or distractions.

 

10.       Further to Condition 3.8, the applicant is advised that a suitable rubbish enclosure adequate to service the development is constructed and provided in accordance with the City of Busselton Health Local Laws 1997.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City has received an application for development approval for a proposed Service Station at Lot 9052 (No. 210) Northerly Street, Vasse. Due to the nature of the issues requiring consideration, the application is being presented to Council for determination, rather than being determined by City officers acting under delegated authority.

 

During the assessment of the application, the following issues that require consideration have been raised in relation to the application:

·        Zoning and land use permissibility;

·        Vehicle access and traffic;

·        Visual impact from Bussell Highway;

·        Height of pylon signs;

·        Bushfire; and

·        Environmental impacts.

 

Having considered the application, including submissions received, officers consider that the application is consistent with the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21 (the ‘Scheme’) and the broader, relevant planning framework.

 

It is recommended that the application be approved, subject to appropriate conditions.

 

BACKGROUND

The Council is asked to consider an application for development approval for a proposed Service Station at Lot 9052 (No. 210) Northerly Street, Vasse. A copy of the development plans that the Council are being asked to consider for approval are provided at Attachment A.

 

Key information regarding the application is set out below:

 

1.         Landowner: Vasse Commercial Pty Ltd

 

2.         Applicant: Able Planning and Project Management 

 

3.         Site area: 5.8130 Ha

 

4.         General description of the site: Lot 9052 (No. 210) Northerly Street, Vasse (the Site) is located approximately two kilometres south-west from the Vasse neighbourhood centre. The Site is bound by Bussell Highway to the west and Northerly Street to the south with the surrounding land in these directions zoned Rural under the Scheme.

Directly to the north of the Site is a Reserve (Recreation) which contains the Franklin Wetland. To the north of this reserve is the Vasse Light Industrial Area (LIA) (zoned Light Industry under the Scheme). The remaining land to the north-east of the site is zoned Urban Development and is planned, under a Development Guide Plan applicable to the area, to be developed for residential lots in the future.

 

5.         Current development/use: The Site is currently vacant however has formerly been used for grazing (Agriculture – Extensive) and associated residential development (Single House). 

 

6.         Brief description of proposed development: The applicant proposes a Service Station with three double sided refuelling bays for standard passenger vehicles and two double sided high-flow bays for larger diesel passenger vehicles and trucks, located under two separate canopies.

 

An ancillary retail building is also proposed that will be the point of sale for fuel purchases, sale of packaged petroleum, lubricant and motoring products, motor vehicle accessories and goods of an incidental or convenience nature, including basic food, snacks and non-alcoholic drinks. 

 

The retail building will have a commercial kitchen, servery, dry store, cool room and freezers, plus a dedicated staff toilet and office.  A unisex ambulant toilet and universal access toilet are provided for customers.

 

Parking will be provided for eight standard vehicles, including one accessible bay. Trucks will be accommodated in three large bays in the western portion of the Site.

 

Two vehicle access points are proposed along Northerly Street. The eastern vehicle access point is proposed to allow access and egress in both an easterly direction towards the Vasse neighbourhood centre and Vasse (LIA) and a westerly direction towards Bussell Highway. The western vehicle access point is proposed to be left-in only and will only provide access into the Site for vehicles approaching from the west, turning off Bussell Highway.

 

The applicant also proposes two illuminated pylon signs which will display brand advertising signage and mandatory fuel pricing. 

 

The proposal includes a 30 metre wide landscaping buffer along the entire length of the western lot boundary of the Site. This buffer will be located between the proposed development and Bussell Highway and, once suitably landscaped, will soften the visual impact of the development as viewed from Bussell Highway.

 

7.         Applicable Zoning and Special Control Area designations: The Site is located within the Urban Development zone and located within a Special Provisions Special Control Area (SP68) and Environmental Conditions Special Control Area.


 

8.         Land-use permissibility: Under the Scheme land use permissibility within the Urban Development zone is as per clause 3.4.3 of the Scheme which states as follows:

If the zoning table does not identify any permissible uses for land in a zone the local government may, in considering an application for development approval for land within the zone, have due regard to any of the following plans that apply to the land –

(a)       a structure plan;

(b)       an activity centre plan;

(c)       a local development plan.

 

The Site is subject to the Vasse Newtown Overall Structure Plan (Vasse Structure Plan) and the Vasse Light Industrial Estate Detailed Area Plan and is designated as a Reserve for Recreation under both. The applicable zoning under the Vasse Structure Plan, as well as the land use permissibility is discussed further in the officer comment section of this report below.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

During consultation on the application, a number of concerns were raised that are not considered to be relevant planning matters. The exercise of discretion when determining a development application should only take into account relevant considerations as identified within Clause 67 Consideration of application by local government, Schedule 2, Deemed Provisions of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations). The decision-maker has an obligation to exercise their statutory responsibilities appropriately and a decision is required to be based upon sound planning principles.

 

The matters to be given consideration which are relevant to this development application are outlined in the Statutory Environment section of this report, below. If an item or issue is not listed it is not deemed to be a valid planning consideration and therefore is not to be given regard in the determination of a development application. For example, while the improvement of the region, including ‘economic development’ is one of the broader aims of the Scheme, economic considerations, including the economic competition as well as demand for a development, are not listed under Clause 67 of the Regulations. Therefore, economic considerations per se should only be considered when setting the planning framework and not when making a determination on an individual development application. 

 

It is considered that the main planning issues relevant for detailed discussion in this report are as follows:

·        Zoning and land use permissibility;

·        Vehicle access and traffic;

·        Visual impacts from Bussell Highway;

·        Height of pylon signs;

·        Bushfire; and

·        Environmental impacts.

 


 

Zoning and Land Use Permissibility

In 2018 the City endorsed Amendment 28 (‘Omnibus 3’) to the Scheme. The intent of Omnibus 3 was to align the Scheme with the Regulations and consolidate the ‘Development’ and ‘Deferred Development’ areas. In relation to the Vasse Structure Plan area, Omnibus 3 re-zoned the developed portions of land in line with the applicable zoning under the structure plan and areas which had not yet been developed were re-zoned either Urban Development or Industrial Development in line with the Regulations. As part of Omnibus 3, which was subsequently gazetted on 16 February 2021, the Site was rezoned from ‘Deferred Vasse Development’ to ‘Urban Development.’

 

Land use permissibility within the Urban Development zone is detailed within Clause 3.4.3 of the Scheme which states as follows:

If the zoning table does not identify any permissible uses for land in a zone the local government may, in considering an application for development approval for land within the zone, have due regard to any of the following plans that apply to the land –

(a)       a structure plan;

(b)       an activity centre plan;

(c)       a local development plan.

 

Currently, under both the Vasse Structure Plan and the Vasse Light Industrial Estate Detailed Area Plan, the Site is designated as ‘Reserve for Recreation.’

 

In 2018, following the endorsement of Omnibus 3 by the City, the City progressed modifications to the Vasse Structure Plan. The purpose of these modifications was to align the structure plan with changes to the Scheme proposed as part of Omnibus 3. During consultation on these modifications, the City received a submission, on behalf of the owners of the Site, opposing to the identification of the Site as ‘Reserve for Recreation.’ As there was never any intent that the modifications to the Vasse Structure Plan would propose substantive changes to existing land use zones the Site remained ‘Reserve for Recreation’.

 

Notwithstanding the above, it is acknowledged that the reservation of the Site on the Structure Plan is somewhat of an anomaly as the land is not required to satisfy the minimum 10% provision of public open space across the Vasse Structure Plan area and in any case is poorly sited for such a purpose. A public open space (POS) audit has been prepared by DPLH for the current Structure Plan area. The schedule identifies 8.81% POS provision within the proposed Structure Plan, representing a shortfall of 1.19% relative to the standard Liveable Neighbourhoods allocation of 10%. However, the shortfall is offset by the over-provision of public open space across the endorsed Structure Plan area of 13% of the developable area.

 

A number of alternative land uses for the Site have been discussed and considered previously by City officers, DPLH and the landowner/landowner’s representative. Agricultural land uses were effectively ruled out, as were active recreation (sports ovals and the like) or conservation areas. The Site is not required for residential purposes (nor is the location of the Site ideal for this) as recent changes to the strategic planning framework for Vasse through the City’s Local Planning Strategy and the Leeuwin Naturaliste Sub-Regional Strategy identifies two planning investigation areas to guide the future expansion of Vasse.

 

The land is now recognised as being a potential extension to the Vasse LIA or ‘Business Park’ north of the Franklin wetland and west of Lynwood Street. A conceptual Local Development Plan for the Site has been prepared by the landowner, which shows the land zoned as Industry – Light, and has been informally discussed with City and Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage (DPLH) officers. To date, however, it is yet to be lodged as a formal application.

 

In relation to the consideration of a structure plan when determining a development application, clause 27 of the Deemed Provisions states as follows:

A decision-maker for an application for development approval or subdivision approval in an area that is covered by a structure plan that has been approved by the Commission is to have due regard to, but is not bound by, the structure plan when deciding the application.

 

In line with the above, while the Council is required to have consideration of a structure plan it is not bound by it when making a determination. It is considered, based on the above justification that the Site is not in a suitable location for a Recreation Reserve, that the Site would form a logical expansion to the Vasse Light Industrial area and that the approval of a Service Station in this location would be in keeping with orderly and proper planning principles.

 

Vehicle Access and Traffic

During consultation comments were received from Main Roads WA raising concerns in relation to the proximity of the proposed western vehicle access point to a future planned roundabout at the intersection of Northerly Street and Bussell Highway. Of particular concern are vehicles turning left into the Site from Northerly Street, after exiting the roundabout, given limited opportunity to signal on approaching the access, as well as potential conflict with between vehicles turning right out of the Site (from the western vehicle access point) and vehicles approaching the roundabout.

 

Following comments from Main Roads WA, additional technical advice in the form of a Technical Note was obtained by the applicant. In addition, clarification was provided that only left-in movements were proposed for the western vehicle access point. Subsequently, Main Roads WA advised that provided the western vehicle access point was left-in only, the risk with respect to rear end crashes as a result of vehicles turning left into the driveway was “minor”.

 

Both the applicant and Main Roads WA indicated that other left-in only vehicle access points have been approved in similar proximity to roundabouts in other locations. While these examples did not meet the Main Roads WA desirable standards they were accepted on the basis that they satisfied the minimum sight distance applicable for intersections and that a median was provided on the through road to manage the right-out movements. Main Roads WA subsequently recommended that, in order to prevent right turn movements into the western vehicle access point, the existing splitter island should be extended past the driveway. Should approval be granted, it is recommended that this be imposed by way of condition.

 

In addition to the above, concerns were also raised during consultation regarding the impact of additional traffic along Northerly Street as a result of the development. A Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) prepared by a suitably qualified Traffic Engineer was submitted with the application. In relation to current and predicted traffic volumes along Northerly Street the TIS states as follows:

 

The latest traffic count data for Northerly Street indicates an average weekday traffic volume of 2,128 vehicles per day (vpd) in September 2016. According to WAPC Liveable Neighbourhoods, the indicative volume range for a Local Distributor Road is 3,000 to 5,000 vpd. The volume of traffic generated by the proposed fuel outlet has been estimated using standard vehicle trip generation rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation. The trip generation rate for standalone service stations are as follows:

•          Daily - 168.56 vehicle trips per fuel position.

•          Morning Peak hour - 12.16 vehicle trips per fuel position.

•          Afternoon Peak Hour - 13.87 vehicle trips per fuel position.

Based on the 9 fuelling positions, the fuel outlet would generate approximately 1517 vehicle trips daily, 109 vehicle trips during the morning peak hour and 125 vehicle trips during the afternoon peak hour.

Standard traffic generation rates suggest that approximately 56% of service station (with convenience stores) vehicle trips are “pass-by” trips which are trips that are already on the road network that would divert to the site and then continue on. This proportion is likely to be higher considering the relatively remote location of the site.

 

The net increase in traffic on the adjacent road network resulting from the development is therefore approximately 667 vehicles per day, 48 vehicles during the morning peak hour and 55 vehicles during the afternoon peak hour.

 

This volume of traffic is considered to be low to moderate and can be accommodated within the existing capacity of the road network.

 

Based on the above, the additional traffic generated by the proposed development along Northerly Street will not adversely affect the function or capacity of the road as a Local Distributor and is therefore acceptable. A copy of the TIS and Technical Note are provided at Attachment B of this report.

 

Visual impacts from Bussell Highway

The potential visual impact of the development as viewed from Bussell Highway was raised as a concern by the City. Clause 4.42 of the Scheme states as follows:

Development which is likely to contribute to ribbon development, the spread of town centres, or otherwise detrimentally impact the efficiency of or the rural and natural ambience of main or arterial roads will not be supported by the local government.

 

Following discussions with the City, the development has been designed to incorporate a 30 metre wide landscaping buffer along the entire western boundary of the Site. It is proposed, should development approval be granted, that this buffer be landscaped prior to the commencement of any works and ceded prior to occupation/use.

 

Based on the distance of the development from Bussell Highway, the existing vegetation that will be retained in the reserve to the north (which provides a high quality screen when travelling south along Bussell Highway) and the requirement for additional landscaping to be installed, it is considered that the visual impacts of the development will be sufficiently ameliorated.  This is demonstrated within the visual perspectives provided by the applicant at Attachment C.

 

Height of Pylon Signs

The development includes two proposed pylon signs being 12 metres in height. The proposed height of the pylon signs exceeds the maximum height requirements for ‘Pylon-Large’ signs permitted in any zone under Local Planning Policy 4.12 – Advertisements and Advertising Signs (LPP4.12). A review of recent pylon signs approved in association with various commercial development, including service stations, is summarised below:

·        Lot 16 (100) West Street, West Busselton – Service station approved by the Regional Joint Development Assessment Panel in March 2021 with a condition for a maximum height of 6 metres.

·        Lot 100 (No. 81 – 93) West Street – Service station approved by the Council in 2020 with a condition for a maximum height of 6 metres.

·        Lot 1 (99) Causeway Road, Busselton – Service station approved in 2017 with a condition for a maximum height of 6 metres.

·        Lot 11 (No. 88) Causeway Road, Busselton – Service station approved in 2015 with a pylon sign 5 metres in height.

 

In addition to the above, it is noted that within the Vasse Village Activity Centre Plan, the maximum height for pylon signage for the Service Commercial lots fronting on to Northerly Street is 6 metres. While the Vasse Village Activity Centre Plan is not applicable to this Site, the standards contained within are consistent with LPP4.12 and other approved Pylon Signs within the City.

 

Notwithstanding the justification submitted by the applicant, the 12m height of the proposed signs is not considered appropriate as it would contribute unnecessarily to visual clutter and pollution and would be contrary to the purpose set out within the LPP. It is further noted that a maximum height of 6m for these kinds of advertising signs is a long held policy position of the City with similar controls being defined in the City’s Signage Local Law prior to the introduction of an LPP in 2020 addressing the issue. It is therefore recommended that, should development approval be granted, a condition be placed on the approval limiting the height of both signs to 6 metres which is consistent with both the LPP and other similar signage within the area.

 

Bushfire

A Service Station is considered a “High-risk” land use under State Planning Policy 3.7 Planning In Bushfire Prone Areas (SPP3.7) and the Guidelines for Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas. A Bushfire Management Plan (BMP), including a risk management plan, prepared by an accredited Level 3 Bushfire Planning Practitioner was provided with the application and was referred to DFES for comment in accordance with SPP 3.7.

 

The Site is well serviced being in close proximity to the Vasse neighbourhood centre and it is proposed that the development will be connected to reticulated water. The Site is easily accessible from Northerly Street which provides access and egress from the Site in either an easterly direction towards the Vasse neighbourhood centre or westerly direction towards Bussell Highway.

Part 6.6 of SPP3.7 applies to consideration of High Risk land uses:

6.6 Vulnerable or high-risk land uses

6.6.1   In areas where BAL-12.5 to BAL-29 applies Subdivision and development applications for vulnerable or high-risk land uses in areas between BAL-12.5 to BAL-29 will not be supported unless they are accompanied by a Bushfire Management Plan jointly endorsed by the relevant local government and the State authority for emergency services. Subdivision applications should make provision for emergency evacuation. Development applications should include an emergency evacuation plan for proposed occupants and/or a risk management plan for any flammable on-site hazards.

 

The BMP indicates that the development can achieve a Bushfire Attack Level (BAL) of BAL-29 and will be able to maintain this BAL rating even within the installation of landscaping within the buffer along the western lot boundary. In accordance with SPP3.7, the BMP was referred to Department of Fire and Emergency Services (DFES) for comment. The only concern raised by DFES was in relation to the Asset Protection Zone (APZ) required to achieve BAL-29 projecting outside the future lot boundary to the north. From a statutory perspective, there is no ability to consider the subdivision of the parent lot as part of this development application. The applicant has agreed that, when the time comes for the structure planning of the Site, the lot boundaries will be designed to ensure the APZ is wholly within the Service Station lot.  A new BMP will be required with the new Structure Plan which can address this issue.

A copy of the Bushfire Management Plan submitted as part of the development application is provided at Attachment D.

Environmental Impacts

A number of concerns were raised during consultation regarding the impact the Service Station may have on the natural environment, more specifically the ground water and the wetlands in this area. The application has been referred to, and a submission received from, the Department of Health, Department of Water Environment and Regulations (DWER) and Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety (DMIRS).

 

DMIRS identified no issues with the development and confirmed that the site will require a Dangerous Goods Licence before it can operate. The site requirements will be fully assessed during the Dangerous Goods Licence application process where it will be assessed against the relevant Australian Standards for compliance. The issuing of the Dangerous Good Licence will ensure that there will be no adverse effect of storing fuel on site such as fumes (vapour) or ground contamination.

The City is satisfied that this type of industry is regulated through DMIRS and that, subject to a suitable stormwater and groundwater management plan being prepared and implemented, the development will not have an adverse impact on the ground water and/or surrounding wetlands.

Statutory Environment

The key statutory environment is set out in the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme 21 (Scheme), the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (Regulations), Schedule 2 of which is the ‘deemed provisions’, which also functionally form part of the Scheme. The key aspects of the Scheme and Regulations relevant to consideration of the application are set out below.

 

Zoning

The site is zoned ‘Urban Development’ under the Scheme.  The objectives of the Urban Development Zone area as follows:

Objectives

(a)       To designate land for future urban development and provide a basis for more detailed structure planning in accordance with this Scheme.

(b)       To provide for a range of residential densities to encourage a diversity of residential housing opportunities.

(c)        To provide for the progressive and planned development of future urban areas for residential purposes and for commercial and other uses normally associated with residential development.

(d)       To proactively plan for vibrant and attractive activity centres in urban areas developed along ‘main-street’ lines with activated public streets, high levels of pedestrian and civic amenity and a mix of public spaces including retail, commercial, café, restaurant, bar, entertainment, tourism and community uses.

(e)       To provide for a range of recreational, community, cultural and social facilities to meet the needs of a growing and diverse population.

(f)        To provide for the protection of natural areas and habitats within urban areas.

Land-use and permissibility

The proposed land use is defined as follows:

 

“Service Station” means premises other than premises used for a transport depot, panel beating, spray painting, major repairs or wrecking, that are used for:

(a)       the retail sale of petroleum products, motor vehicle accessories and goods of an incidental or convenience nature; or

(b)       the carrying out of greasing, tyre repairs and minor mechanical repairs to motor vehicles.

 

Land use permissibility within the Urban Development zone is detailed within Clause 3.4.3 of the Scheme which states as follows:

 

If the zoning table does not identify any permissible uses for land in a zone the local government may, in considering an application for development approval for land within the zone, have due regard to any of the following plans that apply to the land –

(a)       a  structure plan;

(b)       an activity centre plan;

(c)       a local development plan.

 

This matter is discussed further in the officer comment section of this report above.

 

Special Provision Area

The Site is subject to Special Provision Area Special Control Area (SP68) as outlined below:

5.3       SPECIAL PROVISION AREA

5.3.1.  Notwithstanding any other provisions of the Scheme, use and development of land identified on the Scheme map within a Special Provision area and specified in Schedule 3, shall be subject

SP68

Lot 9558 Napoleon Promenade, Lots 4000 and 9000 Yebble Drive, Lot 9521 Bussell Highway, Lots 9052 and 221 Northerly Street, Lot 461 Florence Road and Lot 250 Kaloorup Road, Vasse

(Amendment No. 28 – GG 16 February 2021)

Urban Development

Industrial Development

1.     Notwithstanding the requirement for a structure plan for land in a Development Zone a single integrated Structure Plan shall be required for the whole of Special Provision Area 68.

2.     Lot 221 Northerly Street, Vasse contains important environmental values including, but not limited to, poorly represented vegetation and habitat for Western Ringtail Possum (Pseudocheirus occidentalis) and Black Cockatoo species (Calyptohynchus latirostis, Calyptohynchus baudinii and Calyptohynchus bandsi naso). Future structure planning should require these environmental values to be retained, managed and protected for conservation purposes.

3.     For residential areas of SP68 a minimum front setback of 4 metres applies to dwellings and structures (excluding driveways) to facilitate provision of drainage.

 

 

In relation to point 1 above, see discussions regarding the requirement for an integrated Structure Plan in the officer comment section of this report above.

 


 

In relation to point 2, it is considered that the proposed development will not have a significant impact upon vegetation and habitat for Western Ringtail Possum (Pseudocheirus occidentalis) and Black Cockatoo species (Calyptohynchus latirostis, Calyptohynchus baudinii and Calyptohynchus bandsi naso). It is considered that the proposed landscaping within the vegetation buffer will provide opportunity to enhance supporting habitat for the species. 

 

Point 3 is not applicable to this site.

 

Environmental Conditions

The Site is subject to Environmental Conditions Special Control Area (EC1) as outlined below:

No.

Particulars of Land

Gazettal Date

Environmental Conditions

EC1

 

Portions of Sussex Locations 221, 241, 248 and Part 657 and Lots 1, 2, Part 3 and 173 Bussell Highway, Lot 175 Rendezvous Road, Lots 3, 37 and 174 Kaloorup Road, Part Lot 159, portion of Lot 160 and portion of Sussex Location 4324 Yallingup Siding Road and Part Sussex Location 5, portion of Sussex Location 5252 and Lot 20 Dowell Road, Vasse

October 15, 2004

1        Contamination

1-1     Areas of soil and groundwater contamination resulting from previous activities in the District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 Amendment No. 1 shall be identified and remediated to a standard suitable for the intended land uses.

1-2     Any subdivision or application for development approval for land in the District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 Amendment No. 1 that has been utilised for farming practices creating the potential for contamination shall be accompanied by a report of an investigation of the area to determine the nature and extent of any soil and groundwater contamination, to the requirements of the Department of Environment Regulation. 

           The site is determined to be contaminated if substances occur in the soil or groundwater at concentrations above background levels and where assessment indicates it poses, or has the potential to pose, an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment.

1-3     If unacceptable soil or groundwater contamination is identified by the investigation referred to in condition 1-2, a remediation program shall be prepared and implemented and if necessary, a management plan shall be prepared, to the requirements of the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority, prior to subdivision.

1-4     The management plan referred to in condition 1-3 shall be implemented.

2        Wetland Management Plan

2-1     Prior to ground disturbing activities the developer shall prepare a Wetland Management Plan for the wetlands and buffers to meet the following objectives;

          "to maintain and, where possible enhance the integrity, functions and environmental values of the wetland".

         

 

 

            The Wetland Management Plans shall be prepared to the requirements of the responsible authority in consultation with the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority and on advice of the Department of Parks and Wildlife and the Department of Water.

          Each plan shall include -

          (i)     A description of the wetland including its ecosystem, attributes and values;

          (ii)    Management objectives, including the protection of the water regime that supports the wetland;

          (iii)   Management actions to ensure that the management objectives are achieved including control of access through fencing and paths.

          (iv)    Measures to ensure that where there are impacts to a wetland or its buffer caused by development then there will be a net gain in environmental value for the remaining wetland to offset these impacts;

          (v)     A monitoring programme, including definition of performance criteria and analysis procedures, to demonstrate whether the management objectives are being met;

 

          (vi)    Contingency plans to be implemented in the event that performance criteria are not met; and

          (vii)   Identification of responsibilities for implementation of the plan.

3        Drainage and Nutrient Management

3-1     Prior to ground disturbing activities, a Drainage and Nutrient Management Plan over the whole of the subject land to ensure that the rate, quantity and quality of water leaving the subject land will not adversely impact on Geographe Bay or wetlands on or in the vicinity of the subject land to the requirements of the local government with the concurrence of the Department of Water on advice from the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority.

          This plan shall incorporate -

          (i)     Water Sensitive Urban Design best management practices to achieve the best removal of pollutants and nutrients from surface water and groundwater discharges from the subject land;

 

          (ii)    Water Sensitive Urban Design best management practices to maximise stormwater detention on site;

          (iii)   Mechanisms to minimise erosion during and after the development phase;

          (iv)    Mechanisms to protect the water regimes of the lakes protected under the Environmental Protection (Swan Coastal Plain Lakes) Policy 1992 situated on and nearby the subject land, including water quality and water level; and to ensure that there shall be no direct drainage to the "Franklin" wetland from the proposed adjacent industrial area.

          (v)     A monitoring and reporting programme for nutrient concentration in surface water and groundwater discharges from the subject land;

          (vi)    Contingency measures to be implemented in the event that pollution and nutrient removal and stormwater detention are not achieving Water Sensitive Urban Design best practice; and

          (vii)   Identification of responsibilities for implementation of the Drainage and Nutrient Management Plan.

 

In relation to point 1, a contamination report is generally conducted when there are known prior contaminating land uses, or the site is identified on DWER’s contaminated sites database (this Site is not). Given the Site was previously used for grazing, with no evidence of intensive agriculture or other potentially contaminating land uses, a contamination report is not deemed necessary.  In addition, as no sensitive land uses (e.g: dwellings) are proposed the risk to future users of the site, should contamination be present, is very low. 

 

In relation to points 2 and 3, the requirement for a Wetland Management Plan and a Drainage Nutrient & Pollutant Management Plan pre-date the current requirements under the Better Urban Water Management Manual and Guidelines. Following discussions with DWER, it is considered that the issues raised under points 2 and 3 can be adequately addressed through the provisions of a suitable stormwater and groundwater management plan that addresses the entirety of Lot 9052.  Water management across the whole of Lot 9052, rather than just the area to be developed for the Service Station, is required to be addressed as the development application is being considered forward of subdivision or structure planning, which is when the broad impacts of water management would ordinarily be considered.

 


 

The stormwater and groundwater management plan shall be required to address the following:

a)         Pre-development surface and groundwater regime for the small, minor, and major events; and

b)        Post-development surface and groundwater management criteria to be applied at the sub-catchment and proposed lot scale for the small, minor, and major events; and

c)         Measures to mitigate water quantity and quality risks to the Franklin Wetland and downstream receiving environment.

 

Clause 67 Consideration of application by local government

Clause 67 of the deemed provisions within the Regulations sets out matters to be given consideration by a local government in considering an application for development approval. The following matters are considered to be relevant to consideration of this application:

 

(a)       the aims and provisions of this Scheme and any other local planning scheme operating within the Scheme area;

(b)       the requirements of orderly and proper planning including any proposed local planning scheme or amendment to this Scheme that has been advertised under the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 or any other proposed planning instrument that the local government is seriously considering adopting or approving;

(c)        any approved State planning policy;

(d)       Any environmental protection policy approved under the Environmental Protections Act 1986 Section 31 (d);

(e)       any policy of the commission;

(f)        any policy of the State;

(g)       any local planning policy for the Scheme area;…

(h)       any structure plan or local development plan that relates to the development;

(m)     the compatibility of the development with its setting including –

(i)        compatibility of the development with the desired future character of its setting; and

(ii)       the relationship of the development to development on adjoining land or on other land in the locality including, but not limited to, the likely effect of the height, bulk, scale, orientation and appearance of the development;

(n)       the amenity of the locality including the following —

(i)        environmental impacts of the development

(ii)       the character of the locality;

(iii)      social impacts of the development;   

(o)       the likely effect of the development on the natural environment or water resources and any means that are proposed to protect or to mitigate impacts on the natural environment or the water resource;

(r)        the suitability of the land for the development taking into account the possible risk to human health or safety;

(s)       the adequacy of —

(i)        the proposed means of access to and egress from the site; and

(ii)       arrangements for the loading, unloading, manoeuvring and parking of vehicles;

(t)        the amount of traffic likely to be generated by the development, particularly in relation to the capacity of the road system in the locality and the probable effect on traffic flow and safety;

(u)       the availability and adequacy for the development of the following —  

(i)        public transport services; 

(ii)       public utility services;

(iii)      storage, management and collection of waste; 

(iv)      access for pedestrians and cyclists (including end of trip storage, toilet and shower facilities); 

(v)       access by older people and people with disability;

           (w)     the history of the site where the development is to be located;

(x)       the impact of the development on the community as a whole notwithstanding the impact of the development on particular individuals;

(y)       any submissions received on the application;…

(zb)     any other planning consideration the local government considers appropriate.

 

The proposal generally complies with the relevant provisions noted above.

 

Relevant Plans and Policies

A matters to be given consideration when determining a development application includes any applicable LPP, which in this instance include the following LPPs:

·        LPP 2.1 – Car Parking; and

·        LPP 4.12 – Advertisements and Advertising Signs; and

·        LPP 6.1 – Stormwater.

 

LPPs are prepared by a local government to provide additional information about the position that local government will take on certain planning matters. LPPs are not part of a local planning scheme and as such cannot impose any mandatory requirement upon development, however, they may provide guidance on the way in which proposals will be assessed and determined by that local government. LPPs must be consistent with the intent of the relevant local planning scheme provisions and must also be consistent with any relevant SPP.

Local Planning Policy 2.1 – Car Parking

Under LPP 2.1 there is no car parking standard for a Service Station. For similar applications the car parking standard for a Shop under LPP 2.1 is applied to the net lettable area (NLA) of the store associated with the development.

 

NLA is defined under the Regulations as follows:

net lettable area or NLA means the area of all floors within the internal finished surfaces of permanent walls but does not include the following areas —

(a)       stairs, toilets, cleaner’s cupboards, lift shafts and motor rooms, escalators, tea rooms and plant rooms, and other service areas;

(b)       lobbies between lifts facing other lifts serving the same floor;

(c)        areas set aside as public space or thoroughfares and not for the exclusive use of occupiers of the floor or building;

(d)       areas set aside for the provision of facilities or services to the floor or building where those facilities are not for the exclusive use of occupiers of the floor or building;

In this instance, the NLA for the tenancy is 154m2 which equates to 5.13 (6) car parking bays. The development proposes 8 car bays and therefore it is considered that there is sufficient car parking for the development provided on the Site.

 

Local Planning Policy 4.12 – Advertisements and Advertising Signs

Based on the nature of the development it is considered appropriate that the advertisement requirements applicable to the Light Industry zone be given due regard in the assessment of the development. It is noted that both ‘Pylon – Large’ and Wall advertising signs are proposed as part of the development application.

The requirements applicable to these types of signs in the Light Industry zone under the LPP are as follows:

·        Wall signage : Maximum 25% of the façade or 10m2 per tenancy, whichever is lesser.

·        Pylon – Large :

o   One per Lot – multitenancy sites should combine into one sign.

o   Maximum Height : 6m or the height of the associated building whichever is lesser.

o   Maximum Area : 10m2

o   Shall be located so as to not impede sightlines.

 

Further discussion regarding the Pylon – Large sign is provided within the officer comment section of this report above.

 

Local Planning Policy 6.1 – Stormwater

It is recommend that a condition for a Local Water Management Plan be prepared and submitted should development approval be granted.

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications associated with the officer recommendation.

Stakeholder Consultation

Public Consultation

Consultation on the proposed development was undertaken in the following manner:

·        Letters sent directly to surrounding landowners and the Vasse Joint Venture; and

·        Two signs erected on the lot; and

·        Notification placed in the local paper on 15, 22 and 29 January 2021; and

·        Development plans and information provided by the applicant were made available for public viewing on the City’s website via ‘Your Say’.

 

Consultation on the proposal concluded on 5 February 2021 with 14 public submissions received, including one on behalf of the Vasse Joint Venture, all of which raised concerns with the development.

 


 

The key concerns raised in the submissions are provided below:

·        Economic impact on existing service stations with the locality; and

·        Lack of need/demand for an additional service station in the locality; and

·        Proximity to, and environmental impact on, the Franklin Wetlands to the north of the Site; and

·        Concerns regarding traffic volumes.

 

These issues are addressed in the officer comment section of this report above. A complete schedule of all submissions is provided at Attachment E.

 

Agency Submissions

The proposed development was referred to the following agencies:

·        DMIRS;

·        DWER;

·        DPLH;

·        Department of Health;

·        Main Roads WA;

·        DFES; and

·        DBCA.

 

Submissions were received from all agencies with the key concerns raised by Main Roads WA in relation to potential conflict of the proposed western vehicle access point with a future proposed roundabout at the intersection of Bussell Highway and Northerly Street. A schedule of Agency submissions is provided at Attachment F and further discussions regarding the comments from Main Roads WA and DFES is provided within the officer comment section of this report above.

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:

1.         Refuse the proposal, setting out reasons for doing so; or

2.         Apply additional or different conditions.

 

CONCLUSION

Subject to the inclusion of relevant conditions, the proposal is considered appropriate to support and it is accordingly recommended for approval.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The applicant and those who made a submission will be advised of the Council decision within two weeks of the Council meeting.


Council

92

28 July 2021

13.1

Attachment a

Development Plans

 





Council

110

28 July 2021

13.1

Attachment b

Traffic Technical Advice

 





































Council

133

28 July 2021

13.1

Attachment c

Landscape Strategy Plans and Viewpoint Perspectives

 






Council

139

28 July 2021

13.1

Attachment d

Bushfire Management Plan

 














































































Council

215

28 July 2021

13.1

Attachment e

Schedule of Submissions

 






Council

222

28 July 2021

13.1

Attachment f

Schedule of Agency Submissions

 







 


Council                                                                                      227                                                                     28 July 2021

14.1           RFT 05/21 GREEN WASTE PROCESSING TENDER 2021-26

STRATEGIC THEME

ENVIRONMENT - An environment that is valued, conserved and able to be enjoyed by current and future generations.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY

1.5 Implement best practice waste management strategies with a focus on waste avoidance, reduction, reuse and recycling.

SUBJECT INDEX

Tenders

BUSINESS UNIT

Waste and Fleet Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Manager Waste and Fleet Services - Mark Wong

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Manager Major Projects and Facilities - Eden Shepherd

NATURE OF DECISION

Contractual: To enter into a contract e.g. a lease or the award of a tender etc.

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Published Under Separate Cover  Confidential Tender Evaluation Report RFT 05/21 Processing & Disposal of Green Waste

Attachment b    Published Under Separate Cover  Confidential Projected Cost of processing Green Waste for the next 12 months Based upon 2022/21 Volumes  

 

The officer recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2107/148              Moved Councillor J Barrett-Lennard, seconded Councillor P Cronin

That the Council:

1.         Pursuant to RFT 05/21 Processing and Disposal of Green Waste, accept the tender from T & D Boardman Group Pty Ltd, trading as Geospread, as the most advantageous tender (Successful Tenderer).

 

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 Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 (FG Regs).

 

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

CARRIED 7/0

En Bloc

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council:

1.         Pursuant to RFT 05/21 Processing and Disposal of Green Waste, accept the tender from T & D Boardman Group Pty Ltd, trading as Geospread, as the most advantageous tender (Successful Tenderer).

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 Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 (FG Regs).

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

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City of Busselton invited tenders under Request for Tender RFT 05/21 for Processing and Disposal of Green Waste (RFT 05/21). This report summarises the submissions received, and recommends that Council:

·        endorse the outcome of the evaluation panel’s assessment;

·        delegate power and authority to the CEO to negotiate and agree final terms and conditions with the Successful Tenderer T & D Boardman Group Pty Ltd, t/a Geospread (Geospread); and

·        enter into a contract for the Processing and Disposal of Green Waste.

 

BACKGROUND

Green waste is received at the City of Busselton waste facilities from residents, commercial businesses and from City operations, which includes green waste from reserve maintenance, construction sites and storm damage. The material is stockpiled until a sufficient quantity of material is received, before being processed (mulched) and transported off site to a suitable facility. High quality material is retained at the facilities for operations staff to use on the site or on the City’s reserves and construction sites. Materials transported off site are disposed at suitable facilities where the material is processed into commercial mulches.

RFT 05/21 was issued to be a direct replacement for RFT 06/14 Provision of Green Waste Processing and Recycling Services, which is due to expire in August 2021 and has had all options for extension exhausted. The tender comprised two tasks:

1.         Task 1 – Process Green Waste at the City’s Waste Facilities; and/or

2.         Task 2 – Remove from the Waste Facilities and Dispose of Processed Green Waste.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

RFT 05/21 was issued as a public tender on 6 March 2021 and closed at 2.00pm on 8 April 2021. The invitation to tender was advertised in ‘The West Australian’ newspaper and City of Busselton website.

 

The City received three compliant tender submissions from the following companies:

•          T & D Boardman Group Pty Ltd, t/a Geospread (Geospread)

•          Craneswest Pty Ltd t/a Western Tree Recyclers (Western Tree Recyclers)

•          Leeuwin Civil Pty Ltd (Leeuwin Civil)

 

Geospread and Western Tree Recyclers provided a response for both tasks, whereas Leeuwin Civil responded only for Task 2, the transport component (disposal of green waste).

 


 

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:

·        Tenders received were assessed 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.

·        The assessment of tenders against the following qualitative criteria; weighted according to the table below:


Criteria

Weighting

a)  Price

50%

b)  Relevant Experience

10%

c)  Local Benefit

5%

d)  Respondent’s Resources

20%

e)  Demonstrated Understanding

15%

 

The qualitative criteria were scored depending on the extent to which each tenderer was able to appropriately satisfy each criteria. Subsequently, the tendered prices were then accessed with the weighted qualitative criteria to determine the tender’s score, and which tenderer provides the most advantageous outcome to the City; based on principles of representing best value for money. That means that although price is a consideration, the tender containing the lowest price and / or the highest rank on the qualitative criteria will not necessarily be accepted by the City.

 

Summary of Assessment Outcomes

The outcome of the evaluation panel’s assessment was that Geospread was the highest ranked tenderer. Geospread tendered the cheapest price, displayed the most appropriate previous experience, and are supported by a fleet of machinery and vehicles that are deemed adequate for the contract. They also offer good support towards local community groups, with the supply of machinery and labour.

 

Although Western Tree Recyclers scored marginally higher than Geospread on qualitative aspects of the tender, this was not enough to outweigh the financial advantages of Geospread’s submission (see further Financial Implications section of the report).

 

Geospread are the incumbent supplier and have performed to a high standard over the past seven years, with no concerns raised over performance or safety over that time.

 


 

Evaluation Panel Recommendation

Based on the Evaluation Panel’s assessment and overall ranking of the tenders, it is recommended that Council accept the tender from T & D Boardman Group Pty Ltd, t/a Geospread, as the most advantageous to the City. Geospread, compared to the other tenderers, demonstrated they have:

·        Strong relevant experience in mulching and transporting green waste.

·        A comprehensive understanding of the operational requirements of the service.

·        The lowest price tenderer.

 

Statutory Environment

This tender is a five-year contract with extensions and 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.

 

The officer’s recommendation complies with the above-mentioned legislative requirements.

Relevant Plans and Policies

The City's Purchasing Policy, its Occupational Safety and Health Policy and any other relevant policy to the tender, have been adhered to during the process of requesting and evaluating tenders.

Financial Implications

This contract is funded by the City of Busselton’s green waste processing budget. The 2021/22 draft budget contains an allocation of $196,000. Each year’s budget, for the remaining contract period, will be determined as part of the ordinary budget cycle, noting that the ongoing operational costs for this service have been included in the City’s 10-year Long Term Financial Plan.

 

The contract includes provisions for annual CPI rate increases subject to the tenderer applying, in accordance with the special conditions of contract.

Financial comparisons between the tender submissions were made using the quantities of green waste processed during the 2020/21 financial year, along with estimated downsizing hours and mobilisation events.  Using this analysis, Geospread were the cheapest at a value of $173,851.50.  Further detail is provided in the confidential attachment.

 

The tendered rate for mulching green waste represents a 7.5% increase on the current rate in accordance with RFT06/14. The rate increase from 2014 to the current tender is considered to be reasonable.

 

Unlike the other two responses from contractors who were able to perform all aspects of the service requirement, the evaluation team was only able to assess Leeuwin Civil’s submission to Task 2. Under more detailed examination of the two (2) submissions for both Task 1 and 2, Geospread’s tender was financially more advantageous to the City than that of Western Tree Recyclers, for both the processing and disposal of Green Waste.

Stakeholder Consultation

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’s recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management 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 Geospread assessed as being capable of delivering the services to a suitable service level. 

Options

As an alternative to the proposed recommendation, the Council could award the tender to an alternative tenderer, in which case the City would pay substantially more for the services to be undertaken.

CONCLUSION

Geospread’s submission offers significant financial advantages for the City over the alternative tenders. Additionally, they have been the City’s contractor for the past seven years and have not presented any contractual defaults. For these reasons, Geospread are recommended to be awarded the tender as the Successful Tenderer.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The existing tender expires in August 2021. This replacement tender is designed to take over immediately from the existing tender, and will run for five years, with the option of two 1-year extensions at the City’s sole discretion.

 


Council                                                                                      233                                                                     28 July 2021

14.2           RFT 11/21: PIPELINE AND PUMP STATION - DUNSBOROUGH NON-POTABLE WATER NETWORK, MEWETT ROAD, QUINDALUP

STRATEGIC THEME

ENVIRONMENT - An environment that is valued, conserved and able to be enjoyed by current and future generations.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY

1.4 Respond to the impacts of climate change on the City’s coastlines through informed, long term planning and action.

SUBJECT INDEX

Tenders

BUSINESS UNIT

Operation and Works Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Parks and Gardens Coordinator - Bradley Reynolds

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Manager Major Projects and Facilities - Eden Shepherd

NATURE OF DECISION

Contractual: To enter into a contract e.g. a lease or the award of a tender etc.

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Published Under Separate Cover  Confidential Tender Evaluation Report RFT 11/21  

 

The officer recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2107/149              Moved Councillor J Barrett-Lennard, seconded Councillor P Cronin

That the Council:

1.         Pursuant to RFT 11/21 Dunsborough Non-Potable Water Network (Stage 1), accept the tenders:

·      Total Eden Pty Ltd as being the most advantageous tender for the Pump Station and Tank Construction for the lump sum price of $254,833.00 and;

·      Polyfuse Pty Ltd as being the most advantageous tender for the Pipeline Construction for the lump sum price of $1,084,858.33.

2.         Delegates power and authority to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and agree with the Total Eden and Polyfuse minor variations in accordance with Regulation 20 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996, subject to such variations and the final terms not exceeding the overall project budget.

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

CARRIED 7/0

En Bloc

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council:

1.         Pursuant to RFT 11/21 Dunsborough Non-Potable Water Network (Stage 1), accept the tenders:

·        Total Eden Pty Ltd as being the most advantageous tender for the Pump Station and Tank Construction for the lump sum price of $254,833.00 and;

·        Polyfuse Pty Ltd as being the most advantageous tender for the Pipeline Construction for the lump sum price of $1,084,858.33.

2.         Delegates power and authority to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and agree with the Total Eden and Polyfuse minor variations in accordance with Regulation 20 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996, subject to such variations and the final terms not exceeding the overall project budget.

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

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City of Busselton invited tenders under Request for Tender 11/21 Dunsborough Non-Potable Water Network (RFT 11/21). RFT 11/21 called for respondents to:

(a)       Construct a pump station at the Sue Coal Bore site, Mewett Road, Quindalup.

(b)       Construct an additional water storage tank at the Tank site, Diamante Boulevard, Dunsborough Lakes.

(c)       Install an approximately 3km Pipeline Network from the Mewett Road, Quindalup Bore Site to the Diamante Boulevard Tank Site in Dunsborough Lakes.

 

This report summarises the submissions received, and recommends that Council:

·        Endorse the outcome of the evaluation panel’s assessment.

·        Delegate power and authority to the CEO to negotiate and agree final terms and conditions with the successful tenderers being Total Eden Pty Ltd and Polyfuse Pty Ltd; and

·        Authorise the CEO to award the contract to Total Eden Pty Ltd to provide the requirements of the Pump Station and Tank construction component of the Tender.

·        Authorise the CEO to award the contract to Polyfuse Pty Ltd to provide the requirements of the Pipeline Network component of the Tender.

 

BACKGROUND

Councillors will be aware of the ‘South-West Non-Potable Water Study’, led by the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER), which investigated and assessed non-potable water issues across the South West. In this study, titled ‘Options to Supply Water to Meet Green Space Irrigation Needs in the South-West 2015-2060’ (still awaiting final publication), Dunsborough was identified as an area experiencing ongoing and significant challenges.

 

Dunsborough has access to only limited available allocations of groundwater and is currently experiencing a shortfall of some 25 megalitres per annum; a shortfall predicted to rise to 528 megalitres per annum by 2060. It is therefore critical to establish a viable and sustainable non-potable water supply to meet those longer-term needs.

 

The Water Corporation (WC), in partnership with DWER and the City of Busselton, identified and assessed a range of potential non-potable water options for Dunsborough, including surface water, groundwater, and the re-use of wastewater. The groundwater option, even if lower quality and only available from the deeper Sue Coal Measures aquifer (water licences for the superficial Leederville aquifer have already been fully allocated), was selected as the best option for accessing non-potable water suitable for the irrigation of parks, sporting ovals and other green spaces (including, in time, potentially contributing to water supply for the Dunsborough Lakes Golf Course).    

 


 

In an earlier hydrogeological study commissioned by the City (‘HydroConcept’: January 2019) it was estimated that a total of 5-7 bores accessing the Sue Coal Measures may be required to address total anticipated irrigation water shortfalls in Dunsborough to 2060. These prospective well sites were identified within a bore field that was required to be situated east of the Dunsborough Fault, sufficiently inland from the coastline to mitigate potential problems associated with salinity, and far enough removed from existing Water Corporation bores already in operation in the Sue Coal Measures aquifer in Quindalup (so as to prevent draw down, or otherwise adversely influence or affect operational efficiencies).

 

Research undertaken during the development of the City’s ‘Sports & Recreation Facilities Strategy 2020-2030’ identified a need to build the ovals in the Dunsborough Lakes Sporting Precinct (Sporting Precinct) in the current 2020/2021 financial year in order to meet strong community and strategic planning demand. As such, a viable and sustainable provision of non-potable water is urgently required.

 

The bore drilling works associated with RFT 03/20 had the express aim of investigating the suitability and sustainability of an ongoing supply of non-potable water from the Sue Coal Measures aquifer to irrigate the proposed works for the Dunsborough Non-Potable Water Network Stage 1 (‘Stage 1’). The works for this exploratory/test and production bore have been completed, which has produced adequate quality water and supply for irrigation purposes.

 

Stage 1 will deliver a cost-effective solution for the construction of oval planned for the new Sporting Precinct. Stage 1 will be designed to allow for future expansion to deliver a climate-resilient non-potable water supply for the irrigation of playing fields and other recreational and landscaped public open spaces for the long-term.

 

Additional bores will need to be constructed to service the planned growth of ‘green infrastructure’ and predicted irrigation shortfalls in Dunsborough. The quality and required quantity of non-potable water discovered through the new production bore will enable a cost-effective and reliable supply of water to the Sporting Precinct, when combined with the limited quantity of locally available groundwater that has already been secured.

OFFICER COMMENT

The City issued RFT 11/21 by upload to TenderLink and received a total of 5 submissions as follows:

Pump Station and Tank Construction:

1.         Total Eden Pty Ltd

2.         Polyfuse Pty Ltd

Pipeline Network Construction:

1.         Polyfuse Pty Ltd

2.         Geographe Excavation and Underground Power

3.         RL Communications Pty Ltd

 


 

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

 

(a)       Assessing submissions 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; and

 

(b)       Assessing submissions received against the Qualitative Criteria and each Criteria was given a score in accordance with the rating scale detailed below.

Qualitative Criteria

Weighting

Relevant experience

10%

Local Benefit

5%

Demonstrated Understanding

20%

Tenderers Resources

10%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Summary of Assessment Outcomes

Of the two submissions received for RFT 11/21 (Pump Station and Tank Construction), Total Eden ranked first (1st) on the Qualitative Criteria and ranked first (1st) in the Weighted Cost Criteria, providing a well-documented and detailed submission.

 

Of the two compliant submissions received for RFT 11/21 (Pipeline Network Construction), Polyfuse ranked second (2nd) on the Qualitative Criteria, ranked first (1st) in the Weighted Cost Criteria and ranked (1st) overall, providing a well-documented and detailed submission.

 

This decision is based on the following:

·        The four (4) compliant submissions received were processed through to qualitative criteria assessment on the basis that all terms and conditions and mandatory requirements of RFT 11/21 had been met.  

·        The submissions were scored according to the qualitative criterion outlined above.

·        The net price was scored using the ‘Average Based Scoring Method’ recommended by WALGA in the ‘Local Government Purchasing and Tender Guide’.

·        The panel members individually assessed the qualitative criteria for each schedule, then met and applied an average to provide a final ranking. The scores were then added together to indicate the rankings.

Statutory Environment

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.

The officer’s recommendation complies with the above-mentioned legislative requirements.

Relevant Plans and Policies

The City's Purchasing, Regional Price Preference, Occupational Safety and Health, and Asset Management policies, and the City’s Engineering Technical Standards and Specifications were all relevant to RFT 11/21, and have been adhered to in the process of requesting and evaluating this tender.

Financial Implications

The construction of bores, which are a component of the ‘Dunsborough Non-Potable Water Network Project’, will be funded from a total project budget of $2 million, listed as C3223 ‘Dunsborough Non-Potable Water Network’ and endorsed in the 2020/21 and included in the draft 2021/22 Capital Works budget. 

 

The project budget is a combination of $1,000,000 secured from the Federal Government Grant ‘Drought Communities Program’ and $1,000,000 from the City of Busselton’s ‘Coastal and Climate Adaptation Reserve’.

 

The City of Busselton’s Federal Grant application provided an estimated project budget as detailed in the table below:

Eligible expenditure

Project cost

Other costs

$22,000

Materials

$1,600,000

Suppliers, consultants and contracted labour

$878,000

Equipment

$0

 

Total

$2,500,000

 

Current and known future expenditure is summarised in the table below (C3223 Dunsborough Non- Potable Water Network Project):

Task

Cost

Production and Monitoring Bore

$512,924.21

Pump Station and Tank Construction

$258,333.00

Pipeline Construction

$1,088,358.33

Western Power Quote (Design Only)*

$3,000.00

Current and Future Known Expenditure

$1,862,885.54

Remaining Budget

$137,114.46

* The Council should note the City are awaiting final costings from Western Power to deliver three (3) phase power to the Mewett Rd Bore Site.

Stakeholder Consultation

City officers undertook consultation with the property owners in Lot 91 Mewett Road, Quindalup, with regard to the works associated with the tender.


 

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer’s recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management 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(s) assessed as being capable of delivering the services to a suitable service level. 

Options

As an alternative to the proposed recommendation the Council could determine not to accept the tender from Total Eden as being the most advantageous to the City for the construction of the Pump Station and Tank, and award the construction of the Pump Station, Tank and Pipeline to Polyfuse as a complete contract.  This would incur an additional cost to the City and so is not recommended.

CONCLUSION

The submissions from Total Eden and Polyfuse are considered the most advantageous to the City.  It is therefore recommended that:

·        Total Eden be awarded the contract for the construction of the Pump Station and Tank resulting from RFT 11/21; and

·        Polyfuse be awarded the contract for the construction of the Pipeline Network resulting from RFT 11/21.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

If endorsed by Council, it is expected the City will enter into contracts with Total Eden Pty Ltd and Polyfuse Pty Ltd on 2 August 2021. Both contracts are expected to be completed at the end of November 2021.


Council                                                                                      236                                                                     28 July 2021

17.1           COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN

STRATEGIC THEME

LEADERSHIP - A Council that connects with the community and is accountable in its decision making.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY

4.2 Deliver governance systems that facilitate open, ethical and transparent decision making.

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

Noting: The item is simply for information purposes and noting

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Current Statutory Administrative Tribunal Reviews

Attachment b    Minutes Meeting June 2021 WALGA South West Country Zone

Attachment c    Letter from Department of Water and Environmental Regulation Endorsing Waste Plan

Attachment d   Letter from Hon. Mark McGowan Response to Congratulations

Attachment e    Letter from WALGA - Appointment of Regional Road Safety Advisor  

 

The officer recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2107/150              Moved Councillor J Barrett-Lennard, seconded Councillor P Cronin

 

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

17.1.1      State Administrative Tribunal Reviews

17.1.2      Minutes WALGA South West Country Zone Meeting 25 June 2021

17.1.3      Letter from Department of Water and Environmental Regulation

17.1.4      Minutes of the WALGA State Council Meeting 7 July 2021

17.1.5      Letter from Hon. Mark McGowan MLA

17.1.6      Letter from WALGA – Appointment of Regional Road Safety Advisor

17.1.7      Donations, Contributions and Subsidies Fund – June 2021

CARRIED 7/0

EN BLOC

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

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

17.1.1       State Administrative Tribunal Reviews

17.1.2       Minutes WALGA South West Country Zone Meeting 25 June 2021

17.1.3       Letter from Department of Water and Environmental Regulation

17.1.4       Minutes of the WALGA State Council Meeting 7 July 2021

17.1.5       Letter from Hon. Mark McGowan MLA

17.1.6       Letter from WALGA - Appointment of Regional Road Safety Advisor

17.1.7       Donations, Contributions and Subsidies Fund – June 2021

 

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       State Administrative Tribunal Reviews

The current State Admi