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 27 October 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. 9

Previous Council Meetings. 9

8.1          Minutes of the Council Meeting held 13 October 2021. 9

Committee Meetings. 9

8.2          Minutes of the Finance Committee Meeting held 13 October 2021. 9

9....... RECEIVING OF Petitions, Presentations AND DEPUTATIONS. 10

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

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

ADOPTION BY EXCEPTION RESOLUTION.. 11

12.1        Finance Committee - 13/10/2021 - LIST OF PAYMENTS MADE - AUGUST 2021. 12

12.2        Finance Committee - 13/10/2021 - FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENTS - YEAR TO DATE AS AT 31 AUGUST 2021. 20

17.1        COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN.. 54

ITEMS TO BE DEALT WITH  BY SEPARATE RESOLUTION (WITHOUT DEBATE). 58

12.3        Finance Committee - 13/10/2021 - BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUEST - HOSPITALITY WORKER TRAINING AND MARKETING GRANT AGREEMENT. 58

12.4        Finance Committee - 13/10/2021 - BUDGET AMENDMENT - INSTALLATION OF ADDITIONAL AUTOMATED WEATHER STATIONS. 62

12.5        Finance Committee - 13/10/2021 - SELF SUPPORTING LOAN APPLICATION - DUNSBOROUGH BAY YACHT CLUB INC. 65

12.6        Finance Committee - 13/10/2021 - BUDGET REQUEST -  DESIGNATED AREA MIGRATION AGREEMENT - SOUTH WEST REGION.. 71

ITEMS FOR DEBATE. 74

13.1        AMENDMENT NO. 50 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO. 21 (LOT 81 (18), STRATA PLAN 17588 (20), AND LOTS 115 TO 127 (26-50) GEOGRAPHE BAY ROAD, DUNSBOROUGH) - CONSIDERATION FOR ADOPTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL. 74

18..... Motions of which Previous Notice has been Given.. 115

19..... urgent business. 115

20..... Confidential Reports. 115

21..... Closure. 116

 


Council                                                                                      4                                                                  27 October 2021

MINUTES

 

MINUTES OF A Meeting of the Busselton City Council HELD IN THE Council Chambers, Administration Building, Southern Drive, Busselton, ON 27 October 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 Paul Carter          Deputy Mayor

Cr Sue Riccelli

Cr Ross Paine

Cr Kate Cox

Cr Jodie Richards

Cr Anne Ryan

Cr Mikayla Love

 

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 Phill Cronin (up to 5.34pm and including Item 3)

 

Approved Leave of Absence:

 

Cr Phill Cronin (from 5.34pm and Item 4)

 

Media:

 

Nil

 

Public:

 

19

3.               Prayer

The prayer was delivered by Pastor Paul Colyer of the Busselton Baptist Church.

 

4.               Application for Leave of Absence 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2110/065              Moved Councillor J Richards, seconded Councillor P Carter

That Cr Phill Cronin be granted a Leave of Absence for the period from 27 October 2021 to 16 November 2021 including the Ordinary Council Meetings to be held on 27 October 2021 and 10 November 2021.

CARRIED 8/0

 

5.               Disclosure Of Interests

The Mayor noted that a declaration of impartiality interest had been received from:

 

·         Cr Paul Carter in relation to Agenda Item 12.5 ‘Finance Committee - 13/10/2021 - Self Supporting Loan Application – Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Inc.’

 

The Mayor advised that, in accordance with regulation 22(2)(b) of the Local Government (Model Code of Conduct) Regulations 2021, this declaration would be read out immediately before Item 12.5 was discussed.

 

6.               Announcements Without Discussion

Announcements by the Presiding Member

 

The Mayor announced that prior to the local government elections former Deputy Mayor Kelly Hick and former Councillor Lyndon Miles retired from Council, and that former Councillor Jo Barrett-Lennard was unsuccessful at the election. The Mayor thanked those former Councillors for their years of service. The Mayor also welcomed the new councillors Cr Jodie Richards, Cr Anne Ryan and Cr Mikalya Love to the Council.


 

7.               Question Time For Public

Response to Previous Questions Taken on Notice

 

The following questions were taken on notice by the Council at the 13 October 2021 Ordinary Council meeting.

 

7.1             Ms Anne Ryan

 

Question

The City is prosecuting landowners for non-compliance of approvals with conditions from the City. Can you advise how much the City has spent on City of Busselton versus Bishop court case?

 

Response

(provided by Ben Whitehill, Manager, Legal and Property Services)

The fees paid to date on this matter are approximately $20,214.86.

 

7.2             Mr Keith Sims

 

Question

[In respect to the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre] Can the City confirm, in addition to the $58 rate increase, another $40 arising from the $1.2 million operating loss, making a total of $98?

 

Response

(provided by Mr Tony Nottle, Director Finance and Corporate Services)

As previously advised, $1.2M represents 2.18% of the estimated annual rate base. Therefore, if an average ratepayer ($1,855) pays 2.18% it would be $40.52. This purely shows what percentage of rates this estimated operating cost value ($1.2M) is, on average. Council has a variety of options to fund its operations, ranging from operational savings to utilising reserves and therefore this does not necessarily mean it will just be “added” to the average ratepayer.

Question Time for Public

 

7.3             Mr Keith Sims

 

Question

At the 13 October 2021 Council meeting, the CEO confirmed that funds from the sale of land at Chapman Road, Ambergate, was not going to be used for the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre [BPACC]. This confirmation was not included in the Minutes of that meeting.

 

Response

(Mayor)

It is not Council’s intention to use funds from the disposal of land for the BPACC project. However, a Council at a future point in time could transfer funds out of that Reserve for whatever purpose. I cannot categorically rule out it ever being used for any specific purpose, but it is not our intention in the disposal of that land.

 

Response

(Mr Archer, Chief Executive Officer)

We will review the audio recording of the meeting and clarify this.

Response

(additional response provided by officers following the meeting)

It is confirmed that the minutes of the 13 October 2021 meeting recorded the Mayor’s response to the question that the funds would go into the New Infrastructure Development Reserve. From a review of the audio recording of the meeting, the following was also stated at the meeting and is added below for clarity, in italics:

 

From meeting on 13 October 2021:

Response

(Mr Archer)

That is right. It was for the new infrastructure, not the Busselton performing arts reserve account.

 

Question

(Mr Keith Sims)

So it will not be taken out of that fund for the BPACC?

 

Response

(Mr Archer)

No.

 

Question

Can you please confirm the construction cost [of the BPACC] includes the retractable chairs and the fit-out?

 

Response

(Mrs Naomi Searle, Director Community and Commercial Services)

In the report that Council considered a few weeks ago where the Council resolved to reissue tenders, there was a table that outlined the budget. $38 million was for construction of the BPACC. There was $500,000 for landscaping and $250,000 for AV equipment and fit-out.

 

Response

(Mr Mike Archer, Chief Executive Officer)

The retractable seating is definitely included.

 

Question

Mayor Henley, in your re-election speech, you mentioned a period of 2 years. Would you like to clarify if you intend to complete a 4 year term or retire from Council in two years’ time?

 

Response

(Mayor)

My statement at the Special Council Meeting last Monday was around my appointment as Mayor for a period of two years. It is my intention to complete a 4 year term of Council.


 

7.4             Mr Gordon Bleechmore

 

Question

There is blu tack holding up notices in the main foyer of the Community Resource Centre (CRC). Who would be responsible for that? And is that the best practice for managing the outcome of the walls of the CRC?

 

Response

(Mr Tony Nottle, Director, Finance and Corporate Services)

Staff in the Finance and Corporate Services directorate manage those leases and I can take that on notice and provide a response.

 

Question

There is a significant pothole on the corner of Peel Terrace, near the roundabout. Could that be attended to?

 

Response

(Mr Oliver Darby, Director, Engineering and Works Services)

We will inspect the pothole and repair it as necessary.

 

Question

The paper last week reported that Jamie Bishop was fined in the Court for an offence he breached on his extraction licence. Could you explain what he had done wrong in terms of his breach that instigated the Court case and his subsequent fine?

 

Response

(Mr Nottle)

I will take that on notice.

 

Question

Why will the City not purchase limestone from Mr John Forrest, given he is the closest supplier?

 

Response

(Mayor)

We will take that on notice.

 

Question

Where does the City source its limestone from?

 

Response

(Mr Darby)

We have a tender panel for the supply of quarry products and materials. I can provide you with that information.

 


 

Question

Why would you sell off the Ambergate land asset and not borrow $2.5 million instead?

 

Response

(Mayor)

Council resolved about 10 years ago, after leasing that land and receiving an annual fee, that it would re-examine it in 10 years’ time. It has gone through the appropriate process for the land including a valuation to get the best value for that land.

 

Response

(Mr Archer)

There has been a number of valuations on that land over the last number of years. Those valuations have actually been less than the current valuation.

 

 

7.5             Ms Jill Walsh

 

Question

Given that there are a number of agencies involved, is it possible to have another public forum that is just dedicated to the Lower Vasse River? We would like to be informed about what the Lower Vasse River Management Advisory Group has achieved and what is being considered in the future.

 

Response

(Mayor)

I think it is a fair request to ask for an update on that information and I think we have been open in providing that information through various channels, social media and media releases.

 

Response

(Cr Sue Riccelli)

We have had some concerns that some of the information relayed to the public [from the Lower Vasse River Management Advisory Group] has not been accurate. At the end of each meeting, we develop a statement which outlines everything that was covered at the meeting, which is then used to communicate to the public.

 


 

8.               Confirmation and Receipt Of Minutes

Previous Council Meetings

8.1             Minutes of the Council Meeting held 13 October 2021

COUNCIL DECISION

C2110/066              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor K Cox

That the Minutes of the Council Meeting held 13 October 2021 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

CARRIED 7/1

For the motion: Cr Henley, Cr Carter, Cr Riccelli

Cr Love, Cr Richards, Cr Paine, Cr Cox

Against the motion: Cr Ryan

 

Committee Meetings

8.2             Minutes of the Finance Committee Meeting held 13 October 2021

COUNCIL DECISION

C2110/067              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor S Riccelli

That the Minutes of the Finance Committee Meeting held 13 October 2021 be noted.

CARRIED 7/1

For the motion: Cr Henley, Cr Carter, Cr Riccelli

Cr Love, Cr Richards, Cr Paine, Cr Cox

Against the motion: Cr Ryan

 


 

9.               RECEIVING OF Petitions, Presentations AND DEPUTATIONS

Petitions

 

Nil

Presentations

Mr Tony Sharp, Dunsborough Progress Association, spoke with respect to Agenda Item 13.1 ‘Amendment No. 50 to Local Planning Scheme No. 21 (Lot 81 (18), Strata Plan 17588 (20), and Lots 115 To 127 (26-50) Geographe Bay Road, Dunsborough) - Consideration for Adoption for Final Approval’.

Mr Sharp was opposed to the officer recommendation and in favour of the alternative motion foreshadowed by Cr Sue Riccelli.

 

Mr Peter Kyle, Chair, Dunsborough 2030, spoke with respect to Agenda Item 13.1 ‘Amendment No. 50 to Local Planning Scheme No. 21 (Lot 81 (18), Strata Plan 17588 (20), and Lots 115 To 127 (26-50) Geographe Bay Road, Dunsborough) - Consideration for Adoption for Final Approval’.

Mr Kyle was opposed to the officer recommendation and in favour of the alternative motion foreshadowed by Cr Sue Riccelli.

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

C2110/068              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor K Cox

 

That the Committee Recommendation in relation to item 12.1 and 12.2 and Officer Recommendation in relation to item 17.1 be carried en bloc:

12.1        Finance Committee - 13/10/2021 - LIST OF PAYMENTS MADE - AUGUST 2021

12.2        Finance Committee - 13/10/2021 - FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENTS - YEAR TO DATE AS AT 31 AUGUST 2021

17.1        COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN

CARRIED 8/0

En Bloc

 


Council                                                                                      13                                                               27 October 2021

12.1           Finance Committee - 13/10/2021 - LIST OF PAYMENTS MADE - AUGUST 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

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   List of Payments August 2021

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 13/10/2021, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

 

The committee recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2110/069              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor K Cox

That the Council notes payment of voucher numbers M118882 – M118921, EF081344 – EF081892, T7569 – T7571, DD004566 – DD004590, as well as payroll payments, together totalling $7,130,175.86.

CARRIED 8/0

En Bloc

            

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council notes payment of voucher numbers M118882 – M118921, EF081344 – EF081892, T7569 – T7571, DD004566 – DD004590, as well as payroll payments, together totalling $7,130,175.86.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report provides details of payments made from the City’s bank accounts for the month of August 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 August 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 August 2021 is presented for information.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Not applicable.


Council

19

27 October 2021

12.1

Attachment a

List of Payments August 2021

 





Council                                                                                      36                                                               27 October 2021

12.2           Finance Committee - 13/10/2021 - FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENTS - YEAR TO DATE AS AT 31 AUGUST 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

Director Finance and Corporate Services - Tony Nottle

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   Investment Report - August 2021

Attachment b    Financial Activity Statement - August 2021

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 13/10/2021, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

 

The committee recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2110/070              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor K Cox

That the Council receives the statutory financial activity statement reports for the period ending 31 August 2021, pursuant to Regulation 34(4) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996.

CARRIED 8/0

En Bloc

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council receives the statutory financial activity statement reports for the period ending 31 August 2021, pursuant to Regulation 34(4) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996.

 

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 August 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 26 July 2021, the Council adopted (C2107/140) the following material variance reporting threshold for the 2021/22 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 August 2021

The Statement of Financial Activity (FAS) for the year to date (YTD) shows an overall Net Current Position of $54.7M as opposed to the budget of $47.9M. This represents a positive variance of $6.8M YTD.

 

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

2021/22
Actual YTD

$

2021/22
Amended
Budget YTD

$

2021/22
Amended
Budget

$

2021/22
YTD Bud Variance

%

2021/22
YTD Bud Variance

$

Change in Variance Current Month

$

Revenue from Ordinary Activities

 

0.01%

7,929

563,793

1.    Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions

780,835

869,295

4,730,088

(10.18%)

(88,460)

320,788

2.    Other Revenue

101,383

21,193

414,950

378.38%

80,190

986

3.    Interest Earnings

133,633

55,653

609,250

140.12%

77,980

73,255

Expenses from Ordinary Activities

 

15.06%

2,149,978

1,233,421

4.    Materials & Contracts

(1,398,847)

(2,538,292)

(20,245,296)

44.89%

1,139,445

726,443

5.    Other Expenditure

(577,018)

(1,151,867)

(9,685,100)

49.91%

574,849

265,349

6.    Non-Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions

5,000

3,932,229

34,846,780

(99.87%)

(3,927,229)

(1,479,000)

Capital Revenue & (Expenditure)

 

55.38%

6,886,265

2,185,689

7.    Land & Buildings

(94,401)

(3,890,119)

(22,838,597)

97.57%

3,795,718

1,847,486

Plant & Equipment

(52,281)

(130,000)

(2,870,000)

59.78%

77,719

49,358

Furniture & Equipment

(65,007)

(287,600)

(828,800)

77.40%

222,593

138,716

Infrastructure

(1,124,144)

(5,889,851)

(38,334,501)

80.91%

4,765,707

2,812,503

8.    Proceeds from Sale of Assets

0

51,500

776,071

(100.00%)

(51,500)

(12,500)

9.    Repayment of Capital Lease

(98,375)

(120,464)

(489,199)

18.34%

22,089

0

10.  Transfer to Restricted Assets

(2,488,240)

0

(21,740)

(100.00%)

(2,488,240)

(751,580)

11.  Transfer from Restricted Assets

548,971

0

1,688,974

100.00%

548,971

548,971


Revenue from Ordinary Activities

In total, revenue from Ordinary Activities is very close to budget at only 0.01% ahead YTD.  There are however some material variance items, both positive and negative, that contributing to this.

 

1.      Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions

Behind YTD budget by $88,000, or 10.2%, 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

395,913

333,620

62,293

18.67%

85,777

10152

Other General Purpose Funding - Grants Commission

365,854

277,680

88,174

31.75%

88,174

The first quarterly tranche of the Financial Assistance Grants has been received, of which the budget timing for the bridges component was forecast later in the financial year incorrectly. A budget timing realignment will be processed in September.

10200

Financial Services – Insurance Recoveries

290

36,880

(36,590)

(99.21%)

(11,525)

When and how much insurance claims will be is not possible to predict. The full year budget has been allocated over the year based on the monthly trend over the last 4 years.

Community and Commercial Services

49,912

121,744

(71,832)

(59.00%)

1,499

10543

Community Development – State Government Grants

 -

60,000

(60,000)

(100.00%)

 -

The Lottery West grant for the Strengthening Communities Program was budgeted to be received in July, but we are still awaiting payment.

10591

Geographe Leisure Centre – State Government Grants

 -

10,000

(10,000)

(100.00%)

 -

Reimbursement from the State Government for the trainee at the GLC was budgeted for July, however processing of the training documentation has been delayed at the State Government level due to the Apprentice Support Network being inundated with thousands of trainees applying for the government incentives.  Payment is now expected in September/October.

10625

Art Geo Administration – State Government Grants

 -

10,721

(10,721)

(100.00%)

(10,721)

Grant funding for the Interpretation Plan for the cultural precinct is expected to be received once the work has been completed on the plan. This is now scheduled for substantive completion sometime in December, so funds should be received by that time or shortly thereafter, pending acceptance by grantor.

10380

Busselton Library – Contributions

39,519

 -

39,519

100.00%

39,519

The contribution from the Southwest Library Consortium for employee expenses was received a month earlier than budgeted.

B1361

YCAB (Youth Precinct Foreshore) – Contributions

2,200

23,000

(20,800)

(90.43%)

(19,800)

The sponsorship proposal from Rio Tinto for the continuation of Dunsborough Youth Services is still pending.  This is now expected to be finalised in November.


 

Planning and Development Services

250,147

388,040

(137,893)

(35.54%)

200,176

10942

Bushfire Risk Management Planning – DFES - State Government Grants

 -

88,069

(88,069)

(100.00%)

 -

The invoice for the grant will be raised within October.

10940

Fire Prevention DFES – Contributions

 -

15,038

(15,038)

(100.00%)

(15,038)

The reconciliation of the Fire Prevention DFES contributions will be completed after the end of quarter 1 including any pay that is included within this time.  It is anticipated to be reconciled by the end of October.

10940

Fire Prevention DFES - Reimbursement – ESL Levy

 -

32,400

(32,400)

(100.00%)

(32,400)

The ESL levy reimbursement (LGGS) is completed by DFES at the end of each quarter and is imminent.

Engineering and Works Services

84,864

25,891

58,973

227.77%

33,337

11501

Operations Services Works – Workers compensation Reimbursements

58,547

10,404

48,143

462.73%

27,132

Not possible to predict when or how much in workers compensation claims are going to be received.  Budget has been allocated evenly over the year.

 

2.      Other Revenue

Ahead of YTD budget by $80,000, or 378.4%, 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

$

Engineering and Works Services

85,221

517

84,704

16,384%

84,704

G0030 & G0031

Busselton & Dunsborough  Transfer Station – Sale of Scrap Materials

85,153

517

84,636

16,371%

84,636

The budget for the receipt of income relating to the sale of scrap materials (metal in particular) has not been aligned effectively with actual receipts. This should rectify somewhat as the year progresses.  It should also be noted that the prices received for scrap metal have been extremely favourable – up to $220/tonne, compared to $110-$140/tonne during 2020.

 

3.      Interest Earnings

Interest earnings are $78,000 ahead of budget due to the total annual budget being allocated based on the monthly 4-year trend. The actual levying of annual rates, and when all interest is charged in advance for 21/22, does not match this trend, therefore the City will see a timing difference to budget for the first and second quarters of the 21/22 financial year. This will decrease as the year progresses.

 

Expenses from Ordinary Activities

Expenditure from ordinary activities is $2.15M, or 15.06%, less than expected when compared to the budget YTD as at August. The expense line items on the face of the financial statement that have a YTD variance that meet the material reporting threshold are outlined below.


 

4.      Materials & Contracts

Less than YTD budget by $1.14M.  The main contributors to this variance are listed in the table below:

Cost Code

Cost Code Description

Actual YTD

$

Amended Budget YTD

$

Variance
YTD
$

Variance
YTD
%

Change in Variance Current Month

$

Finance and Corporate Services

107,075

379,453

272,378

71.8%

166,826

10000

Members of Council

47

40,014

39,967

99.9%

39,960

Timing variance with payment of WALGA subscriptions delayed.  These variances will persist even when this is paid, as the actual cost will spread and allocated evenly over the term of the subscription.

10250

Information & Communication Technology Services

53,377

166,282

112,905

67.9%

52,537

The monthly allocation of the annual budget was set based on an historical 4 year monthly cash payment trend. This will not necessarily align with the new prepaid expenses allocation process that has been adopted to more accurately reflect proper accrual accounting practices. There were also $20,000 of GIS costs that were budgeted to be expended by YTD August, that have not yet occurred.

10500

Legal and Compliance Services

(3,563)

20,524

24,087

117.4%

13,825

The variance YTD relates predominantly to the unspent budgeted amount for external legal services.  It is not possible to predict when or to what extent legal services will be required at the time of setting the budget, therefore the annual allocation is spread evenly over the year.  The credit represents a year end accrual (based on open purchase orders for work completed), reversal for which the invoices for the legal services in question has still not yet been received.

10510

Governance Support Services

3,718

20,083

16,365

81.5%

13,203

The underspend is due to a number of software licenses for programs used in the Governance area not as yet being renewed. When paid, the cost for these will be spread over the term of the license, so timing differences to the budget (set based on historical cash trend), may persist.

10521

Human Resources & Payroll

1,273

21,124

19,851

94.0%

19,758

The WALGA ER Subscription renewal was delayed, and will be spread over the subscription period.  Actual incurrence of other budgeted items YTD, such as TAPS payroll and the WALGA Remuneration Survey are now forecast to occur later in the year.

10616, 10617, & 10618

Aged Housing

5,904

27,862

21,958

78.8%

8,429

We can never say with certainty when this will be drawn on, as works are carried out throughout the year and generally need to coincide with vacancies.  It is likely refurbishment works will be carried out on at least one unit in the next 4-6 weeks.


 

Community and Commercial Services

146,514

412,803

266,289

64.5%

94,000

10543

Community Development

36

40,000

39,964

99.9%

(36)

This relates to the Strengthening Communities program funded by Lotterywest. The program is still in development and procurement has not yet taken place. It is anticipated that this program will be launched during September.

10600

Busselton Jetty Tourist Park

45,305

92,904

47,599

51.2%

2,949

The YTD variance is mainly due to the monthly payment of the Park Management Contract being one month in arrears.  By end of financial year this expenditure catches up, as June will be accrued, however the budget timing does not reflect this.

10625

Art Geo Administration

1,998

22,218

20,220

91.0%

14,856

Whilst YTD actual spend it under forecast there have been commitments made in August for goods and services not yet received and invoiced these are for the Courthouse Complex Interpretation Plan, which is 50% externally funded, and a lighting upgrade for the gallery. The delivery is due 24/9/21.

10630

Economic and Business Development Administration

333

14,147

13,814

97.6%

13,761

Delays in recruiting an EBD Coordinator has resulted in changing of priorities of ED activities and projects for the year and as such actual expenditure from EBD budget over the course of the year is likely to be different to what was projected.

11151

Airport Operations

25,392

93,576

68,184

72.9%

20,733

YTD variances are mainly due to:

·        Airport screening services – allocated monthly amounts have been delayed until flights start.

·        Inspections – Electrical ATI and generator inspections have been delayed until September to a value of $6,800.

·        Commission charges – due to the timing of the monthly invoices/billing we will always be at least a  month behind.

11152

Airport Operations – Buildings

 -

11,356

11,356

100.0%

5,678

The actual maintenance and cleaning costs budgeted here, have inadvertently been included amongst the Facilities Maintenance section expenditures. Actual cost or budget allocations will be rectified in subsequent months

B1361

YCAB (Youth Precinct Foreshore)

4,640

27,389

22,749

83.1%

14,591

The variance is due to:

·        Crime prevention grant for a series of workshops delivered to schools. Workshops were due to commence in August but the dates were changed to September.

·        Delay in processing grant tax invoices for COVID-19 Youth recovery grants for the leadership camp. The camp was held over the weekend of August 20th. Due to the date, invoices were processed in the September pay run.

·        August purchases on credit card have not been processed.


 

Planning and Development Services

137,372

142,955

5,583

3.9%

(33,603)

10820

Strategic Planning

21

26,184

26,163

99.9%

15,213

The variance YTD is essentially due to holistic Consultancy budget being allocated across the 12-month period. Strategic Planning is subject to competing demands and project prioritisation (also timing delays etc. due to consultancy periods, peak authority feedback or processes and lack of availability on occasion of specialised consultant assistance). Appointment of consultants or other anticipated strategic expenditures are always difficult to predict on that basis.    

10830

Environmental Management Administration

40,337

21,780

(18,557)

(85.2%)

(15,948)

Annual budgets for consultancy, contractors and purchase of materials were allocated at the end of each quarter.  Actuals have come in a lot earlier (in line with prior year trends). 

10931

Protective Burning & Firebreaks-Reserves

74,457

2,742

(71,715)

(2615.4%)

(78,859)

The YTD variance is as a result of an invoice for works completed late in the 20/21 financial year that was not accrued.  Funding from DFES was received in last financial year for these works, so this contributed to part of the end of year budget surplus, but will therefore effectively reduce any 21/22 financial year surplus.

11170

Meelup Regional Park

1,874

31,540

29,666

94.1%

16,536

The Environmental Services staff have recently relocated from Environmental Services in P&DS to the Parks and Gardens area within EWS.  During this time it has required adjustments in physical location, reporting and accounting requirements. The observed variance will be reconciled once all of these adjustments have been completed and work prioritised within the new structure.

Engineering and Works Services

1,007,932

1,602,401

594,469

37.1%

498,834

12600

Street & Drain Cleaning

32,775

61,378

28,603

46.6%

28,603

The budget was entered based on historical expenditure patterns averaged over the previous three financial years. $36,000 in Sweeping costs associated with the August period have been receipted into early September thus cancelling out this monthly YTD variance.  

12620 & 12621

Rural & Urban Tree Pruning

32,817

143,404

110,587

77.1%

84,839

The majority of rural tree pruning budget valued at $351,000 is ordinarily planned to be completed by the end of November 2021. However priority has been given to storm damage clean-up activities, meaning some of these works will occur later this financial year. Rural Road verges to be pruned are prioritised based on the time since last pruning, inspections, volume/ type of traffic and many other considerations. This is a timing variance only.

Various

Bridge Maintenance

3,110

106,808

103,698

97.1%

52,416

Bridge Maintenance works are largely scheduled to occur post-Christmas and in the later part of the financial year when water flows are at their lowest; planning of these works are underway. Some works scheduled in 2020/21 were withheld due to May 2020 storms with $208,000 of this budget subsequently carried over into the first quarter of the new financial year. This variance will continue to grow until late in the year when works commence.

Various

Building Maintenance

175,807

136,811

(38,996)

(28.5%)

(1,575)

The majority of this variance has derived from the receipting and payment of high value cleaning invoices from the 20/21 financial year in July 2021, due to missing the cut off for receipting in the correct financial year.


 

Various

Waste Services

77,721

372,515

294,794

79.1%

239,559

The Cleanaway invoice for the monthly recycling service is yet to be processed for both July and August accounting for $98,000 of the YTD variance. A further $65,000 and $46,000 of the variance is associated with a portion of the concrete crushing and green waste processing budget planned for later in the year. $45,000 is attributable to invoices that are yet to be processed for the external disposal of waste at the Cleanaway Dardanup Site. $34,000 of the variance is associated with postponement of the FOGO trial where no costs are being incurred.

Various

Roads Maintenance

123,682

103,026

(20,656)

(20.0%)

3,670

Road Maintenance activities are generally greater in the first five months of the year as the City’s maintenance and construction crews focus on maintenance grading, road shoulders maintenance, road surface repair and drainage maintenance etc. There has been an overspend to budget mostly attributable to greater than anticipated works in relation to storm damage clean-up activities contributing to the year to date variance.      

Various

Other Infrastructure Maintenance

158,306

252,316

94,010

37.3%

79,617

This category encompasses the consolidation of almost 100 individual cost codes representing a unique assortment 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; cycle-ways and footpaths etc. The $94,000 YTD under expenditure variance to budget is due to coastal related works (-$48,000) and street light installation works (-$32,000) amongst other variances.

 

5.      Other Expenditure  

$575,000, or 49.9%, 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

11,049

13,834

2,785

20.1%

(3,337)

10001

Office of the CEO

1,890

13,834

11,944

86.3%

5,027

Timing variances associated with spending against donations, contributions budget, discretionary and inter council initiatives.

10011

Emergency Contingency Costs (Other)

7,200

 -

(7,200)

(100.0%)

(7,200)

Costs represent the City granting the use of the YCAB building as a COVID vaccination hub. 

Finance and Corporate Services

203,369

149,939

(53,430)

(35.6%)

30,327

10221/27/

28/29/30

Finance & Borrowing Program 04/11/12/13/14

100,095

 -

(100,095)

(100.0%)

 -

Notification of the second bi-annual payment of the indicative guarantee for the City’s borrowings through the WA Treasury Corporation, for the 20/21 financial year, was not received by the end of June, so ended up being processed in July. Depending on whether the final payment is made or accrued in June 2022, this may end up being an overspend variance at the end of the year.

10511

Community Assistance Program (Governance)

 -

16,666

16,666

100.0%

8,333

Timing variances associated with how this line item has been spread.  It has been spread monthly however spend will not occur until the end of the financial year.


 

10700

Public Relations

12,588

23,720

11,132

46.9%

15,622

Timing variances, up and down, associated with underspend against sister city allocations, community consultations and surveys and catering and overspend against council advertising.

Community and Commercial Services

261,535

912,444

650,909

71.3%

255,602

10533

Welfare / Senior Citizens

22,520

 -

(22,520)

(100.0%)

(22,520)

The quarterly contribution was budgeted to be incurred at the end of the quarter in September, but was paid a month early.

10543

Community Development

 -

62,342

62,342

100.0%

 -

This relates to the first round of Community Assistance Program applications. The closing date was extended out into August so it is likely that successful applications will be funded in September but only 80% of the total applied for with the remaining 20% upon significant progress and/or acquittal.

10558

Events

196,500

279,752

83,252

29.8%

(124,374)

A number of expenses have not yet been paid as the event holders have not yet invoiced the City.

10634

Business Support Program

 -

23,850

23,850

100.0%

11,925

Final acquittals of the support program yet to be received.  This budget was carried over from the 20/21 financial year, funded from the MERG Reserve, however it has now been ascertained that only approximately $10,000 will be required.  This will more than likely be the positive variance by the end of the year, offset by a lower transfer from the reserve.

11151

Airport Operations

 -

383,352

383,352

100.0%

191,676

Marketing activities continue to be delayed due to the postponement of Jetstar RPT services as a result of COVID restrictions/lockdowns etc. in the Eastern States.

12631

Peel Tce Building & Surrounds

41,514

 -

(41,514)

(100.0%)

(41,514)

The first quarterly payment was made to the MRBTA one month earlier than budgeted.  It has also gone to the wrong cost code, which will be corrected in September by moving to Economic and Business Development Administration to align with where the budget will appear.

11156

Airport Development Operations

 -

148,550

148,550

100.0%

74,275

At the time of setting the budget the timing for the final carried over payments related to a noise mitigation project were not known. $148,000 is estimated to be remaining in total, split over three payments in September, November and January. As such, there will be budget timing variances until these payments are completed.

Engineering and Works Services

97,984

73,117

(24,867)

(34.0%)

(17,630)

11000

Engineering & Works Services Support

117

12,133

12,016

99.0%

6,106

The budget YTD represents the planned donations of portions of the pavers removed from the CBD during the footpath upgrade project.  These donations are yet to be processed.

B1223

Micro Brewery - Public Ablution

 -

60,000

60,000

100.0%

60,000

The full contractual contribution towards the Micro Brewery Public Ablutions was made in the 19/20 and 20/21 financial years. A remaining $60,000 contribution was incorrectly included again in the 21/22 budget.  This will be partitioned as part of any year end budget surplus and go towards the funding of the 22/23 budget.

G0042

BTS External Restoration Works

94,497

 -

(94,497)

(100.0%)

(82,645)

Settlement outlays and reimbursements are inherently difficult to predict, both in timing and in quantum. 

6.      Non-Operating Grants, Subsidies & Contributions  

The negative variance of $3.9M is mainly due to the items in the table below. It should be noted that any negative variance in this area will approximately correlate to an offsetting positive underspend variance in a capital project tied to these funding sources. This can be seen in the section below that outlines the capital expenditure variances.

Revenue Code

Revenue Code Description

Actual YTD

$

Amended Budget YTD

$

Variance
YTD
$

Variance
YTD
%

Change in Variance Current Month

$

Engineering and Works Services

 -

3,932,229

(3,932,229)

(100.0%)

(1,484,000)

A0014

Bussell Highway Bridge – 0241 – Federal Capital Grant

 -

744,000

(744,000)

(100.0%)

(744,000)

A0022

Yallingup Beach Road Bridge - 3347 – Federal Capital Grant

 -

700,000

(700,000)

(100.0%)

(700,000)

B9407

Busselton Senior Citizens – Developer Cont. Utilised

 -

111,750

(111,750)

(100.0%)

 -

B9591

Performing Arts Convention Centre – Federal Capital Grant

 -

1,138,500

(1,138,500)

(100.0%)

 -

F0112

Causeway Road Shared Path – State Capital Grant

 -

40,000

(40,000)

(100.0%)

 -

S0048

Bussell Highway – Developer Cont. Utilised

 -

200,000

(200,000)

(100.0%)

 -

S0076

Kaloorup Road (Stage 1) – Main Roads Direct Grant

 -

224,400

(224,400)

(100.0%)

 -

S0077

Ludlow-Hithergreen Stage 2 Reconstruct & Widen – MR Capital Grant

 -

96,000

(96,000)

(100.0%)

 -

S0078

Sugarloaf Road –

State Capital Grant

 -

321,599

(321,599)

(100.0%)

 -

S0321

Yoongarillup Road - Second Coat Seal –

MR Capital Grant

 -

100,000

(100,000)

(100.0%)

 -

S0331

Barracks Drive Spray Seal – MR Capital Grant

 -

130,980

(130,980)

(100.0%)

 -

S0332

Inlet Drive Spray Seal –

MR Capital Grant

 -

47,000

(47,000)

(100.0%)

 -

S0333

Chapman Crescent Spray Seal – MR Capital Grant

 -

78,000

(78,000)

(100.0%)

 -

 


 

7.      Capital Expenditure  

As at 31 August 2021, there is an underspend variance of 86.9%, or $8.86M, in total capital expenditure, with YTD actual at $1.3M against the YTD budget of $10.2M. A large 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 and Restricted Assets 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

$

Buildings

91,802

3,881,785

3,789,983

97.6%

1,845,592

B9614

Dunsborough Lakes Sporting Precinct-Pavilion /Changeroom Facilities

 -

50,000

50,000

100.0%

25,000

There has been nil expenditure to date as the works have not yet commenced. The contract for Pavilion / Changeroom design is to be awarded in September 2021, with construction estimated to commence in April 2022.

B9300/1/2

Aged Housing

Capital Improvements

 -

50,000

50,000

100.0%

 -

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. A Purchase Order has been raised for the preparation of an application to Western Power for an alternative power separation proposal and the contractor will report back once Western Power have responded.  The decision on which option to pursue cannot be made until this is received.  

B9407

Busselton Senior Citizens

 -

111,750

111,750

100.0%

 -

Roofing upgrade works were planned to be completed July 2021, but were postponed due to unsuitable weather. Works have now commenced but the discovery of asbestos material will cause further delays to the works programme. Completion date estimated November 2021.

B9591

Performing Arts Convention Centre

10,920

3,070,085

3,059,165

99.6%

1,529,069

The project has been retendered with tenders closing 6 October 2021. 

B9605

Energy Efficiency Initiatives (Various Buildings)

74,400

85,250

10,850

12.7%

42,625

Works planned for commencement have encountered delays pending Western Power applications and approvals.

B9611

Smiths Beach

New Public Toilet

 -

250,000

250,000

100.0%

125,000

Project commencement was delayed due to changes to the project scope as a result of potential changes to size of the toilet facilities and investigations into the capacity of the existing septic system/upgrade to an ATU system to accommodate these changes. Project planning is now underway, with preliminary design work completed.  Septic system design work is also underway. Notification has been received by the entity that currently supplies the water, that they are no longer able to supply water for City toilets.  As such an MOU is being reviewed by property team to establish viability of infrastructure works and costs for water supply. 


 

B9612

Churchill Park

Renew Sports Lights

2,000

212,850

210,850

99.1%

106,425

Works were planned to take place in July 2021, however due to a budget increase of $73K from CSRFF grant funding, the project scope is now being re-scoped. 

B9711

Busselton Airport – Building

 -

12,200

12,200

100.0%

 -

Small capital works projects that were planned to be completed prior to Jetstar flights commencing. These have been delayed due to the continuing deferment of the commencement of RPT flights.

B9717

Airport Construction - Existing Terminal Upgrade

 -

39,650

39,650

100.0%

19,825

Invoicing in relation to the retention monies owing to Pindan for works completed has not yet been received.

Plant & Equipment

52,281

130,000

77,719

59.8%

49,358

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.

10540

Recreation Administration

 -

40,000

40,000

100.0%

 -

The budget relates to a vehicle for the recently created Manager position. Vehicle has been ordered, delivery due in January.

11107

Engineering Services Design

 -

70,000

70,000

100.0%

70,000

Limited quotations have been received for new survey equipment, delaying commencement of the procurement process.

11402

Plant Purchases (P10)

20,642

 -

(20,642)

(100.0%)

(20,642)

This is a carryover from 2020/21 FY – the second generator for the DWF.

11403

Plant Purchases (P11)

31,639

 -

(31,639)

(100.0%)

 -

This is a carryover from 2020/21 FY – the Turf Maintenance rough cut ute.

Furniture & Office Equipment

65,007

287,600

222,593

77.4%

138,716

10250

Information & Communication Technology Services

42,100

 -

(42,100)

(100.0%)

(13,900)

At the time of budget preparation, an initial priority list for IT is collated, but it is not possible to determine at that time when and to what extent these priorities will eventually be undertaken.  This is due to numerous competing and higher priority projects and activities being scheduled over the top of this initial list.  As such there will be many seemingly odd budget timing variances.

Asset replacement is scheduled to begin in October which will result in capital spend, though its worth noting that issues with supply chain may further delay delivery/invoicing for the assets.

10558

Events

 -

200,000

200,000

100.0%

100,000

The budget August YTD represents the carry-over from the 20/21 year for the electronic billboard. The tender has closed with three responses, all of which have come in over the forecast budget. Options on how to proceed are currently being investigated and discussions are continuing with MERG.

10590

Naturaliste Community Centre

 -

26,600

26,600

100.0%

13,300

Budget is for fencing to accommodate vacation care program and purchase of replacement fitness equipment. Works to be finalised and PO’s raised this month, with a plan to expend in September.


 

10900

Cultural Planning

 -

13,400

13,400

100.0%

6,700

The virtual reality component of the Ballaarat Engine 150th display has been delayed waiting for an expected grant opportunity to help subsidise the project.

B1350

Churchill Park-

Other Buildings

 -

26,450

26,450

100.0%

13,225

The budget relates to the storage facility project. Discussions are still progressing with the Stakeholders, delaying construction until a later date.

Infrastructure By Class

1,124,144

5,889,851

4,765,707

80.9%

2,812,503

Various

Roads

297,855

1,177,668

879,813

74.7%

355,346

The majority of road construction happens during the months October to April and major contracted scopes of work including Wildwood Road, Kaloorup Road, Chapman Hill Road and Rendezvous Road are yet to commence. By mid-year, the actual YTD should be nearer the budget YTD with major road works projects in progress. Generally, the budget cash flows are not reflective of works scheduling which results in the YTD variances.

Various

Bridges

 -

1,444,000

1,444,000

100.0%

1,444,000

Major bridge works are contracted by MRWA and are scheduled to take place between the months of October to May. Cost reconciliation with MRWA is typically not completed until later in the financial year. MRWA is currently working on the construction of Yallingup Beach Road bridge #3347 and the Tuart Drive Bridge  #0238 both of which are scheduled for completion in early 2022. Other major bridge works are currently out for tender by MRWA with works anticipated to take place January to May 2022.

Internal bridge maintenance works are scheduled for completion from January to April when water levels are at their lowest.

Various

Car Parks

58,384

572,702

514,318

89.8%

234,454

The variance YTD is attributable to the following projects:

•          Dunsborough Lakes Sporting Precinct (Stage 1) – Car parking under spent to budget by $133,334; stage 2 works not scheduled to commence until the new calendar year.

•          Barnard Park East Foreshore Car Parking $95,137; Tender has been awarded with works to commence shortly.

•          In addition to the above, carpark construction for Dunsborough Town Centre, Fourth Street, and Meelup are scheduled for completion in early 2022. No works have commenced to date due to wet weather and ground water levels.

Various

Footpaths & Cycleways

104,104

372,366

268,262

72.0%

46,910

The Buayanup Drain Shared path has now been fully asphalted and the remaining works (line marking and fencing) are scheduled for completion in October. By end of October, the remaining contract value of $265,000 should be fully acquitted, reducing the YTD Variance to near nil.

The majority of other footpath and cycleway projects are scheduled for construction between the months of November to March.

Various

Parks, Gardens & Reserves

603,329

2,211,280

1,607,951

72.7%

710,468

66% of the variance is attributable to the following projects:

·        Mitchell Park Upgrade - $339,000

·        Dunsborough Lakes Sporting Precinct - $335,000

·        Barnard Park East Foreshore Landscaping & Underground Power - $393,000

The rest is constituted by numerous projects where it has been difficult to secure timely contractual works in line with budgetary expectations.


 

Various

Regional Airport & Industrial Park Infrastructure

60,472

111,835

51,363

45.9%

21,325

The variance is primarily due to a delay in the timing on the payment for the carpark line marking and non-commencement of other works such as the awning shelters on the arrivals hall.

 

8.      Proceeds From Sale of Assets  

YTD there have been no proceeds from sale of assets recorded against the YTD budget of $51,500. This is due to the continuing delays in delivery of acquisitions, and the associated transfer to auction of the vehicles being replaced. 

 

9.      Repayment of Capital Leases  

Lease payments are $22,000 less than budgeted YTD, as one lease budgeted to be paid in August was not invoiced until September.

 

10.   Transfer to Restricted Assets  

There is a YTD variance in transfers to Restricted Assets of $2.5M as there is no budget for this item.

 

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 (or unspent portions thereof). The following grants, totalling $2.1M, have been received and transferred to Restricted Assets for which there was no budgeted transfer:

·        $44,000 for the Causeway Road Shared Path Project from the Department of Transport;

·        $1.4M for various roads projects from Main Roads, State Blackspot Fund and the Regional Roads Program;

·        $80,000 for the Dunsborough youth space project from the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development;

·        $54,000 from Lotterywest for the Strengthening & Adapting Organisations program;

·        $500,000 from DFES for the Mitigation Activity Fund; and

·        $30,000 from the Federal Government Community Grants Hub for Community Child Care Sustainability programs.

 

Developer contributions, deposits and bonds are inherently hard to predict and budget for. An annual amount of $22,000 was budgeted for later in the year, however over $381,000 has been received YTD, with $136,000 for road works bonds and $155,000 for caravan park deposits.

 

11.   Transfer from Restricted Assets

YTD there has been $549,000 transferred from Restricted Assets into the Municipal Account. This was mainly attributable to the Bushfire Mitigation Activity funds that did not need to be restricted.


 

Investment Report

Pursuant to the Council’s Investment Policy, a report is to be provided to the Council on a monthly basis, detailing the investment portfolio in terms of performance and counterparty percentage exposure of total portfolio. The report is also to provide details of investment income earned against budget, whilst confirming compliance of the portfolio with legislative and policy limits.

 

As at 31st August 2021, the value of the City’s invested funds totalled $78.4M, up from $71.4M as at 31st July 2021.  This is mainly due the payment of rates.

 

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) increased from $5.5M to $12.5M.   

 

During the month of August, five term deposits totalling the amount of $15.5M matured. Remaining deposits were renewed for a further 189 days at 0.32% on average.

 

The official cash rate remains steady for the month of August 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 August 2021 are provided below to ensure there is appropriate oversight and awareness.

 

Date

Payee

Description

$ Amount

6/08/21

DUXTON HOTEL

ACCOMMODATION –

RCAWA MEETING PERTH

$251.72

13/08/21

ZEST FLOWERS

FLOWER DELIVERY - BEREAVEMENT

$100.00

19/08/21

ONE RUSTIC BLOOM

GIFT PRESENTATION - BALLAARAT ENGINE 150TH EXHIBITION LAUNCH

$75.00

25/08/21

THAI LEMONGRASS

COUNCIL DINNER - 18.08.21

$400.00

 

 

 

$826.72

 

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 August 2021, the City’s net current position stands at $54.7M. The City’s financial performance is considered satisfactory, and cash reserves remain strong.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Not applicable.  


Council

37

27 October 2021

12.2

Attachment a

Investment Report - August 2021

 


Council

52

27 October 2021

12.2

Attachment b

Financial Activity Statement - August 2021

 

















Council                                                                                      57                                                               27 October 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

Chief Executive Officer - Mike Archer

NATURE OF DECISION

Noting: The item is simply for information purposes and noting

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

 

The officer recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2110/071              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor K Cox

 

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

 

17.1.1     Minor Donations Program – September 2021

 

17.1.2     Current Active Tenders

CARRIED 8/0

En Bloc

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

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

17.1.1       Minor Donations Program – September 2021 

17.1.2       Current Active Tenders 

 

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       Minor Donations Program – September 2021 

 

The Council allocates an annual budget allowance to the Minor Donations Program. This is provided such that eligible groups and individuals can apply for and receive sponsorship to assist them in the pursuit of endeavours that bring direct benefit to the broader community.

 

Allocation of funds is delegated to the Chief Executive Officer, in accordance with the published guidelines and funding availability.

 

Seven applications were approved in September 2021, totalling $2,900.00, as outlined in the table below:

 

Recipient

Purpose

Amount

Cornerstone Christian College –

Busselton and Dunsborough Campuses

Sponsorship of end of year awards - $200 for Busselton Secondary school and $100 for Busselton and Dunsborough primary schools.

$400.00

Radiance Network South West

Funds to assist with running the 5th Big Pram Walk event as part of the Act Belong Commit Radiance Festival – a free community event at the Busselton foreshore on 14 November 2021.

$500.00

Foodlosophy Southwest

Cost of catering covered in support of the Ride against Domestic Violence launch dinner at the Busselton Yacht Club.

$1,000.00

Geographe Marine Research Ltd

Funds requested to assist with organising ‘The Whaley Cool Whale Day’ - an inaugural community conservation and education event at Clancy’s fish pub in Dunsborough on 26 September 2021.

This event is intended to raise the community’s appreciation and understanding of the annual whale migration through Geographe Bay.

Funding to cover the cost of event signage and free educational activities. 

$500.00

St Mary MacKillop College

Sponsorship of end of year awards - $200 for Busselton Secondary school and $100 for the primary school.

$300.00

Busselton Primary School

Sponsorship of year 6 end of year awards.

$100.00

Dunsborough Primary School

Sponsorship of year 6 end of year awards.

$100.00

September total: $2,900.00

 


 

17.1.2       Current Active Tenders 

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

 

RFT 14/21 ELECTRONIC EVENTS BILLBOARD

·        Requirements - the design, fabrication and installation of an electronic events billboard on Bussell Hwy, Busselton.

·        A request for tender was advertised on 19 June and closed on 14 July 2021. 

·        Three submissions were received – all exceed the project budget. 

·        City officers are in the process of seeking further direction from Marketing and Events Reference Group in relation to funding for this project. 

 

RFT 15/21 SURF LIFE SAVING SERVICES

·        Requirements – the provision of professional lifeguarding services at Smiths Beach and Yallingup Beach for the 2021/22 & 2022/23 seasons. 

·        A request for tender was advertised on 15 September 2021 and closed on 5 October 2021.

·        One submission was received. 

·        The value of the contract exceeds the CEO’s delegated power for accepting tenders (DA 1 – 07 Inviting, Rejecting and Accepting Tenders).

 

RFT 18/21 REPLACEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION BUILDING CLADDING

·        Requirements – a contractor to substantially replace the cladding to the City Administration building as a result of a state wide cladding audit. The existing material used has been deemed non-compliant.

·        A request for tender was advertised on 1 September 2021 and closed on 30 September 2021.

·        One submission was received. 

·        The value of the contract is within the CEO’s delegated power for accepting tenders (DA 1 – 07 Inviting, Rejecting and Accepting Tenders). A report to the CEO for a decision on the tender will be presented when the evaluation panel has completed its review.  

 

PQS 04/21 SUPPLY OF SOILS AND MULCHES

·        Requirements – a panel of pre-qualified suppliers to supply the City’s soil and mulch needs.

·        A request for applications was advertised on 2 October 2021, closing on 21 October 2021.

·        The power to accept applications to join a panel of pre-qualified suppliers and the ability to enter into contract with successful applicants is within the CEO’s delegated power (DA 1 – 10 Panels of Pre-qualified suppliers).

 

RFT 19/21 DUNSBOROUGH LAKES SPORTS PRECINCT CARPARK AND COURTS 

·        Requirements – Construction of carpark and multi-use courts for the Dunsborough Lakes Sports Precinct. 

·        A request for tender was advertised on 2 October 2021, closing on 26 October 2021.

·        The value of the contract is expected to exceed the CEO’s delegated power for accepting tenders (DA 1 – 07 Inviting, Rejecting and Accepting Tenders).

·        It is intended that a report to Council for a decision on the tender will be presented to Council at its meeting on 10 November 2021. 

 


 

RFT 20/21 SEDIMENT REMOVAL LOWER VASSE RIVER

·        Requirements – a suitable contractor to remove sediment in the Lower Vasse River.

·        A request for tender was advertised on 25 September 2021, closing on 21 October 2021.

·        The value of the contract is expected to exceed the CEO’s delegated power for accepting tenders (DA 1 – 07 Inviting, Rejecting and Accepting Tenders).

·        A report to Council for a decision on the tender is intended to be included at the 8 December 2021 meeting. 

 

EOI 01/21 SOUTH WEST REGIONAL WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICES

·        Requirements – a waste management expert to provide solutions to participating local governments in the South West of WA for sustainable, long term management of municipal solid waste. 

·        An expression of interest on behalf of a number of South West regional local governments was advertised on 30 September 2021, closing on 25 November 2021. 

 

RFT 22/21 BUSSELTON PERFORMING ARTS & CONVENTION CENTRE

·        Requirements – an experienced contractor to construct the Busselton Performing Arts & Convention Centre.  

·        The tender closed on 6 October 2021. Two submissions were received. 

·        The CEO was delegated authority by resolution C2109/197 to accept a tender and enter into a construction contract, however, the CEO advises Council of his intention that the decision to award a contract will be presented back to Council upon the Evaluation Panel having completed their evaluation and value management opportunities have been considered as per the resolution.

 

 

 


Council                                                                                      61                                                               27 October 2021

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

12.3           Finance Committee - 13/10/2021 - BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUEST - HOSPITALITY WORKER TRAINING AND MARKETING GRANT AGREEMENT

STRATEGIC THEME

OPPORTUNITY - A vibrant City with diverse opportunities and a prosperous economy.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY

3.2 Facilitate an innovative and diversified economy that supports local enterprise, business, investment and employment growth.

SUBJECT INDEX

Economic Development

BUSINESS UNIT

Community and Commercial Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

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

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 13/10/2021, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

 

The committee recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2110/072              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor K Cox

That the Council endorse:

1.         The following requested budget amendment, recognising the income is a result of transfers from Restricted Assets:

Reference Item #

Description

 

 

Project Code

Net Increase in Revenue

Net Additional Expenditure

Net Impact on Operational Budget

Net Impact on Cash

Net Impact on Reserves

1

Increase to Operating Grants & Subsidies

350.10630.1239.9357

100,000

-

-

-

(100,000)

Increase to Consultancy

350.10630.3260.9650

-

100,000

-

(100,000)

-

 

2.         The net budget amendment, as outlined within this report and in accordance with section 6.8(1) of the Local Government Act 1995, resulting in a nil impact on the 2021/22 annual operating budget and a nil impact on the budgeted net current position.

CARRIED 8/0

BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY

 


 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council endorse:

1.         The following requested budget amendment, recognising the income is a result of transfers from Restricted Assets:

Reference Item #

Description

 

 

Project Code

Net Increase in Revenue

Net Additional Expenditure

Net Impact on Operational Budget

Net Impact on Cash

Net Impact on Reserves

1

Increase to Operating Grants & Subsidies

350.10630.1239.9357

100,000

-

-

-

(100,000)

Increase to Consultancy

350.10630.3260.9650

-

100,000

-

(100,000)

-

 

2.         The net budget amendment, as outlined within this report and in accordance with section 6.8(1) of the Local Government Act 1995, resulting in a nil impact on the 2021/22 annual operating budget and a nil impact on the budgeted net current position.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report seeks Council approval of budget amendments as detailed in this report. Adoption of the officer recommendation will result in a net neutral impact on the City’s budgeted net current position.

 

BACKGROUND

In accordance with section 6.8(1) of the Local Government Act 1995, a local government is not to incur expenditure from its Municipal fund for an additional purpose except where the expenditure:

·        is incurred in a financial year before the adoption of the annual budget by the local government; and

·        is authorised in advance by Council resolution - absolute majority required; or

·        is authorised in advance by the Mayor in an emergency.

 

Approval is therefore sought for the budget adjustments detailed in the attachment for the reasons specified.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

Council adopted its 2021/2022 Municipal budget on Monday 26 July 2021 (C2107/138) with a budget surplus position. Since then, officers have identified budgets that require adjustment. It is good management practice to revise the adopted budget when it is known that circumstances have changed. In keeping with this practice, budgets are reviewed on a monthly basis.

 

Amendments to the budget are categorised into the three key types as listed below:

1.         Adjustments impacting the budget balance or net position of the City; relatively uncommon type.

2.         Adjustments with no impact on the budget balance; most common amendment type.

3.         Adjustments to transfer budget between capital and operating undertakings; relatively uncommon type.

 

The adjustments that are required for this budget amendment are of the type 2 category above, being an adjustment with no impact on the budget balance. At the end of the 2020/21 financial year, the City was advised that it was successful in securing $100,000 from the South West Development Commission (SWDC) towards a ‘Busselton and Margaret River Hospitality Worker Training and Marketing Campaign’.  The amount was received in late 2020/21, however it was not included in the 2021/22 budget due to the timing of being notified and as such a budget amendment is required.  The amendment will require a budget expense increase which will be offset by an increase in transfers from restricted asset Government Grant and Reserves. 

After making the above adjustments, the net Municipal budget position remains unchanged.

The funding is provided for the development and implementation of a hospitality worker training and marketing campaign for the City of Busselton and Shire of Augusta-Margaret River local government areas. The City will auspice the funding on behalf of a project steering group, established by the SWDC, who will oversee the development and implementation of the project.  The project is fully funded by the SWDC and will be used to engage appropriate consultants, contractors and expertise to develop, manage and implement a marketing campaign for hospitality workforce in the Busselton Margaret River region.  Specifically, the campaign will see the development and implementation of a localised, targeted campaign for the region to train a pool of causal hospitality staff in time for the peak season commencing in December 2021.  The campaign is in response to the severe work shortage across the region.

 

Statutory Environment

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

 

Relevant Plans and Policies

The officer recommendation aligns to the following adopted plan or policy:

·        City of Busselton Economic Development Strategy 2016-2026

 

Financial Implications

The details of the financial implications of this recommendation is shown below. The proposed budget amendment will be fully funded from grant funding already received so will have a net neutral impact on the City’s Municipal budget.

 

Reference Item #

Description

 

 

Project Code

Net Increase in Revenue

Net Additional Expenditure

Net Impact on Operational Budget

Net Impact on Cash

Net Impact on Reserves

1

Increase to Operating Grants & Subsidies

350.10630.1239.9357

100,000

-

-

-

(100,000)

Increase to Consultancy

350.10630.3260.9650

-

100,000

-

(100,000)

-

 


 

Stakeholder Consultation

Consultation was undertaken with the South West Development Commission and Margaret River Busselton Tourism Association.

 

Risk Assessment

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

 

Options

The Council could decide not to proceed with the proposed budget amendment request. The funding would need to be returned to the South West Development Commission.

 

CONCLUSION

Council’s approval is sought to amend the budget as per the details contained in this report.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

If the officer recommendation is endorsed, the budget amendment will be processed within a month of being approved.

 


Council                                                                                      64                                                               27 October 2021

12.4           Finance Committee - 13/10/2021 - BUDGET AMENDMENT - INSTALLATION OF ADDITIONAL AUTOMATED WEATHER STATIONS

STRATEGIC THEME

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

STRATEGIC PRIORITY

4.3 Make decisions that respect our strategic vision for the District.

SUBJECT INDEX

Budget Amendments

BUSINESS UNIT

Finance and Corporate Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Director Finance and Corporate Services - Tony Nottle

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director Finance and Corporate Services - Tony Nottle

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

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 13/10/2021, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

 

The committee recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2110/073              Moved Councillor R Paine, seconded Councillor S Riccelli

That the Council agree to endorse a budget amendment for the supply and installation of automated weather stations in the Busselton and Dunsborough townsites up to a value of $20,000, to be funded from the current budget surplus, reducing the budget surplus position to $1,098,181.

CARRIED 8/0

by absolute majority

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council agree to endorse a budget amendment for the supply and installation of automated weather stations in the Busselton and Dunsborough townsites up to a value of $20,000, to be funded from the current budget surplus, reducing the budget surplus position to $1,098,181.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council is requested to consider a budget amendment to facilitate the purchase and installation of two automated weather stations for Busselton and Dunsborough. The original bid was not included within the current 2021/22 Annual Budget. This report recommends including the Automatic Weather Stations (AWS) into the budget, to be funded from the existing surplus position.

 

BACKGROUND

The installation of AWS within the City of Busselton was initially raised at the General Meeting of Electors held on the 2 December 2019. At this meeting, the following motion was carried:

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

 


 

In response, Council considered the motion at its Ordinary Council meeting of 29 January 2020 and resolved (C2001/023):

 

That the Council:

1.         Note the following Motion carried at the General Meeting of Electors, 2 December 2019 (C1912/245): That the City of Busselton take the necessary steps to request that the WA Bureau of Meteorology establish an office weather station in the Busselton CBD;

 

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

 

3.         Additionally request the CEO to write to the Bureau of Meteorology seeking the establishment of a weather station at a suitable and central location in the Dunsborough town centre.

 

Officers wrote to the BOM on 28 February 2020 and received a response declining the City’s request.

 

In a report to Council on 24 February 2021 this feedback was provided to Council along with information surrounding the potential (at BOM’s suggestion) procurement and installation of the City’s own AWS. At this meeting it was resolved (C2102/030):

 

That the Council:

1.         Acknowledge the Bureau of Meteorology’s (BOM) response to the City’s request for establishment of additional weather stations in Busselton and Dunsborough;

 

2.         Further consider the procurement and installation of two automated weather stations, one in Busselton and one in Dunsborough, as part of its 2021/2022 budget deliberation process.

 

As a result of this resolution, the item was placed on the Councillor bids list for budget consideration for the 2021/22 draft budget. While Council agreed to support the installation, it was unwittingly not included within the adopted 2021/22budget.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

Council has previously discussed the installation of AWS and agreed it would be beneficial to locate an AWS in both the Busselton and Dunsborough townsites.

 

The omission of the AWS proposal through the Council bid process was an oversight in the preparation of the final version of the 2021/22 budget. As provided in a report to Council in February 2021, the estimated costs of the AWS at both sites would be approximately $17,000, based on the supply and installation of the recommended MEA model of the AWS. With installation of the AWS of an amount of approximately $3,000, the total project would be up to $20,000.

 

In a report to the February 2021 Ordinary Meeting of Council, officers advised that:

The MEA station transmits data to a web app called Green Brain. The BOM however have referred to a website called WOW. The WOW website is a BOM affiliated website and has significantly more weather data, both from BOM and from private weather stations.  It is therefore recommended that the data from any automated weather station be pushed to the WOW website. An upload link would need to be configured by IT for this purpose.  A link to the WOW website would be placed on the City’s website and promoted through Facebook and the City’s Bay to Bay publication. 

Statutory Environment

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

 

Relevant Plans and Policies

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

 

Financial Implications

The total estimated costs to procure and install the AWS in both the Dunsborough and Busselton townsites is $20,000.

 

It is proposed that this cost be funded from the existing surplus within the 2021/22 Annual Budget which is currently at $1,118,181. If Council were to approve the officer recommendation, this would reduce the budget surplus position to $1,098,181.

 

Stakeholder Consultation

The motion of installing AWS was moved and passed by the electors at a General Meeting of Electors. Following this motion from the electors, additional consultation has occurred with BOM.

 

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.         Choose not to accept the officer recommendation, leaving the amount of $20,000 in the budget surplus position of the City; or

2.         Choose to only install one AWS as a trial.

CONCLUSION

Council has previously indicated a desire to install AWS in the Busselton and Dunsborough townsites. Due to the oversight, the costs were not allocated within the 2021/22 annual budget. It is therefore recommended that the Council utilise funds from its surplus position for the project.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

It is estimated that the AWS could be installed within 2 – 4 weeks from delivery of the equipment.


Council                                                                                      68                                                               27 October 2021

12.5           Finance Committee - 13/10/2021 - SELF SUPPORTING LOAN APPLICATION - DUNSBOROUGH BAY YACHT CLUB INC.

STRATEGIC THEME

LIFESTYLE - A place that is relaxed, safe and friendly with services and facilities that support healthy lifestyles and wellbeing.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY

2.3 Provide well planned sport and recreation facilities to support healthy and active lifestyles.

SUBJECT INDEX

Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Inc. Self Supporting Loan Application

BUSINESS UNIT

Community Development

REPORTING OFFICER

Club Development Officer - Pam Glossop

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

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   Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Strategic Plan 2021-2024

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 13/10/2021, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

Date

27 October 2021

Meeting

Ordinary Council

Name/Position

Cr Paul Carter, Councillor

Item No./Subject

12.5 Self Supporting Loan Application – Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Inc.

Type of Interest

Impartiality Interest

Nature of Interest

I declare an Impartiality Interest in relation to Agenda Item 6.1 as I am a social member of the Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club.

 

The committee recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2110/074              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor K Cox

That the Council:

1.         Approve a self-supporting loan to the Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Inc. for the purposes of purchasing a vessel for club volunteers to undertake race control, course setup and safety duties, through the Western Australian Treasury Corporation for the amount of $25,000 for a term of up to five (5) years.

2.         Authorises the CEO to enter into a Loan Repayment Agreement with the Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Inc. where:

(a)       The Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Inc. acknowledges it is responsible for reimbursement to the City of Busselton of full costs associated with the loan; and

(b)       The loan repayment calculations are on the basis of the prevailing Western Australian Treasury Corporation lending rate Including Government Guarantee Fee at the time of actual funding of the loan.

CARRIED 8/0

 

 

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council:

1.         Approve a self-supporting loan to the Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Inc. for the purposes of purchasing a vessel for club volunteers to undertake race control, course setup and safety duties, through the Western Australian Treasury Corporation for the amount of $25,000 for a term of up to five (5) years.

2.         Authorises the CEO to enter into a Loan Repayment Agreement with the Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Inc. where:

(a)       The Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Inc. acknowledges it is responsible for reimbursement to the City of Busselton of full costs associated with the loan; and

(b)       The loan repayment calculations are on the basis of the prevailing Western Australian Treasury Corporation lending rate Including Government Guarantee Fee at the time of actual funding of the loan.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Inc. (the Club) has applied to the City of Busselton for a self-supporting loan of $25,000 for a term of 5 years, to purchase a vessel for Club volunteers to undertake race control, course set-up and safety duties as part of the Club’s regular sporting and training activities. Officers have been working closely with the Club, including through the development of a strategic plan, and can confirm that this is one of the Club’s key actions under the ‘our club facilities’ key priority area.

 

BACKGROUND

In 2021, through the City’s Club Development program, the Club was engaged to undertake a comprehensive strategic planning process. This was funded through a grant from the Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries’ Every Club Funding program.

 

As an outcome, the Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Inc. Strategic Plan was developed (Attachment A) which identified five (5) key priority areas. In the priority area of “our club facilities” an action was to upgrade the existing facilities:

Outcome:            To maximise the use of the boating and recreation facilities.

Strategy:              Consider purchasing a Race Start Boat/Club Volunteer Boat to assist in club activities, reducing safety issues and storage.

Who:                     DBYC Risk, Governance and Stakeholders Sub Committee.

When:                  2021

Priority:                High

 

The Club has been using a 4.2m ‘Plakka’ boat that has a maximum of only 3 people safely on board together with a large amount of required equipment. Most importantly, it has been identified that, if a sailor had to be rescued, this boat would not be adequate if an injured person had to be treated.

 

The vessel the Club is looking to procure is a 7.2m 2001 Bertram 5 litre V8 with a life expectancy of between 15 and 20 years which will address these issues, by allowing for an increased number of volunteers on board and decrease the reliance on the use of private craft.   

 

Over the past five years, the Club has seen steady growth in membership from 213 in 2016 to 433 active members in 2021, with a trend in juniors and family members and plays host to regattas and State level competitions throughout the sailing season.

OFFICER COMMENT

City officers have been working closely with the Club over an extended period of time, to carefully plan for the future. The City has assisted the Club in developing a strategic plan which clearly articulates strategies to grow the sport and forms part of the Club’s regular management committee meetings. An example of this is following the development of the Clubs strategic plan, 5 sub-committees were formed with each sub-committee chaired by a committee member who reports into the monthly management committee.

 

The purchase of a suitable vessel is considered to be of a high priority given the safety issues raised and limitations on volunteers on the water during club activities.

 

The project cost breakdown is:

Self-Supporting Loan:                        $25,000 (over 5 years)

Community Assistance Program:  $10,000 (endorsed subject to the Self-Supporting Loan endorsement)

Applicant cash:                                     $10,000

Total project:                                        $45,000

 

As part of the self-supporting loan application, the Club has provided a range of supporting documentation including:

·        Recent management committee meeting minutes confirming the Club’s intent to apply to the City for a self-supporting loan of up to $25,000 over 5 years.

·        Audited financial statements for the financial years ended 30 June 2019, 30 June 2020 and 30 June 2021.

·        Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Strategic Plan 2021-24.

·        Cash Flow Forecast for 1 October 2021 to 30 September 2022.

 

These supporting documents have been reviewed by the City staff and the proposal by the Club is considered to be low risk based on the information provided and should be able to meet the repayment obligations provided the Club maintains its current financial position.

 

Statutory Environment

The City’s adopted 2020/21 budget has been compiled in accordance with section 6.2 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Part 3 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996.

 

Relevant Plans and Policies

The officer recommendation aligns to Council Policy ‘Loan Facilities’. This Policy is applicable in offering the Club a self-supporting loan.

 

Financial Implications

The City’s 2021/2022 adopted budget includes the provision for funding of self-supporting loans to the community to a maximum of $200,000. Accordingly, assuming this cap has not been met at the time this loan is to be drawn (if approved), then a formal advertising period and budget amendment would not be required.

 

 

 

The loan would be granted on the basis of the prevailing Western Australian Treasury Corporation (WATC) lending rate including Government Guarantee Fee at the time of actual funding of the loan and subject to WATC approval. The WATC have advised that as at 30 September 2021 the current borrowing rate for 5 years is 0.7877%. The Government Guarantee Fee is 0.7%.

 

All interest and principal repayments would be formally agreed to prior to release of any funding.

 

The repayments of a $25,000 loan over 5 years would be approximately $5,100 per annum plus the Government Guarantee fee of 0.7% on outstanding principal each year.

 

Stakeholder Consultation

City officers have been consulting with the Club and the WATC throughout this process.

 

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 chose to not approve the request from the Club or consider the following options:

1.         Agree to a different loan amount.

2.         Set different terms of the loan.

 

CONCLUSION

Through the assessment of documents provided during the application process, officers are of the opinion that the Club is financially sound and has sufficient cash reserves to ensure the purchase of the vessel and the repayment schedule is met. The City has been working together with the Club on its strategic plan and officers consider that this loan will assist the Club to achieve one of its key priorities identified under the plan.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Action will be taken immediately to implement the recommendations of the Council.


Council

70

27 October 2021

12.5

Attachment a

Dunsborough Bay Yacht Club Strategic Plan 2021-2024

 


 


Council                                                                                      73                                                               27 October 2021

12.6           Finance Committee - 13/10/2021 - BUDGET REQUEST -  DESIGNATED AREA MIGRATION AGREEMENT - SOUTH WEST REGION

STRATEGIC THEME

OPPORTUNITY - A vibrant City with diverse opportunities and a prosperous economy.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY

3.2 Facilitate an innovative and diversified economy that supports local enterprise, business, investment and employment growth.

SUBJECT INDEX

Economic Development

BUSINESS UNIT

Commercial Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Manager Economic and Business Development Services - Jennifer May

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

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

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 13/10/2021, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

 

The committee recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2110/075              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor K Cox

That the Council increase the annual commitment of $5,000 up to $7,500 to the Shire of Dardanup for five years commencing 2021/22 to operate as the Designated Area Representative for the South West region Designated Area Migration Agreement, to be funded from the Economic and Business Development budget.

CARRIED 8/0

BY ABSOLUTE  MAJORITY

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council increase the annual commitment of $5,000 up to $7,500 to the Shire of Dardanup for five years commencing 2021/22 to operate as the Designated Area Representative for the South West region Designated Area Migration Agreement, to be funded from the Economic and Business Development budget.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report seeks Council approval for a budget request as detailed in this report. Adoption of the officer recommendation will result in the expenditure of up to $7,500 from the Economic and Business Development budget per annum over the next five years.

 


 

BACKGROUND

On 27 November 2020, at the meeting of the South West Country Zone of the Western Australian Local Government Association (SWALGA), a presentation from consultants Perdaman on the establishment of a South West region Designated Area Migration Agreement (DAMA) was given and the following motion was passed including the support of the City of Busselton:

 

That the South West Country Zone of WALGA support the establishment of a DAMA across the South West region and requests individual local government to consider contributing towards a 5 year MOU to support the implementation of the DAMA through a Designated Area Representative body (DAR), which is still to be determined.”

 

Following this meeting, it was determined by consensus of the South West region CEO’s that the Shire of Dardanup would be best placed to become the DAR for the DAMA given their already strong leadership and commitment to this opportunity.

 

On 23 June 2021, Council resolved (C2106/132) to support the establishment of a South West regional Designated Area Migration Agreement (DAMA), acknowledge the Shire of Dardanup as the Designated Area Representative (DAR) and commit $5,000 per annum over a five year period to contribute towards administrative costs incurred by the Shire of Dardanup.

 

Since June 2021, a total of $37,500 has been committed from SWALGA representatives which is significantly under the expected $60,000 contribution required for the DAR administration costs to be borne by the Shire of Dardanup. As such the Shire of Dardanup has requested that the larger South West Local Governments commit an additional $2,500 per annum resulting in a total contribution of up to $7,500 per annum over the 5 year period. In addition to the local government contributions, applicants will be charged a fee per position sponsored through the agreement. The Shire of Dardanup have also suggested that any funds left over at the end of the five year term to be returned to the various contributing local governments in proportion to their respective contributions.

 

Local governments that contribute towards the DAR will also receive regular visits from the DAR to promote the South West DAMA and support local businesses to access the DAMA as may be appropriate. The number of visits per year will be dependent on the amount contributed with the following breakdown set out:

 

Proposed DAR visits per year based on contribution

$2,500

Two visits per year

$5,000

Four visits per year

$7,500

Six visits per year

 

OFFICER COMMENT

Council adopted its 2021/2022 Municipal budget on Monday 26 July 2021. Since then, officers have identified budgets that require adjustment or additional budget expenditure items be considered. It is good management practice to revise the adopted budget when it is known that circumstances have changed. In keeping with this practice, budgets are reviewed on a monthly basis.

 

Amendments to the budget are categorised into the three key types as listed below:

1.         Adjustments impacting the budget balance or net position of the City; relatively uncommon type.

2.         Adjustments with no impact on the budget balance; most common amendment type.

3.         Adjustments to transfer budget between capital and operating undertakings; relatively uncommon type.

This report requests budget considerations that are of the type 2 category above, being a budget request with no impact on the budget balance as the total requested amount can be funded from the Economic and Business Development budget. The increase in contribution of $2,500 up to a total of $7,500 per annum over the five years will ensure that the Shire of Dardanup will not be significantly financially impacted in acting as the South West DAR and facilitating City of Busselton businesses access to skilled workers under the DAMA. 

 

Statutory Environment

The Commonwealth Migration Act 1958 enables the establishment of a DAMA and the Local Government Act 1995 establishes the mechanism for expenditure of public funds by local governments.

 

Relevant Plans and Policies

The officer recommendation aligns to the following adopted plan or policy:

·        City of Busselton Economic Development Strategy 2016-2026

 

Financial Implications

The City of Busselton’s financial contribution would be up to $7,500 per annum over five years and is considered a strong economic investment in businesses in the City of Busselton district. The $7,500 contribution for financial year 2021/2022 would be funded from the approved Economic and Business Development budget.  

 

Stakeholder Consultation

The City of Busselton has not specifically undertaken any external stakeholder consultation in relation to this matter, however, as part of the feasibility report carried out by Perdaman, consultation was performed with businesses throughout the South West region with a number of workshops and business surveys distributed.

 

Risk Assessment

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

 

Options

The Council can decide not to proceed with the proposed budget request to increase the City of Busselton’s contribution from $5,000 up to $7,500 per annum over the five year term. This may reduce the capacity of the Shire of Dardanup to act as the DAR and limit the ability of businesses within the City of Busselton to lodge a labour agreement request under the DAMA agreement.

CONCLUSION

Council’s approval is sought to increase the City of Busselton’s contribution to the Shire of Dardanup acting as the DAR for the South West DAMA by $2,500, from $5,000 up to $7,500 per annum over five years. The $7,500 contribution is be funded from the Economic and Business Development budget.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

If the officer recommendation is endorsed, the City will enter into a Memorandum of Understanding for the South West DAR with the Shire of Dardanup for the financial contribution within a month of being approved.

 


Council                                                                                      74                                                               27 October 2021

ITEMS FOR DEBATE

13.1           AMENDMENT NO. 50 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO. 21 (LOT 81 (18), STRATA PLAN 17588 (20), AND LOTS 115 TO 127 (26-50) GEOGRAPHE BAY ROAD, DUNSBOROUGH) - CONSIDERATION FOR ADOPTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL

STRATEGIC THEME

LIFESTYLE - A place that is relaxed, safe and friendly with services and facilities that support healthy lifestyles and wellbeing.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY

2.8 Plan for and facilitate the development of neighbourhoods that are functional, green and provide for diverse and affordable housing choices.

SUBJECT INDEX

Local Planning Scheme No. 21 Amendments

BUSINESS UNIT

Strategic Planning

REPORTING OFFICER

Planning Officer - Joanna Wilkinson

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

NATURE OF DECISION

Legislative: adoption of “legislative documents” such as local laws, local planning schemes and local planning policies

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Location Plan

Attachment b    Aerial Photo

Attachment c    Scheme Amendment Map

Attachment d   Schedule of Submissions

Attachment e    Schedule of Modifications  

 

Prior to the meeting, Councillor Riccelli foreshadowed a motion that was different to the officer recommendation. In accordance with clause 10.18(7) of the City’s Standing Orders Local Law 2018, it was taken to be an alternative motion and was moved first.

 

There was opposition to the motion, debate ensued and the alternative motion was carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2110/076              Moved Councillor S Riccelli, seconded Councillor A Ryan

That the Council:

1.       In pursuance of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, adopts Amendment 50 to Local Planning Scheme No. 21 for final approval, in accordance with the modifications proposed in the Schedule of Modifications shown at Attachment E, for the purposes of amending the Scheme map by modifying the residential density code from R80 to R60 over Lot 81 (18), Strata Plan 17588 (20) and Lots 115 to 127 (26-50) Geographe Bay Road, Dunsborough, subject to deletion of Items 2, 3 and 4 in the Schedule of Modifications.

2.         Advise the Western Australian Planning Commission that Amendment 50 is considered a ‘standard’ amendment pursuant to the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 as it is:

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

(b)           an amendment that would have minimal impact on land in the Scheme area that is not the subject of the amendment;

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

 

3.       Pursuant to r.53 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, endorses the Schedule of Submissions at Attachment D, which has been prepared in response to the public consultation process undertaken in relation to Amendment 50.

4.       Upon preparation of the necessary documentation, refers the adopted Amendment 50 to the Western Australian Planning Commission for consideration and determination in accordance with the Planning and Development Act 2005.

5.         Pursuant to r.56 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, should directions be given that further or different modifications to Amendment 50 are required, they shall be formally referred back to the Council for assessment and determination.

CARRIED 8/0

Reasons:  The modifications proposed in items 2, 3 & 4 in the Schedule of Modifications (Attachment E) are new amendments and should not be included in Amendment 50 which has been professionally prepared and submitted by an independent senior planner.

 

If the modifications suggested in items 2, 3, & 4 were accepted, they would ultimately eliminate the role of the 150m high water mark clause, thereby reducing our options to control the height.  It will allow significantly more discretion for higher buildings.

 

The officers have advised in their reasoning that the “stated purpose of Amendment 50 (changing R coding along Geographe Bay Road from R80 to R60) was to apply a 3-storey height control by way of the R60 coding and that they believe this stated purpose can only be achieved by resolving the inconsistency between the R60 coding and the Clause surrounding land within 150 metres of the mean high-water mark, hence their suggested Schedule of Modifications as an addition to Amendment 50.

 

This appears to be contrary to the community’s objectives. The Dunsborough community have clearly communicated their concern around building heights to the point of raising funds to initiate a Supreme Court Case. The community have indicated that 3 storey buildings are the highest they will accept, but preference is given to 1-2 storey building where possible.

 

Item 2 of Schedule of Modifications

My reasons for removing Item 2 primarily involve the references to R80 and R60.

 

In Item 2 of the Schedule of Modifications, officers are suggesting that Amendment 50 be further modified so that clause 4.3.2 includes not just RAC3 coded land, but also R80 and R60.  It is extremely important to understand that at present clause 4.3.2 only includes RAC3 zoned land which allows for a lot of discretion in relation to height, otherwise clause 4.8 applies and R codes are excluded entirely.

 

By including R80 and R60 in item 2 of the modifications, you are removing the ability to be governed by 4.8.1 thereby reducing the capacity to limit heights. It allows for a Developer to put an DA in again for a 4-storey building and even if the CoB refused to approve the DA, the JDAP can override this decision. I do not believe this is a policy neutral modification as it will have a major effect on future height controls. 

 

 

 

 

Item 3 of Schedule of Modifications

My reasons for removing Item 3 from the Schedule of Modifications are primarily around the officers’ suggestion to move the phrase except where otherwise provided for in the scheme” to include (a).

 

Below is the wording as it stands now without the Officer Recommendation to move the phrase “except where otherwise provided for in the scheme” to include (a).

 

1.       that Amendment 50 be modified so that clause 4.8.1 of the Scheme is amended to state: 

A person must not erect any building that -  

a) contains more than two storeys or exceeds a height of 9 metres above natural ground level, where land is within 150 metres of the mean high-water mark: or 

b) contains more than three storeys or exceeds a height of 12 metres above natural ground level, where land is more than 150 metres of the mean high-water mark, except where otherwise provided for in the scheme.

 

Officers are suggesting moving the phrase "except where otherwise provided for in the scheme" from where it currently sits after point (b) in item 3 of the Schedule of Modifications to in front of point (a) i.e. to include (a) as well as (b).

 

If we were to move that phrase to include (a) as well as (b) it undermines the 4.8.1 regulation. The phrase is part of (b) because (b) is open ended i.e. it covers land beyond 150m, (a) however covers land within 150m and therefore should not include the phrase.

 

Item 4 of Schedule of Modifications

My reason for removing Item 4 is due to the reference to land with a residential coding. It is in conflict with 4.3.2.   As already advised, 4.3.2 currently only applies to R-AC3 land not residential land with R60 and R80 codings, therefore the discretion granted by 4.8.3 can only be exercised in respect of R-AC3 land. Item 4 includes modifications which may be in direct conflict with the findings from the Supreme Court decision.

 

Point 5 Alteration of Officer Recommendation

My reasoning for my alteration to point 5 of the recommendation is to ensure that due to the importance and controversial nature of this issue and the effect that modifying the Amendment can have on height controls, all future modifications should come back formally to Council for consideration.

 

Supreme Court Decision

Lastly and perhaps most importantly, no modifications that impact height control and the high-water mark clause, should be allowed until the outcome of the Supreme Court decision.

 

I have heard the argument that the Supreme Court Action is about the lawfulness of a past decision and not about the planning law that will guide future decision, however I disagree with this. The Supreme Court Decision challenges whether there is lawful discretion to build anything over 9 metres.  It will determine whether clause 4.8.1 is absolute or if we can use the discretion of Clause 4.8.3. This will have a major impact on all future planning decisions around height control.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council:

1.         In pursuance of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, adopts Amendment 50 to Local Planning Scheme No. 21 for final approval, in accordance with the modifications proposed in the Schedule of Modifications shown at Attachment E, for the purposes of amending the Scheme map by modifying the residential density code from R80 to R60 over Lot 81 (18), Strata Plan 17588 (20) and Lots 115 to 127 (26-50) Geographe Bay Road, Dunsborough, as set out at Attachment C.

2.         Advise the Western Australian Planning Commission that Amendment 50 is considered a ‘standard’ amendment pursuant to the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 as it is:

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

(b)       an amendment that would have minimal impact on land in the Scheme area that is not the subject of the amendment;

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

3.         Pursuant to r.53 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, endorses the Schedule of Submissions at Attachment D, which has been prepared in response to the public consultation process undertaken in relation to Amendment 50.

4.         Upon preparation of the necessary documentation, refers the adopted Amendment 50 to the Western Australian Planning Commission for consideration and determination in accordance with the Planning and Development Act 2005.

5.         Pursuant to r.56 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, should directions be given that modifications to Amendment 50 are required, direct these modifications to be undertaken accordingly, on behalf of the Council, unless they are considered by officers likely to significantly affect the purpose and intent of the Amendment, in which case the matter shall be formally referred back to the Council for assessment and determination.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of this report is to set out recommendations regarding the final adoption of Amendment No. 50 (the Amendment) to Local Planning Scheme No. 21 (LPS 21), following consideration of the submissions received through the consultation process. The amendment proposes a reduction to the density coding of 23 residential lots fronting Geographe Bay Road on the Dunsborough foreshore, from R80 to R60. A location plan and aerial photograph are provided at Attachments A and B, respectively.

The Amendment was initiated by Council in February 2021 (C2102/021) following community interest in a recent development approval (DA 20/0624) in this locality, granted by the Regional Joint Development Assessment Panel (RJDAP). The majority of submissions to the Amendment demonstrate concern about future development in the locality and support for the proposed down-coding.

Officers recommend that Council seek finalisation of the Amendment in accordance with the modifications in the Schedule of Modifications provided at Attachment E.

BACKGROUND

Note: this section of the report has been drafted by an independent planning consultant who is not employed by the City. This consultant was engaged by the City to prepare the Amendment documents, draft comments and recommendations in respect of submissions received (Schedule of Submissions, Attachment D), and assist with the drafting of this Council report. Minor edits only have been made by officers and the consultant has indicated no objection to those edits. The views expressed in this section of the report do not necessarily reflect the views or understandings of City officers.

The Amendment was initiated by Council in response to community concerns about future development on Geographe Bay Road along the foreshore. This concern was prompted by the approval of DA 20/0624, a four storey apartment building on Lots 115 and 116 (26-28) Geographe Bay Road and Lots 139 and 140 (23-25) Lorna Street, by the RJDAP in February 2021.  Objections to DA 20/0624 centred on the height and bulk of the proposed development in this foreshore precinct, which was regarded as important to the attraction and ambience of Dunsborough as a residential and tourist area. Approval for the proposed development, including additional plot ratio requirements, setback dispensations and a parking reduction, was granted on the grounds that it satisfied the performance requirements of current state planning policies and was supported by a design assessment undertaken by consultants on behalf of the City. Some submitters indicated that they had been advised by the City that a three storey height limit would apply in this area as required in LPS 21.

This first apartment building development, as is often the case when areas are up-coded, demonstrated the potential and the impact of the R80 coding in this locality. The amalgamation of four lots for this development, their juxtaposition with Seymour Park and dual road access, enabled the design of a substantial four storey building on this site. Approval of this application highlighted the scope of height control provisions in LPS 21, providing for development above three storeys. It also raised wider concern about the ability of State and local planning instruments to achieve an acceptable design outcome in this locality without the support of a site-specific strategic framework and design guidelines for subdivision and development. Overall, there was significant concern about the transitioning of development in this area, and this approval was seen as an undesirable precedent for development along this sensitive foreshore strip.

The substantial increase in coding of lots from R15 to R80 was approved some four years ago as part of Amendment No. 1 to LPS 21. This change was justified at the time on the basis that it reflected the recommendations of a number of strategic plans and studies for the Dunsborough Town Centre. A proportion of the submissions opposed the coding change citing loss of “village” atmosphere as a result of the visual impact of increased height and bulk of buildings, increased noise and light, overshadowing, loss of privacy, and increased traffic and parking demand. The R80 coding was supported by the Council and approved by the Minister on the grounds that it reflected the strategic direction for the Town. It was considered that any negative impacts could be managed through the development approval process, the provisions of LPS 21 with regard to permitted heights, the Residential Design Codes (R-Codes), and comprehensive assessment within urban design guidelines. The City also indicated that it was committed to constructive engagement with the community to ensure transitional improvement in the town.


 

Since the approval of Amendment No.1, new State policies have been introduced to guide the design of residential buildings at a higher density. An urban design assessment which includes the subject lots (apart from Lot 81 (18) Geographe Bay Road) was completed in 2021 to assist with the preparation of a Precinct Structure Plan (PSP) for the Dunsborough Town Centre, but to date no specific design guidelines or special provisions have been prepared for this area. The City is actively engaged in the preparation of the PSP and preliminary consultation has revealed community concern about density and height of future development in the area.

Summary of Submissions to Amendment 50

A total of 114 submissions were received during public advertising of the Amendment, including one public objection and no agency objections. A Schedule of Submissions is provided at Attachment D.

The support for the Amendment followed several consistent themes. In the first place, submissions emphasised the need to retain the seaside village feel of Dunsborough particularly outside the Town Centre and along the foreshore. Great emphasis was placed on protecting and enhancing its small, intimate and unique character and the special qualities of the bay area. In this regard four storey development was seen as conflicting with this important objective and also perceived as likely to obstruct views to the foreshore coming from the Town Centre, block out northern sun to adjoining properties and contribute to increased traffic and parking problems.

There was general support for the R60 down-coding, in particular the three storey height control. R60 was seen by some respondents as achieving a balance between providing for manageable residential density and at the same time providing a transition between the Town Centre and the seafront. Some submissions indicated that further design controls should be implemented such as requiring greater setbacks for higher buildings to avoid solid walls opposite the foreshore and measuring setbacks from balcony lines rather than wall lines. A number of submissions favoured a two storey limit to maintain the low density environment along the foreshore.

Several submissions raised concerns about past assurances by the City that the height of the development would be limited to three storeys on the foreshore, through specific provisions in LPS 21 regarding development within 150 metres of the mean high water mark. The ‘loophole’ that allowed the approval of a four storey building approval was questioned and the importance of removing this to safeguard the future amenity of the foreshore locality.

Four submissions were received from owners of lots directly affected by the proposed down-coding to R60. Three of these, the owners of Lot 119 (34), Lot 122 (40) and Lot 126 (48) Geographe Bay Road, supported the coding of R60 citing concern with the impact of four storey buildings on the surrounding lots and the vista and views from the park and beachfront. The submissions emphasised the need to protect the space, peace and environment of the foreshore and the coastal feel and integrity of the town.

One objection to the Amendment was received on behalf of the owner of the four lots granted development approval for DA 20/0624. This submits that the Amendment should be modified and the R80 coding on this land retained as there is already a development approval in place, the proposed design is broadly consistent with an R80 coding, and the development approval is currently being implemented. It is argued that the land has unique characteristics abutting a public reserve, has dual frontage, constitutes a large development site and is in close proximity to the R-AC3 coding of the Town Centre. The submission also questioned the planning rationale behind the Amendment as the change from R80 to R60 is not apparently supported by strategic planning, planning principles or urban design modelling. Should the Amendment be modified over Lots 115 and 116 (26-28) Geographe Bay Road, given the unique attributes of the land and the fact that there is a development approval in place, the owner raises no objection to the down-coding of the remaining lots.

Current strategic direction for higher density residential development

There continues to be significant emphasis in State Government planning direction on increasing residential density in urban areas to provide for more diverse accommodation choices and to achieve a more sustainable footprint from an economic, environmental and social point of view. The approach of imposing higher density codings without adequate design control and guidance over existing residential areas has proved to be a “blunt instrument” in several cases with a corresponding adverse impact on urban form, streetscapes and the adjoining areas. Many initiatives in this regard throughout urban areas in WA have raised community concern prompting some successful attempts to reduce density codings and substantial review of State policy in the past few years. State Planning Policy 7.0 – Design of Built Environment (SPP 7.0) was gazetted in 2019 to address these issues more comprehensively. It identifies important design principles to be taken into consideration - context and character, landscape quality, built form and scale, functionality and build quality, sustainability, amenity, legibility, safety, community and aesthetics.

The R-Codes indicate that a local government may, with the approval of the WAPC, prepare local planning policies, local development plans, structure plans, and activity centre plans to deal with specific local circumstances. This acknowledgement of the need to protect sensitive and unique areas, such as coastal towns and foreshores, using these planning instruments reflects widespread practice in Australia and is of particular relevance to Dunsborough.

The Local Planning Strategy 2020 is the most recently endorsed strategic planning document for the City of Busselton, and recommends the continued growth of the Dunsborough Urban Area through the redevelopment and consolidation of the existing urban area, and identification of suitable areas for planned, progressive expansion. In this respect, it deals in broad terms with the issue of increased density and where it should be applied, but does not prescribe a specific density or built form outcomes.

It is intended that the PSP for the Dunsborough Town Centre, which is being progressed, will provide more guidance on how such development should occur in the Study Area. An Urban Design Assessment Report prepared by Urbis as part of the PSP process identified that the Town Centre had its own “sense of place” and a low key friendly atmosphere. The report came up with broad urban design objectives for identified precincts including the area the subject of the amendment defined as Dunn Bay East. Within this particular area it identified the potential for inconsistent streetscapes and the need to ensure that scale and transitioning between areas was properly managed. The Report was again broad in scope and not intended to be accompanied by specific recommendations to address the above design issues.

Future development along Geographe Bay Road

The application of the R80 coding in Amendment No. 1 to the local planning scheme, a substantial change from R15 coding in 2017, was based on broad recommendations in strategic documents including the objective of linking the town centre with the foreshore and providing for more activation from Dunn Bay Road southwards along Geographe Bay Road. The amendment created the opportunity for a range of mixed uses on the land coded R80 subject to the preparation of urban design guidelines or special provisions to address a range of issues. These included  appropriate building setbacks, built form articulation, architectural design, function, bulk, scale, massing, grain, signage, vehicular access, and  location of crossovers/provision of onsite car parking; roofscapes, skylines and service installation sites. This detailed guidance has not been undertaken to date and the assessment of DA 20/0624 was carried out using the R-Codes and a design assessment of the proposal by Urbis consultants.


 

The design assessment of DA 20/0624 specifically addressed design principles in the absence of local design guidelines and concluded that it was a suitable design response which largely met the design principles of SPP7.0. The assessment acknowledged in terms of context and character that the proposal departed from the existing two and three storey buildings in the vicinity, but considered it appropriate in the wider residential context of three storey structures across the Town Centre. It was also justified on the basis of its location close to Dunn Bay Road and its potential to provide a gateway entry and transition between the town centre and the foreshore. The assessment placed considerable emphasis on its advantageous siting next to Seymour Park which provided the opportunity not only for visual relief and containing the park edge but also surveillance and access for the gym and café uses. It also pointed out the opportunities for servicing, legibility and transitioning of building form offered by the larger lot size and its frontage to two streets.

The majority of the remaining R80 lots subject to the Amendment are between 800 and 900 square metres and are further removed from the Town Centre. Access is limited to Geographe Bay Road, there is no abutting open space and the interface is with R15 coded residential land. The lead up to and the processing of this Amendment has highlighted the need and demand for additional design controls to provide for more rigorous assessment of higher coded development along this portion of the Dunsborough foreshore. Whilst current State design policies and possible assistance by a Design Review Committee in the future may assist in development assessment, there is a need to address wider strategic issues than building design such as the transitioning of development with surrounding areas and articulating a clear vision for the future development of the Town.

Alternative Recommendations for Amendment No. 50

The alternative courses of action by the Council regarding the progress of the Amendment in terms of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, are to support the Amendment without modification, to support the Amendment with proposed modifications or not to support the Amendment.

The R60 coding if approved in this locality would reduce the prospect of development above three storeys on the remaining foreshore lots. This coding is not in conflict with the broad urban consolidation objective for the Dunsborough Town Centre and continues to reflect the strategic direction for mixed use and higher residential development in this locality. This would reflect the majority of views in submissions and signal the concern about the potential impact of the current R80 coding in this sensitive locality within the current planning framework. Given the constraints associated with developing the remaining lots and the progression of the PSP process this is unlikely to create any negative impact for landowners in the short term. It is recommended therefore that the Council resolve to seek final adoption of the Amendment.

The shortcomings of a blanket density code in this sensitive foreshore locality without supporting design guidance have been outlined above and it is recommended that the issue of more detailed analysis of potential development outcomes on the remaining lots be given priority as part of the PSP process or its recommendations for further action.

The proposed designation of the R60 coding on Lots 115 and 116 (26-28) Geographe Bay Road, whilst retaining the R80 coding on Lots 139 and 140 (23-25) Lorna Street, is potentially confusing given that the lots are being amalgamated to form one development site, with development approval for one building. In order to reflect a uniform coding over this development site, a modification to the Amendment to R80 or R60 should be required.


 

An R80 coding over the site would indicate the density approved for the apartment development. It would also represent an exception for this significant lot on the Dunsborough foreshore as Lots 81 and Strata Lots 1-9 across Dunn Bay Road and Lots 117- 127 Geographe Bay Road would remain coded R60. It is acknowledged that the site has some unique advantages for the design of a landmark commercial and residential development but a similar case could be argued for redevelopment of the site on the opposite corner of Dunn Bay Road.

If the R60 coding proceeds within this amendment, it will not affect the validity of the approval already issued. The development approval remains valid (notwithstanding any down-coding) unless the approval lapses and the development has not been substantially commenced. However, the development approval is the subject of an application for judicial review in the Supreme Court (unrelated to the proposed down-coding) and, depending on the outcome, this may impact on the validity of the approval.

Notwithstanding the concerns raised by the owner, it is recommended that the Amendment be modified to include Lots 139 and 140 in the R60 coding to reflect the overarching intention to down-code lots on the Dunsborough foreshore. It is envisaged that the PSP process will provide specific provisions and clearer guidance aimed at protecting the future of this unique foreshore location and this may prompt future amendments to the local planning scheme.

This recommendation for final approval and modification is made on the grounds that the proposed down-coding is not contrary to current strategic planning direction, reflects community concern about future development of this coastal locality, and will not cause a negative impact on future development of the area.

OFFICER COMMENT

Note: this section of the report has been drafted solely by Planning Officers who are employed by the City.

Recommended Modification to the Amendment – Scheme Map

Officers acknowledge that the proposal to down-code the subject lots from R80 to R60 broadly aligns with the strategic objective for urban consolidation and redevelopment in Dunsborough, and that it continues to allow for mixed use development in order to link the foreshore to the Town Centre.

In terms of mixed use development, land on the periphery of the Town Centre has been identified through a number of strategic documents, endorsed by Council, to allow for low-key commercial and service land uses to support the Town Centre. This was formally enacted through Amendment No. 1 and the introduction of ‘Additional Use 74’. The recent Dunsborough [Town] Centre Commercial Growth Analysis (Pracsys, 2018), commissioned to inform the Dunsborough PSP, identified that that there will be a shortfall of commercial floor-space in the Dunsborough Town Centre, to meet future demand. Mixed use development of these peripheral sites, including the subject land, will contribute to alleviating the shortfall of future demand.

Officers agree that the proposed designation of R60 coding on Lots 115 and 116 (26-28) Geographe Bay Road, whilst retaining the R80 coding on Lots 139 and 140 (23-25) Lorna Street, is potentially confusing given that the four lots have been approved for amalgamation and will form one development site, with development approval for one building. Officers also understand that a significant number of people in the community have expressed concern with four storey development on the site.


 

Officers also agree that, in contrast to the communication around the application of the ‘RAC-3’ Coding to the ‘Centre’ Zoned portion of the Dunsborough Town Centre, where implications in terms of building height and density were made clear, the same cannot be said to the application of the R80 coding to areas on the periphery. In part as a result of that and also having considered the submissions, officers do support the application of the R60 coding to the bulk of the land subject of the amendment.

Reflecting the recommendation of the independent planning consultant, the Schedule of Modifications provided as Attachment E indicates support for application of the R60 coding across the whole of the site. City officers are not fully supportive of that recommendation, and there are some alternatives that the Council may wish to consider – as briefly outlined in the ‘Options’ section of this report.

Recommended Modification to the Amendment - Scheme Text

Officers have recommended three additional modifications that relate to height control clauses in LPS 21. The key reason for these additional modifications is to ensure that the fundamental intent of the amendment is reflected in the Scheme – i.e. to apply a three storey height control to the affected land. The proposed changes and the more detailed rationale for them is set out below.

1.         To update clause 4.3.2 to include reference to the R60 residential density coding, to clarify that building proposals are permitted under the relevant provisions of the R-Codes.

The policy aim of the Amendment is to allow R60 coded buildings, with a three storey height control, to be proposed and considered within the Amendment area. Submissions were broadly supportive of the R60/three storey height control. Current height controls in clause 4.8.1(a) require that a building containing more than two storeys must not be erected within 150 metres of the mean high water mark, which is contrary to the policy aim of the Amendment. Clause 4.8.3 is intended to provide the discretion to vary clause 4.8.1, however these modifications would provide further clarification to landowners and developers that the R-Codes can be applied.

2.         To update clause 4.8.1 to clarify that the wording “except where otherwise provided for in the Scheme” applies to both parts (a) and (b) of the clause.

Currently, it is possible that the clause may be interpreted so that wording “except where otherwise provided for in the Scheme” is applied only to part (b) of clause 4.8.1.

3.         To update clause 4.8.1 to clarify that building height is measured from natural ground level.

For proposals where a residential density coding has been designated, they would be measured consistently with ‘Figure Series 7 – Building Height’ of the Volume 1 of the R-Codes, or in accordance with ‘2.2 Building height’ in Volume 2 of the R-Codes. For non-residential proposals, this also clarifies that building height would be measured from natural ground level (which is the reference point used in practice currently).


 

4.         To update clauses 4.3.2 and 4.8.3 when referring to the R-Codes, to reflect amendments to Volume 1 and the introduction of Volume 2.

When drafted, clauses 4.3.2 and 4.8.3 referred to a version of the R-Codes that is now redundant. In 2019 the R-Codes was effectively split into two separate volumes and, the result is that Volume 1 still contains provisions for single houses, grouped dwellings and multiple dwellings in areas coded less than R40, however planning and design standards for multiple dwellings in areas coded R40 or greater, within mixed use development and/or activity centres, is now contained in Volume 2 – Apartments. Each volume uses different terminology when referring to design standards and performance principles, and the structure and format of Volume 2 is quite different from that of Volume 1.

In regard to providing direct reference in clause 4.3.2 to the ‘Deemed-to-Comply’ and ‘Acceptable Outcome’ provisions of Volumes 1 or 2 of the R-Codes, Parts 2.4 and 2.5 (Volume 1) and page IV (Volume 2) of the R-Codes explicitly allow for the standards in each policy to be applied with a degree of flexibility, and the exercise of judgement on the contextual merit of individual proposals. While direct reference is made in this clause to ‘Deemed-to-Comply’ and ‘Acceptable Outcome’, a proposal could still be assessed on ‘Design Principles’ and ‘Element Objectives’ of Volumes 1 or 2 of the R-Codes, as proposed in the modification to clause 4.8.3.

5.         To clarify that clauses 4.3.2 and 4.8.3 should be read in accordance with amended versions of the R-Codes.

The R-Codes is subject to reasonably regular amendments (more so than many other State planning policies). This modification provides clarity that if specific parts of the R-Codes have been referenced in the Scheme, and the structure or format of the R-Codes is subsequently changed, then the stated part of the R-Codes should be read in accordance with the amended version of the R-Codes, which may be different to what is stated in the Scheme.

6.         To update clause 4.8.3 to clarify that only buildings proposed on land where a residential density coding has been designated, are to be consistent with the relevant provisions of the R-Codes.

Clause 4.8.3 currently requires that applications proposing to exceed the height controls specified in clause 4.8.1 are to be assessed against the relevant criteria of clause 67 ‘Matters to be Considered’ of the Deemed Provisions, and the relevant criteria of the R-Codes. However not all land within the City is zoned Residential and, it may not always be appropriate to assess development proposing to exceed the height controls against the relevant criteria of the R-Codes. In fact, it may be the case that none of the criteria are relevant.


 

Detailed Urban Design Guidelines

As discussed in the Background section above, Amendment No. 1 to LSP 21 up-coded the subject sites to R80, and at the same time the opportunity for mixed use development was created. Amendment No. 1 was gazetted in 2017, at a time when the State was developing new ‘performance-based’ urban design guidance through draft policies on the design of the urban environment and, more specifically, apartments within mixed use developments and/or activity centres. In many instances, as the State introduces and ‘works through’ policy reform, local governments can be delayed in their own development of complementary policy. Indeed the State planning policies 7.0: Design of the Built Environment and 7.3: Residential Design Codes Volume 2 – Apartments were not gazetted until, respectively, February and May 2019. Any work the City had done in this policy space prior to the gazettals may have been premature and rendered redundant during the time those policies were being formulated.

Officers accept and agree that detailed urban design guidelines for all of the subject lots will provide clarity around the design of future developments. In this regard, there is an opportunity to provide a nuanced approach in focused ‘design response areas’ through the Dunsborough PSP, in a manner that strategically provides for residential and commercial growth, and also listens and responds to community concern. A considerable amount of work in researching and collating information and data in respect to the preparation of the Dunsborough PSP has already been carried out, and it is anticipated that this will be presented to Council, for endorsement to advertise, later in 2021.

Statutory Environment

The key statutory documents relevant to this proposal include the Planning and Development Act 2005, the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, and the relevant objectives and provisions of the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21. Each is discussed below under appropriate subheadings.

Planning and Development Act 2005

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

Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015

The Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations), which came into operational effect on 19 October 2015, identify three different levels of amendments – basic, standard and complex. The resolution of the local government is to specify the level of the amendment and provide an explanation justifying this choice.  This Amendment is considered to be a ‘standard’ amendment.


 

Local Planning Scheme No. 21

The subject land is zoned ‘Residential’ with a residential density coding of R80; and, is identified in Schedule 2 ‘Additional Uses’ no. A74. Land uses and conditions specified for A74 are:

LAND USE PERMITTED/SPECIFIED

CONDITIONS

Guesthouse

Medical Centre

Office

Consulting Rooms

Restaurant/Café

Shop

Tourist Accommodation

1.         The Additional Uses specified shall be deemed to be “D” uses for the purposes of the Scheme.

2.         Shop’ land uses may be permitted at ground floor level only and occupy 50% of total development floor space, up to a maximum area of 300m2 per lot.

3.         A nil setback to the street shall be considered for active frontages.

4.         The provisions of Clause 4.25 relating to cash in lieu of car parking shall apply.

5.         Urban design guidelines (and/or Special Provisions) shall be prepared and adopted as a Local Planning Policy to address the following matters in relation to any proposed development:

a.         Appropriate building setbacks to prevent or suitably mitigate overshadowing or overlooking of neighbouring properties;

b.         Built form articulation, architectural design, function, bulk, scale, massing, grain, signage, and surveillance (in relation to the streetscape, surrounding buildings, adjoining land uses and the overall character and amenity of the subject development area);

c.         Vehicle access, and the location of crossovers/provision of onsite car parking;

d.         Roof scapes, skylines and service installation sites to ensure minimal visual intrusion.

Relevant Plans and Policies

The key policy documents relevant to this proposal are the Dunsborough Town Centre Conceptual Plan 2014, and the Local Planning Strategy. Each is discussed below under appropriate subheadings.

Dunsborough Town Centre Conceptual Plan 2014

This Plan shows land along Chieftain Court, Geographe Bay Road and Dunn Bay Road designated for potential expansion of low-key commercial development and increased residential density into adjoining streets which connect to the Town Centre and foreshore. It recommends that Dunsborough improves linkage with the foreshore by replacing low and intermittent activity with an area of interest and pedestrian amenity from the Town Centre.


 

City of Busselton Local Planning Strategy 2020

The LPS recommends the continued growth of the Dunsborough Urban Area through the redevelopment and consolidation of the existing urban area and identification of suitable areas for planned, progressive expansion. This objective to be achieved by urban consolidation and redevelopment (including increases in permissible residential density) in existing urban areas, especially in areas close to the Town Centre, high amenity areas, such as coastal locations, adjacent to open space, or areas close to significant community facilities.

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications associated with the officer recommendation.

Stakeholder Consultation

The Amendment was advertised for a period of 49 days ending 20 August 2021. During the advertising period it became apparent that direct written advice had not been sent to the 23 affected landowners. Each owner was contacted by telephone and email advising that the closing period for submissions would be extended by a further week.

A total of 114 submissions were received, from five government agencies and 96 different members of the public, including four affected landowners. Some members of the public provided two submissions of support, and 10 public submissions declared that they ‘did not support’ the proposal, however their comments indicated that they were in fact supportive. Each of these submitters was invited to clarify their views, and each provided a second submission, changing their view from ‘do not support’ to ‘support’.

One public submission was a clear objection, and there were no objections received from Government agencies.

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.         Resolve to not support the Amendment for final approval (and provide a reason for such a decision). The Council would need to make that as a recommendation to the Minister, setting out the rationale for the recommendation. The decision would then rest with the Minister, having also received and considered a recommendation on the amendment from the Western Australian Planning Commission.

2.         To make different or further modifications including, potentially, retaining the R80 coding over Lots 115 and 116 (26-28) Geographe Bay Road, and Lots 139 and 140 (23-25) Lorna Street, or retaining the R80 coding over the Lorna Street lots only, reflecting the amendment as advertised.


 

CONCLUSION

The Amendment concerns the potential future development of land along the Dunsborough foreshore, an iconic area of the South West and one that has merit for special design consideration. The coding of the land for R80 residential development in 2017, whilst reflecting broad strategic objectives, also placed reliance on LPS 21 and state residential development controls, and the use of specific design guidelines to guide future development. The recent approval of an apartment complex has demonstrated the potential impact of R80 coding, particularly in terms of height and bulk, in this sensitive foreshore location, and highlighted concerns about future development in this locality.

An R60 coding will continue to permit medium density development but will alleviate concerns about development exceeding three storeys. The Amendment proposal is not contrary to the strategic direction in state and local government policies and plans and reflects community concerns about the future development of this foreshore land, as it retains a medium density coding that will permit apartment and mixed-use development to occur, albeit at slightly lower density than is currently permissible. There is also the opportunity in future to provide more specific design guidance for the remaining lots in this locality and the townsite in the preparation of the PSP and further studies.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The implementation of the officer recommendation will involve the referral of Amendment No. 50 to the Western Australian Planning Commission for final approval and this will occur within one month of the resolution.


Council

89

27 October 2021

13.1

Attachment a

Location Plan

 


Council

90

27 October 2021

13.1

Attachment b

Aerial Photo

 


Council

91

27 October 2021

13.1

Attachment c

Scheme Amendment Map

 


Council

110

27 October 2021

13.1

Attachment d

Schedule of Submissions

 




















Council

114

27 October 2021

13.1

Attachment e

Schedule of Modifications

 




 


Council                                                                                      116                                                             27 October 2021

18.             Motions of which Previous Notice has been Given

Nil

 

19.             urgent business

Nil

 

20.             Confidential Reports  

Nil

 

 

 


 

21.             Closure

The Presiding Member closed the meeting at 6.54pm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

THESE MINUTES CONSISTING OF PAGES 1 TO 116 WERE CONFIRMED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD ON Wednesday, 10 November 2021.

 

DATE:_________________  PRESIDING MEMBER:         _____________________________