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 24 November 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. 4

8....... Confirmation and Receipt Of Minutes. 10

Previous Council Meetings. 10

8.1          Minutes of the Council Meeting held 10 November 2021. 10

Committee Meetings. 10

8.2          Minutes of the Finance Committee Meeting held 10 November 2021. 10

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

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

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

14.2        RFT 22/21 CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUSSELTON PERFORMING ARTS AND CONVENTION CENTRE (BPACC). 12

ADOPTION BY EXCEPTION RESOLUTION.. 26

12.1        Finance Committee - 10/11/2021 - LIST OF PAYMENTS MADE - SEPTEMBER 2021. 27

12.2        Finance Committee - 10/11/2021 - FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENTS - YEAR TO DATE AS AT 30 SEPTEMBER 2021. 37

14.1        RFQ 64/21 ASPHALT AND SPRAY SEAL SERVICES. 68

16.1        PROPOSED COUNCIL MEETING DATES 2022. 72

17.1        COUNCILLORS INFORMATION BULLETIN.. 76

ITEMS FOR DEBATE. 84

13.1        AMENDMENT NO. 40 (MODIFICATIONS TO THE ZONING TABLE) - CONSIDERATION FOR FINAL ADOPTION.. 84

16.2        DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY LOTS 58 & 59 CHAPMAN HILL ROAD AND LOT 60 QUEEN ELIZABETH ROAD, AMBERGATE, REPORT ON SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO LOCAL PUBLIC NOTICE UNDER SECTION 3.58 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1995. 247

18..... Motions of which Previous Notice has been Given.. 271

19..... urgent business. 271

20..... Confidential Reports. 272

20.1  RFT 04/21 ROAD NETWORK UPGRADE PEEL TERRACE/CAUSEWAY ROAD INTERSECTION UPGRADE STAGE 1. 272

21..... Closure. 274

 


Council                                                                                      8                                                            24 November 2021

MINUTES

 

MINUTES OF A Meeting of the Busselton City Council HELD IN THE Council Chambers, Administration Building, Southern Drive, Busselton, ON 24 November 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 Anne Ryan

Cr Phill Cronin

Cr Jodie Richards

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

Ms Sarah Pierson, Acting Director, Finance and Corporate Services

Mrs Emma Heys, Governance Coordinator

Ms Melissa Egan, Governance Officer

 

Apologies:

 

Nil

 

Approved Leave of Absence:

 

Nil

 

Media:

 

“Busselton-Dunsborough Times”

“Busselton-Dunsborough Mail”

 

Public:

 

53

3.               Prayer

The prayer was delivered by Pastor Andy Pitt of the Down South Gospel Church.

 

4.               Application for Leave of Absence 

Nil

 

5.               Disclosure Of Interests

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

 

·                Cr Kate Cox in relation to Agenda Item 13.1 ‘Amendment No. 40 (Modifications to the Zoning Table) – Consideration for Final Adoption’.

·                Cr Jodie Richards in relation to Agenda Item 13.1 ‘Amendment No. 40 (Modifications to the Zoning Table) – Consideration for Final Adoption’.

 

·                Cr Ross Paine in relation to Agenda Item 14.2 ‘RFT 22/21 Construction of the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre (BPACC)’.

The Mayor advised that, in accordance with regulation 22(2)(b) of the Local Government (Model Code of Conduct) Regulations 2021, these declarations would be read out immediately before the items were discussed.

 

6.               Announcements Without Discussion

Announcements by the Presiding Member

 

Nil

 

7.               Question Time For Public

Question Time for Public

 

7.1             Mr Gordon Bleechmore

 

Question

Will Cr Kate Cox be disclosing an interest in item 14.2 [‘RFT 22/21 Construction of the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre (BPACC)’] tonight?

 

Response

(Mayor)

It is up to each Councillor to declare whether they have an interest in an item or not.

 

Response

(Cr Kate Cox)

I am comfortable I do not have a financial interest in item 14.2.

                                  

 

 

Question

                   How many limestone extraction licences are issued in the City of Busselton?

 

                   Response

                   (Mayor)

                   We will take that question on notice.

 

                   Question

Has the final amount of Blue Tack been removed from the walls of the Community Resource Centre?

 

Response

                   (Mayor)

We will take that on notice.

 

                   Question

I noticed about 12 months ago, there was plastic placed around the peppermint trees behind the Weld Theatre – what was that for?

 

Response

(Mayor)

We will take that on notice.

 

Question

Mr Forrest, who has a limestone extraction licence at Ludlow, applied to have a caveat on his property lifted to allow a change of financial institutions. It was later discovered that the lawyers acting for the City of Busselton were instructed to go slow. Who from the City would have given that instruction?

 

Response

(Mayor)

We will take that on notice. If it is not legally privileged, we will provide an answer.

 

 

7.2             Mrs Lisa Shreeve, Chief Executive Officer, Busselton Jetty Inc.

 

Question

If we want the Australian Underwater Discovery Centre [AUDC] and the Performing Arts and Convention Centre to proceed, how can Busselton Jetty Inc. and the City of Busselton work together to ensure both projects are built?

 

Response

(Mayor)

We should work together like we did on previous projects on the Jetty, like the interpretative centre, the underwater observatory, and the rebuild of the Jetty. We should be advocating for $20 million from the State Government and seeking a top-up from the Federal Government for $20 million towards the AUDC project. The City and BJI should work collaboratively to meet the shortfall, should that not be well beyond the current expected price.

 


 

Question

The AUDC was the best and only plan that BJI and the City came up with together to reduce the ratepayer contribution to $0. If we do not build the AUDC, what is the plan so that ratepayers do not have to contribute more each year to Jetty maintenance?

 

Response

(Mayor)

Currently, BJI’s contribution is 25% of turnover, which pre-COVID, is $4 million per year. There are also additional leases [on the Foreshore] including the Hilton and the old tennis club, which contribute to the Jetty Maintenance Reserve. This will be about $450,000 per year once the Hilton is built. Between that and the Jetty Licence, there is a small shortfall which is made up by ratepayers. With additional leases, that shortfall can be closed even further.

 

 

7.3             Mr Keith Sims

 

Question

At the 8 September Council meeting, you moved “resolves to proceed with construction of the BPACC on the basis of a modified design including an option to stage the development”. Why do you not take notice of the 64% of the people saying ‘no’ in the survey results and vote against tonight’s motion to proceed with the BPACC?

 

Response

(Mayor)

It was not a motion, as it was not put. It was a proposal at the time that I discussed with fellow Councillors and we did not proceed with it. I wanted the opportunity to pursue up until the last minute further funding from the State Government. And I do not take on board that it was 64% that said no. That is just not true.

 

Question

Are you going to vote against this proposal?

 

Response

(Mayor)

I will listen to debate and make my decision based on all the information presented.

 

Question

The business case [for the BPACC] had an interest rate of 1.96% in August 2021. Now the interest rate as at November 2021 is 2.5%. Has the interest rate been factored in to the business case and at what extra cost?

 

Response

(Mayor)

It has been factored in to the long-term impacts and there has been modelling conducted on the increased interest.

 


 

Question

I do not believe that Councillors have all the financial information to make a decision on the BPACC tonight.

 

Response

That information would be estimated in any case, because there are things like contingent funds in a building that may or may not be utilised. It is a best esimate of costs and how it will be paid for.

 

 

7.4             Mr Trevor Avery

 

Question

With value add engineering, you have managed to get the tenders for the BPACC under $38 million. Most projects of this size come in at least 10%-20% over budget. Will we see variations to the contract because COVID will drive up the labour costs and the material costs?

 

Response

(Mayor)

Should the resolution be approved this evening, the resolution is to authorise the CEO to sign a fixed price contract, without those labour and material escalations in it, for under $38 million. There is a contingency amount, but with our experience on superintending and managing projects, we are pretty close to the mark and within our budget and contingent thresholds.

 

Response

(Mr Mike Archer, Chief Executive Officer)

There is a contingency of $3 million.

 

Response

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

The project budget has $38 million for the construction build, the contingency amount of $3 million and then it does have some other allocations for landscaping and other design fees, so $44 million is the total project budget, which is in the officer report for Councillors to read.

 

7.5             Mr Kevin Strapp

                  

Question

Have any of the groups in favour of the BPACC project made any financial contribution to the project?

 

Response

(Mayor)

I am not aware of any contribution.

 

Response

(Mrs Naomi Searle, Director, Community and Commercial Services)

The Busselton Repertory Club have fundraised and been successful with obtaining just under $1 million for upgrading the Weld Theatre.

 


 

Question

Australia’s South West foreshadowed a discounted package deal involving BPACC. Who is going to be paying for the marketing?

 

Response

(Mayor)

We will be doing some promotion to attract shows and bring people to town.

 

Response

(Mrs Searle)

Australia’s South West has been successful in obtaining Federal Government funding to assist in the marketing of the Busselton Melbourne route.

 

Question

The City has a contingent liabaility to Jetstar to pick up the costs of any empty seats over a 3-year period. Is this contigent liability budgeted?

 

Response

(Mayor)

It is budgeted, but the commercial agreement with Jetstar is confidential.

 

 

7.6             Ms Michelle Shackleton

 

Question

Given that the BPACC budget is four times the construction cost of the HEART, and the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River has to fund local community groups to the sum of $62,810 annually, to afford booking costs, is there a budget so our local groups can use these facilities?

 

Response

(Mrs Searle)

We have financial projections in the business plan, which is on the City’s Your Say website. We have factored that into our financial projections. The Magaret River HEART operates differently to the way we propose to operate the BPACC, so it is difficult to compare the two.

 

Question

The groups that presented in favour of the BPACC already have premises that they operate from. The BPACC will only offer a final performance place, not somewhere to operate on a weekly basis.

 

Response

(Mayor)

There are rehearsal spaces as well as performance space.

 

Response

(Mrs Searle)

The financial projctions for the BPACC also includes a line item for discounting community groups.

 


 

Question

On what grounds do you ignore the advice received early on [in the Pegasus report] that there was not the need, in terms of the population, to make the BPACC succesfful?

 

Response

(Mrs Searle)

That report was prepared in 2008. A number of reports have been commissioned since. More recently, a market demand analysis has been undertaken that took into consideration Margaret River HEART and the BREC, that indicated the City of Busselton could sustain and has the demand for a 600 and up to a 650 seat performing arts centre. That is also included in Your Say on the website.

 

Question

Did Cr Cronin convey his conversation he had with the manager of the BREC during the Town Teams conference in August where she told him that BPACC would have a detrimental effect on the BREC?

 

Response

(Cr Phill Cronin)

I was not told that comment. We were told they were wanting to work with us and we have talked closely with the BREC.

 

Question

Apparently there are 115 people who are going to come to town to build the BPACC. Where will they live?

 

Response

(Mr Archer)

My understanding is the builder has secured accommodation, but he is looking at a lot of local contractors who have already got accommodation.

 

 

7.7             Mrs Julia Avery

 

Question

Who is the City official who authorised the removal of the Eucalypts in the car park near Mitchell Park?

 

Response

(Mr Paul Needham, Director, Planning and Development Services)

The land is privately owned, there is a development approval in place for the development of the land, and there are no City approvals required for clearing of those trees.

 

Question

Does the Council intend to continue to knock down old trees?

 

Response

(Mayor)

We are not knocking down trees.

 


 

8.               Confirmation and Receipt Of Minutes

Previous Council Meetings

8.1             Minutes of the Council Meeting held 10 November 2021

COUNCIL DECISION

C2111/090              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor A Ryan

 

That the Minutes of the Council Meeting held 10 November 2021 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

CARRIED 9/0

 

Committee Meetings

8.2             Minutes of the Finance Committee Meeting held 10 November 2021

COUNCIL DECISION

C2111/091              Moved Councillor A Ryan, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That the Minutes of the Finance Committee Meeting held 10 November 2021 be noted.

CARRIED 9/0

 

9.               RECEIVING OF Petitions, Presentations AND DEPUTATIONS

Petitions

 

Nil

Presentations

 

Mrs Helen Shervington, Chair CinefestOZ, spoke with respect to Agenda Item 14.2 RFT 21/22 Construction of the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre (BPACC).

Mrs Shervington was in favour of the officer recommendation.

 

Mr Ray Mountney, Bay to Bay Action Group, spoke with respect to Agenda Item 14.2 RFT 21/22 Construction of the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre (BPACC).

Mr Mountney was opposed to the officer recommendation.

 

Mr John McCallum, President, Busselton Repertory Club, spoke with respect to Agenda Item 14.2 RFT 21/22 Construction of the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre (BPACC).

Mr McCallum was in favour of the officer recommendation.

 

Mr Paul Kotsoglo, Managing Director, Planning Solutions, spoke with respect to Agenda Item 13.1 ‘Amendment No. 40 (Modifications to the Zoning Table) - Consideration For Final Adoption’.

Mr Kotsoglo was opposed to the officer recommendation.

Deputations

 

Nil

 

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

Nil

 


 

6.54pm:                At this time, the Mayor indicated that Item 14.2 ‘RFT 22/21 Construction of the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre (BPACC)’ would be moved forward for the benefit of the gallery.

11.             Items brought forward

14.2           RFT 22/21 CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUSSELTON PERFORMING ARTS AND CONVENTION CENTRE (BPACC)

STRATEGIC THEME

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

STRATEGIC PRIORITY

2.4 Establish a performing arts facility for the District.

SUBJECT INDEX

Tenders

BUSINESS UNIT

Major Projects and Facilities

REPORTING OFFICER

Manager Major Projects and Facilities - Eden Shepherd

Manager, Community Services - Maxine Palmer

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director, Engineering and Works Services - Oliver Darby

NATURE OF DECISION

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

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Published Under Separate Cover  Confidential RFT 22/21 Evaluation Report with attachments (Panel Consensus Report, Evaluation Sheet)  

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

Date

24 November 2021

Meeting

Ordinary Council

Name/Position

Cr Ross Paine / Councillor

Item No./Subject

Item No. 14.2 ‘RFT 21/22 Construction of the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre (BPACC)’

Type of Interest

Impartiality Interest

Nature of Interest

I previously disclosed an impartiality interest, as I was a volunteer with Acting Up, which is an organisation that occasionally hires the Weld Theatre.

 

Prior to the meeting, Cr Ryan 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 considered first.

 

There was opposition to the alternative motion and debate ensued.

 

During debate, Cr Henley foreshadowed moving the officer recommendation.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2111/092              Moved Councillor A Ryan, seconded Councillor J Richards

 

1.              That the City decline to accept any tender for the Performing Arts and Convention Centre.

2.              Acknowledges the financial support provided by the Commonwealth Government and the advocacy of our Federal Member the Hon. Nola Marino MP and note the disappointing lack of State Government funding for this priority project.

 

3.              Seek Commonwealth Government Department approval to vary the Regional Growth Fund grant and recoup any design and professional fees of approximately $1.8m incurred to date on the BPACC project.

4.              Seek to enlist Commonwealth Government Departmental and Ministerial approval to quarantine and reallocate the balance of funding of the City’s Regional Growth Fund grant towards the provision of a new airport terminal or Busselton Jetty AUDC.

5.              Further revisit the project as a priority project in 2023, alongside an interim review of the LTFP and SCP, then clearly articulate to the community when a performing arts project will be delivered.

LOST 4/5

For the motion: Cr Ryan, Cr Richards, Cr Riccelli, Cr Love

Against the motion: Cr Henley, Cr Carter, Cr Cronin, Cr Paine, Cr Cox

 

With the alternative motion being lost, Cr Henley's foreshadowed motion, being the officer recommendation, was considered.

 

There was opposition, debate ensued and the officer recommendation was carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2111/093              Moved Councillor G Henley, seconded Councillor P Cronin

 

That the Council accepts the tender from Broad Construction Pty Ltd for RFT 22/21 Construction of the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre subject to minor variations being negotiated in accordance with Regulation 20 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations and subject to the building construction contract value not exceeding $38,000,000 (excluding GST).

CARRIED 5/4

For the motion: Cr Henley, Cr Carter, Cr Cronin, Cr Paine, Cr Cox

Against the motion: Cr Ryan, Cr Richards, Cr Riccelli, Cr Love

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council accepts the tender from Broad Construction Pty Ltd for RFT22/21 Construction of the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre subject to minor variations being negotiated in accordance with Regulation 20 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations and subject to the building construction contract value not exceeding $38,000,000 (excluding GST).

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City of Busselton invited tenders under Request for Tender, RFT 22/21 Construction of the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre (RFT 22/21), for a suitably qualified contractor to construct the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre. 

 

This report documents the results of the tender evaluation and makes a recommendation to Council about the award of the tender. 

 

BACKGROUND

The Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre (BPACC) is planned as a destination for performing arts, conferences, trade shows and events. The City Busselton will be provided with a state-of-the-art events facility, functionally and technically different to any other in the State, meeting the needs of our community and its visitors, with a contemporary design respecting the heritage setting, bringing vibrancy to the City’s cultural precinct. 

 

The BPACC will form an integral part of the Cultural Precinct, located in and respecting its heritage setting between the ArtGeo Gallery and the Weld Theatre along Queen Street. This has been a key consideration in the conceptual design of the building aesthetics along with operational integration between new and existing facilities.

 

The need for a performing arts venue was initially identified as early as 2004, and since then feasibility reports, project planning and comprehensive stakeholder and community engagement has occurred to ensure the viability, support and long term sustainability of the centre.  The development of the facility has been identified in cultural plans and as a community priority through the City of Busselton’s strategic community planning processes over consecutive years. 

 

Alongside the Busselton and Dunsborough Foreshores, and the Busselton Margaret River Airport, the BPACC has been progressed as a priority pillar project of the City, providing social and cultural benefits, and as an economic driver.  In brief the economic and social benefits can be summarised as:

 

Economic:

·        Injection of $6.6m annually to the local economy (as per the December 2020 Cost – Benefit Analysis);

·        Creation of local jobs - 115 during construction and 44 through its operations;

·        Increased tourism and events offering;

·        Increased visitor spend and attraction of a more lucrative, higher spending business, incentive and exhibition travel market;

·        Activation of CBD, particularly night time activation, and connection of the foreshore with the Busselton town centre.

Social:

·        Providing support for local artistic and cultural pursuits;

·        Providing opportunities for creative industries sector;

·        Broadening opportunities for creative youth;

·        Providing entertainment for youth;

·        Improved mental health and capacity to connect and engage;

·        Total social benefits valued at an estimated $7M (as per as per the December 2020 Cost – Benefit Analysis).

 


 

The project scope for RFT 22/21 incorporates but is not limited to the following:

 

·        A traditional performing arts auditorium with a minimum of 600 seats;

·        Stage with capacity to accommodate a symphonic orchestra

·        Adjoining studio/rehearsal/function and conference facilities with operational flexibility to hold small or large events;

·        Multipurpose foyer/function space capable of supporting larger events, conferences, trade shows;

·        Administration and technical support space;

·        Service kitchens;

·        An A class gallery; and

·        Integration of existing Weld Theatre Building and ArtGeo Building with the new building.

 

The project is jointly funded by the City of Busselton and the Federal Government. The $10.35m Federal Government funding agreement has been extended to 30 June 2023 for completion of the project. 

 

The City has also continued to pursue other funding opportunities through both Federal and State Governments as well as the private sector.  Following the South West Development Commission’s engagement of an independent consultant to review the BPACC business case, the Minister for Regional Development advised the City recently that the State Government would not contribute to the project given the City’s strong financial position and capacity to cover the debt required to complete the build.  A Lotterywest funding application of $2.7m was submitted in October 2021 and remains pending.

 

The City issued RFT 06/21 for Construction of BPACC in March 2021.  RFT 06/21 closed in May 2021 with prices coming in higher than anticipated due to construction market conditions. As a result Council resolved at its Ordinary Council Meeting on 23 June 2021 (C2106/0136):

That the Council:

1.         Acknowledges receipt of the tender submissions for RFT 06/21 Construction of the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre; and

2.         Declines to accept any tender; and

3.         Continues to pursue additional funding from State and Federal Governments; and

4.         If a commitment for further funding is not obtained within one month that would maintain or not significantly increase the current financial contribution by the City, reviews design options and associated impacts and undertakes a community survey to help inform decisions on the future of the project.

 

Having been unable to secure a funding commitment from the State Government and receiving no further funding from the Federal Government (although representations continue), the City reconsidered design options for the facility and then engaged Catalyse Pty Ltd, an independent research company to conduct a community survey.  The survey sought community views in relation to the project, in order to provide information that would assist and contribute to Council’s decision making on its future.  Further information in relation to the community survey is presented under the Stakeholder Consultation section of this report.

 

Following presentation of the survey results and considering all factors including favourable borrowing terms (20 years fixed low interest rates), economic benefits and social return on investment, Council resolved at its Ordinary Council Meeting on Wednesday 8 September 2021 (C2109/194):

That the Council:

1.         Receives and notes the outcomes of the survey in relation to the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre (BPACC); and

2.         Resolves to proceed with construction of the BPACC on the basis of the current and previously tendered design subject to value engineering options that do not materially affect functionality or performance of the centre;

3.         Delegates power and authority to the CEO to accept a tender and enter into a construction contract not exceeding the value of $38 million, either through the public invitation of tenders or through utilisation of Regulation 11(2)(c)(i) of the Local Government (Function and General) Regulations 1996 ; and

4.         Acknowledges the community sentiment raised by some residents in relation to potential future rate increases and the City’s debt levels; and

5.         Requests that the CEO review funding options for the BPACC which may assist to mitigate concerns around rate increases and debt, including continuing to pursue State and Federal Government funding contributions, reviewing the use of City Reserves to potentially reduce Treasury borrowings, and reviewing Fees and Charges; and present funding scenarios as part of the next review of the City’s Long Term Financial Plan.

 

On Friday 10 September 2021, the City issued RFT 22/21. RFT 22/21 closed at 2pm on
Wednesday 6 October 2021.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

RFT 22/21 was issued as a closed request for tender by the City to 5 suitably qualified builders who were shortlisted via a prior expression of interest process (EOI02-20 Construction of the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre).

 

Two tender submissions were received by the City from the following companies:

 

·        Broad Group Holdings Pty Ltd

·        Perkins (WA) Pty Ltd

 

Assessment Process

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

 


 

The tender assessment process included:

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

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

Criteria

Weighting

·    Tendered Price

50%

·    Key Personnel Skills and Experience

5%

·    Demonstrated Understanding

25%

·    Value Management

20%

 

The net tendered price was scored using the ‘average based scoring method’ recommended by WALGA in the Local Government Purchasing and Tender Guide. 

 

The qualitative criteria were scored depending on the extent of which each tenderer was able to appropriately satisfy each criteria. The tenders were then scored and ranked to determine the most advantageous outcome to the City; based on principles of representing best value for money.

 

Summary of Assessment Outcomes

The outcome of the evaluation panel’s assessment was that Broad Group Holdings Pty Ltd was determined to be the highest ranked tenderer.  Broad Group Holdings Pty Ltd offered a competitive price and demonstrated a strong understanding of the overall project scope and requirements.  The confidential attachment (Attachment A) provides further detail in relation to the relative merits of each tender. 

 

Price Considerations and Value Management

The budget for the construction of the BPACC is $38 million, with an overall project budget of $44.5 million (excluding GST).  Excluding consideration of any value management options, all tenders submitted exceeded the construction budget of $38 million, with the lowest priced tenderer exceeding the construction budget by approximately $4.6 million. Each tenderer provided value management options that allow the City to generate savings.  The tender from Perkins however remained above the allowable budget noting that VE options were not impact on the functionality of the building.

 

Inclusive of value management options, the total construction cost of under $38 million is able to be achieved with Broad Group Holdings Pty Ltd. A summary of those value management options is provided below.


 

Item

Description

Savings

Structure

Timber to steel (internal/external), change colour of concrete and fabrication boundary wall.

$934,022

Finishes

Carpets reduction M2 rate, simplified ceiling finishes, removal feature ceiling (foyer), simplified geometry auditorium timber veneer panels, door hardware, wall panelling in foyer areas, bar benchtop (stone to artificial)

$1,263,046

Exterior

Redesign roof light, alternative glazing system, alternative AC fixing system

$287,794

Services

Various mechanical and electrical items reviewed and supported by City consultant team.

$191,742

Other savings

Remove landscape and loose furniture (budget provided for separately), cabinetry (1 bar), Ground Floor kitchen fit out (cold shell), simplify Back of House external elevation

$1,627,701

TOTAL

- $4,304,305

 

Evaluation Panel Recommendation

Based on the Evaluation Panel’s assessment and overall ranking of the tenders it is recommended that the City accept the tender from Broad Group Holdings Pty Ltd (Preferred Tenderer) for the following reasons:

·        The Preferred Tenderer demonstrated a good range of relevant experience and ability to deliver the scope of works;

·        The Preferred Tenderer demonstrated a very good understanding of the project requirements and ability to complete the works within the desired timeframe;

·        The Preferred Tenderer provided comprehensive value management options that do not compromise the functionality and operational efficiency of the venue; and

·        The Preferred Tenderer’s value management options are economical and bring the total cost of construction to within the budget.

Statutory Environment

Council resolved on 8 September 2021 to delegate power and authority to the CEO to accept a tender and enter into a construction contract not exceeding the value of $38 million.  Notwithstanding this, the CEO is of the view that it is most appropriate for the Council to make the decision to proceed with construction and therefore accept the tender.  

 

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

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

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

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

 

Relevant Plans and Policies

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

 

The development of a performing arts facility for Busselton has been identified as a priority project in the City of Busselton Strategic Community Plan since 2010 (2013, reviewed 2015; 2017, reviewed 2019 and as recent as 2021).

 

A Performing Arts and Convention Centre in Busselton was also identified as a priority project in the South West Development Commission South West Blueprint, the City of Busselton Economic Development Strategy, Cultural Plan, Cultural Interpretation Strategy and Event Strategy, the Capes Regional Arts and Cultural Facilities Needs Assessment, and most recently in an Industry Sector Analysis Report and Investment Strategy prepared for the City.

 

Busselton was also identified as one of just four cultural and creative activity hotspots in Western Australia in a study by the Queensland University of Technology and University of Newcastle, Australia commissioned by the Australian Government Research Council. The report noted how the investment in the BPACC would address the lack of cultural hub and large-scale cultural amenities in the City.

 

Financial Implications

The tender price on application of value management options is $37,736,572. The table below sets out the overall project budget, estimated project value and the variance to budget.

Project budget

Tender price

(including VE options)

Variance

Building contract

including Weld Theatre upgrade

$38,000,000

$37,736,572

-$263,428

Other City costs

Consultant design

$2,800,000

$2,800,000

$0

Contingency

$3,000,000

$3,000,000

$0

Loose furniture/AV

$250,000

$250,000

$0

Landscaping

$500,000

$400,000*

-$100,000

Additional design fees

$69,000

$69,000

Utility costs

$193,000

$193,000

TOTAL

$44,550,000

$44,448,572

-$101,428

* Landscape allowance reduced due to pricing at tender (VE savings swap granite for Queen St pavers (-$100k))

The total project funding is set out as follows:

Income

Value $

Comment

Federal Grant

$10.35M

Extended to 30 June 2023

Loan Borrowings

$26.5M

Fixed 20 years 2.5% (current as at 10 November 2021)

Old Library Building Sale

$2.7M

 

P&G / Building Reserve

$575,000

 

LRCIP Federal Grant

$1.92M

Tranche 3

Surplus 20/21

$1M

 

Developer Contributions

$625k

 

Sponsorship

$250k

Rio Tinto

Furniture & Equipment Reserve

$350k

 

TOTAL

$44,550,000

 

The City also has other funding opportunities including a current application with Lotterywest for $2.7M, to be determined in December / January. If successful, this would reduce the loan borrowings down to $23.8M.

 

The City has the borrowing capacity to more than adequately service the required loan amount while maintaining the appropriate benchmarks debt ratios. To ensure the City’s debt remains within an acceptable level, the Debt Service Coverage Ratio (DSCR) is required to remain above the minimum standard of 2.0 as per the Department of Local Government Sport and Cultural Industries (DLGSC) Guidelines.

 

Based on a final loan value of $26.5M, borrowed at a low fixed interest rate of 2.5% over a term of 20 years (interest rate confirmed as at 10 November 2021), the impact of the total projected borrowings on the City’s DSCR is depicted in the graph below, demonstrating the City’s borrowing capacity.  The graph below clearly highlights the City’s ability to remain well above the minimum standard, and from year 2028/29 exceed the highest standard.

 

 

Borrowings and associated repayments could be funded through increases to fees and charges or rates, or a combination of the two.   In addition, Council also has the ability to consider a review of key cash reserves held by the City, of which there is a current balance of $62.8 million, and to consider its current schedule of transfers to reserves.  For example Council could defer the 1% of rates scheduled to be transferred to the CBD Upgrade Reserve, noting that recent upgrade to the Busselton CBD was brought forward through receipt and use of Federal stimulus funding under the LRCIP (Tranche 1).

 

As detailed in the community survey information, in the absence of any other funding, an additional rate increase of up to 2% may be necessary to fund the borrowings, most likely applied over 3 years and taking rate increases from projected increases of 2.5% (22/23), 2.95% (23/24) and 2.95% (24/25) to 3.5% in each of those years.  Based on the average rent per annum, a 1% increase equates to $18 per annum. 

 

In summary, based on all of the current modelling and information, Council does have the financial capacity to proceed with the project at the tendered value if it chooses to do so.

 

Stakeholder Consultation

The City has, since as early as 2004 – 2005, engaged with stakeholders and the community in relation to plans for a performing arts centre.  Consultation with relevant community and stakeholder groups have assisted in the development of a functional detailed design of the venue. The community groups consulted have included:

·        Acting Up

·        Australia South West

·        Aboriginal Advisory Group

·        Business Events Perth

·        Busselton Repertory Club

·        Busselton Chamber of Commerce

·        Margaret River Busselton Tourism Association

·        Busselton Town Team

·        High Schools

·        Undalup Association

·        Local choir and dance groups

Community Survey

Most recently, in July – August 2021, a community survey was undertaken through an independent research company, to ascertain community views on the project and to provide information that would assist and contribute to Council’s decision making on the future of the project.

 

A total of 2,352 people completed the survey with the survey submissions grouped and reported by:

·        residents;

·        out of area ratepayers;

·        visitors;

·        businesses; and

·        Council affiliated

 

The City has also further sought a random sample ratepayer grouping – as identified (shaded) in the table below.

 

The resident sample was weighted for age and gender (using ABS population data); with the out of area ratepayers, visitors, businesses and council affiliated samples being unweighted. Council affiliated respondents were removed from the resident sample to ensure this remained free of any perceived or potential bias. 

 

The table below summarises the sentiment as to whether Council should proceed (based on selection of either option A or B) or not proceed (based on selection of option C) with the project:

 

 

Proceed (A or B)

Do not proceed (C)

Unsure / NR

Residents

45%

53%

2%

Random

44%

52%

 

Opt In

45%

53%

 

Out of area ratepayers

73%

27%

0%

Visitors

90%

9%

1%

Businesses

46%

52%

2%

Council affiliated 

71%

29%

0%

Resident and out of area  ratepayers - Random sample *

48%

48%

4%

 

* Additional data-set obtained to reflect combined (resident and non-resident) ratepayer sentiment.

 


 

In making its previous decision Council took into account the various views expressed by the community alongside the project objectives, benefits and costs. To summarise these views:

 

·        Males and gender diverse residents are the least supportive of the project proceeding, along with those in the 55 plus age bracket, and those living in rural and rural residential locations.

·        Support is strongest amongst resident youth and younger adults.  Support declines through the age brackets.  

·        Residents with children in the household are more supportive than those without (50% support vs 41% support).

·        The results do not vary significantly in terms of where people live within the District, with the exception of rural and rural residential residents.

·        Owner-occupiers are less supportive of proceeding with the project than those renting / other, who are quite strongly supportive (41% support owner occupier vs 65% support renting / other).

·        Out of area ratepayers, visitors and council affiliated respondents are very supportive of the Council proceeding.

·        Businesses as a subset sample (noting this includes both resident and out of area respondents) are less supportive.

·                When looking at all ratepayers within the random sample support for proceeding versus not proceeding was split equally at 48%.

Qualitative analysis of the survey results showed that respondents who selected Option A were primarily focused on the economic and social benefits.  Respondents who selected Option B did so on the basis that it is a cheaper option, and adequate for our needs.  Respondents who selected Option C were primarily focused on financial concerns.

 

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management framework, with the assessed taking into account any controls already in place.  The following risk has been identified: 

Reputational damage with respect to resident perceptions of Council not listening.

Risk Category

Risk Consequence

Likelihood of Consequence

Risk Level

Reputation

Moderate

Possible

Medium

Financial risk due to the current climate.

Risk Category

Risk Consequence

Likelihood of Consequence

Risk Level

Financial

Moderate

Possible

Medium

 


 

There are also risks associated with the option proposed in the options section of this report, as outlined below:

 

Reputational damage with respect to those residents and respondents who would like to see the project proceed.

Risk Category

Risk Consequence

Likelihood of Consequence

Risk Level

Reputation

Moderate

Possible

Medium

Reputational damage with respect to Federal Government perception by returning the $10.35M and loss of future financial funding.

Risk Category

Risk Consequence

Likelihood of Consequence

Risk Level

Reputation

Moderate

Possible

Medium

Financial opportunity loss / risk of returning the $10.35M in funding.

Risk Category

Risk Consequence

Likelihood of Consequence

Risk Level

Financial

Moderate

Likely

High

 

Options

As an alternative to the proposed recommendation the Council could move the following motion:

That the Council:

(1)       Decline to accept any tender for the construction of the Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre (BPACC) and defer the project due to the current lack of external funding.

(2)       Acknowledges the financial support provided by the Commonwealth Government and the advocacy of our local Federal member the Hon. Nola Marino MP, and note the disappointing lack of State Government funding for this priority project.

(3)       Continue to advocate for funding for the BPACC Project from State and Commonwealth Governments.

(4)       Seek Commonwealth Government Departmental approval to vary the Regional Growth Fund (RGF) grant and recoup any design and professional fees (of approximately $1.8M)  incurred to date on the BPACC Project.

(5)       Seek to enlist Commonwealth Government Departmental and Ministerial approval to quarantine and reallocate the balance of funding of the City’s Regional Growth fund grant towards the provision of a new airport terminal.

(6)       Further review the future of this priority project as part of the City’s next Long Term Financial Plan and Strategic Community Plan review, then clearly articulate to the community when a performing arts and convention centre is likely to be delivered.


 

Rationale for the option is outline below:

·        Notwithstanding that there is community support for the project, officers also acknowledge there is community concern in relation to the costs of the project.

·        That, as identified in the risks section of this report, despite the City’s best contract and project management experience, there are always finance risks associated with budget management for projects of this size and nature, and especially in the current economic climate. 

·        The airport is another priority project of the City and there is an immediate need at the airport for a new terminal given the increased activity levels being experienced.  Hence officers recommend in this option that a request is made to quarantine the funds for this purpose. This would supplement the $500,000 provisioned by the Commonwealth Government for a new airport terminal and replace the funding that the State Government has reallocated.  Officers’ note there is no guarantee of this being supported and it is likely that significant lobbying would be required. 

If Council choose this option, it is important to inform the community as to why and as to the future of the project, noting it has been a priority project for many years and that half of the community is keen to see it proceed.  Hence it should continue to be looked at as part of the next review of the City’s Long Term Financial Plan and Strategic Community Plan.

CONCLUSION

This project has been identified as a community priority for over twelve years along with the City’s two other pillar projects - the Busselton Margaret River Airport Development and Busselton and Dunsborough foreshore developments. It took nine years to secure sufficient Commonwealth funding to enable the project to progress beyond a concept. A project of this size is a one off investment for the future in arts and culture and in a facility that will support events, arts, culture, and increase vibrancy within the town.

 

It is a difficult decision for any Council and one that requires Councillors to consider many factors.  Council needs to consider the cost to construct and operate such a centre, alongside the value of arts, culture, events and entertainment in terms of the broader economic benefit and the social benefits in terms of the health and vitality of our community. The potential loss of $10.35m in funding and the ability for Council to provide this facility in the future, without such funding, also needs to be considered, as does the views of the community which are essentially split 50/50 as to whether Council should proceed with the project or not.

 

Having considered all of these factors, and in accordance with Council’s previous decision, it is recommended that Council accept the tender under RFT 22/21 from Broad Group Holdings Pty Ltd as the most advantageous to the City, subject to minor variations to be negotiated by the CEO, not exceeding the overall value of $38 million.  

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Should Council adopt the officer recommendation, it is anticipated that the contract for construction will commence in December 2021.   


Council                                                                                      26                                                          24 November 2021

                ADOPTION BY EXCEPTION RESOLUTION

At this juncture, the Mayor advised the meeting that the following items would be adopted en bloc, i.e. all together.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2111/094              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor R Paine

 

That the Committee Recommendations for items 12.1 and 12.2 and the Officer Recommendations for items 14.1, 16.1 and 17.1 be adopted en bloc:    

12.1        Finance Committee - 10/11/2021 - LIST OF PAYMENTS MADE - SEPTEMBER 2021

12.2        Finance Committee - 10/11/2021 - FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENTS - YEAR TO DATE AS AT 30 SEPTEMBER 2021

14.1        RFQ 64/21 ASPHALT AND SPRAY SEAL SERVICES

16.1        PROPOSED COUNCIL MEETING DATES 2022

17.1        COUNCILLORS INFORMATION BULLETIN:

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 


Council                                                                                      27                                                          24 November 2021

12.1           Finance Committee - 10/11/2021 - LIST OF PAYMENTS MADE - SEPTEMBER 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

Acting Director, Finance and Corporate Services – Sarah Pierson

NATURE OF DECISION

Noting: The item is simply for information purposes and noting

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   List of Payments - September 2021

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 10/11/2021, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

 

The committee recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2111/095              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor R Paine

 

That the Council notes payment of voucher numbers M118922 – M118970, EF081893 – EF082494, T7572 – T7574, DD004591 – DD004628, as well as payroll payments, together totalling $28,520,356.08

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council notes payment of voucher numbers M118922 – M118970, EF081893 – EF082494, T7572 – T7574, DD004591 – DD004628, as well as payroll payments, together totalling $28,520,356.08

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

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

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Not applicable.


Council

36

24 November 2021

12.1

Attachment a

List of Payments - September 2021

 




Council                                                                                      52                                                          24 November 2021

12.2           Finance Committee - 10/11/2021 - FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENTS - YEAR TO DATE AS AT 30 SEPTEMBER 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

Acting Director, Finance and Corporate Services - Sarah Pierson

NATURE OF DECISION

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

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Investment Report - September 2021

Attachment b    Loan Schedule - September 2021

Attachment c    Financial Activity Statement - September 2021

 

This item was considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting on 10/11/2021, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

 

The committee recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2111/096              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor R Paine

 

That the Council receives the statutory financial activity statement reports for the period ending 30 September 2021, pursuant to Regulation 34(4) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council receives the statutory financial activity statement reports for the period ending 30 September 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 30 September 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 30 September 2021

The Statement of Financial Activity (FAS) for the year to date (YTD) shows an overall Net Current Position of $48M as opposed to the budget of $39M. This represents a positive variance of $9M 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

 

0.81%

528,501

520,572

1.    Other Revenue

153,615

31,375

414,950

389.61%

122,240

42,050

2.    Interest Earnings

312,828

149,280

609,250

109.56%

163,548

85,567

Expenses from Ordinary Activities

 

12.81%

2,717,604

567,626

3.    Materials & Contracts

(2,967,723)

(4,266,623)

(20,245,296)

30.44%

1,298,900

159,455

4.    Other Expenditure

(650,103)

(1,565,260)

(9,685,100)

58.47%

915,157

340,308

5.    Non-Operating Grants, Subsidies and Contributions

703,230

6,105,480

34,850,687

(88.48%)

(5,402,250)

(1,475,021)

Capital Revenue & (Expenditure)

 

49.88%

9,788,177

2,901,912

6.    Land & Buildings

(148,069)

(5,598,429)

(22,802,632)

97.36%

5,450,360

1,654,641

Plant & Equipment

(452,278)

(138,000)

(2,870,000)

(227.74%)

(314,278)

(391,997)

Furniture & Equipment

(82,777)

(295,950)

(828,800)

72.03%

213,173

(9,420)

Infrastructure

(2,877,830)

(8,988,375)

(38,537,750)

67.98%

6,110,544

1,344,837

7.    Proceeds from Sale of Assets

0

71,500

776,071

(100.00%)

(71,500)

(20,000)

8.    Total Loan Repayments – Principal

(614,430)

(731,069)

(3,839,418)

15.95%

116,639

116,640

9.    Transfer to Restricted Assets

(2,669,786)

0

(21,740)

(100.00%)

(2,669,786)

(181,546)

10.  Transfer from Restricted Assets

894,473

0

1,735,682

100.00%

894,473

345,502


Revenue from Ordinary Activities

In total, revenue from Ordinary Activities is very close to budget at only 0.81% ahead YTD.  There are however some material variance items, that contribute to this.

                                   

1.      Other Revenue

Ahead of YTD budget by $122K, or 389.6%, 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

111,350

2,384

108,966

4570.73%

23,644

G0030 & G0031

Busselton & Dunsborough  Transfer Station – Sale of Scrap Materials

108,511

2,384

106,127

4451.62%

20,872

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.

 

2.      Interest Earnings

Interest earnings are $164K 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 $2.7M, or 12.6%, less than expected when compared to the budget YTD as at September. The expense line items that have a YTD variance that meet the material reporting threshold are outlined below.

 

3.     Materials & Contracts

Less than YTD budget by $1.2M.  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

289,410

569,580

280,170

49.2%

7,792

10000

Members of Council

2,365

40,021

37,656

94.1%

(2,312)

Timing variance with payment of WALGA subscriptions delayed.  These variances will persist even when this is paid, as the actual cost will be spread and allocated evenly over the term of the subscription, whereas the budget was set on a cash-outlay basis.

10200

Financial Services

5,571

16,024

10,453

65.2%

5,321

Savings to budget are as a result of bank charges not coming in at the level expected, and some budgeted subscriptions either being cancelled or allocated to more appropriate areas.


 

10250

Information & Communication Technology Services

151,328

251,047

99,719

39.7%

(13,186)

The monthly allocation of the annual budget was set based on a 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.

10500

Legal and Compliance Services

(641)

30,786

31,427

102.1%

7,340

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 reversal, where the invoices for the services have come in slightly less than expected on the purchase orders.

10510

Governance Support Services

6,711

31,451

24,740

78.7%

8,375

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) will persist.

10521

Human Resources & Payroll

17,570

30,537

12,967

42.5%

(6,884)

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

10,721

41,733

31,012

74.3%

9,054

We can never say with certainty when this budget will be drawn on, even in comparison to prior year trends, 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

285,581

692,937

407,356

58.8%

141,067

10380 & 10381

Busselton & Dunsborough Libraries

18,587

38,978

20,391

52.3%

5,983

The variances YTD mainly arise in relation to the cost of Computer Software Licences used at the libraries being spread over the period they relate to, rather than when the cash is outlaid, which is how the budget was allocated.

10540

Recreation Administration

(8,736)

25,667

34,403

134.0%

25,478

The credit relates to year end accrual reversals for which invoices are yet to be received.

10543

Community Development

36

55,000

54,964

99.9%

15,000

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 November/December with bulk of expenditure expected from Jan 2022.   Timing of disbursement may need to be amended at mid-year budget review.

10591

Geographe Leisure Centre

85,137

72,454

(12,683)

(17.5%)

(13,374)

The overspend YTD is due to increased expenditure in cleaning consumables/maintenance, earlier than forecast procurement of non-capital furniture and office equipment, and increased expenses for café consumables, which is offset by additional income.

10600

Busselton Jetty Tourist Park

87,805

143,754

55,949

38.9%

8,350

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.

11151

Airport Operations

38,499

214,011

175,512

82.0%

107,328

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

 -

17,034

17,034

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)

6,927

30,321

23,394

77.2%

645

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 and have not yet been invoiced.

·    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.   Accommodation payment on the corporate credit card has not yet been processed as yet.

·    August & September purchases on credit card have not been processed.

·    Mental health week event budget was not utilised as paired with Raising the Vibe concert.

·    Crime prevention grant cost for August/ Sept/ October/ November will now be delivered in Jan 2022.

Planning and Development Services

170,046

139,927

(30,119)

(21.5%)

(35,702)

10820

Strategic Planning

5,017

39,276

34,259

87.2%

8,096

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.    

10925

Preventative Services - CLAG

43,242

17,250

(25,992)

(150.7%)

(34,769)

The CLAG budget is fully reconciled with the Shire of Capel after the mosquito season each year.  This will occur circa February and all changes made accordingly by the EOFY each year.

10931

Protective Burning & Firebreaks-Reserves

74,457

4,011

(70,446)

(1756.3%)

1,269

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.


 

10950

Animal Control

6,238

17,243

11,005

63.8%

5,330

The YTD underspend variance relates to the following:

·        Loose Tools Purchase - $1.2K for the Spectur Annual Charges

·        Purchase of Materials:

o   $4.5K due to only 1 pallet of dog bags being purchased as a result of reduced usage over winter period.  Another pallet will be purchased November (forecast 1 pallet per quarter)

o   $1.5K due to purchase of cat cages delayed (ACF modification)

·        Computer Software Licenses & Cloud Services - $750 due to timing delay in prepaid cost allocation

·        Fines Enforcement Costs - $1.3K underspend. Fines enforcement referrals are processed on an ad-hoc basis, and dependent on non-payment of fines.

Various

Bushfire Brigades

14,609

4,369

(10,240)

(234.4%)

(4,409)

BFBs are currently preparing for the upcoming fire season.  A large amount of PPE has been purchased in readiness for dispersal to BFB as required.

Engineering and Works Services

2,222,499

2,807,761

585,262

20.8%

(9,207)

10830

Environmental Management Administration

53,717

99,555

45,838

46.0%

64,395

Annual budgets for consultancy, contractors and purchase of materials were allocated at the end of each quarter.  Historic expenditure is weighted in a large proportion during the second half of the year and so a review of budget timing will be undertaken.  Approximately $30,000 invoices for street tree planting, revegetation and weed control were approved in October.  Spring weed control is currently underway.

11170

Meelup Regional Park

7,122

59,510

52,388

88.0%

22,723

The recreation reserve maintenance budget was spread evenly across the year and thus does not reflect seasonally impacted expenditure patterns. To this end, planning is under for the noxious weed control program and works associated with the Healthy Countries Plan. $95K in works have been committed representing works that are now underway or will commence shortly.   

12600

Street & Drain Cleaning

86,018

109,072

23,054

21.1%

(5,549)

The budget was entered based on historical expenditure patterns averaged over the previous three financial years.  All of $465K annual budget has already been committed based on a scheduled maintenance plan, so the YTD variance is timing only.

12620 & 12621

Rural & Urban Tree Pruning

117,360

291,501

174,141

59.7%

63,555

This year’s rural tree pruning budget of $352K included $153K carried over from the prior year. Works are ordinarily planned to be done by the end of November 2021 however priority has been given to storm damage clean-up activities meaning some of these works will now occur later the financial year. The rural road verges to be pruned are prioritised based on the time since last pruned, inspections, volume and types of traffic and numerous other considerations. This is a timing variance only.

Various

Bridge Maintenance

25,457

115,608

90,151

78.0%

(13,547)

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 well underway. Bridge maintenance works scheduled in 2020/21 were postponed due to May 2020 storm costs incurred, with $208,000 of the 2021 budget subsequently carried over into the first quarter of this the new financial year. This variance will moderate as this level with the remaining budget realigned to later in the year commensurate with when works are planned to commence.


 

Various

Building Maintenance

305,478

247,649

(57,829)

(23.4%)

(18,833)

The budget was entered based on historical expenditure patterns averaged over the previous three financial years. This area is impacted by seasonality with costs increasing through the busy summer holiday period and also post Easter where the level of scheduled maintenance has historically been at its highest. To this end, 3/12th of the annual Materials & Contractor budget equates to $518K which is favourable to the $305K expended YTD. Thus the $57.8k variance is considered a timing variance only.  

Various

Waste Services

352,520

618,794

266,274

43.0%

(28,520)

$65K and $53K of the variance is associated with a portion of the concrete crushing and green waste processing that is planned for later in the financial year. $52.8K is attributable to External Restoration Works associated with the Rendezvous contaminated sites matter. $38K of the variance is associated with postponement of the FOGO trial where no costs are being incurred.

Various

Roads Maintenance

275,424

193,898

(81,526)

(42.0%)

(60,870)

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, drainage maintenance, fixing pot holes 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

Parks & Gardens

260,354

299,738

39,384

13.1%

30,267

This variance comprises YTD under and over’s against 188 individual cost codes with an annual budget totalling $2.392m. 3/12th of the annual budget is $598K and thus actual costs at the end of September amounting to $260K are acceptable. The variance is due to timing only.

 

4.      Other Expenditure  

$915K, or 58.5%, 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

14,285

20,751

6,466

31.2%

3,681

10001

Office of the CEO

4,303

20,751

16,448

79.3%

4,503

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%)

 -

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

Finance and Corporate Services

222,090

210,642

(11,448)

(5.4%)

41,982

10000

Members of Council

84,400

136,503

52,103

38.2%

42,544

Timing related variances with underspends in primarily member allowances and sitting fees, plus some more minor underspends in reimbursements and training expenses due to change of council members.

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%

 -

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.  Remaining budget from September to June has been re-allocated to June.

10700

Public Relations

18,460

28,682

10,222

35.6%

(910)

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

Community and Commercial Services

281,808

1,246,055

964,247

77.4%

313,338

10530

Events & Cultural Services Administration

(10,015)

50

10,065

20130.0%

50

The credit represents the reversal of an accrual of costs related to services received in June from Busselton Horse & Pony Club, for an invoice has not yet been received and processed.

10532

BPACC Operations

(350)

12,500

12,850

102.8%

12,500

BPACC operational activity will not commence until such time as the Tender for construction has been awarded and timeframes for delivery of the project are known.

10543

Community Development

145

63,367

63,222

99.8%

880

This relates to the first two rounds of Community Assistance Program. Round 1 and 2 approvals were combined due to Council elections. Expected a similar trend in October, with approx. $50,853 by end of November.  Timing of disbursement may need to be amended a mid-year budget review as timing is largely dependent on CAP Applications received from community groups.

10558

Events

207,510

329,482

121,972

37.0%

38,720

There have been 3 funded events (Pedal Prix WA, SW Mudfest, Cape Naturaliste Pro) cancel for a total of $38k. We are also waiting on a number of events to invoice us for event sponsorships.

10634

Business Support Program

 -

23,850

23,850

100.0%

 -

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

 -

575,528

575,528

100.0%

192,176

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.

11156

Airport Development Operations

 -

148,550

148,550

100.0%

 -

At the time of setting the budget the timing for the final carried over payments related to a noise mitigation project were not known. $148K 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. 

Planning and Development Services

33,233

7,610

(25,623)

(336.7%)

(25,075)

10820

Strategic Planning

28,710

215

(28,495)

(13253.6%)

(28,300)

The budgeted contribution to the Peron Naturaliste Partnership occurred one month earlier than planned.


 

Engineering and Works Services

98,688

80,202

(18,486)

(23.0%)

6,381

11000

Engineering & Works Services Support

117

19,083

18,966

99.4%

6,950

The budget YTD represents the planned donations of portions of the pavers removed from the CBD during the footpath upgrade project. The recipients of the donations are yet to contact the City to organise collection, as such the donations have not been processed in the accounts.

B1223

Micro Brewery - Public Ablution

 -

60,000

60,000

100.0%

 -

The full contractual contribution towards the Micro Brewery Public Ablutions was made in the 19/20 and 20/21 financial years. A remaining $60K contribution was incorrectly included again in the 21/22 budget. The budget will be amended in due course to remove this outgoing.

G0042

BTS External Restoration Works

94,497

 -

(94,497)

(100.0%)

 -

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

 

5.      Non-Operating Grants, Subsidies & Contributions  

The negative variance of $5.4M 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.  Where this is not the case, the reconciliation of the projects and the required funding to be recognised in revenue is not competed until closer to year end.

Revenue Code

Revenue Code Description

Actual YTD

$

Amended Budget YTD

$

Variance
YTD
$

Variance
YTD
%

Change in Variance Current Month

$

Community and Commercial Services

 -

66,401

(66,401)

(100.0%)

(66,401)

10540

Recreation Administration

 -

25,625

(25,625)

(100.0%)

(25,625)

10590

Naturaliste Community Centre

 -

23,350

(23,350)

(100.0%)

(23,350)

C6010

Airport Fencing Works

 -

17,426

(17,426)

(100.0%)

(17,426)

Engineering and Works Services

698,230

6,034,079

(5,335,849)

(88.4%)

(1,403,620)

A0014

Bussell Highway Bridge – 0241 – Federal Capital Grant

 -

744,000

(744,000)

(100.0%)

 -

A0022

Yallingup Beach Road Bridge - 3347 – Federal Capital Grant

 -

700,000

(700,000)

(100.0%)

 -

A0200

Donated Bridges

698,230

 -

698,230

100.0%

698,230

B9407

Busselton Senior Citizens – Developer Cont. Utilised

 -

111,750

(111,750)

(100.0%)

 -

B9591

Performing Arts Convention Centre – Federal Capital Grant

 -

2,277,000

(2,277,000)

(100.0%)

(1,138,500)

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%)

 -

S0334

Chapman Hill Road – MR Capital Grant

 -

374,000

(374,000)

(100.0%)

(374,000)

S0335

Kaloorup Road – MR Capital Grant

 -

120,475

(120,475)

(100.0%)

(120,475)

S0336

Wildwood Road – MR Capital Grant

 -

468,875

(468,875)

(100.0%)

(468,875)

 

6.      Capital Expenditure  

As at 30 September 2021, there is an underspend variance of 76.3%, or $11.5M, in total capital expenditure, with YTD actual at $3.5M against the YTD budget of $15M. 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

145,470

5,585,928

5,440,458

97.4%

1,650,474

B9614

Dunsborough Lakes Sporting Precinct-Pavilion /Changeroom Facilities

 -

75,000

75,000

100.0%

25,000

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

B9300/1/2

Aged Housing

Capital Improvements

1,870

92,150

90,280

98.0%

40,280

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

10,861

4,604,798

4,593,937

99.8%

1,534,772

The project has been retendered. 

B9596

GLC Building Improvements

32,213

71,284

39,071

54.8%

41,612

Proposed project for stadium ventilation has been put on hold, pending a review of capital projects.

B9605

Energy Efficiency Initiatives (Various Buildings)

78,162

111,580

33,418

29.9%

22,568

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%

 -

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 the property team to establish viability of infrastructure works and costs for water supply. A clearing permit application is also underway, however all other activity on the project has been put on hold until these issues are resolved.

B9612

Churchill Park

Renew Sports Lights

7,160

212,850

205,690

96.6%

(5,160)

Works were planned to take place in July 2021, however due to a budget increase of $73K from CSRFF grant funding, the project was re-scoped.  RFQ’s have gone out, with design works expected to commence in November.  Actual works will not commence until after trotting season, sometime in February or March 2022.

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%

 -

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

Plant & Equipment

452,278

138,000

(314,278)

(227.7%)

(391,997)

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 a Management position. Vehicle has been ordered, delivery due in January.


 

11107

Engineering Services Design

 -

70,000

70,000

100.0%

 -

Limited informal quotations were received for new survey equipment, which has delayed commencement of the procurement process. Formal RFQ documentation will be prepared in October, with procurement planned for November.

11402

Plant Purchases (P10)

420,639

8,000

(412,639)

(5158.0%)

(391,997)

This is a carryover from 2020/21 FY of the second generator for the DWF and a new rubbish truck.  The budget timing for this was later in the year.

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

82,777

295,950

213,173

72.0%

(9,420)

10250

Information & Communication Technology Services

56,790

 -

(56,790)

(100.0%)

(14,690)

Costs were incurred for new Attain software (for Governance), and the Council Chambers A/V upgrade.  The new Promapp software (for business process mapping for the whole organisation), was purchased earlier than expected.

10558

Events

 -

200,000

200,000

100.0%

 -

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 will be discussed with MERG at the November meeting.

10590

Naturaliste Community Centre

 -

34,950

34,950

100.0%

8,350

Budget is for fencing to accommodate vacation care program and purchase of replacement fitness equipment. A purchase order will be raised in October for fencing works and an equipment purchase order will be finalised in November.

10900

Cultural Planning

 -

13,400

13,400

100.0%

 -

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%

 -

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

Infrastructure By Class

2,877,830

8,988,375

6,110,544

68.0%

1,344,836

Various

Roads

443,548

2,704,550

2,261,002

83.6%

1,381,187

The majority of road construction happens during the months October to April. 56% of the YTD variance representing $1.256M is associated with the four projects being Wildwood Road (now underway), Chapman Hill and Kaloorup Road safety shoulder widening projects and the State blackspot project for the Sugarloaf Road upgrade and renewal. All these projects had their budget spread evenly across the year as works had not yet been scheduled. These projects are valued at $5.059M collectively and represent 40% of Road capital works for the year. 27% representing $615K of the variance is associated with the Peel / Queen street roundabout renewal works that were carried over from last financial year. These works will now commence after Christmas. It is anticipated that this variance will begin to moderate as major road works projects continue to come on line. Budgeted cash flows are not reflective in all instances of scheduled works which is resulting in the significant YTD variances.


 

Various

Bridges

698,230

1,444,000

745,770

51.6%

(698,230)

Major bridge works are completed by MRWA and are primarily scheduled to take place between the months of October to May when creek and river flows are at their lowest levels. Financial recognition of works is often not done with MRWA until late 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. The City has limited control over Main Roads scheduling and it is often the case that some Bridge projects are rescheduled into the following year.     

Various

Car Parks

95,440

786,427

690,987

87.9%

176,669

87.5% of the YTD variance is attributable to the following projects:

·        Dunsborough Lakes Sporting Precinct (Stage 1) – Car parking under spent to YTD budget by $400K; stage 2 works are not scheduled to commence until the new calendar year thus the budget timing is not reflective of when works will be undertaken.

·        Barnard Park East Foreshore Car Parking $204K; Tender has been awarded with works now underway.

Various

Footpaths & Cycleways

288,746

532,250

243,504

45.7%

(24,759)

47% of the YTD variance valued at $114K is associated with the Buayanup Drain Shared path project that has now been completed with only minor works remaining. Not all the budget will be expended as the value of the project was reduced towards the end of last financial year, however the amount carried over was not adjusted based on the reduced cost. This variance will remain unless the budget is reduced accordingly.

52% of the YTD variance valued at $102K is associated with path works at the Barnard East Development that is now underway and works at the Busselton Foreshore.       

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

Parks, Gardens & Reserves

1,245,488

3,392,197

2,146,709

63.3%

538,757

Various

Busselton Jetty - Capital Expenditure

13,970

136,262

122,292

89.7%

(5,250)

Major Maintenance works are scheduled to take place on the Jetty between late October and March, when sea conditions are most conducive. The timing of major works on the jetty can be quite variable based on the nature of tasks planned.

Various

Waste Services

10,703

452,500

441,797

97.6%

310,924

The majority of this variance is associated with budgets that were carried over from the previous year. 56% of the variance representing $250K is regarding Stage 1 Busselton Landfill Post-closure Capping, Rehab & Remediation works that are not as yet planned to go ahead this financial year. $82K of the YTD variance is regarding works on a Depot Washdown Facility Upgrade that is still in the planning phase.    

Various

Townscape & Vasse River

6,085

36,223

30,138

83.2%

3,697

No works of any significance associated with projects within this category have yet commenced.

Various

Other P&G Infrastructure

1,171,173

2,727,212

1,556,038

57.1%

231,459

72% of this significant YTD variance to budget valued at a combined $1.125m is associated with the carried over Barnard Park East Foreshore Development and the Dunsborough Lakes Sporting Precinct project including the Non-Potable Water Network. A further $158K of the YTD variance is associated with the Mitchell Park redevelopment with works on this project ongoing.

Various

Regional Airport & Industrial Park Infrastructure

105,778

128,951

23,174

18.0%

(28,189)

This line item is made up of four separate account strings all part of the Airport development project. Some are completed (underspent) and others may not be spent until the end of the FY depending on timing of the works.

 

7.      Proceeds From Sale of Assets  

YTD there have been no proceeds from sale of assets recorded against the YTD budget of $71.5K. This is due to the continuing delays in delivery of acquisitions, and the associated transfer to auction of the vehicles being replaced. 

 

8.      Total Loan Repayments - Principal  

Repayments of the principal on loans is $117K under budget YTD, due to the loan for the BPACC not proceeding as budgeted.

 

9.      Transfer to Restricted Assets  

There is a YTD variance in transfers to Restricted Assets of $2.7M 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, totaling $2.3M, have been received and transferred to Restricted Assets for which there was no budgeted transfer:

·        $44K 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;

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

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

·        $526K from DFES for the Mitigation Activity Fund and shared costs of the Emergency Services Manager;

·        $30K from the Federal Government Community Grants Hub for Community Child Care Sustainability programs;

·       $11K from the South West Catchment Council - National Landcare Program for the planting of 4,000 seedlings; and

·       $20K from Australia’s South West to fund an aviation research report for the Recovery for Regional Tourism Project Control Group.

 

Developer contributions, deposits and bonds are inherently hard to predict and budget for. An annual amount of $22K was budgeted for later in the year, however over $393K has been received YTD, with $136K for road works bonds and $166K for caravan park deposits.

 

10.   Transfer from Restricted Assets

YTD there has been $894K transferred from Restricted Assets into the Municipal Account. This was mainly attributable to $500K of Bushfire Mitigation Activity funds that did not need to be restricted, and $287K of various roadworks grant & bond funding that has been utilised.

 

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 30 September 2021, the value of the City’s invested funds totalled $94.4M up from $78.4M as at 31 August 2021. This is due to the payment of rates becoming due during the month and subsequently invested.

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) decreased from $12.5M to $6.5M as fund were transferred to new term deposit accounts.  

 

During the month of September four term deposits totalling the amount of $11.0M matured and a further eight term deposits totalling $22.0M were opened. Remaining deposits were renewed for a further 193 days at 0.31% on average.

 

The official cash rate remains steady for the month of September at 0.10%.  This will continue to have an impact on the City’s interest earnings for the foreseeable future.

 

Borrowings Update

As at YTD September there have been no new loans entered into or drawn down.  The attached Loan Schedule outlines the status of all existing loans as at September YTD.

 

Chief Executive Officer – Corporate Credit Card

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

 

Date

Payee

Description

$ Amount

20/09/21

AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE  OF COMPANY DIRECTORS

SOUTH WEST DIRECTOR’S BRIEFING - THE BOARD’S ROLE IN WORKFORCE CULTURE.  M.ARCHER*

$60.00

22/09/21

MANTRA ON HAY

FOOD & ACCOMMODATION -ATTENDANCE AT 2021 LOCAL GOVT CONVENTION  - Cr R.PAINE

$581.00

30/09/21

LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROFFESIONALS AUST. WA

LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROFFESIONALS ANNUAL STATE CONFERENCE 2021.  M.ARCHER*

$1,200.00

 

 

TOTAL

$1,841.00

* Funding from CEO’s professional development allowance under contract.

 

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 30 September 2021, the City’s net current position stands at $48M. The City’s financial performance is considered satisfactory, and cash reserves remain strong.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Not applicable.  


Council

54

24 November 2021

12.2

Attachment a

Investment Report - September 2021

 


Council

55

24 November 2021

12.2

Attachment b

Loan Schedule - September 2021

 


Council

66

24 November 2021

12.2

Attachment c

Financial Activity Statement - September 2021

 













Council                                                                                      71                                                          24 November 2021

14.1           RFQ 64/21 ASPHALT AND SPRAY SEAL SERVICES

STRATEGIC THEME

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

STRATEGIC PRIORITY

2.10 Provide local road networks that allow for the safe movement of people through the District.

SUBJECT INDEX

Request for Quotation

BUSINESS UNIT

Operations and Works Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Maintenance & Construction Coordinator - Kevin Bowser

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director, Engineering and Works Services - Oliver Darby

NATURE OF DECISION

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

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Published Under Separate Cover  Confidential RFQ 64/21 Asphalt & Spray Sealing Services - Evaluation Report  

 

The officer recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2111/097              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor R Paine

 

That the Council:

1.         Pursuant to RFQ 64/21 Asphalt and Spray Sealing Services accept the quotation from Malatesta Road Paving & Hot Mix as the most advantageous quotation to the City.

2.         Delegates power and authority to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and agree minor variations in accordance with Regulation 20 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council:

1.         Pursuant to RFQ 64/21 Asphalt and Spray Sealing Services accept the quotation from Malatesta Road Paving & Hot Mix as the most advantageous quotation to the City.

2.         Delegates power and authority to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and agree minor variations in accordance with Regulation 20 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City of Busselton invited quotations under Request for Quotation RFQ 64/21 Asphalt and Spray Seal Services via the WALGA Preferred Supplier Program for a suitably qualified contractor to provide asphalt and spray seal services for a term of three (3) years with two (2) options to extend for an additional one (1) year each.

 

This report recommends that Council endorse the outcome of the evaluation panel’s assessment and delegate power and authority to the CEO to negotiate and agree final terms and conditions with the preferred supplier, Malatesta Road Paving & Hot Mix (Malatesta).

BACKGROUND

The City requires the supply, delivery and application of bitumen surfacing and asphalt products to adequately maintain existing road network and civil infrastructure and to complete capital upgrades throughout the City. The City previously established a contract for provision of these services pursuant to RFT 23/16 Asphalt and Spray Sealing Services. The current contract is due to expire on 17 December 2021 and the City has invited suitably qualified contractors to submit quotations via the WALGA Preferred Supplier Program for the ongoing provision of these services.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

On 23 September 2021, suppliers that pre-qualified through the WALGA Preferred Supplier Program were invited to submit quotations via the Vendorpanel WALGA eQuotes online platform. The quotation period closed on 7 October 2021 and two (2) submissions were received:

 

1.         Malatesta Road Paving & Hot Mix; and

 

2.         Fulton Hogan Industries Pty Ltd.

 

Assessment Process

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

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

(b)       Assessing submissions received against the Qualitative Criteria weighted as detailed below.

 

Qualitative Criteria

Weighting

Local Content

5%

Tenderer’s Resources

25%

 

The proposed contract is a schedule of rates based contract and the Evaluation Panel developed a pricing scenario which included asphalt and spray seal services procured during the 20/21 capital works programme. The quoted rates were then applied to each project separately to determine the total quoted price for evaluation purposes that was entered into the Evaluation Sheet. 

 

Quoted prices/costs were considered as part of the qualitative criteria and weighted as follows:

 

Qualitative Criteria

Weighting

Quoted Price

70%

 

Each member of the evaluation panel individually assessed each quotation in accordance with the Request for Quotation and the Panel Guide and recoded her/his findings in an Evaluation Panel Individual Score Sheet. This assessment is included in the attached Evaluation Report (Attachment A).

 


 

Summary of Assessment Outcomes

Based on the evaluation panel’s assessment and overall ranking of the quotations, it is recommended that the quotation submitted by Malatesta Road Paving & Hot Mix would be the most advantageous to the City to accept.

 

Malatesta’s submission met and in some respects exceeds the criteria and their quotation was ranked first overall for both price and qualitative criteria.

 

Statutory Environment

Section 3.57 of the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act) requires a local government to invite tenders before it enters into a contract of a prescribed kind under which another person is to supply goods and service. Part 4 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996:

·        requires that tenders be publicly invited for such contracts where the estimated cost of providing the required goods and/or service exceeds $250,000; and

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

 

In terms of section 5.27 of the City’s Purchasing Policy, the City can make purchases from WALGA preferred suppliers for purchases over $250,000 in reliance on the exemption to the requirement for a public tender, provided that three quotes must be sought.

 

Pursuant to sections 5.14 and 5.15 of the Purchasing Policy the Chief Executive Officer (or such other employee of the City to whom such power has been delegated) may waive the requirements to obtain quotations as set out in this Policy. The responsible City officer must document the waiver process in the manner required by the CEO [section 5.14].

 

It is considered not appropriate or not reasonably practicable to seek further quotations in respect to the following reasons:

·        three suppliers were invited to quote but only two responded;

·        the prices/rates submitted by the respondents are considered to be market related;

·        the quotation from the Preferred Supplier is considered to provide good value for money; and

·        the type and nature of the purchase and the associated risk;

 

Therefore, the CEO has exercised the power to waive the requirement under section 5.27 of the Purchasing Policy of obtaining at least 3 written quotations.

 

The estimated expenditure is in excess of $500,000 which is above the Chief Executive Officer’s delegated authority, therefore the award of the tender requires a decision of Council.

 

Relevant Plans and Policies

The City's Purchasing, Regional Price Preference, Occupational Safety and Health, and Asset Management policies, and the City’s Engineering Technical Standards and Specifications, were all relevant to RFQ 64/21, and have been adhered to in the process of requesting and evaluating the submissions.

 

Financial Implications

The asphalt and spray seal services under this contract will be funded from the Operating Budget (541 Maintenance & Construction) and project specific Capital Works budgets as required.

 

The 20/21 financial year expenditure under the current Asphalt and Spray Sealing Services Tender (RFT 23/16) was $1.3M which was within budgeted allocations.

 

The schedule of rates offered by Malatesta Road Paving & Hot Mix have increased by approximately 7– 9% (depending on the product and quantity) since the previous rates offered under RFT 23/16 in 2016 which is less than the inflation rate over the same period.

 

With a contract duration of up to 5 years the total anticipated expenditure under the contract is approximately $6.5M which is above the Chief Executive Officers delegated authority and is therefore being presented to the Council.

 

The submitted rates are variable for the term of the contract and prices will vary according the to Raise and Fall formula/e specified in the contract. The rate of variation applied to the price schedule quoted shall be based on a rise and fall in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for All Groups, Table 6401.0 for Perth, Western Australia since December 2021. Price adjustments may not be applied for by the contractor until after 12 months following the award of this contract.  

 

Stakeholder Consultation

No external stakeholder consultation was required or undertaken in relation to this matter.

 

Risk Assessment

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

 

Options

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

1.         Determine not to accept the quotation from Malatesta Road Paving & Hot Mix and accept the quotation from the other contractor who submitted; or

2.         Decline to accept any quotation.

 

CONCLUSION

The submission from Malatesta Road Paving & Hot Mix is considered the most advantageous to the City and it is recommended that Malatesta Road Paving & Hot Mix be awarded the contract pursuant to RFQ 64/21 Asphalt & Spray Sealing Services.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

If endorsed by Council, it is expected the City will enter into a Contract with Malatesta Road Paving & Hot Mix by the end of November 2021 with a contract commencement date of 17 December 2021.


Council                                                                                      73                                                          24 November 2021

16.1           PROPOSED COUNCIL MEETING DATES 2022

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

Council Meetings

BUSINESS UNIT

Governance Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Governance Officer - Melissa Egan

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Acting Director, Finance and Corporate Services – Sarah Pierson

NATURE OF DECISION

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

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

 

The officer recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2111/098              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor R Paine

 

That Council adopts the dates for the Ordinary Meetings of Council for the 2022 calendar year as follows:

·      Tuesday 25 January

·      Wednesday 9 February

·      Wednesday 23 February

·      Wednesday 9 March

·      Wednesday 23 March

·      Wednesday 13 April

·      Wednesday 27 April

·      Wednesday 11 May

·      Wednesday 25 May

·      Wednesday 8 June

·      Wednesday 22 June

·      Wednesday 27 July

·      Wednesday 10 August

·      Tuesday 23 August

·      Wednesday 14 September

·      Wednesday 28 September

·      Wednesday 12 October

·      Wednesday 26 October

·      Wednesday 9 November

·      Wednesday 23 November

·      Wednesday 14 December

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That Council adopts the dates for the Ordinary Meetings of Council for the 2022 calendar year as follows:

·        Tuesday 25 January

·        Wednesday 9 February

·        Wednesday 23 February

·        Wednesday 9 March

·        Wednesday 23 March

·        Wednesday 13 April

·        Wednesday 27 April

·        Wednesday 11 May

·        Wednesday 25 May

·        Wednesday 8 June

·        Wednesday 22 June

·        Wednesday 27 July

·        Wednesday 10 August

·        Tuesday 23 August

·        Wednesday 14 September

·        Wednesday 28 September

·        Wednesday 12 October

·        Wednesday 26 October

·        Wednesday 9 November

·        Wednesday 23 November

·        Wednesday 14 December

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report presents the proposed dates for the Ordinary Meetings of Council for the 2022 calendar year for adoption by Council.

 

BACKGROUND

Council currently holds its Ordinary Meetings on the second and fourth Wednesday of each month, with Community Access Sessions being held on the first and third Wednesday of each month. Agenda Briefing Sessions are held on each Wednesday immediately preceding a Community Access Session or Ordinary Council Meeting.

OFFICER COMMENT

It is proposed that the Ordinary Meetings of Council for 2022 continue to be held on the second and fourth Wednesday of each month, with the exception of Council recesses in January and July. The first Ordinary Council Meeting of 2022 would normally be held on the fourth Wednesday of January, following Council’s return from its end of year recess, however this first meeting will be held on Tuesday 25 January 2022 as Wednesday 26 January 2022 is the Australia Day public holiday.

 

It is proposed to schedule a mid-year recess from 23 June 2022 through to 17 July to align to the Western Australia school holidays. The first Ordinary Meeting of Council after this recess will be held on Wednesday 27 July 2022.

 

In addition, the months of March, August and November have five Wednesdays and, as in previous years, no Ordinary Meetings of Council or Community Access Sessions will be scheduled for these weeks.

 

Customarily, the CinefestOZ Film Festival is held on the fourth week of August. As the City plays an integral part in CinefestOZ, and as its opening night is traditionally held on a Wednesday, it is proposed that the Ordinary Meeting of Council scheduled for this week be held on the Tuesday, 23 August 2022.

 

Council’s end of year recess is scheduled from 15 December 2022 through to 15 January 2023, inclusive.

 

For Council’s information, the Western Australian school holiday dates in 2022 are as follows:

 

Saturday 9 April 2022 – Monday 25 April 2022

Saturday 2 July 2022 – Sunday 17 July 2022

Saturday 24 September 2022 – Sunday 9 October 2022

Friday 16 December 2022 – Tuesday 31 January 2023

 

The Western Australian Public Holidays in 2022 are:

 

Monday 3 January 2022 – alternative public holiday for New Year’s Day

Wednesday 26 January 2022 – Australia Day

Monday 7 March 2022 – Labour Day

Friday 15 April 2022 – Good Friday

Monday 18 April 2022 – Easter Monday

Monday 25 April 202 – ANZAC Day

Monday 6 June 2022 – Western Australia Day

Monday 26 September 2022 – Queen’s Birthday

Sunday 25 December 2022 – Christmas Day

Monday 26 December 2022 – Alternative public holiday for Christmas Day

Tuesday 27 December 2022 – Alternative public holiday for Boxing Day

 

Statutory Environment

Pursuant to section 5.3 of the Local Government Act (Act), a Council must hold Ordinary Meetings and may hold special meetings. Ordinary Meetings of Council must be held no more than three months apart (as per section 5.3(2) of the Act). Council is otherwise permitted to schedule the dates and times of its Ordinary Meetings as it sees fit.

 

Regulation 12 of the Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996 (the Regulations) requires a local government to, at least once per year, give local public notice of the dates on which, and the time and place at which, Ordinary Meetings of Council are to be held for the following 12 months.

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

As an alternative to the proposed recommendation, Council could choose to amend the proposed dates of the Ordinary Council Meetings for the 2022 calendar year.

CONCLUSION

It is proposed that Council will continue to hold its Ordinary Council Meetings on the second and fourth Wednesday of each month in 2022, with Community Access Sessions to be held on the first and third Wednesdays of each month. Agenda Briefing Sessions will continue to be held prior to a Community Access Session or Ordinary Council Meeting each Wednesday.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The schedule of the Ordinary Meetings of Council for the 2022 calendar year will be publicly advertised prior to the end of 2021.

 


Council                                                                                      77                                                          24 November 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

Attachment a   Cape Naturaliste College thank you letter

Attachment b    Ride Against Domestic Violence thank you letter  

 

The officer recommendation was moved and carried.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2111/099              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor R Paine

 

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

 

17.1.1      Minor Donations Program – October 2021

 

17.1.2      Current Active Tenders 

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

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

17.1.1       Minor Donations Program – October 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 – October 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.

 

Four applications were approved ion October 2021, totalling $1,731.50, as outlined in the table below:

 

Recipient

Purpose

Amount

Busselton Woodturners

Each year host a Weekend Workshop which will attract a large number of visitors to the City and bring a range of expertise to extend the knowledge of local turners.

Funding requested to cover the cost of venue hire fees for Churchill Park Hall and Soccer Club Rooms.

$600.00

South West Kayak Anglers

South West Kayak Anglers promote fun, safety and participation in all aspects of kayak angling in the SW and broader WA. The group hosts a number of public open days and answer questions from those looking to start their kayak fishing journey.

Funding requested to purchase a SWKA banner as a promotional tool during their public open days planned at the Busselton Foreshore.

$300.00

Leo's Club of Busselton

The LEO Club of Busselton, a youth run sub-branch of the Busselton Lions Club hosted a quiz night on 16 October 2021. A donation in the form of passes from the Geographe Leisure Centre was requested (2x 10 10 class passes) All funds raised on the night will be used to support local charities.

$331.50

Southwest Indonesian Community Inc.

The Southwest Indonesian Community Inc. hosted the ‘Bali Now in Southwest’ cultural event at Churchill Park on 16 October. The free community event was open to all members of the public and encouraged cultural togetherness within our community. Funds requested to cover the cost of stage hire for the event.

$500.00

 

October Total

$1,731.50

 

Correspondence has been received from Cape Naturaliste College and Ride Against Domestic Violence in acknowledgement of funding received from the Minor Donations Program. Copies of the correspondence are provided at Attachment A and Attachment B.

17.1.2       Current Active Tenders

 

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. 

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

·        This item will not proceed and further options will be considered at the next meeting of the Marketing and Events Reference Group.

 

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).

·        City officers are in the process of seeking further direction

 

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.  

·        The tender has been processed by the Chief Executive Officer under his delegated authority.

 

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 and closed on 21 October 2021.

·        Three submissions were received. 

·        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 9 November 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 8 December 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 and closed on 21 October 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.  

 

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 21/21 WEST BUSSELTON SEAWALL REFURBISHMENT – STAGE 2

·        Requirements – a suitable contractor to undertake refurbishment of the existing rock-armoured ironstone seawall on the Geographe Bay coastline (the remaining 220m of the western section of the structure west from Seagrott Road).

·        A request for tender was advertised on 30 October 2021, closing on 18 November 2021.

·        The value of the contract is expected to exceed the CEO’s delegated power for 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 8 December 2021. 

 

RFT 22/21 BUSSELTON PERFORMING ARTS AND CONVENTION CENTRE

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

·        The request for tender was not publically advertised – an exemption applies under the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations r 21.

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

·        Whilst the CEO was delegated authority to proceed with awarding of the tender if the value could be achieved under $38 million, the CEO has elected to not exercise this delegation.

·        A report to Council will be considered at this Ordinary Council Meeting, 24 November 2021.

 


 

RFQ 64/21 ASPHALT AND SPRAY SEAL SERVICES

·        Requirements - supply, delivery and application of the City’s asphalt and bitumen products.

·        The request for quotation was not publically advertised – an exemption applies under the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations r 11(2)(b) WALGA preferred supplier program.  

·        The request for quotations closed on 18 October 2021.  Two submissions were received. 

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

·        A report to Council will be considered at this Ordinary Council Meeting, 24 November 2021.

 


Council

81

24 November 2021

17.1

Attachment a

Cape Naturaliste College thank you letter

 


Council

83

24 November 2021

17.1

Attachment b

Ride Against Domestic Violence thank you letter

 


 


Council                                                                                      117                                                       24 November 2021

ITEMS FOR DEBATE

13.1           AMENDMENT NO. 40 (MODIFICATIONS TO THE ZONING TABLE) - CONSIDERATION FOR FINAL ADOPTION

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

Local Planning Schemes and Amendments

BUSINESS UNIT

Strategic Planning

REPORTING OFFICER

Senior Strategic Planner - Helen Foulds

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

NATURE OF DECISION

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

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Schedule of Modifications

Attachment b    Schedule of Submissions

Attachment c    Busselton City Centre Retail and Commercial Analysis

Attachment d   Proposed Modifications to the Zoning Table  

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

Date

24 November 2021

Meeting

Ordinary Council

Name/Position

Cr Kate Cox / Councillor

Item No./Subject

Item No. 13.1 ‘Amendment No. 40 (Modifications to the Zoning Table) - Consideration For Final Adoption’

Type of Interest

Impartiality Interest

Nature of Interest

I own a commercial premises in the Busselton central business district.

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

Date

24 November 2021

Meeting

Ordinary Council

Name/Position

Cr Jodie Richards / Councillor

Item No./Subject

Item No. 13.1 ‘Amendment No. 40 (Modifications to the Zoning Table) - Consideration For Final Adoption’

Type of Interest

Impartiality Interest

Nature of Interest

I am a leaseholder at the Origin Markets.

 

Prior to the meeting, Councillor Love 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 considered first.

 

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


 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2111/100              Moved Councillor M Love, seconded Councillor R Paine

That the Council:

I.          In pursuance of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, adopts Amendment No. 40 to the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No.21 for final approval, in accordance with the modifications proposed in the ‘Schedule of Modifications’ shown at Attachment A, and subject to the inclusion of a further modification in relation to the use class ‘Service Station’, to replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘A’ in the ‘Local Centre’ and ‘Service Commercial’ zones, for the purposes of:

1.         Amending clause 3.5 “Exceptions to the Zoning Table” by:

a)        Inserting a new sub-clause 3.5.3(e) as follows:

(e)       other than with respect to a Lunch Bar or Service Station, the sale of the following goods or products by retail or wholesale to the public from land in the Service Commercial, Light Industry or General Industry zone:

(i)        foodstuffs, liquor or beverages;

(ii)       items of clothing or apparel;

(iii)     magazines, newspapers, books or paper products;

(iv)      medicinal or pharmaceutical products;

(v)       china, glassware or domestic hardware other than building supplies; or

(vi)      items of personal adornment;

unless such goods are manufactured on the lot;

b)        Deleting sub-clause 3.5.4(d);

c)         Deleting sub-clause 3.5.4(e); and

d)        Renumbering sub-clause 3.5.4(f) to 3.5.4(d);

2.         Amending Table 1 “Zoning Table” by, in relation to the use class ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’, replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Regional Centre’, ‘Centre’, ‘Local Centre’ and ‘Service Commercial’ zones;

3.         Amending Division 2 of Schedule 1 “Interpretations” by modifying the definition of ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ to replace “or” between parts (a) and (b) with “and”;

4.         Amending Table 1 “Zoning Table” by –

a)        In relation to the use class ‘Aged Persons Home’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Rural’ zone;

b)        In relation to the use class ‘Amusement Parlour’, replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones;

c)         Modifying the title ‘Ancillary Accommodation’ to read ‘Ancillary Dwelling’ and associated references throughout the Scheme accordingly;

d)        Inserting the use class ‘Art Gallery’ and allocating –

(i)        the symbol ‘D’ to the ‘Regional Centre’, ‘Centre’, ‘Local Centre’, ‘Tourism’, ‘Rural’ and ‘Viticulture and Tourism’ zones;

(ii)       the symbol ‘A’ to the ‘Rural Residential’ zone; and

(iii)     the symbol ‘X’ to the ‘Residential’, ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Light Industry’, ‘General Industry’, ‘Rural Landscape’, ‘Conservation’ and ‘Bushland Protection’ zones;

e)        In relation to the use class ‘Brewery’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

f)         In relation to the use class ‘Bus Depot’, replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Rural’ zone;

g)        In relation to the use class ‘Cinema/Theatre’, replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

h)        In relation to the use class ‘Convenience Store’, replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones;

i)         In relation to the use class ‘Corner Shop’ –

(i)        replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone; and

(ii)       replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones;

j)         In relation to the use class ‘Exhibition Centre’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

k)        In relation to the use class ‘Fuel Depot’, replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones;

l)         In relation to the use class ‘Garden Centre’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Regional Centre’, ‘Centre’, ‘Local Centre’ and ‘Rural Residential’ zones;

m)       In relation to the use class ‘Hospital’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Rural Landscape’ zone;

n)        In relation to the use class ‘Hotel’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

o)        In relation to the use class ‘Liquor Store – Large’, replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Regional Centre’, ‘Centre’ and ‘Local Centre’ zones;

p)        In relation to the use class ‘Liquor Store – Small’, replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Local Centre’ zone;

q)        In relation to the use class ‘Market’ –

(i)        replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Light Industry’, ‘General Industry’, ‘Rural’ and ‘Viticulture and Tourism’ zones; and

(ii)       replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Rural Residential’ zone;

r)         In relation to the use class ‘Medical Centre’, replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones;

s)         In relation to the use class ‘Motel’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

t)         In relation to the use class ‘Motor Vehicle, Boat or Caravan Sales’ –

(i)        replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Regional Centre’, ‘Centre’ and ‘Local Centre’ zones; and

(ii)       replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones;

u)        In relation to the use class ‘Motor Vehicle Repair’, replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Light Industry’ zone;

v)        In relation to the use class ‘Reception Centre’, replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

w)       In relation to the use class ‘Residential Building’, replace the symbol ‘X’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Regional Centre’ and ‘Centre’ zones;

x)        In relation to the use class ‘Restaurant/Café’, replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

y)        In relation to the use class ‘Restricted Premises’, replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

z)         In relation to the use class ‘Service Station’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Rural’ zone;

aa)      In relation to the use class ‘Small Bar’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ and ‘Light Industry’ zones;

bb)     In relation to the use class ‘Takeaway Food Outlet’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Regional Centre’ and ‘Centre’ zones;

cc)       In relation to the use class ‘Tavern’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ and ‘Light Industry’ zones;

dd)     In relation to the use class ‘Trade Supplies’ –

(i)        replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Regional Centre’, ‘Centre’, ‘Local Centre’ and ‘Service Commercial’ zones; and

(ii)       replace the symbol ‘X’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘General Industry’ zone;

ee)     In relation to the use class ‘Veterinary Centre’, replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

ff)       In relation to the use class ‘Winery’ –

(i)        replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘A’ in the ‘Regional Centre’, ‘Centre’ and ‘Local Centre’ zones;

(ii)       replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Light Industry’ zone;

(iii)     replace the symbol ‘X’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘General Industry’ zone; and

(iv)      replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ and ‘Rural Landscape’ zones;

5.         Inserting new sub-clause 4.19 as follows, and renumbering subsequent clauses accordingly:

4.19    BREWERIES AND WINERIES

4.19.1 The development of a Brewery or a Winery within the Service Commercial, Light Industry and General Industry zones shall be primarily for the production, storage and/or distribution of the product.  The following restrictions shall apply –

 

(a)       consumption of the product at the site shall be limited to tastings only, being incidental to the production of the product on site, with maximum serving sizes of:

(i)        50mls for wine;

(ii)       100mls for beer/cider; and

(iii)     15mls for spirits;

(b)       no dining on the premises or the consumption or service of food shall take place;

(c)       patronage at the site shall not exceed 30 people at any one time; and

(d)       customers visiting the site for the purpose of tasting and/or sales are restricted to Monday to Sunday, including public holidays, between the hours of 12.00pm and 5.00pm.”

6.         Amending Additional Use No. 74 within Schedule 2 by inserting ‘Car Park’ within the list of land uses permitted.

II.         Advises the Western Australian Planning Commission that Amendment No. 40 is considered a ‘standard’ amendment pursuant to the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 for the following reasons:

1.         An amendment relating to a zone or reserve that is consistent with the objectives identified in the Scheme for that zone or reserve;

2.         An amendment that is consistent with a local planning strategy for the Scheme that has been endorsed by the Commission; and

3.         An amendment that does not result in any significant environmental, social, economic or governance impacts on land in the Scheme area.

III.       Pursuant to r.53 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, endorses the Summary of Submissions at Attachment B, which has been prepared in response to the public consultation process undertaken in relation to Amendment No. 40.

IV.       Upon preparation of the necessary documentation, refers the adopted Amendment No. 40 to the Western Australian Planning Commission for consideration and determination in accordance with the Planning and Development Act 2005.

V.        Pursuant to r.56 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, should directions be given that modifications to Amendment No. 40 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.

Reasons:    Modifying the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘A’ in the ‘Local Centre’ and ‘Service Commercial’ zones will help alleviate the public’s concerns that they will not be consulted with, in regards to any future Service Station proposals. The ‘A’ use permissibility means that the use is not permitted unless the local government has exercised its discretion by granting development approval after giving special notice in accordance with clause 64 of the Deemed Provisions. Essentially this will mean there are set advertising requirements for any Service Station proposals for the ‘Local Centre’ and ‘Service Commercial’ zones.

CARRIED 8/1

For the motion: Cr Richards, Cr Carter, Cr Love, Cr Henley

Cr Riccelli, Cr Cronin, Cr Paine, Cr Cox

Against the motion: Cr Ryan

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council:

I.          In pursuance of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, adopts Amendment No. 40 to the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No.21 for final approval, in accordance with the modifications proposed in the ‘Schedule of Modifications’ shown at Attachment A, for the purposes of:

1.         Amending clause 3.5 “Exceptions to the Zoning Table” by:

a)        Inserting a new sub-clause 3.5.3(e) as follows:

(e)       other than with respect to a Lunch Bar or Service Station, the sale of the following goods or products by retail or wholesale to the public from land in the Service Commercial, Light Industry or General Industry zone:

(i)        foodstuffs, liquor or beverages;

(ii)       items of clothing or apparel;

(iii)     magazines, newspapers, books or paper products;

(iv)      medicinal or pharmaceutical products;

(v)       china, glassware or domestic hardware other than building supplies; or

(vi)      items of personal adornment;

unless such goods are manufactured on the lot;

b)        Deleting sub-clause 3.5.4(d);

c)         Deleting sub-clause 3.5.4(e); and

d)        Renumbering sub-clause 3.5.4(f) to 3.5.4(d);

2.         Amending Table 1 “Zoning Table” by, in relation to the use class ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’, replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Regional Centre’, ‘Centre’, ‘Local Centre’ and ‘Service Commercial’ zones;

3.         Amending Division 2 of Schedule 1 “Interpretations” by modifying the definition of ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ to replace “or” between parts (a) and (b) with “and”;

4.         Amending Table 1 “Zoning Table” by –

a)        In relation to the use class ‘Aged Persons Home’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Rural’ zone;

b)        In relation to the use class ‘Amusement Parlour’, replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones;

c)         Modifying the title ‘Ancillary Accommodation’ to read ‘Ancillary Dwelling’ and associated references throughout the Scheme accordingly;

d)        Inserting the use class ‘Art Gallery’ and allocating –

(i)        the symbol ‘D’ to the ‘Regional Centre’, ‘Centre’, ‘Local Centre’, ‘Tourism’, ‘Rural’ and ‘Viticulture and Tourism’ zones;

(ii)       the symbol ‘A’ to the ‘Rural Residential’ zone; and

(iii)     the symbol ‘X’ to the ‘Residential’, ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Light Industry’, ‘General Industry’, ‘Rural Landscape’, ‘Conservation’ and ‘Bushland Protection’ zones;

e)        In relation to the use class ‘Brewery’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

f)         In relation to the use class ‘Bus Depot’, replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Rural’ zone;

g)        In relation to the use class ‘Cinema/Theatre’, replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

h)        In relation to the use class ‘Convenience Store’, replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones;

i)         In relation to the use class ‘Corner Shop’ –

(i)        replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone; and

(ii)       replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones;

j)         In relation to the use class ‘Exhibition Centre’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

k)        In relation to the use class ‘Fuel Depot’, replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones;

l)         In relation to the use class ‘Garden Centre’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Regional Centre’, ‘Centre’, ‘Local Centre’ and ‘Rural Residential’ zones;

m)       In relation to the use class ‘Hospital’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Rural Landscape’ zone;

n)        In relation to the use class ‘Hotel’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

o)        In relation to the use class ‘Liquor Store – Large’, replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Regional Centre’, ‘Centre’ and ‘Local Centre’ zones;

p)        In relation to the use class ‘Liquor Store – Small’, replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Local Centre’ zone;

q)        In relation to the use class ‘Market’ –

(i)        replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Light Industry’, ‘General Industry’, ‘Rural’ and ‘Viticulture and Tourism’ zones; and

(ii)       replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Rural Residential’ zone;

r)         In relation to the use class ‘Medical Centre’, replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones;

s)         In relation to the use class ‘Motel’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

t)         In relation to the use class ‘Motor Vehicle, Boat or Caravan Sales’ –

(i)        replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Regional Centre’, ‘Centre’ and ‘Local Centre’ zones; and

(ii)       replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones;

u)        In relation to the use class ‘Motor Vehicle Repair’, replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Light Industry’ zone;

v)        In relation to the use class ‘Reception Centre’, replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

w)       In relation to the use class ‘Residential Building’, replace the symbol ‘X’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Regional Centre’ and ‘Centre’ zones;

x)        In relation to the use class ‘Restaurant/Café’, replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

y)        In relation to the use class ‘Restricted Premises’, replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

z)         In relation to the use class ‘Service Station’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Rural’ zone;

aa)      In relation to the use class ‘Small Bar’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ and ‘Light Industry’ zones;

bb)     In relation to the use class ‘Takeaway Food Outlet’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Regional Centre’ and ‘Centre’ zones;

cc)       In relation to the use class ‘Tavern’, replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ and ‘Light Industry’ zones;

dd)     In relation to the use class ‘Trade Supplies’ –

(i)        replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Regional Centre’, ‘Centre’, ‘Local Centre’ and ‘Service Commercial’ zones; and

(ii)       replace the symbol ‘X’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘General Industry’ zone;

ee)     In relation to the use class ‘Veterinary Centre’, replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone;

ff)       In relation to the use class ‘Winery’ –

(i)        replace the symbol ‘D’ with the symbol ‘A’ in the ‘Regional Centre’, ‘Centre’ and ‘Local Centre’ zones;

(ii)       replace the symbol ‘P’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘Light Industry’ zone;

(iii)     replace the symbol ‘X’ with the symbol ‘D’ in the ‘General Industry’ zone; and

 

 

(iv)      replace the symbol ‘A’ with the symbol ‘X’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ and ‘Rural Landscape’ zones;

 

 

 

5.         Inserting new sub-clause 4.19 as follows, and renumbering subsequent clauses accordingly:

4.19    BREWERIES AND WINERIES

4.19.1 The development of a Brewery or a Winery within the Service Commercial, Light Industry and General Industry zones shall be primarily for the production, storage and/or distribution of the product.  The following restrictions shall apply –

(a)       consumption of the product at the site shall be limited to tastings only, being incidental to the production of the product on site, with maximum serving sizes of:

(i)        50mls for wine;

(ii)       100mls for beer/cider; and

(iii)     15mls for spirits;

(b)       no dining on the premises or the consumption or service of food shall take place;

(c)       patronage at the site shall not exceed 30 people at any one time; and

(d)       customers visiting the site for the purpose of tasting and/or sales are restricted to Monday to Sunday, including public holidays, between the hours of 12.00pm and 5.00pm.”

6.         Amending Additional Use No. 74 within Schedule 2 by inserting ‘Car Park’ within the list of land uses permitted.

II.         Advises the Western Australian Planning Commission that Amendment No. 40 is considered a ‘standard’ amendment pursuant to the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 for the following reasons:

1.         An amendment relating to a zone or reserve that is consistent with the objectives identified in the Scheme for that zone or reserve;

2.         An amendment that is consistent with a local planning strategy for the Scheme that has been endorsed by the Commission; and

3.         An amendment that does not result in any significant environmental, social, economic or governance impacts on land in the Scheme area.

III.       Pursuant to r.53 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, endorses the Summary of Submissions at Attachment B, which has been prepared in response to the public consultation process undertaken in relation to Amendment No. 40.

IV.       Upon preparation of the necessary documentation, refers the adopted Amendment No. 40 to the Western Australian Planning Commission for consideration and determination in accordance with the Planning and Development Act 2005.

V.        Pursuant to r.56 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, should directions be given that modifications to Amendment No. 40 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 Council is requested to consider adopting for final approval Amendment No. 40 to Local Planning Scheme No. 21 (the Scheme), following an earlier deferral of consideration at the Ordinary Council Meeting of 13 October 2021.

 

The main purpose of Amendment 40 is to implement key strategies of the City’s Council and WAPC endorsed Local Planning Strategy, which requires that shop retail, office and other kinds of ‘town centre’ land uses predominantly occur in existing and planned ‘activity centres’, especially the Busselton City Centre and Dunsborough Town Centre, rather than occurring in service commercial or light industrial areas. The underlying aim of those strategies is to support the continuing vitality of existing centres, as well as supporting further investment in both existing and planned centres, so that the centres remain and develop as the hearts of their growing communities, and as walkable, pedestrian friendly centres.

 

The Amendment seeks to achieve that purpose through reviewing permissibilities for a range of land uses within the Zoning Table of the Scheme, along with a limited number of associated modifications to other Scheme provisions – all of which seek to ensure that town centre uses are permissible only in the various ‘Centre’ Zones, whilst still ensuring that genuine bulky goods retailing, as well as other kinds of retailing appropriate to service commercial or light industrial areas, continue to be permissible in the Service Commercial and Light Industrial Zones.

 

It is recommended that the Council adopt the Amendment for final approval, subject to some modifications. All of the modifications that formed part of the recommendation to the Council in October are also incorporated into the recommendation of this report. One additional modification is also recommended; involving the proposed inclusion of ‘Office’ as an additional use right on one lot with some unique attributes in the Service Commercial Zone, on Bussell Highway.

 

Once Council has made its decision, the Amendment will be forwarded to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) and Minister for Panning for final consideration.

 

BACKGROUND

Following the advertising period, the report was initially brought before Council for consideration for final adoption at the Ordinary Council Meeting of 13 October 2021, where it was deferred until the 24 November 2021 for the following reason:

 

“Further consideration, discussion and consultation needs to be undertaken to ensure any proposed modifications to the zoning table provides fair and equitable treatment to all relevant stakeholders.”

 

This has enabled further discussion between officers and the Council, as well as further detailed discussions with the Chambers of Commerce, and some individual business or property owners.

 

 


 

Purpose of the Amendment

The Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) gave final endorsement to the City of Busselton Local Planning Strategy (LPS) early in 2020. The LPS identifies a range of planning aims, objectives and strategies, particularly around ensuring consolidation of the main centres and ensuring the continuation of the centres as the social and economic hearts of our growing community. Achieving that requires changes to the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme 21 (the Scheme), triggering a review of the Zoning Table to investigate current land use permissibilities and associated provisions.

 

Consideration was given to incorporating the proposed changes into the current Scheme Review process, as the City is working to the timely and effective preparation of, and smooth transition to, a new and replacement local planning scheme. However, it will be in the order of two or more years before the next Scheme is likely to be gazetted and become operational, and it is considered that the issues addressed in the Amendment need to be addressed more quickly.

 

As such, the matters contained herein are proposed to be dealt with more expeditiously, and as a targeted Amendment to the current Scheme.

 

Context

The local and regional tourism industry is of great importance to the City of Busselton, and to the State. Many visitors to the South West region choose to stay in Busselton and Dunsborough, establishing these centres as a base for exploring the wider region and surrounding attractions, and making the City of Busselton an important tourism destination for regional, interstate and international visitors.

 

Whilst there are many other attractors, both within our region and in many other places around Australia and around the world, an important and valuable part of the tourism experience is having vibrant, walkable, authentic town centre/main street or similar kinds of environments. Those environments also promote a strong sense of local community identity and social cohesion. A key part of the tourism experience is being to visit somewhere which looks and feels different to ‘home’. In that context, it is critical that the City of Busselton continues to have centres that have their own feel and character, and are authentic hearts of the community.

 

For the City of Busselton, that means ensuring that our urban and landscape character looks and feels different to Perth (which is the dominant tourism market), and where a very significant amount of the commercial development is in commercial strips, visible from major roads and highways, or in ‘shopping centres - car-dominated environments with little sense of place or local character. With rare exceptions, there has also been a failure to develop new town centre/main street or similar kinds of environments, or allow existing, more traditional centres to grow and consolidate. The same is, unfortunately, true in many of WA’s other regional centres.

 

The tourism industry within the South West region is worth more than $1.06 billion annually to the State’s economy. The Busselton Jetty and Foreshore Precinct have also benefitted from substantial State, Federal, City and private investment over the last decade. Development has included the reconstruction of the Busselton Jetty ($27M), the construction of coastal defences, award-winning playgrounds (including the skate park), as well as the Barnard Park Sports Precinct (with competition grade turf and new sport pavilion), together with a dedicated Youth and Community Activities Building, and Visitors Centre.

 

In total, there has been around $70M of public investment in the Foreshore Precinct. That investment has and will continue to leverage significant private investment. That includes the development of the ‘Shelter’ microbrewery (circa $4M), the current development of a 110 room, four star hotel (circa $20M), as well as two, further, potential hotel development sites.

Busselton has also been experiencing increasing cruise ship visitations in recent years, with a resultant boost to the local economy. Subject to resolution of COVID-19 related issues, it is expected that Busselton will continue to play a major role in attracting the cruise ship industry and passengers to WA in future.

 

The next major public investments are the proposed Busselton Performing Arts and Convention Centre (BPACC) and Australian Underwater Discovery Centre (AUDC). The BPACC is set to be a key project to attract and support WA, interstate and international tourism and investment. Approximately $38M may be invested in the construction of the BPACC. The BPACC, should development proceed, will further energise Busselton as a popular tourist, events and cultural centre, and play an important role in linking the Busselton Foreshore to the Busselton City Centre – consolidating the two precincts and creating a stronger economic cluster/agglomeration effect, to the benefit of both precincts and the broader economy. The AUDC, also a circa $30M investment, would be a major addition to the iconic Busselton Jetty, and would be Australia’s largest natural marine observatory, further enhancing the visitor experience at what is already one of Western Australia’s most popular tourist destinations.

 

Supporting the investment in the Busselton area is the upgrading of the existing Busselton Margaret River Airport, which is now capable of facilitating air services to interstate destinations including Melbourne and Sydney, and in future international destinations as far away as China. 

 

It is considered that the Jetty, Foreshore and City Centre need to form a coherent, integrated and activated, visitor, entertainment and retail precinct to optimise the economic and social benefits to the local and State economy, arising from the significant public and private investment that has occurred and is planned.

 

In combination, these projects not only establish high quality infrastructure and facilities for the benefit and enjoyment of our local community, but are also likely to further encourage and increase regional, interstate and international tourism. The Jetty/Foreshore precinct and Busselton generally are already one of the most highly visited areas state-wide and therefore are of great importance to the State’s tourism industry. These and related projects could be undesirably affected in future if there was vacant shop/retail floor space within the Busselton City Centre, and the opportunity to build on that investment would also be undermined if future investment does not occur in the City Centre – and instead occurs in the nearby service commercial and light industrial areas.

 

The Busselton City Centre Retail and Commercial Analysis (Urbis, 2020) was prepared to inform the preparation of an Activity Centre Plan. The analysis reviews floor space demand and supply and provides recommendations for revitalisation of the City Centre. A copy of this analysis is provided at Attachment C.

 

The Retail and Commercial Analysis found that the decentralisation of retail by the development of ‘shop’ retail outside the ‘Regional Centre’ zone was having a significant negative effect on the vitality and success of retail uses within the City Centre. A key recommendation of the Analysis is to support the primacy of the City Centre to ensure it retains its role as the highest order retail, entertainment, leisure and commercial precinct in the area. A further recommendation suggests the inclusion of criteria within the Scheme to better manage the leakage of ‘shop’ retail from the City Centre. This outcome strongly reflects the aims and objectives of the City of Busselton Local Planning Strategy (LPS).

 


 

At the time of the Analysis, 17 vacant shops were identified in the City Centre with some recognised dispersal to cheaper alternative premises, including within warehouse and industrial tenancies. This comes at the opportunity cost of development in the Busselton City Centre and further out-of-centre development will continue to affect the ability to fill vacancies and encourage further development of the City Centre as the primary centre. Without stronger controls, ‘leakage’ will accelerate, further eroding passing trade and general vitality.

 

The Retail and Commercial Analysis identifies a high level of visitation from people who live outside the City of Busselton. This includes international and domestic visitors (intrastate and interstate). This level of visitation from people outside the local catchment area is very high compared to other regional city centres (such as Bunbury and Geraldton) and indicates that the Busselton City Centre has a significant level of spending generated by tourists. Preventing retail leakage and strengthening Busselton as the main activity centre, though, is vital to linking the Foreshore to the City Centre and will serve to underpin the significant public and private investment in both areas. This in turn will support the valuable tourism industry.

 

The Proposal

Amendment No. 29, gazetted on 7 July 2019, sought to generally align the Scheme with the Model Provisions of the Regulations through alignment of the zones and land-use definitions. Also included within Amendment 29 was the incorporation of a number of standard provisions into the Scheme for the Busselton City and Dunsborough Town Centres, in order to provide guidance to development within the new ‘Regional Centre’ (Busselton) and ‘Centre’ (Dunsborough) zones.

 

Amendment No. 21 was considered by the WAPC and the Minister concurrently with Amendment 29 as it also proposed changes to a number of definitions, including ‘Shop’ and ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’, which applied to certain properties on West Street and Chapman Hill Road.

 

A small number of unintended and undesirable outcomes from Amendment 29 as a result of direction from the Minister has resulted in the need for further consideration of land use permissibilities within the Zoning Table. These outcomes were particularly due to definition changes required to align with the Model Provisions contained within the Regulations.

 

The purpose of Amendment 40 is to address identified ‘critical issues’ by closing certain ‘loopholes’ or inconsistencies in the Scheme’s Zoning Table, particularly looking at where land uses are currently permissible where they should not be, creating pressure on the Busselton and Dunsborough CBDs through potential retail and investment leakage to the ‘Service Commercial’ zone and, in some cases, the ‘Light Industry’ zone. The Amendment also considers quasi-industrial uses in rural areas, which can place unwelcome pressure on industry-zoned land and create ad-hoc commercial strips along major roads outside the urban centres.

 

In summary, Amendment 40 deals with two primary issues:

1.         ‘Shop’ / ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ definitions; and

2.         Land Use Permissibilities / Zoning Table.

 

These issues are discussed in detail below.


 

1.  ‘Shop’ / ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ definitions

The Issue

A review of all land use definitions was undertaken during the assessment process for Amendment No. 29. The City was satisfied that the then-current definition of ‘Showroom’ (being the previous land use title for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’) sufficiently met the purpose and intent of the Scheme and the desirable objectives of the applicable zones. The previous definition of ‘Showroom’ was as follows:

‘Showroom’ means any building or part of a building used or intended for use for the purpose of displaying or offering for sale by wholesale or retail, automotive spare parts, carpets, large electrical appliances, furniture, hardware or bulky goods but does not include the sale by retail of foodstuffs, liquor or beverages, items of clothing or apparel, magazines, newspapers, books or paper products, china, glassware or domestic hardware, or items of personal adornment.

 

A definition for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ that was compliant with the Regulations was introduced through Amendment 21 as required by the Minister, along with a revised definition of ‘Shop’, and these have served to alter the way in which these land uses would normally be considered.

 

Previously, the definition for ‘Shop’ was very broad, and that for ‘Showroom’ was very specific. In effect, a use was considered to be a ‘Shop’ unless it was more specifically defined elsewhere in the Scheme.

 

This position has now effectively been reversed, with a very broad definition for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’:

 

‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ means premises –

 

(a)       used to sell by retail any of the goods and accessories of the following types that are principally used for domestic purposes —

(i)        automotive parts and accessories;

(ii)       camping, outdoor and recreation goods;

(iii)      electric light fittings;

(iv)      animal supplies including equestrian and pet goods;

(v)       floor and window coverings;

(vi)      furniture, bedding, furnishings, fabrics, manchester and homewares;

(vii)     household appliances, electrical goods and home entertainment goods;

(viii)    party supplies;

(ix)      office equipment and supplies;

(x)       babies’ and children’s goods, including play equipment and accessories;

(xi)      sporting, cycling, leisure, fitness goods and accessories;

(xii)     swimming pools;

or

(b)       used to sell by retail goods and accessories by retail if —

(i)        a large area is required for the handling, display or storage of the goods; or

(ii)       vehicular access is required to the premises for the purpose of collection of purchased goods.

 


 

Meanwhile, the definition for ‘Shop’ has been substantially narrowed:

‘Shop’ means premises other than a bulky goods showroom, a liquor store – large or a liquor store – small used to sell goods by retail, to hire goods, or to provide services of a personal nature, including hairdressing or beauty therapy services.

 

The City considers there to be multiple issues associated with the current definition of ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’:

·        The current wording provides for a broad definition, using ambiguous terms such as “recreation goods”, “home entertainment goods”, “office equipment and supplies”, “children’s goods” and “accessories”, and does not explicitly require goods to be of a necessarily bulky nature.

·        The presence of the “or” instead of an “and” between parts (a) and (b) of the definition separates the definition into two parts creating, in the City’s opinion, a level of uncertainty in interpretation. The sale of goods found in part (a) are no longer required to be housed in a large area as required by part (b). Conversely, a premises does not need to include any of the items listed in part (a) but may require a large area for display and sale; meaning a supermarket, or any other large shop, arguably fits this definition regardless of whether it sells bulky goods.

·        Due to the words “‘Shop’ means premises other than a bulky goods showroom…” a retail use would first need to be determined as to whether it fits into the definition for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’. Some examples of businesses that would previously have been considered as constituting a ‘Shop’ but now could arguably be considered as a ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ include:

o   a newsagent (under part (a)(ix), “office supplies”);

o   a children’s clothing store (under part (a)(x), “children’s goods”); and

o   sports clothing and shoe store (under part (a)(xi), “sporting, cycling, leisure, fitness goods and accessories”).

·        The land use permissibility for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ was not modified through Amendment 21 and so was retained as a ‘P’ use (permitted) in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone and a ‘D’ use (discretionary) within the ‘Light Industry’ zone. This provides a potential gateway for inappropriate retail within the ‘Service Commercial’ and ‘Light Industry’ zones.

 

The LPS places strong emphasis on preventing retail activity, including bulky goods retail, from being located in industrial and service commercial areas. This position has been supported by the Retail and Commercial Analysis (provided at Attachment C). The alternative, and what has been experienced already to some degree, unfortunately, is the dispersal of retail businesses and investment out of the City Centre.

 

As mentioned earlier within this report, the local and regional tourism industry is of great importance to Busselton and the State. Tourists do not visit the area to drive around a car-dominated service commercial area. Instead, vibrant, pedestrian-focused, authentic town centre/main street environments are an important part of the visitor experience – as well as promoting a strong sense of local community identity and social cohesion.


 

Importantly, the tourism industry is a significant source of employment within both Busselton and the South West region. The complexities surrounding certain land use definitions and permissibilities mentioned previously are considered likely to have a very real impact on the tourism experience by potentially depleting the activity and vibrancy of our main centres. The Retail and Commercial Analysis identifies the significance of enhancing the tourism experience within the City Centre, enriching a sense of enjoyment, engagement and connectivity, and encouraging ongoing investment and holiday spending within the Centre.

 

Proposed Approach

In relation to the ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ land use, proposed Amendment 40 was advertised with a three-pronged approach to correcting the anomalies currently present within the Scheme:

 

1.         Amend the permissibilities for such land uses from ‘P’ to ‘D’ in the ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Regional Centre’ and ‘Centre’ zones, thereby requiring a Development Approval process to change the use of a building or premises to that use.

 

2.         Amend clause 3.5 “Exceptions to the Zoning Table” by deleting sub-clauses 3.5.4(d) and (e) and replacing them with a new sub-clause inserted into clause 3.5.3 specifying that the sale of the following goods or products will be deemed an ‘X’ use in the ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Light Industry’ or ‘General Industry’ zones:

(i)        foodstuffs, liquor or beverages;

(ii)       items of clothing or apparel;

(iii)      magazines, newspapers, books or paper products;

(iv)      medicinal or pharmaceutical products;

(v)       china, glassware or domestic hardware other than building supplies; or

(vi)      items of personal adornment;

 

unless such goods are manufactured on the lot.

 

3.         Amend the definition for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ by changing the “or” between parts (a) and (b) to “and”, thereby creating a clear and meaningful link between the two parts of the definition to remove uncertainty and better address issues such as those mentioned previously.

 

Proposals 1 and 3, above, are discussed in the previous section in relation to the concerns held with the ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ definition.

 

With regard to item 2 above, the existing sub-clauses 3.5.4(d) and (e) are inconsistent with the general intent and strategic direction set out in the LPS. Sub-clause 3.5.4(d), reproduced below, is proposed to be deleted, as it is problematic and often unworkable in terms of the development assessment process due to its non-specific nature and the difficulty in quantifying the impact of such a use on either the “nearby business centre” or the “industrial nature of the zone”. Furthermore, the ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ use is already a ‘D’ use in the ‘Light Industry’ zone and not permitted in the ‘General Industry’ zone.

 


 

The existing clause 3.5.4(d) states:

 

3.5.4   Notwithstanding the provisions of clause 3.3 and Table 1, the following development shall be deemed a “D” use –

...

(d)      development for the purposes of commercial premises for the retailing of bulky goods in the Light Industry or General Industry zones, subject to the local government being satisfied that -

(i)        suitable land for the development is not available in any nearby business centre;

(ii)       the development would not, by reason of the number of retail outlets which exist or are proposed on land within the Light Industry or General Industry zone, defeat the predominantly industrial nature of the zone; and

(iii)      the proposed development will not detrimentally affect the viability of any business centre.

 

In order to resolve the concern that the ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ definition could unnecessarily draw essential retail uses and activities away from the Centres, and also so as not to conflict with the ‘Trade Supplies’ definition, sub-clause 3.5.4(e) (shown below) is proposed to be modified and inserted into clause 3.5.3, which specifies uses that shall be deemed an ‘X’ use.

 

The existing sub-clause 3.5.4(e) states:

 

3.5.4   Notwithstanding the provisions of clause 3.3 and Table 1, the following development shall be deemed a “D” use –

...

(e)       excluding reference to a convenience store or lunch bar, the sale of goods or products by retail or wholesale to the public from land in the Light Industry or General Industry zone, provided that –

(i)        the goods or produce are manufactured or stored in bulk on the lot;

(ii)       not more than 50% of the gross floor area of building on the lot is used for the sale of such goods or produce; and

(iii)      the goods or produce sold are not –

(I)        foodstuffs, liquor or beverages;

(II)       items of clothing or apparel;

(III)     magazines, newspapers, books or paper products;

(IV)     medicinal or pharmaceutical products;

(V)      china, glassware or domestic hardware other than building supplies; or

(VI)     items of personal adornment;

 

unless such goods are manufactured on the lot;

 

The proposed modification to the sub-clause seeks to ensure the sale of these inappropriate goods (listed from ‘I’ to ‘VI’ above) will be excluded from the specific zones, ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’, with the addition of the ‘Service Commercial’ zone. Parts (i) and (ii) of the sub-clause are not proposed to be replicated as they could potentially cause conflict with the definition of ‘Trade Supplies’, which already provides a reasonably specific definition for development that is acceptable to be located in those zones. However, given that ‘Convenience Store’ is proposed to become an ‘X’ use in the ‘Service Commercial’ and industrial zones, it should be removed from the sub-clause. ‘Service Station’ remains as a ‘D’ use in these zones and so should be included with ‘Lunch Bar’.

The proposed modification reads as follows:

 

3.5.3   Notwithstanding the provisions of clause 3.3 and Table 1, the following development shall be deemed an “X” use –

...

(e)       other than with respect to a Lunch Bar or Service Station, the sale of the following goods or products by retail or wholesale to the public from land in the Service Commercial, Light Industry or General Industry zone:

(i)        foodstuffs, liquor or beverages;

(ii)       items of clothing or apparel;

(iii)      magazines, newspapers, books or paper products;

(iv)      medicinal or pharmaceutical products;

(v)       china, glassware or domestic hardware other than building supplies; or

(vi)      items of personal adornment;

 

unless such goods are manufactured on the lot.

 

This combination of modifying permissibilities, introducing a slight modification to the definition, and varying the relevant provisions within Part 3 of the Scheme, as discussed above, were considered to satisfactorily resolve the main concerns held by the City in relation to potential retail leakage from the main centres. These proposals can be found within the Officer Recommendation at sections 1, 2 and 3.

 

2.  Land Use Permissibilities / Zoning Table

The Zoning Table was reviewed by the City with a focus on aligning the land use permissibilities with the objectives for the zones and the strategic directions of the LPS, such as maintaining the primacy and activity of the City and Town Centres. Some land use definitions were changed in order to be consistent with the Regulations as a directive from the Minister (for example, ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’, as described in the previous section), and are considered to carry potential risks to the primacy of the City and Town Centre in the absence of any timely review of the Zoning Table.

 

This review focussed on what were considered to be the most critical issues, such as modifications that should be introduced as soon as possible, rather than awaiting the full Scheme Review.

 

With the above matters in mind, the critical issues are considered to be:

·        Consolidation of activity within the Busselton City and Dunsborough Town Centres, as well as avoiding retail leakage from the Centres, particularly into the ‘Service Commercial’ zone and, to a lesser extent, into the ‘Light Industry’ zone;

·        Permissible uses where a development application should instead be required and assessed; and

·        Quasi-industrial land uses in rural areas, causing leakage from the Industrial zones.

 

A table identifying a full list of the proposed changes for each land use, with justification provided, is shown at Attachment D, with the recommendations provided at sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Officer Recommendation.

 


 

In relation to the symbols used within the Zoning Table:

·        ‘P’ is a permitted use provided the use complies with the relevant development standards;

·        ‘D’ means the use is permitted if the local government has exercised its discretion by granting planning approval;

·        ‘A’ means the use is permitted if the local government has exercised its discretion by granting planning approval following public consultation; and

·        ‘X’ means the use is not permitted within that zone.

 

Discussion on some of the key changes are provided in greater detail below.

 

Aged Persons Home

‘Aged Persons Home’ is proposed to become an ‘X’ use (from an ‘A’ use) in the ‘Rural’ zone given the generally poorer levels of accessibility to services, infrastructure (e.g. dual use paths) and public transport in the rural areas, thus increasing reliance on vehicles. Often the residents of this land use have an increased reliance on such services and facilities and yet may have less of an ability to drive themselves. The proposal aims to factor in the appropriate location of this use with better access to associated services and facilities, in accordance with Theme 1, Strategy ‘h’ of the LPS.

 

Breweries and Wineries in the Industrial zones

The preferred location for a ‘Brewery’ and a ‘Winery’ is generally within the ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones, provided these uses are predominately for the production, storage and distribution of the manufactured product. This is because these zones are usually located in areas with ready connection to services and utilities enabling the disposal of wastewater in an appropriate manner. These zones are also normally situated with appropriate separation distances to sensitive land uses.

 

In more recent times, an increase in the production of craft beer and the development of cellar door facilities has heightened the popularity of tasting facilities as tourist destinations and places of social interaction, resulting in a split of two predominant practices for both land uses – (1) production and (2) tourism/tastings/sales.

 

The latter has a tendency to place pressure on the scale of the development as business owners seek to cater for a growing number of customers by increasing floor areas, and often also seeking to provide commercial kitchens for the preparation and delivery of meals in association with these tastings.

 

The popularity of these businesses contributes to the economic vitality of the region, providing attractive venues for both tourists and locals alike. However, conflict can arise where these are not appropriately located. Increasing pressure for the provision of meals, with no restrictions to tasting sizes, results in the perception of these facilities as a ‘Tavern’ and/or a ‘Restaurant/Café’, being uses which are not appropriate to be located within the ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones.

 

The appropriate location of such commercial activity is within the City and Town Centres where walkability and an ability to activate the Centres beyond standard business hours contributes to increased vitality and patronage. Given the success of the ‘Margaret River Wine Region’, tourist-related uses also tend to be located within the ‘Rural’ and ‘Viticulture and Tourism’ zones. However, the ‘Rural’ and ‘Viticulture and Tourism’ zones do not tend to have access to services needed for the ‘production’ component of the business.

 

‘Restaurant/Café’, ‘Tavern’ and ‘Reception Centre’ are not uses typically associated with the Industrial zones, the Scheme objectives for which include providing for industrial, service and storage activities that generally cannot be located in other zones. Industrial-zoned land should be preserved primarily for that important purpose, whilst the introduction of more sensitive, amenity-based uses such as a ‘Tavern’ (for example) has the potential to compromise, or restrict, surrounding industrial land uses, contrary to the core purpose and intention of the zone.

 

The definition of ‘Brewery’ within the Scheme is for premises the subject of a Producer’s Licence under the Liquor Control Act 1988 and can include the manufacturing of beer, cider and/or spirits. Beer must have been brewed on the premises and generally the licence authorises the sale/supply of take-away liquor for consumption off the premises. The Liquor Control Act allows for tastings, subject to the provision of toilet facilities, and the licensee is authorised to sell/supply liquor, other than that liquor produced by the licensee, if the liquor is consumed ancillary to a meal in a dedicated dining area in the same premises (delivered at a table, or a fixed structure used as a table, with cutlery provided for the purpose of eating a meal).

 

A Producer's Licence generally restricts the vessel size in which alcohol can be served, although the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor (DRGL) has been known to allow an increase in tasting sizes if supported by the local government.

 

In these instances, tastings should be incidental to the production of the beer or wine (etc.) and therefore the hours of operation (for tasting and sales) should be limited and defined to ensure this. Concern that the use could be developed into a pseudo-‘Restaurant’, ‘Tavern’ or ‘Reception Centre’, where none of those uses are either currently permissible within the ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones, or are proposed to be made not-permissible through this Amendment 40, has been a leading factor in that (‘tastings’) use being deemed inappropriate and contrary to the objectives of those zones.

 

To ensure the Brewery or Winery facility operates in accordance with its stated intent and predominant use (being production), a number of restrictions are also proposed to be included within the relevant provision to ensure the use of the said facilities meet the objectives of the zones. These restrictions are proposed to include for the ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones:

·        The size of the tastings – the measurements prescribed by the Liquor Control Regulations 1988 for ‘sample quantities’ has been assumed, being 50 ml for wine, 100 ml for beer/cider, and 15 ml for spirits.

·        No consumption or service of food – the provision of a meal quickly overtakes the original intention of the tastings as being incidental to the production of the liquor. It is not the intention of a Producer’s Licence to facilitate a ‘pseudo-restaurant’, with in-house dining facilities being considered inappropriate in the subject zones.

·        The number of patrons – it is recommended that maximum patronage is limited to 30 people at any one time, being the equivalent of one coaster bus, plus one or two groups of “walk-ins”.

·        Hours of operation – to ensure the tasting facility operates as intended (an incidental use) and not as a makeshift tavern, a restriction on the number of customers visiting the site for the purpose of tasting and/or sales is proposed to be limited to between the hours of 12.00pm and 5.00pm Monday to Sunday, including public holidays.

 

Modifications to the Zoning Table have been proposed in the expectation that the proposed provision will be implemented into the Scheme, thereby better guiding and controlling the appropriate location of production facilities. The permissibilities for the ‘Brewery’ and ‘Winery’ land uses are being brought into closer relation with each other given the similarity of the main issues and considerations associated with them.

The changes proposed in relation to these uses are as follows:

 

Zone/Use Class

Res

Reg

Ctr

Ctr

Loc

Ctr

Serv Com

Tour

L/

Ind

G/

Ind

Rural

Vit/

Tour

Rural

Res

Rural Lsp

Cons

Bush

Prtn

Brewery

X

A

A

A

A X

A

D

D

A

A

X

X

X

X

Winery

X

D A

D A

D A

D X

A

P D

X D

D

D

X

A X

X

X

 

Both ‘Brewery’ and ‘Winery’ land uses are proposed to become prohibited within the ‘Service Commercial’ zone, given the recommended buffer distances identified by the Environmental Protection Authority in the ‘Separation Distances between Industrial and Sensitive Land Uses’ guidelines of 200 – 500 metres. This is due to the potential adverse impacts caused by odour, gases, noise and dust. This buffer distance would effectively rule out any ‘Service Commercial’ zoned site being used, given the relatively small areas of land covered by this zone and their generally close proximity to residential areas.

 

The tourism component of these particular uses would be more appropriately located within the ‘Centre’ zones, and it is proposed to bring the permissibilities for a ‘Winery’ land use into closer certainty with a ‘Brewery’ land use.

 

The proposed modification to ‘Winery’ permissibilities in the industrial zones, and the retention of the ‘D’ use for ‘Brewery’ within these zones, is based on an appropriate provision for the restriction of tastings and food service (etc.) being inserted into the Scheme.

 

Finally, ‘Winery’ is proposed to become an ‘X’ use within ‘Rural Landscape’ zone, aligning with ‘Brewery’, due to the more sensitive nature of such locations and the need to preserve and protect the integrity of the zone.

 

These proposals specific to Breweries and Wineries are listed at section 4e), 4ff) and 5 of the Officer Recommendation.

 

Car Park

A ‘Car Park’ is currently a ‘D’ use within the ‘Regional Centre’ and ‘Centre’ zones. The ideal locations for this land use are on the outer edges of the Centres, in order to encourage, pedestrian focused development within core commercial/retail areas that contributes to a vibrant City and Town Centre, thereby aligning with the objectives of the LPS while also providing improved development options within the central sites themselves. This is particularly the case in Dunsborough (‘Centre’ zone) where there is less available land for development/re-development.

 

The Additional Use ‘A74’ was created through Amendment No. 1 (gazetted 4 August 2017), which allows for a small number of low impact commercial uses within a limited and defined area of ‘Residential’ zoned land adjoining the Busselton City and Dunsborough Town Centre. The uses already included within ‘A74’ are ‘Office’, ‘Guesthouse’, ‘Medical Centre’, ‘Consulting Rooms’, ‘Restaurant/Café’, ‘Shop’ and ‘Tourist Accommodation’, all of which are ‘discretionary’. Amendment 40 proposes to include ‘Car Park’ into this list of additional uses, thereby requiring the consideration of a development application to ensure appropriate design outcomes and control of potential amenity impacts on surrounding properties.

 

Hospital

A ‘Hospital’ is considered to be a ‘vulnerable’ land use under the bushfire planning framework. Given that the small number of ‘Rural Landscape’ zoned lots are all located within ‘Bushfire Prone Areas’ and are therefore unlikely to comply with the bushfire safety requirements for a ‘vulnerable’ land use, a ‘Hospital’ is not considered to be an appropriate land use within this zone.

 

Market

The definition of ‘Market’, as a “premises used for the display and sale of goods from stalls by independent vendors”, has been particularly problematic in recent times, with difficulty in distinguishing that use from a ‘Shop’ use. Being essentially a retail use, ‘Market’ is proposed to be removed from zones such as the ‘Service Commercial’ zone, and industrial and rural zones, all of which would not normally allow for shop retail uses in any event.  

 

Medical Centre

‘Medical Centre’ is proposed to change from a ‘D’ use to an ‘X’ use within the ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones as this land use is not consistent with the underlying objectives of these zones. This land use would be better located within or close to main centres, where better access to complementary uses (e.g. pharmacies) and public transport is available.

 

Service Station

The ‘Service Station’ land use is a typical contributor to ‘ribbon development’ along major travel routes and is generally contrary to the recommendations of the LPS and the provisions of the Scheme when located in rural areas. Should a ‘Service Station’ be deemed a necessary land use in a particular location for strategic reasons, a targeted Scheme Amendment could be undertaken to enable a merits-based assessment for that land use on that particular site. There has been recent concern about development of new service stations in the City, and this change would provide greater control over this land use along highways in rural areas.

 

Miscellaneous

Other miscellaneous proposed changes worth highlighting are:

 

·        A number of land uses typically have a social element and therefore should be focused within the main centres in order to encourage pedestrian visitation, associated spend and an active contribution to the overall viability and vitality of the CBDs. Any potential for such land uses to be situated within the ‘Service Commercial’ or ‘Industrial’ zones is proposed to be removed from the Scheme as they are contrary to the aims and objectives of these zones and the recommendations of the LPS. 

 

These uses include: 

§  ‘Amusement Parlour’;

§  ‘Cinema/Theatre’;

§  ‘Exhibition Centre’;

§  ‘Hotel’;

§  ‘Reception Centre’;

§  ‘Restaurant/Café’;

§  ‘Small Bar’; and

§  ‘Tavern’.


 

·        Review of a certain land uses to ensure that appropriate levels of permissibility are in place, especially where their location may have the potential to cause nuisance to nearby residential dwellings and workplaces. These uses may typically be located within the ‘Service Commercial’ zone and/or industrial zones and, while there is no suggestion that they should not be located within these zones, their proximity to residential areas must be taken into reasonable account. Such uses include:

§  ‘Garden Centre’;

§  ‘Motor Vehicle, Boat or Caravan Sales’;

§  ‘Motor Vehicle Repair’; and

§  ‘Veterinary Centre’. 

OFFICER COMMENT

The most relevant and substantive issues raised during the public consultation process can be addressed under the following headings:

1.         Definition of ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ land use

2.         Permissibility of ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ land use

3.         Prohibiting sale of certain items (cl. 3.5.3(e))

4.         Incidental uses and activities

5.         “Domestic hardware”

6.         Prohibiting land uses

7.         Chapman Hill Road Industrial/Service Commercial and Enterprise Park (Dunsborough)

8.         Miscellaneous modifications

9.         Retail and economics data

 

1.            Definition of ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ land use

The primary reason for Amendment 40 is to address the potential leakage of shop/retail and other high intensity land uses, and future investment, away from designated Activity Centres, particularly the Busselton City Centre. A component of this issue is the concerns held by the City with the ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ definition. The current definition is very broad and uncertain in terms of what types of business activity falls within this definition, and what activity falls within other uses, especially ‘Shop’. Officers are of the strong view that the current definition could allow shop/retail operators to argue they should be allowed in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone due to the need for large showroom areas and vehicle access to receive goods.

 

This situation creates very significant risk of introducing activity that should be in an Activity Centre into zones that should be set aside for other purposes, and critically undermines the direction set out in the City’s (recently) WAPC endorsed LPS. The outcome potentially caused by the current definition is also not aligned with draft SPP 4.2 that identifies shop/retail uses as those that should be located within Activity Centres. The proposed change to the definition by substituting the “or” with “and” between parts (a) and (b) is considered critical to avoid this issue.

 

The Amendment No. 40 is striving to better align the Scheme with the expectations of the LPS and to ensure development adheres to the State Planning Framework (including draft SPP4.2) by reducing out of centre development, protecting the primacy of activity centres and protecting land that is appropriate for Bulky Goods Showroom uses from being taken up by shop/retail uses.

 

Officers reinforce the importance of the proposed change to the ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ definition to create the clear and meaningful link between the two parts of the definition as initiated by the Council.

 

2.            Permissibility of ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ land use

The Amendment proposes to modify the permissibility of this use from ‘P’ (permitted) to ‘D’ (discretionary) in the Centre zones and the ‘Service Commercial’ zone.

 

It should be made clear that the most appropriate location for genuine ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ land uses is on the periphery of, or adjacent to, Activity Centres. In that respect, land in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone should be protected for land uses that are appropriately classified as ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’, and not shop/retail that would be better located within the Activity Centre. With this in mind, and subject to the definition for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ being amended (as discussed in the section above), requiring a Development Application to ensure the use was suitable for the ‘Service Commercial’ zone should not be necessary.

 

Therefore, following further consideration after the closure of the submission period, Officers recommend that the permissibility of this use within the ‘Regional Centre’, ‘Centre’ and ‘Service Commercial’ zones retain the designated ‘P’ permissibility. This recommendation is provided in the Schedule of Modifications at Attachment A (item no. 4).

 

However, as the ‘Local Centres’ tend to be smaller in area and in close proximity to residential zoned land, full consideration of the appropriateness of the use should be considered, particularly in relation to impacts off site. The proposed change of the permissibility to ‘D’ in this zone, as advertised, is therefore recommended.

 

3.            Prohibiting sale of certain items (cl. 3.5.3(e))

With regard to the restriction of sales of certain products, proposed sub-clause 3.5.3(e) is recommended to be altered to remove reference to the ‘Service Commercial’ zone (listed as item no. 1 in Attachment A, Schedule of Modifications). This will reflect the existing clause 3.5.4(e)(iii) (which the proposed clause seeks to replace), in that it only refers to the ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones. This recommended modification will reduce the proposed restrictions on the ‘Service Commercial’ zone, being located on the periphery of the Busselton City Centre and the recommended location for bulky goods/large format retail as identified by the draft SPP 4.2 Implementation Guidelines. The industrial areas are not the recommended location for shop/retail sales, as discussed at comment no. 1, above.

 

As with the above discussion regarding permissibilities of ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ uses, this recommended modification is dependent on the change to the definition being supported.

 

Summary of recommended modifications related to ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ land use

Draft Amendment as advertised

Proposed Modification

1

Permissibilities for Bulky Goods Showroom from ‘P’ to ‘D’ in the ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Regional Centre’ and ‘Centre’ zones

Recommend remove change of permissibility for Bulky Goods Showroom such that the only change as a result of the Amendment is to the ‘Local Centre’ zone (from ‘P’ to ‘D’).

2

Modify provision to prohibit sale of certain items within the ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones (clause 3.5.3(e))

Remove ‘Service Commercial’ from the clause so that the clause only applies to the ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones, consistent with existing clause 3.5.4(e)(iii).

3

Amend the Bulky Goods Showroom definition by replacing the “or” with an “and”

No proposed change

 

If the WAPC does not accept the proposed modification to the ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ definition, officers would recommend the Council seek the use to be prohibited within the ‘Light Industry’ zone and a ‘D’ use in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone, as well as the zone ‘Service Commercial’ being reinstated into the proposed clause 3.5.3(e).

 

4.            Incidental uses and activities

Consideration has been given to whether proposed clause 3.5.3(e) should refer to the sale of products that are incidental to the main use. Several submissions received expressed concern that it is not explicit in the proposed clause that the prohibition would only apply where the main purpose of the activity is to sell those items listed in the clause.

 

It was initially considered this would be unnecessary as clause 3.3.3 exists in the Scheme:

 

3.3.3   A reference to a use that may be carried out only with development approval includes a reference to any use ordinarily ancillary, subsidiary or incidental to the predominant use for which approval is sought.

 

However, the beginning of clause 3.5.3 uses the words “notwithstanding the provisions of clause 3.3 and Table 1”. These words are used to make clear which of two provisions is to prevail in the event of a conflict between those provisions. The use of those words could operate to exclude existing clause 3.3.3, provided above.

 

The City takes and expects to continue to take a fairly pragmatic approach towards incidental uses and activities, and it is seen as important to find ways to avoid losing reasonable flexibility. Therefore, in order to improve clarity for proponents, decision makers and tribunals, officers recommend that the following words are included at the end of the proposed clause:

 

                “...or are ordinarily ancillary, subsidiary or incidental to the predominant use.”

 

This recommendation is provided for within the Schedule of Modifications at Attachment A (item no. 3).

 

Consideration will need to be given as to how incidental uses will be dealt with during preparation of the new Local Planning Scheme No. 22 to ensure this flexibility is not lost.

 

5.            “Domestic hardware”

There has been some misunderstanding within several submissions in relation to the term “domestic hardware”, which is listed within proposed clause 3.5.3(e). This does not include hammers, tools and the like, in fact the existing clause 3.5.4(e) and proposed clause 3.5.3(e) both state “domestic hardware other than building supplies”. 

 

The term “domestic hardware” appears first within District Town Planning Scheme No. 20, which was gazetted in September 1999. The Australian and New Zealand Standard Industrial Classification 1993 (ANZSIC) classified ‘Domestic Hardware and Houseware Retailing’ as those businesses that were engaged in retailing household items such as crockery, cutlery, cooking utensils, glassware and other general kitchenware items. The ANZSIC now identifies the retail sale of these items as ‘Houseware Retailing’ and consists of businesses mainly engaged in retailing kitchenware, china, glassware, silverware or other houseware goods. These are clearly the products that the original clause was targeting, given it was listed alongside china and glassware.

 

It is recommended that the term “domestic hardware” be updated to reflect the current reference of “houseware retailing” to avoid confusion and is therefore included in the Schedule of Modifications at Attachment A (item no. 2).

6.            Prohibiting land uses

A number of submissions objected to the proposed downgrading of permissibilities to some uses, particularly in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone, and to a smaller extent, in the ‘Light Industry’ zone. Reasons for this objection cited the role of these uses in providing amenities for local workers and the detrimental impact on establishing new businesses in the area.

 

These uses that are proposed by Amendment 40 to become prohibited in these zones are identified as Activity Centre uses under draft SPP4.2 and are generally identified as not suited to either ‘Service Commercial’ or ‘Light Industrial’ areas. SPP4.2 (2010) states that commercial uses in industrial areas should be limited to meeting the core local convenience needs of workers. The Scheme allows for ‘Lunch Bars’ and ‘Service Stations’ in these zones, with the addition of ‘Takeaway Food Outlets’ in the ‘Service Commercial’ zone, and no change is proposed by the Amendment. These uses are allowed to sell food and beverage items, providing for the daily needs of workers and visitors to the respective areas.

 

The range of uses targeted by the Amendment are all identified as Activity Centre uses by the draft SPP4.2, grouped as ‘Retail development’, ‘Entertainment, Education and Leisure facilities’, ‘Commercial uses’ and ‘Cultural/Tourism uses’. These uses are not required to address the daily needs of workers and visitors during working hours as would be appropriate for Service Commercial or Industrial areas. Both the Busselton and Vasse Light Industrial Areas, as well as the Busselton ‘Service Commercial’ area, are within relative close proximity to the respective Activity Centres to enable workers to make use of those particular amenities.

 

The principles set out in the WAPC’s Activity Centres State Planning Policy 4.2 do not support these uses outside Regional Centre, District Centre and Centre zones where they can activate streets after hours, maintain investment and infrastructure in existing centres and avoid ‘out of centre’ development that would undermine the primacy and retail sustainability of the central Activity Centre areas and trade catchments.

 

Some of the uses that are proposed to have downgraded permissibilities are important components of developing a strong night-time economy. Allowing night-time uses such as restaurants, taverns and small bars to locate in the ‘Service Commercial’ and ‘Light Industry’ areas would be at the cost of having night-time uses in the City Centre and would limit the ability for the Busselton City Centre to attract and foster its own vibrant night-time economy. The uses should be clustered in order to function effectively. If these uses are spread, or develop ‘out of centre’, it would undermine that objective. 

 

It is essential that developable land in ‘Service Commercial’ areas be protected to provide for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ and other more suitable uses. Draft SPP4.2 states that “the preferred location of bulky goods/large format retail is in precincts on the periphery of activity centres and the regional road and public transport networks”, which aligns with the ‘Service Commercial’ zone provided along West Street and Bussell Highway.

 

For these reasons, there is no recommended modification to the Amendment as it relates to the permissibilities changes, generally.

 


 

Recommended Additional Use ‘Office’ at No. 17 Bussell Highway (‘Service Commercial’ zone)

However, officers do recommend a modification to the Amendment specifically in relation to Units 1 to 5, No. 17 Bussell Highway, West Busselton (Strata Plan 27226). This is in response to submissions made during the advertising period and in-person by land owners to the Council at the Community Access Session on 6 October 2021, triggering further consideration of the specific issues relevant to the site.

 

These strata units were originally approved and built for use as ‘Showroom/Warehouse’ in 1994. However, given the unit sizes range from 129sqm to 223sqm, the design has not proven to be suited to those uses – and to a significant degree, the size and layout of premises is better suited to low-intensity office use. A number of years ago, the City made a decision to allow office use in some premises in Enterprise Park in Dunsborough for similar reasons – i.e. premises had been built and were ostensibly to be used for bulky goods retailing or industrial purposes, but in some cases they were 50sqm upstairs tenancies, clearly unsuited for those purposes. Relative to other premises in the area, most of the premises on the 17 Bussell Highway site also have less exposure to passing traffic on Bussell Highway – again, making them less suitable for use as showrooms and for bulky goods retailing.

 

Officers therefore propose introducing an Additional Use for ‘Office’ over 17 Bussell Highway to address concern over the future use of these units. The proposed Additional Use is not recommended to be extended across the full block due to the fact that the existing buildings do not have the same physical constraints, because of the significant effect that it could have on parking demand, and because of the presence of existing additional use rights on some other sites in the vicinity. 

 

In terms of the existing buildings on other sites, with the exception of the food premises in the area (which are permissible land uses on their respective sites), they are relatively large premises, with good exposure to Bussell Highway – and they are currently being used successfully, mostly for existing and locally owned bulky goods retailing businesses that provide important services to the community. 

 

In terms of the potential effect on car parking demand, the property at 7 Bussell Highway provides an example of the challenges that could arise if more of the existing buildings in the area were able to be used as offices. 7 Bussell Highway, consists of three separate premises, each a little under 400sqm in area, with a total building area a little under 1,200sqm, and 20 car bays in total on the subject property (generally reflecting the normal car provision standard for showroom floorspace of 1 bay per 50sqm of net lettable area (which excludes some parts of the building floorspace). 

 

The three current tenants are South West Cycles, Barbeques Galore and Anytime Fitness. It is estimated that, in total, the maximum staff numbers of those three businesses combined would be 10-15. Office floorspace, however, can have significantly higher numbers of staff relative to the size of the premises, and it would not be unusual for office floorspace to generate parking demand as high as 3 or even 4 bays per 50sqm (in theory, office premises could in fact accommodate as many 1 staff member per 10sqm – although that level is unlikely to be reached).

 

Within the broader precinct, if even a small proportion of premises was to be used for office or other more intensive land uses, parking demand overall could significantly exceed supply, generating conflict between and negatively affecting other businesses and landowners in the area.

 


 

In addition, there are two existing additional use right designations that apply to land in the broader precinct. Additional Use 80 applies to the site that is now occupied by Retravision, and does allow for office uses, but was introduced through a site-specific amendment that sought to provide for the re-use and redevelopment of the former Busselton Squash Courts site. Additional Use 43 was introduced in the City’s previous town planning scheme, and allows for the ‘Restaurant/Café’ land-use (and the site contains the Urban Coffee House and Al Forno businesses currently).

 

It is considered that some redevelopment of this precinct may be appropriate in future, but that applying an additional use designation across the whole of the precinct without a broader planning vision and process would not be appropriate.

 

The recommended modification is included in the Schedule of Modifications at Attachment A (item no. 6).

 

7.            Chapman Hill Road Industrial/Service Commercial and Enterprise Park (Dunsborough)

Two areas were identified in submissions as being exempt from the proposed changes as they are not specifically zoned ‘Service Commercial’ or ‘Light Industry’. These areas are legacy matters which were created by allocating the ‘Special Use’ zone with ‘Special Provisions’ listed within the Scheme. The Special Provisions usually would refer to a Structure Plan to guide subdivision, development and land uses. The Regulations now require an alternative and consistent approach to development areas, by using the zones ‘Urban Development’ and ‘Industrial Development’.

 

Amendment 28 recently (February 2021) introduced these zones to the Scheme and corrected the zoning of many of these development areas, including the Chapman Hill Road Industrial/Service Commercial precinct.

 

The Chapman Hill Road Industrial/Service Commercial precinct is located on the southern side of the Busselton Bypass and bordered by Chapman Hill Road to the east and the Vasse Diversion Drain and Ambergate North to the west. Initially identified to become a motor vehicle sales precinct, the area is now considered to be a “service commercial and mixed light industrial precinct”.

 

The area was rezoned through Amendment 28 from ‘Special Use’ to ‘Industrial Development’, with ‘Special Provision No. 48’. The special provision identifies the intent of the site and specifies certain land uses and their permissibilities, including ‘Convenience Store’, ‘Medical Centre’ and ‘Bulky Goods Showrooms’. It is understood that these land uses were based on the Zoning Table at the time of the initial Scheme Amendment, replicating the uses that were permissible within the ‘Service Commercial’ and ‘Light Industry’ zones. Amendment 40 was unable to modify the requirements of the special provision given Amendment 28 was still progressing.

 

In order for development to take place, the ‘Industrial Development’ zone requires subdivision in accordance with an approved Structure Plan and ‘hard zoning’ thereafter. This ‘hard zoning’ would bring the subject parcels into line with the remainder of the Scheme by zoning the land as either ‘Service Commercial’ or ‘Light Industrial’, where identified by a Structure Plan, with development therefore being required to comply with the Zoning Table. Alternatively this could be corrected through the drafting of the new Scheme, whichever process occurs first. 

 

Dunsborough Lakes Enterprise Park is currently zoned ‘Special Use No. 24’ with ‘Special Provision No. 42’. Given the timing of previous Amendments 28 and 29 (that made changes to the zone and zone objectives of the Scheme) and concurrent modifications to the Structure Plan, the rezoning of Enterprise Park to ‘Service Commercial’ with an Additional Use for ‘Office’ is expected to be undertaken as a separate Basic Amendment or through the Scheme Review process. Multiple other issues are at play in the Dunsborough area, given there is not currently a specific ‘Service Commercial’ zoned area and the availability of land for relevant uses in Dunsborough is quite limited.

 

For these legacy areas, it would be inappropriate to make this a modification to Amendment 40, and given the risks to the Activity Centre hierarchy are relatively low, these areas will instead be subject to corrections in the new Scheme, or a separate, standalone Amendment.

 

8.            Miscellaneous modifications

Officers recommend minor modifications to proposed clause 4.19 ‘Breweries and Wineries’ to correct drafting errors.

 

The provision makes reference to the ‘Service Commercial’ zone as well as the ‘Light Industry’ and ‘General Industry’ zones, while the Amendment also proposes to make these uses ‘not permitted’ within the ‘Service Commercial’ zone. The Environmental Protection Authority Guidance Statement (Separation Distances between Industrial and Sensitive Land Uses (GS 3)) requirement for buffer distances essentially discounts the ability for this use to be established within the ‘Service Commercial’ zone, given the close proximity to residential areas. It is therefore recommended that reference to the ‘Service Commercial’ zone be removed from the clause to reduce confusion.

 

Another minor modification is recommended at proposed sub-clause 4.19.1(a) to modify the units from “mls” to “ml” to reflect the correct usage of the symbol for millilitre.

 

These recommended modifications are included within the Schedule of Modifications, provided at Attachment A (item no. 5).

 

9.            Retail and economics data

Some of the submissions identify, correctly, that the vacancy rate in the Busselton City Centre is relatively low at present – and that means that there is no need to be concerned about retail leakage and/or that further economic analysis is required to justify aspects of the amendment. Those contentions are flawed, for two key reasons.

 

Firstly, to achieve the strategic aims set out in the LPS, it is not sufficient to avoid having excessive vacancies in existing floorspace – it is also critical to see new investment and delivery of additional floorspace. In the case of both the Busselton City Centre and the Dunsborough Town Centre, there is substantial capacity to accommodate new development, on land that is Zoned but either undeveloped, or under-developed. Secondly, current experience in terms of demand in the City of Busselton economy is quite different to what has occurred in the past, and may well not be a good guide to what may occur in the future – some information to support that contention is set out below.

 

The graph below shows that the period July 2020 to January 2021 saw a period of extraordinary economic growth – with total spend in January 2021 in Busselton alone being nearly $10M higher across the key retail spend categories relative to January 2020.

 

 

The additional graph below shows month-by-month comparisons, relative to the 2018/19 financial year (i.e. pre-COVID) – showing that in each month since July 2020, total local spend across the key retail categories has been at least 25% and as much as 200% higher than 2018/19. Whilst robust population and economic growth is expected to continue in the City of Busselton, the current period is, quite simply, not necessarily a good guide to what may occur in the future – and to be confident that our main centres can remain viable and attractive locations for investment, it is important that the planning framework send a clear message that those centres are the desired location for investment in shop retail and other high intensity land-uses.

Statutory Environment

The key elements of the statutory environment in relation to Amendment 40 are set out in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 and the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21. This Scheme Amendment has been prepared having regard to the Act and the Regulations (and the Model Provisions and Deemed Provisions contained therein). Each is discussed below under appropriate subheadings.

Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015

The Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 identifies three different levels of amendments – ‘basic’, ‘standard’ and ‘complex’. The resolution of the local government is required to specify the level of the amendment and provide a brief explanation justifying this specification.

 

Amendment 40 is considered to be a ‘standard’ amendment, given it is consistent with the identified zone objectives provided for within the Scheme, and with the outcomes and recommendations endorsed in the Local Planning Strategy (2019), and will not result in any significant environmental, social, economic or governance impacts on land in the Scheme area.

 

City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21

The proposal is considered to be generally consistent with the objectives of the zones under LPS21. The pertinent objectives of the most relevant zones are provided below.

 

Regional Centre

a.   To provide a genuine centre of community life, socially, culturally and economically.

b.   To ensure that development provides for activation of the street and public spaces, high quality design and a variety of land uses.

 

Centre

a.   To provide a genuine centre of community life, socially, culturally and economically.

b.   To ensure that development provides for activation of the street and public spaces, high quality design and a variety of land uses.

 

Service Commercial

a.   To accommodate commercial activities which, because of the nature of the business, require good vehicular access and/or large sites.

b.   To provide for a range of wholesale sales, showrooms, trade and services which, by reason of their scale, character, operational or land requirements, are not generally appropriate in, or cannot conveniently or economically be accommodated in the Centre zones.

c.    To provide for development which will not result in a detrimental impact on surrounding commercial centres and has regard to the strategic importance and need to maintain the commercial primacy of the Regional Centre and Centre zones.

 

Light Industry

a.   To provide for a range of industrial and service commercial uses generally compatible with urban areas, that generally cannot be located in other zones, whilst maintaining the commercial primacy of the Regional Centre and Centre zones.

 

Rural

a.   To provide for the maintenance or enhancement of specific local rural character.

f.    To provide for development and expansion of the viticultural, winemaking and associated tourism activities and other industries related to agricultural activities, in addition to general rural pursuits, in a manner that does not cause adverse environmental impact.


Relevant Plans and Policies

The key policy implications with respect to the Amendment proposal are set out below, and discussed under appropriate sub-headings:

·        State Planning Policy 4.2: Activity Centres for Perth and Peel (2010) and Draft State Planning Policy 4.2: Activity Centre (2020);

·        City of Busselton Local Planning Strategy; and

·        City of Busselton Local Commercial Planning Strategy.

 

State Planning Policy 4.2: Activity Centres for Perth and Peel (2010) and Draft State Planning Policy 4.2: Activity Centre (2020)

The main purpose of State Planning Policy 4.2: Activity Centres for Perth and Peel (SPP 4.2) is to specify broad planning requirements for the planning and development of new activity centres, and the redevelopment and renewal of existing centres in Perth and Peel.  It is mainly concerned with the distribution, function, broad land use and urban design criteria of Activity Centres, and with coordinating their respective land use and infrastructure planning.  Whilst it primarily contends with the Perth and Peel region, it can also be used as a guide regional centres.

 

In the time since the Amendment was considered for initiation by the Council, the WAPC advertised the draft revision of SPP 4.2. The draft SPP 4.2 clarifies the ability for the policy to be applied outside the region scheme areas, being at the discretion of the WAPC. The draft SPP should be used to guide the preparation and review of local planning proposals and have due regard to any relevant provisions relating to activity centres role, function and hierarchy in the Local Planning Framework and/or Regional Framework.

 

SPP 4.2 (including the advertised draft) encourages shop-retail uses to be located within a pedestrian friendly urban environment of an Activity Centre. Bulky goods retailing is cited as being unsuitable to the core of Activity Centres due to their large area and associated car parking requirements, corresponding low employment densities, and the need for freight vehicle access (clause 5.6.1(1)). Therefore, clusters of bulky goods retail should be located adjacent to or in close proximity to activity centres.

 

The draft SPP states that (Policy Measures 7.4) “Local planning schemes should ensure that desired activity centre uses are located within activity centres through appropriate zoning and use class permissibility.” The draft SPP also provides a definition for ‘Activity centre use(s)’, reproduced below.

 

Activity centre use(s)

Includes (but not limited to) the following:

•          Retail development: Shop, Bulky Goods Showroom, Liquor Store – Small, Liquor Store – Large, Market and Restricted Premises.

•          Entertainment, Education and Leisure facilities: Amusement Parlour, Educational Establishment, Nightclub, Place of Worship, Recreation – Private, Restaurant / Café, Small Bar, Tavern.

•          Commercial uses: Office, Medical Centre, Consulting Rooms.

•          Services: Small scale automotive services and recycling services.

•          Cultural / Tourism Uses: Art Gallery, Cinema / Theatre, Hotel Tourist Development.

 


 

Local Planning Strategy (LPS)

The LPS sets the long-term strategic planning direction for the whole of the District of the City of Busselton and provides the strategic rationale for decisions related to the progressive review and amendment of the Scheme.  The LPS was adopted for final approval by the Council in September 2016 and was endorsed by the WAPC on 10 December 2019, subject to certain agreed modifications prior to endorsement by the DPLH.  The DPLH formally endorsed the LPS on 13 March 2020.

 

‘Theme 1’ of the LPS, ‘Settlement and Community’, identifies the following relevant objectives and strategies:

 

Objective (a):

“The continued growth as the principal settlement in the District of the Busselton-Vasse Urban Area as a regional centre and the Dunsborough Urban Area as a major town through: the redevelopment and consolidation of the existing urban areas; and through the identification of suitable areas for planned, progressive expansion of those settlements.”

 

Objective (c):

“The creation of compact, liveable and sustainable settlements that provide their residents with housing and lifestyle choice and affordability, a high quality of life, health and wellbeing and convenient access to high quality employment and services.”

 

Strategy (h):

“Generally, but especially in urban growth areas, plan for housing choice, diversity, health, wellbeing and ageing in place, with a mix of housing types and lot sizes, with higher densities in proximity to activity centres and open space areas, and with identification of land for aged and dependent persons’ housing and care facilities in proximity to activity centres in all medium-term urban growth areas.”

 

Strategy (m):

“Identify locations for the following particular significant community facilities –

·    Aged care facilities”

 

Strategy (r):

“Do not support the following –

i.      Unplanned new settlements or urban growth areas, including through creation of new settlements not identified in the established settlement framework or new urban growth areas not identified in the urban growth area framework;

iii.    Planning proposals that would significantly compromise the capacity of urban growth areas to accommodate planned growth;”

 

 


 

‘Theme 2’ of the LPS, ‘Activity Centres and Economy’, identifies the following relevant objectives and strategies:

 

Objective (d):

“The continued growth of the Busselton City Centre and Dunsborough Town Centre as the main centres of the economic, social and cultural life of the District.”

 

Strategy (c):

“…activity centres shall… be developed along predominantly ‘main-street’ lines, with activated public streets and high levels of pedestrian amenity…”

 

Strategy (j):

“Support and pro-actively plan for industrial/service commercial area development… via… Preventing retail activity which can be located in activity centres from being located in industrial/service commercial areas…”

 

Strategy (p):

“Do not support the following –

i.      unplanned new, or expansion of, existing activity centres not identified in the established activity centre framework;

iii)   significant shop retail or office uses locating outside activity centres;

iv)   retail activity, including bulky goods retail, outside activity centres unless there is a clear and compelling argument to do so...”

 

 

Table 4 ‘Industrial/Service Commercial Area Framework’ identifies the prevention of establishing retail activity that should be located in Activity Centres as a key issue within the following areas:

·        Strelly Street/Busselton Light Industrial Area;

·        Bussell Highway Service Commercial;

·        Chapman Hill Road Service Commercial; and

·        Vasse Light Industrial, Services Commercial.

 

Local Commercial Planning Strategy (LCPS)

The Local Commercial Planning Strategy (LCPS), adopted by Council on 10 November 2010, provides the long term strategic land use planning and strategic direction for the development of commercial land within the District.

 

The LCPS considered and made recommendations on a number of matters relevant to Amendment 40:

 

Recommendation 9:

“Further service commercial development along major roads, including the Busselton Bypass, Bussell Highway and Causeway Road, other than that accommodated by existing zonings and/or specifically supported by the Strategy is not supported.”

 

Recommendation 11:

“Control retail intrusion into the industrial areas of the shire, particularly Strelly Street.”

 

Recommendation 38:

“Council should consider the need for an Amendment to the TPS to restrict retail uses in the industrial zone to only that which is necessary as an ancillary component to the main industrial activity.”

 

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications associated with the officer recommendation.

Stakeholder Consultation

The Amendment was advertised for 42 days, ending 18 November 2020, with notifications being sent directly to a total of 887 landowners within the ‘Regional Centre’ (Busselton City Centre), ‘Centre’ (Dunsborough Town Centre), ‘Service Commercial’ and ‘Light Industry’ zones.

 

This advice was also sent to the Busselton Chamber of Commerce, Dunsborough Yallingup Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the Dunsborough Progress Association, along with a number of planning consultants who had requested notification. A media release was issued on 23 October 2020 and a specific Facebook post was also created.

 

Following the 13 October meeting of Council when the consideration of the Amendment was deferred, officers met with members of the Busselton and Dunsborough-Yallingup Chambers of Commerce, as well as some business/land owners from the Busselton City Centre and Service Commercial zone. General support was received for the intent of the Amendment and the modifications proposed.

 

Twelve government agency submissions were received with no substantive issues being raised. Nineteen public submissions were received which can be outlined as follows:

·    Specific or general SUPPORT in relation to the matters proposed:                                  2

·    Specific or general OBJECTION in relation to the matters proposed:                              14

·    Specific or general COMMENT or CONCERN in relation to the matters proposed:    3

 

The substance of objections and concerns can be broadly classified as follows:

·    Changing the ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ land use definition.

·    Changing the permissibilities of the ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ land use.

·    The prohibition against the sale of certain products from the ‘Service Commercial’ and/or ‘Light Industry’ zones.

·    The prohibition of land uses from the ‘Service Commercial’ and/or ‘Light Industry’ zones.

 

A number of the submissions were based on assumptions, sometimes incorrectly, surrounding the classification of land uses and ‘incidental uses’.

 

A Summary of Submissions, along with officer comments in respect to each submission, is provided at Attachment B. The most substantive matters raised by the submissions are discussed in the Officer Comment section, above.

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management framework, with risks assessed taking into account any controls already in place.

 

The implementation of the officer recommendation will involve adopting the Amendment for final approval and referral to the Western Australian Planning Commission and Minister for Planning for final approval. No risks of a medium or greater level have been identified.


 

Options

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

1.         Resolve to 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.         Seek further information before making a final determination.

3.         Make different or further changes.

CONCLUSION

As a result of the assessment detailed above, officers are of the view that the proposal is generally consistent with the aims and objectives of the State and local planning policy framework. It is recommended that the Council provides a recommendation to the Western Australian Planning Commission to endorse the final approval of Amendment 40, subject to the modifications set out at Attachment A.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The implementation of the officer recommendation will involve the referral of Amendment 40 to the Western Australian Planning Commission for final approval and this will occur within 21 days of the resolution.


Council

122

24 November 2021

13.1

Attachment a

Schedule of Modifications

 




Council

177

24 November 2021

13.1

Attachment b

Schedule of Submissions

 
























































Council

236

24 November 2021

13.1

Attachment c

Busselton City Centre Retail and Commercial Analysis