150120 council agenda - city of bunbury

CITY OF BUNBURY 4 Stephen Street

Bunbury WA 6230 Western Australia

Correspondence to: Post Office Box 21

Bunbury WA 6231

Telephone: (08) 9792 7234 ◌ Facsimile: (08) 9792 7184 ◌ TTY: (08) 9792 7370 ◌ www.bunbury.wa.gov.au

Bunbury City Council

Notice of Meeting and Agenda

20 January 2015

Table of Contents

Item No Subject Page

1. Declaration of Opening/Announcements of Visitors ............................................................................. 6

2. Disclaimer ............................................................................................................................................... 7

3. Announcements from the Presiding Member ........................................................................................ 7

4. Attendance ............................................................................................................................................. 7

4.1 Apologies ................................................................................................. 7 4.2 Approved Leave of Absence ....................................................................... 7

5. Declaration of Interest ............................................................................................................................ 8

6. Public Question Time .............................................................................................................................. 9

6.1 Public Question Time ................................................................................ 9 6.2 Responses to Public Questions Taken ‘On Notice’ ......................................... 9

7. Confirmation of Previous Minutes and other Meetings under Clause 19.1 ......................................... 15

7.1 Minutes ................................................................................................. 15 7.1.1 Minutes – Ordinary Council Meeting ................................................................... 15

7.1.2 Minutes – Council Advisory Committees and Working/Project Groups ............. 16

8. Petitions, Presentations, Deputations and Delegations ....................................................................... 17

8.1 Petitions ................................................................................................ 17 8.2 Presentations ......................................................................................... 17 8.3 Deputations ........................................................................................... 17 8.4 Council Delegates’ Reports ...................................................................... 17 8.5 Conference Delegates’ Reports................................................................. 17

9. Method of Dealing with Agenda Business ............................................................................................ 17

10. Reports .................................................................................................................................................. 18

10.1 Recommendations from Advisory Committees ........................................... 18 10.1.1 New Council Policy – Asset Monitoring ............................................................... 18

10.1.2 Revision of Council Policy – Purchasing - Local Preferences ............................... 20

10.1.3 Revision of Council Policy – Street Addressing .................................................... 22

10.1.4 Revision of Council Policy – City of Bunbury Art Collection Policy ...................... 23

10.1.5 Amendment of Council Policy – Leases and Licences .......................................... 25

10.1.6 New Council Policy – Commercial Leases ............................................................ 27

10.1.7 Revision of Council Policy – Recreation Facilities and Provide Diverse Range

of Activities and Facilities for Residents and Visitors .......................................... 29

10.1.8 Revision of Council Policy – Bunbury Museum Collection Policy ........................ 31

10.1.9 Revision of Council Policy – Vandalism/Graffiti Management Policy .................. 33

10.2 Chief Executive Officer Reports ................................................................ 34 10.2.1 Petition - Proposed Sale of Lot 70 Winthrop Avenue College Grove .................. 34

10.2.2 Lot 70 Winthrop Avenue ...................................................................................... 37

10.2.3 Release of Confidential Report ............................................................................ 44

10.2.4 Major Projects Update Report for the period 1 July 2014 to 31 December

2014 ............................................................................................................. 46

Table of Contents

Item No Subject Page

10.2.5 Development Assessment Panels – Local Government Nominations ................. 48

10.2.6 Motions Passed at the Annual Meeting of Electors 2014 ................................... 51

10.2.7 Schedule of Accounts Paid for the Period 1 November 2014 to 30 November

2014 ............................................................................................................. 54

10.2.8 Financial Management Report for the Period Ending 30 November 2014 ......... 55

10.3 Director Corporate and Community Services .............................................. 61 10.3.1 National Sister Cities Australia Conference 2014 ................................................ 61

10.3.2 Creative City Strategy 2015-2020 ........................................................................ 65

10.3.3 Proposed Deed of License to Heather MacFarlane Pty Ltd as Trustee for the

Jenny Spencer Trust Trading as Yours or Mine over a portion of Lot 3 Blair

Street, Bunbury .................................................................................................... 68

10.3.4 Dedication of Road Reserve - Bunbury Primary School – Lovegrove Avenue

Traffic and Parking ............................................................................................... 71

10.4 Director Planning and Development Services Reports ................................. 74 10.4.1 Bunbury War Memorial Conservation Works...................................................... 74

10-4-2 Proposed Structure Plan – Part Lots 120 and 549 South Western Highway,

Davenport ............................................................................................................ 77

10.5 Director Works and Services Reports......................................................... 85 10.5.1 Vittoria Rd/Jeffrey Rd – Proposed Compulsory Acquisition of Land ................... 85

10.5.2 Bunbury Timber Jetty – Heritage Interpretation ................................................. 88

11. Applications for Leave of Absence ........................................................................................................ 93

12. Motions on Notice ................................................................................................................................ 93

12.1 Motion on Notice – Cr Steck – Boulters Heights ................................................. 93

13. Questions on Notice ............................................................................................................................. 95

13.1 Response to Previous Questions from Members taken on Notice ................. 95 13.2 Questions from Members ........................................................................ 95

14. New Business of an Urgent Nature Introduced by Decision of the Meeting ....................................... 97

14.1 Street Trading Licence application - Helicopter Joy Flights, Lot 882

Koombana Drive, Bunbury ................................................................................... 97

15. Meeting Closed to Public .................................................................................................................... 100

15.1 Matters for which the Meeting may be Closed ......................................... 100 15.2 Public Reading of Resolutions that may be made Public ............................ 100

16. Closure ................................................................................................................................................ 100

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATED TERMS

Term Explanation

1:100 Ratio of 'one in one hundred'

AD Acceptable Development

ARI Annual Recurrence Interval

AHD Australian Height Datum

ANEF Australian Noise Exposure Forecast

AWARE All West Australians Reducing Emergencies (grant funding)

BCA Building Code of Australia

BCCI Bunbury Chamber of Commerce & Industries

BCRAB Bunbury Community Recreation Association Board

BEAC Built Environment Advisory Committee

BESAC Bunbury Environment and Sustainability Advisory Committee

BHRC Bunbury Harvey Regional Council

BPA Bunbury Port Authority

BRAG Bunbury Regional Art Galleries

BRAMB Bunbury Regional Arts Management Board

BREC Bunbury Regional Entertainment Centre

BSSC Big Swamp Steering Committee

BTJE&CS Bunbury Timber Jetty Environment & Conservation Society

BWEA Bunbury Wellington Economic Alliance

CALM Department of Conservation and Land Management

CBD Central Business District

CCAFF Community Cultural and Arts Facilities Fund

CERM Centre of Environmental and Recreation Management

CPI Consumer Price Index

CSRFF Community Sport and Recreation Facilities Fund

DADAAWA Disability in the Arts Disadvantage in the Arts Australia, Western Australia

DAP Detailed Area Plan (required by WA Planning Commission)

DCU Development Coordinating Unit

DEC Department of Environment and Conservation (formerly CALM)

DEWCP Department for Environment, Water and Catchment Protection

DLI Department of Land Information

DoE Department of Environment

DOLA Department of Land Administration

DoPI Department of Primary Industry

DoW Department of Water

DPI Department for Planning and Infrastructure

DSR Department of Sport and Recreation

DUP Dual-use Path

ECT Enforcement Computer Technology

EDAC Economic Development Advisory Committee

EDWA Education Department of Western Australia

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EPA Environmental Protection Authority

ERMP Environmental Review and Management Program

ESL Emergency Services Levy

FESA Fire and Emergency Services Authority

FFL Finished Floor Level

GBPG Greater Bunbury Progress Group

GBRP Greater Bunbury Resource Plan report

GBRS Greater Bunbury Region Scheme

GL Gigalitres

GRV Gross Rental Value

GST Goods and Services Tax

HCWA Heritage Council of Western Australia

ICLEI International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives

ICT Information and Communications Technology

IP Internet Protocol

IT Information Technology

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATED TERMS

Term Explanation

ITC In Town Centre

ITLC Former In-Town Lunch Centre (now the "In Town Centre")

LAP Local Action Plan

LCC Leschenault Catchment Council

LEMC Bunbury Local Emergency Management Committee

LIA Light Industrial Area

LN (2000) Liveable Neighbourhoods Policy (2000)

LSNA Local Significant Natural Area

MHDG Marlston Hill Design Guidelines

MRWA Main Roads Western Australia

NDMP National Disaster Mitigation Program

NEEDAC Noongar Employment & Enterprise Development Aboriginal Corp.

NRM Natural Resource Management

NRMO Natural Resource Management Officer

ODP Outline Development Plan

PAW Public Access Way

PHCC Peel-Harvey Catchment Council

PR Plot Ratio

R-IC Residential Inner City (Housing) - special density provisions

RDC Residential Design Codes

RDG Residential Design Guidelines

Residential R15 Town Planning Zone – up to 15 residential dwellings per hectare




RFDS Royal Flying Doctor Service

RMFFL Recommended Minimum Finished Floor Levels

ROS Regional Open Space

ROW Right-of-Way

RSL Returned Services League

SBCC South Bunbury Cricket Club Inc.

SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition

SGDC Sportsgrounds Development Committee

SW South West

SWACC South Western Area Consultative Committee

SWAMS South West Aboriginal Medical Service

SWBP South West Biodiversity Project

SWCC South West Catchments Council

SWDC South West Development Commission

SWDRP South West Dolphin Research Program

SWEL South West Electronic Library

SWSC South West Sports Centre

TME Thompson McRobert Edgeloe

TPS Town Planning Scheme

USBA Union Bank of Switzerland Australia

VGO Valuer General’s Office

VOIP Voice-Over Internet Protocol

WALGA Western Australian Local Government Association

WAPC Western Australian Planning Commission

WAPRES Western Australian Plantation Resources

WAWA Water Authority of Western Australia

WC Water Corporation

WML WML Consultants

WRC Waters and Rivers Commission

20 January 2015

Agenda – Council Meeting

Bunbury City Council

Notice of Meeting

The next Ordinary Meeting of the Bunbury City Council will be held in the Council Chambers, City of

Bunbury Administration Building, 4 Stephen Street, Bunbury on Tuesday, 20 January 2015 at 5.30pm.

Andrew Brien

Chief Executive Officer (Date of Issue: 16/01/2015)

Agenda 20 January 2015

Note: The recommendations contained in this document are not final and are subject to adoption, amendment (or

otherwise) at the meeting.

Council Members:

Mayor Gary Brennan

Deputy Mayor Councillor Brendan Kelly

Councillor Murray Cook

Councillor Wendy Giles

Councillor James Hayward

Councillor Judy Jones

Councillor Betty McCleary

Councillor Neville McNeill

Councillor Jaysen Miguel

Councillor Sam Morris

Councillor David Prosser

Councillor Michelle Steck

Councillor Karen Steele

1. Declaration of Opening/Announcements of Visitors

20 January 2015


2. Disclaimer

All persons present are advised that the proceedings of this meeting will be recorded for record

keeping purposes and to ensure accuracy in the minute taking process, and will also be streamed

live via the internet to the public.

3. Announcements from the Presiding Member

4. Attendance

4.1 Apologies

4.2 Approved Leave of Absence

Nil.

20 January 2015


5. Declaration of Interest

Members should fill in Disclosure of Interest forms for items in which they have a financial,

proximity or impartiality interest and forward these to the Presiding Member before the meeting

commences.

Section 5.60A: “a person has a financial interest in a matter if it is reasonable to expect that the

matter will, if dealt with by the local government, or an employee or committee of the local

government or member of the council of the local government, in a particular way, result in a

financial gain, loss, benefit or detriment for the person.”

Section 5.60B: “a person has a proximity interest in a matter if the matter concerns –

(a) a proposed change to a planning scheme affecting land that adjoins the person’s

land; or

(b) a proposed change to the zoning or use of land that adjoins the person’s land; or

(c) a proposed development (as defined in section 5.63(5)) of land that adjoins the

person’s land.”

Regulation 34C (Impartiality): “interest means an interest that could, or could reasonably be

perceived to, adversely affect the impartiality of the person having the interest and includes an

interest arising from kinship, friendship or membership of an association.”

Cr Jones declared an impartiality interest in item 10.2.1 titled “Petition – Proposed Sale of Lot 70

Winthrop Avenue College Grove” as she is the Chairman of Alliance Housing. Cr Jones will remain in

the chamber for the discussion and the vote on the matter.

Cr Jones declared an impartiality interest in item 10.2.1 titled “Lot 70 Winthrop Avenue” as she is

the Chairman of Alliance Housing. Cr Jones will remain in the chamber for the discussion and the

vote on the matter.

Cr Cook declared an impartiality interest in item 10.4.1 titled “Bunbury War Memorial Conservation

Works” as he is an affiliate member of the Bunbury RSL Sub-Branch. Cr Cook will remain in the

chamber for the discussion and the vote on the matter.

Cr Cook declared an impartiality interest in item 10.5.1 titled “Vittoria Rd/Jeffrey Rd – Proposed

Compulsory Acquisition of Land” as his niece is the Canteen Manager at Grace Christian. Cr Cook

will remain in the chamber for the discussion and the vote on the matter.

Cr Cook declared an impartiality interest in item 10.5.2 titled “Bunbury Timber Jetty – Heritage

Interpretation” as he is a financial member of the Bunbury Timber Jetty Environment &

Conservation Society (Inc). Cr Cook will remain in the chamber for the discussion and the vote on

the matter.

20 January 2015


6. Public Question Time

In accordance with Reg. 7(4)(a) of the Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996, members of the

public in attendance at the meeting may stand, state aloud their name and address, and ask a question in

relation to any matter over which the municipality of Bunbury has jurisdiction or involvement.

In accordance with Standing Order 6.7(3)(a) a person wishing to ask a question, must complete a question

form which is provided in the trays at the back of the public gallery and on the City’s website. The completed

form must include your name and address and contain no more than three (3) questions. If your question

requires research or cannot be answered at the meeting, it will be taken on notice and you will receive a

written response and a summary of your question (and any responses provided) will be printed in the

minutes of the meeting.

6.1 Public Question Time

6.2 Responses to Public Questions Taken ‘On Notice’

At the Council Meeting held 9 December 2014, a number of questions were asked during Public

Question Time that could not be answered during the meeting. A copy of the questions and the

written responses forwarded to the questioner following the meeting is provided below for public

information:

Mr Zyggi Uchwal – PO Box 801, Bunbury WA 6231

1. Why were private valuers used and not Valuer General Office used for valuation of the

Land?

Reply: Council regularly users private valuers to get faster turnaround on valuations. This is in

accordance with legislative provisions and valuations are from registered valuers.

2. Why 31 sites (existing zooming) is sold to Developers for $775,000 ($25,000 per site) if

cleaning cost only $400,000 then effective price per lot is $12,000? If cost of clean-up

reaches $700,000 then land will be sold for less than $2,000 per lot

Reply: No decision has been made on the number of lots or the decontamination of site, therefore

remediation costs are not know and all costs so far are purely speculative. Decontamination

will be a cost for that must be absorbed by the developers.

3. What will be benefit to the ratepayers from proposed sale – information obtained from

CEO was that this sale will pay for extension of Somerville Drive and crossing to Robinson

Drive, could be explained how much of this cost will be recovered while this land is being

sold for free?

20 January 2015


Reply: The land is not being given away and any proceeds from the sale will need to be used for

repayment of debt for the Somerville Drive extension which was completed last year.

J. Yasmina Jackson, PO Box 801, BUNBURY WA 6231

1. Whilst the proposed elderly village was refused on the grounds of lack of amenities, what

amenities exist for Alliance Housing to make it so attractive to buy?

Reply: The Council has not refused any development on the site nor has amenity been raised as an

issue for an elderly village. In relation to the questions about what makes the proposed site

attractive to Alliance this is a question that should be referred to them for a response.

2. Why is there a plan to make cluster of misery where worldwide study suggest that this is

worst possible scenario and it will only add to detriment not solve the problem – see

research Uni of NSW – School of Social Studies et al.

Reply: There is no formal application before Council at this stage and therefore the question

cannot be answered. The comments in relation to research are noted.

3. Why Council do not learn from Pelican Point contention (Short stay apartment block) which

cost Bunbury Ratepayers close to $60,000, stop sale of the College Grove land to the

proposed developer and avoid this issue altogether?

Reply: The two matters are not related and are therefore not comparable. The application for the

development at Pelican Point was considered in accordance with requirements of the

planning scheme and building requirements, and decisions were then made based on

factual information. As there is no development application before Council it is not possible

to compare situations.

Gary Probin, PO Box 801, BUNBURY WA 6231

1. As this is former shooting range – copper, lead, antimony and arsenic will be present – how

City will deal with contamination on the site and who will pay the bill?

Reply: Environmental consultants are currently working on the level of site contamination and will

provide Council with a report once completed. Once the situation in relation to the level of

contamination and costs of remediation are known this information will be further

considered by Council. Addressing the costs of decontamination will be the responsibility of

the developer.

2. What is the estimated cost of the clean-up? If not determined or established, why sell

before this data is available?

Reply: Currently reports are being prepared to consider this matter

20 January 2015


3. City does not have money, only what it collects in rates and taxes, why City and Councillors

propose to spend Ratepayers and Taxpayers money for nothing in return?

Reply: The Termination Deed and the Joint Venture Agreement were developed based on the

requirement to sell or develop land in order to repay debt.

Kylie Clancy for Carly Stone, PO Box 801, BUNBURY WA 6231

1. What will prevent the Developer from constructing 84 houses or four story 180 units of

flats after re-zoning?

Reply: When a development application is lodged the Council will consider the matter. At this point

in time there is nothing to assess and until an application is lodged a more detailed answer

cannot be provided.

2. Who will ultimately pay for the development and infrastructure of this proposed College

Grove subdivision?

Reply: Infrastructure required as part of any development is a cost for the developer.

3. Why did the Council not listen to the overwhelming residents of the College Grove

opposition to the proposed developer?

Reply: Council has not made a decision in relation to this matter. A report is to be provided to

Council for consideration in January 2015

Darlene Drummond, PO Box 801, BUNBURY WA 6231

1. Why has no one else been offered to tender for the land?

Reply: The City was approached for the sale and a report provided to Council for consideration.

This is standard practice and the Local Government Act provides for this to occur.

2. Why is there going to be a zone change?

Reply: At this stage the concept for rezoning has only been raised to assist in determining financial

viability of the project. No formal application for a zoning change has been lodged.

3. Why is the land being re-zoned to smaller blocks when the demand for 500sqm plus blocks

is there?

Reply: At this stage the concept for rezoning has only been raised to assist in determining financial

viability of the project. No formal application for a zoning change has been lodged.

20 January 2015


Jislav Daniel Uchwal, PO Box 801 BUNBURY WA 6231

1. Did Councillor Judy Jones, Bunbury City Council member excuse herself from dispute and

voting on the subject as she is as well the Chairman of Alliance Housing and land in

question is going to be sold to Alliance?

Reply: No – when the matter was first considered by Council Alliance Housing was not a party to

the proposal and hence there was no need for Cr Jones to disclose any conflict.

2. When did Alliance Housing proposed purchase of the land?

Reply: Council was advised of the joint venture between Alliance Housing and Stellar Living and its

proposal on 11 November 2014.

3. Will the tenants include people being rehoused from prisons, pathways (mental health) and

other anti-social groups?

Reply: No application has yet been lodged for the proposed development so no answers can be

provided at this stage.

Cole Jackson, PO Box 801, BUNBURY WA 6231

1. On our Facebook Page, we have several questions when the blocks will be sold, therefore,

why can’t the Council subdivide land into standard residential blocks for sale in line with the

previous development in College Grove?

Reply: When a formal development application is lodged, the Council will consider the matter

further. The views of the residents have been passed on to the proposed purchasers.

2. When was the College Grove land put to tender?

Reply: The land has not been put to tender. It has been advertised for disposal in accordance with

section 3.58(3) of the LGA

3. Could Council guarantee that property and land values of existing residents will not suffer

by ANY development by devaluation of our current property prices?

Reply: No – this is a market driven outcome

John Robinson for Rob Drummond, PO Box 801, BUNBURY WA 6231

1. What is the Council’s plan for the intersection of Somerville Drive and Bussell Highway?

With any type of development how will the Council deal with the traffic congestions?

Reply: This will be subject to a traffic management plan as part of any development proposal.

Nothing has been approved by Council at this stage.

20 January 2015


2. How is the Council planning to control the increase in noise if the development goes ahead?

Reply: As a residential subdivision, noise is not considered an issue at this stage of the process.

3. Why is the government land being sold to a selected private enterprise without being

offered to the public and other developers?

Reply: The land is proposed to be disposed of in accordance with provisions of section 3.58(3) of

the LGA.

Mr Ahmad Adni, PO Box 1839 Bunbury 6231

1. In regards to the City taxi rank (in front of the Lord Forrest Hotel) and after hour parking by

private cars: people regularly park in the taxi night rank pick up area. This causes the other

cars to go around the taxis to have to veer to the wrong side of the road to get around

them, It is only a matter of time before someone is injured or killed when this happens. Can

anything be done to fix this?

Reply: Police and Rangers have been made aware of the issue through the Bunbury Alcohol Accord

Committee and will liaise and work with the Bunbury Taxis to establish strategies to

manage illegally parked vehicles within the Symmons Street night taxi rank.

2. During any event in Bunbury, there is a complete block on vehicles entering the city area.

Can taxis be exempt from this so that people can be moved in and out of the city area,

before and during the event.

Reply: The Bunbury Taxis will be consulted as part of the development of the Traffic Management

Plan for any Council community event to ensure that consideration is given to access for

taxis during an event.

Mr Mike Fenton, 25 Acacia St Bunbury 6230

1. Last evening Council had a Bushfire Threat Assessment Meeting attended by 18 people. 75

residents did not receive meeting notices until yesterday. Will the CEO Mr Brien schedule a

new meeting to enable proper community consultation?

Reply: Letters were issued to properties that were determined to be at very high or extreme

bushfire risk. Approximately 35 letters were hand delivered to properties on 3/12/14 and

the remainder were posted on 3/12/14 Offers have already been made for any residents

who want to get a group together that staff will attend and work through any issues with

them. Staff have indicated that if groups of neighbours wish to get together, appropriate

arrangements will be made for staff to attend neighbourhood meetings to provide locally

specific bush fire preparedness advice. The letters contained a personal invitation to meet

with us at the Christmas activities on Sunday afternoon and/or the community meeting, and

this was supported by website, newspaper, social media advertising of the event.

20 January 2015


2. Most questions posed by residents were beyond the scope of Mr Widmer (insurance,

negligence, Parks and Gardens, Rangers, Planning, etc. Will the CEO commit to chairing

future meetings?

Reply: Any questions that could not be answered on the night were taken on notice. Residents are

encouraged to write to Council with any outstanding questions to enable responses to be

provided to them directly. Based on the information provided by staff in attendance, the

questions were outside of the scope of local government activities and would not have been

answerable regardless of who from Council was present. As such, the presence of the CEO is

not essential to the conduct of the meetings and future meetings may or may not be chaired

by the CEO depending on availability.

3. Two years ago the CEO told me that the private land at the corner of Upper

Esplanade/Stockley Road did not pose a fire risk to Wattle Hill Lodge because the owners

were building imminently. Can the CEO detail how much the owners have been fined for

avoiding regulation firebreaks since then?

Reply: The owners have not been fined and Council considers appropriate actions have been taken.

The owners of the property as identified by Mr Fenton were not fined as they complied with

all of Council requirements and also allowed staff from the City and DFES to conduct a

prescribed burn from their property when the City conducted a prescribed burn of the Irwin

Street Reserve.

In correspondence to you in 2012 the following was provided –

“To inexperienced persons, any vegetation sometimes appears to be a risk. And it is true

that many materials have a point of flammability, however, this must be weighed up in

balance of a significant range of factors that determine fire behaviour characteristics and

the resultant treatments for fire hazard mitigation.

This area has also been assessed by several experienced fire officers, career and private,

and the consensus is to institute a Fire Management Plan that takes into account the

amenities of the area, Bunbury’s bushland environment, and above all community safety

consideration. This in fact has been started and works associated with this will be scheduled

appropriately.”

20 January 2015


7. Confirmation of Previous Minutes and other Meetings under

Clause 19.1

7.1 Minutes

7.1.1 Minutes – Ordinary Council Meeting

The minutes of the Ordinary meeting of the Bunbury City Council held 9 December 2014 have been

circulated.

Recommendation

The Minutes of the Ordinary meeting of the Bunbury City Council held 9 December 2014 be

confirmed as a true and accurate record.

20 January 2015


7.1.2 Minutes – Council Advisory Committees and Working/Project Groups

File Ref: Various

Applicant/Proponent: Internal Report

Author: Various

Executive: Various

Attachments: Appendix MTBN-1 – Bunbury Setagaya Sister Cities Committee Minutes

26-11-2014

Appendix MTBN-2 – Community Access Committee Minutes 5-12-2014

Appendix MTBN-3 – Policy Review and Development Committee

Minutes 18-12-2014

Appendix MTBN-4 - Youth Advisory Committee Minutes 10-12-2014

Summary

The following Advisory Committee Meetings were held and the minutes are presented for noting:

1. Title: Bunbury Setagaya Sister Cities Committee Minutes 26 November 2014

Author: Jaimee Earl, Executive Assistant Office of the Mayor

Appendix: MTBN-1

2 Title: Community Access Committee Minutes 5 December 2014

Author: Isabell Evans, Community Development Officer

Appendix: MTBN-2

3 Title: Policy Review and Development Committee Minutes 18 December 2014

Author: Greg Golinski, Manager Governance

Appendix: MTBN-3

4 Title: Youth Advisory Committee Minutes 10 December 2014

Author: Elizabeth Larkin, Community Development Projects Assistant

Appendix: MTBN-4

Executive Committee Recommendation

The following Advisory Committee meeting minutes listed in the report be accepted and noted:

1. Bunbury Setagaya Sister Cities Committee Minutes 26 November 2014

2. Community Access Committee Minutes 5 December 2014

3. Policy Review and Development Committee Minutes 18 December 2014

4. Youth Advisory Committee Minutes 10 December 2014

20 January 2015


8. Petitions, Presentations, Deputations and Delegations

8.1 Petitions

Pursuant to clause 6.10(2) of the City of Bunbury Standing Orders 2012, upon receiving a petition,

the Council is to

a) Receive the petition and refer to the relevant officer for a report to be submitted within

the next two (2) rounds of Council meetings; or

b) Reject the petition

8.2 Presentations

Nil.

8.3 Deputations

Nil.

8.4 Council Delegates’ Reports

Nil.

8.5 Conference Delegates’ Reports

Nil.

9. Method of Dealing with Agenda Business

20 January 2015


10. Reports

10.1 Recommendations from Advisory Committees

10.1.1 New Council Policy – Asset Monitoring

Applicant/Proponent: Policy Review and Development Committee

Author: Aileen Clemens, Manager Organisational Development and HR

Executive: Andrew Brien, Chief Executive Officer

Attachments: Appendix RAC-1: Council Policy: Asset Monitoring

Summary

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider a new Council Policy relating to workplace

surveillance, as applicable to the City of Bunbury.

Committee Recommendation

That that Council adopt the new Council Policy entitled Asset Monitoring as presented at appendix

RAC-1.

Background

The draft policy, Asset Monitoring, as presented at appendix RAC-1 makes provision for the

implementation of workplace surveillance in the City of Bunbury.

Council Policy Compliance

This report proposes the adoption of a new Council Policy – Asset Monitoring.

Legislative Compliance

The Surveillance Device Act 1998 requires organisations to have in place policies prior to any

surveillance activities being implemented, to ensure all affected persons (employees) are fully

aware of the City’s intentions in this regard.

Officer Comments

The purpose of the proposed policy is to facilitate the protection of the City’s assets and

equipment; to improve community and employee safety; and to assist in the management of

mobile plant and equipment.

The City of Bunbury is committed to providing a safe work environment for its employees and the

community in which unlawful, antisocial and inappropriate activity is kept to a minimum while

respecting the individual rights of privacy.

The proposed policy will ensure that the possible use of workplace surveillance will be compliant

with the requirements of relevant legislation, including the Surveillance Device Act 1998.

20 January 2015


Analysis of Financial and Budget Implications

There are no financial or budgetary implications impacting from the recommendations of this

report. Any possible future surveillance activities will be funded using current year budgeted funds.

Councillor/Officer Consultation

The proposed policy is commended to Council by the Policy Review and Development Committee.

20 January 2015


10.1.2 Revision of Council Policy – Purchasing - Local Preferences


Author: David Russell, Senior Contracts and Procurement Officer


Attachments: Appendix RAC-2: Council Policy Purchasing – Local Preferences

Summary

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider a revised Policy relating to Purchasing – Local

Preferences for local contractors/suppliers.


That Council adopt the revised Council Policy entitled Purchasing – Local Preferences as presented

at appendix RAC-2.

Background

The Policy was adopted by Council in July 2001 and last reviewed in June 2010. The purpose of the

Policy is to promote economic activity, increase employment opportunities and facilitate small

business participation in the buying process of the City of Bunbury. The current entitlement is for

local suppliers and contractors within the City of Bunbury.


This report proposes a revision of an existing Council Policy.


This policy complies with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1995 and associated

regulations.

Officer Comments

The Policy Review and Development Committee have undertaken a review of the Council Policy

Purchasing – Local Preferences.

The Policy is proposed to be amended to maintain consistency with the City’s current processes

and procedures. The length of the policy has been reduced to be more user-friendly for suppliers

and contractors. The core elements of the policy remain and the percentage of local preference

(5%) remains unchanged. The application of the policy however, is proposed to be extended from

the City of Bunbury to the Bunbury Wellington Region.

The amendment of the qualifying period from twelve to six months was done to ensure compliance

with the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996.

It should be noted that in the last eighteen (18) months, this policy has not had an influence on the

outcome of any tender or quotation process for procurement over $50,000 in value.

20 January 2015




report when considering changes from the current policy to the recommended policy.

Where the Purchasing – Local Preferences policy has an influence over the selected tenderer then

there may be an increase in expenditure of 5% on a case by case basis for either project or base line

expenditure within budgeted allocations.


The Manager Governance and staff within the Corporate Governance and Contracts and Property

Department have been consulted in the review of this Policy. The revised policy is commended to

Council by the Policy Review and Development Committee.

20 January 2015


10.1.3 Revision of Council Policy – Street Addressing


Author: Leonie Barwick, Team Leader Corporate Revenue - Finance


Attachments: Appendix RAC-3: Street Addressing Policy

Summary

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider the revision of a Council policy relating to the

standards and procedures for the assignment and amendment of street numbering within the City

of Bunbury.


That Council note the review of Council Policy Street Addressing, with no changes, as presented at

appendix RAC-3.

Background

The Street Addressing Policy was developed to establish a clear documented policy position rather

than an otherwise unidentified process which residents can relate to when seeking advice or

opposing proposed re-allocation of street numbers.

The Policy was first adopted by Council at its meeting held 25 September 2012 (refer Council

decision 278/12).


This report proposes the revision of an existing Council Policy.


There is no legislative compliance impacting upon this report.

Officer Comments

The Policy Review and Development Committee have undertaken a review of the Council Policy

Street Addressing, and recommend that no changes are required at this time.



report, as the intent of the existing Policies has not been altered.


The Manager Finance has been consulted in the review of this Policy. The policy is commended to

Council by the Policy Review and Development Committee.

20 January 2015


10.1.4 Revision of Council Policy – City of Bunbury Art Collection Policy


Author: Julian Bowron, Manager Arts and Culture

Executive: Stephanie Addison-Brown, Director Corporate and Community Services

Attachments: Appendix RAC-4: Council Policy City of Bunbury Art Collection

Summary

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider a revised policy relating to the City of Bunbury

Art Collection.


That Council adopt the revised Council Policy City of Bunbury Art Collection as presented at

appendix RAC-4.

Background

At its ordinary meeting held on 4 February 2014 Bunbury City Council meeting Council resolved to

suspend the City of Bunbury Arts Collection Committee (refer Council decision 36/14). At the same

meeting Council also resolved that “The Bunbury Regional Arts Management Board’s tenure of

management of the Bunbury Regional Art Gallery end at 30th June 2014...” (refer Council decision

35/14).

While the City’s collection was owned and managed by the City with advice provided by the

Committee, from 1 July 2014 management of the City of Bunbury Art Collection became the

responsibility of City’s Manager Arts and Culture (who also has the title Director of Bunbury

Regional Art Galleries).

The previous City of Bunbury Art Collection policy was prepared by the Arts Collection Committee

and reflected their management of the Collection. The Committee also held Deductible Gift

Recipient status which enables gifts and bequests to the collection to attract a tax concession.


This report proposes a substantial revision of an existing Council Policy.


Deductible Gift Recipient DGR status from the Australian Tax Office which enables gifts and

bequests to the collection to attract a tax concession is held in the name of City of Bunbury Arts

Collection Committee.

It is now necessary to re-apply for DGR status in the name of Bunbury Regional Art Gallery and to

provide an appropriate policy which reflects the current management of the Collection. It is also

necessary to ensure that the wording required by the Australian Tax Office to facilitate DGR status

is contained in this policy.

20 January 2015


Officer Comments

The Policy Review and Development Committee has undertaken a review of City of Bunbury Art

Collection Policy.

The Policy has been amended accordingly to maintain consistency with the City’s current processes

and procedures, and updated in accordance with operating developments and professional art

museum standards generally.

The previous policy required substantial rewriting to address the following:

- Provide greater clarity with regard to acquisition and de-acquisition criteria and guidelines;

- Introduce an appropriate process for approving acquisitions consistent with industry best

practice;

- Updating the history of the Collection;

- Conservation and disaster planning;

- Provide greater clarity around the terms and conditions for loans from the Collection.



report, as the intent of the existing Policy has not been altered.


The Director Corporate and Community Services and staff within the Arts and Culture department

have been consulted in the review of this Policy. The revised policy is commended to Council by the

Policy Review and Development Committee.

20 January 2015


10.1.5 Amendment of Council Policy – Leases and Licences


Author: Massimo Andreone, Manager Contracts and Property


Attachments: Appendix RAC-5: Council Policy Leases and Licences

Summary

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider an amendment to the Council Policy relating to

Leases and Licences, which was adopted by Council on 11 November 2014.


That the Policy Review and Development Committee recommend that Council adopt the amended

Council Policy entitled Leases and Licences as presented at appendix RAC-5.

Background

On 11 November 2014, Council adopted a Policy regarding the provision of leases and licences to

organisations which cover land and buildings owned or managed by the City including crown land

(refer Council decision 419/14). A revision to the policy is proposed by the Policy Review and

Development Committee.


This report proposes an amendment of an existing Council Policy.



Officer Comments

Officers have received a request from a Councillor to incorporate an additional clause within the

Policy to clarify the position relating to peppercorn leases. Accordingly, it is proposed to include

the following clause into the Policy:

“Not for profit community groups which are currently on a “peppercorn” lease/licence will remain

as such and not be charged a fee document preparation fee unless determined otherwise by

Council.”

There is no cost for valuations, as they are not conducted when leases are peppercorn, however

Council will still need to cover the cost of document preparation fee and advertising costs.


Should this change be endorsed, the City will need to absorb the cost of the following in relation to

peppercorn leases:

20 January 2015


Document preparation fee $550 incl. GST (estimate only)

Advertising costs $200 incl. GST (estimate only)

$750 (estimate only)


The Director Corporate and Community Services, and staff within the Contracts and Property

Department have been consulted prior to the amendment of this Policy. The revised policy is

commended to Council by the Policy Review and Development Committee

20 January 2015


10.1.6 New Council Policy – Commercial Leases


Author: Massimo Andreone, Manager Contracts and Property


Attachments: Appendix RAC-6: Council Policy Commercial Leases

Summary

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider a new Council Policy relating to the provision of

commercial leases.


That Council adopt the new Council Policy entitled Commercial Leases as presented at appendix

RAC-6.

Background

Following the adoption of a Policy relating to leases and licences for community groups and

organisations (Council Resolution 419/14 11 November 2014) and further to comments from

Councillor Steck at the meeting held 11 November 2014, officers prepared a draft policy relating to

commercial leases for the consideration of the Policy Review and Development Committee at its

December meeting.


This report proposes the adoption of a new Council Policy – Commercial Leases.


Where required, the City will establish lease agreements in accordance with the Commercial

Tenancy (Retail Shops) Agreements Act 1985, the Local Government Act 1995, and the Land

Administration Act 1997.

Officer Comments

The proposed draft policy, Commercial Leases as presented at appendix RAC-6, defines the way in

which commercial leases are determined and applied within the City of Bunbury.

The Policy Review and Development Committee added an additional clause into the draft policy as

prepared by Officers, to read: Commercial leases will be subject to appropriate conditions as

imposed by resolution of Council



report.

20 January 2015



The proposed Commercial Lease policy is commended to Council by the Policy Review and

Development Committee.

20 January 2015


10.1.7 Revision of Council Policy – Recreation Facilities and Provide Diverse Range of Activities and

Facilities for Residents and Visitors


Author: Garry Stokes, Sport and Recreation and Kristy Tillett, Manager

Landscape and Open Space


Attachments: Appendix RAC-7: Council Policy Recreation Facilities

Summary

The purpose of this report is Council to consider the revision of two Council policies relating to the

provision of a diverse range of activities and facilities for residents and visitors.


That Council:

1. Adopt new Council Policy entitled Recreation Facilities as presented at appendix RAC-7;

and

2. Note that this new policy is an amalgamation of 2 previous policies: Recreation Facilities

(DWS-3) and Provide Diverse Range of Activities and Facilities for Residents and Visitors

(DWS-4).

Background

At the Council meeting held on 14 April 1998, Council adopted a Recreation Facilities Policy (DWS-

3). Whilst this Policy has been reviewed numerous times since its initial adoption, the majority of

the content remain as written in 1998.

At a subsequent meeting held on 15 September 1998, following involvement from the Department

of Sport and Recreation, disability and community groups within Bunbury, recreation clubs and

associations, Council adopted an additional Recreation Policy (Provide diverse range of activities

and facilities for residents and visitors – DWS-4) to provide a general direction for recreation

development throughout the City.

Similarly this Policy has been reviewed numerous times since its initial adoption, without requiring

major changes.


This report proposes to combine two policies Recreation Facilities (DWS-3) and Provide Diverse

Range of Activities and Facilities for Residents and Visitors (DWS-4) into one new Council policy.

The new policy supports the strategies of the 2012-2017 Disability Access and Inclusion Plan.



20 January 2015


Officer Comments

The Policy Review and Development Committee have undertaken a review of both Council Policies

Recreation Facilities (DWS-3) and Provide Diverse Range of Activities and Facilities for Residents and

Visitors (DWS-4).

As both policies refer to the provision of recreation facilities and provide the same outcomes, it is

proposed to combine the two policies into one.

The proposed new policy is entitled Recreation Facilities and reads the same as Provide Diverse

Range of Activities and Facilities for Residents and Visitors with minor wording changes and the

addition of point 8 under Policy Details.

A combined and revised Council Policy entitled Recreation Facilities is presented at appendix RAC-7.



report, as the intent of the existing Policies has not been altered.


The Director of Corporate and Community Services, Manager of Sport and Recreation, Manager of

Landscape and Open Places and Sport and Recreation Liaison Officer have been consulted in the

review of these Policies.

The combined policy is commended to Council by the Policy Review and Development Committee.

20 January 2015


10.1.8 Revision of Council Policy – Bunbury Museum Collection Policy


Author: Lauretta Davies, Museum Curator

Executive: Stephanie Addison Brown, Director Corporate and Community Services

Attachments: Appendix RAC-8: Council Policy Bunbury Museum and Heritage Centre

Collection

Summary

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider a revised Policy relating to the Bunbury

Museum Collection Policy.


That Council adopt the revised Council Policy Bunbury Museum and Heritage Centre Collection

Policy as presented at appendix RAC-8.

Background

The Bunbury Museum Collection Policy was originally adopted by Council on 5 March 2013, and

revised to comply with the Australian Taxation Office requirements for Deductible Gift Recipient

status.


This report proposes a revision of an existing Council Policy.



Officer Comments

The Policy Review and Development Committee has undertaken a review of the Council Policy

Bunbury Museum Collection Policy.

The Policy has been amended and retitled to maintain consistency with the City’s current processes

and procedures, and updated in accordance with operating developments and museum standards

generally.



report, as the intent of the existing Policy has not been altered

20 January 2015



The Director Corporate and Community Services and staff within the Arts and Culture department

have been consulted in the review of this Policy. This policy is commended to Council by the Policy

Review and Development Committee.

20 January 2015


10.1.9 Revision of Council Policy – Vandalism/Graffiti Management Policy


Author: James Shepherd, Manager Assets and Projects

Executive: Phil Harris, Director Works and Services

Attachments: Appendix RAC-9: Council Policy Vandalism/Graffiti Management

Summary

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider the revision of a Council policy relating to

vandalism and graffiti management.


That Council adopt the reviewed Council Policy Vandalism/Graffiti Management as presented at

appendix RAC-9.

Background

The Vandalism/Graffiti Management Policy was developed in consultation with the Community

Crime Prevention Committee and first adopted by Council at its meeting held on 1 May 2007 (refer

Council Decision 81/07).

The policy provides guidelines and procedures for the removal of graffiti and repair of damage, the

offer of rewards for information from the public, a program of community education, and the

proactive development of activities for young people that address associated risk factors.


This report proposes the revision of an existing Council Policy.



Officer Comments

The Policy was reviewed by the Policy Review and Development Committee on 18 December 2014,

with only minor formatting changes proposed.



report, as the intent of the existing policy has not been altered.


The Manager Waste Services and Community Development Officer - Community Safety, have been

consulted in the review of this Policy. The revised policy is commended to Council by the Policy

Review and Development Committee.

20 January 2015


10.2 Chief Executive Officer Reports

10.2.1 Petition - Proposed Sale of Lot 70 Winthrop Avenue College Grove

File Ref: Internal

Applicant/Proponent: Joanna Yasmina Jackson

Author: Andrew Brien, Chief Executive Officer


Attachments: Nil

Summary

A Petition has been received in relation to the Sale and Development of Lot 70 Winthrop Ave

College Grove with the Chief Petitioner being Joanna Yasmina Jackson of 10 University Close

Bunbury. The basis of the petition was to request that Council hold an extraordinary meeting prior

to considering the matter of the disposal of Lot 70. The petition contained 324 signatures.

Executive Recommendation

That Council note the petition and opposition to the sale and development of Lot 70 Winthrop Ave

and advise the Chief Petitioner as follows:

1. The Council has followed the provisions of the Local Government Act 1995 in relation to the

disposal of land;

2. The Council does not support the view of the petitioners that the Council has acted in an

underhanded manner nor has there been any secrecy surrounding the sale; and

3. The Council held a community forum on 13 January 2015 to allow community input into

the matter and to expand on the previously received public submissions, which

appropriately addresses the request of the petitioners.

Background

At the Council Meeting held 28 October 2014 Council resolved to delegate authority to the Chief

Executive Officer to commence the process for the disposal of Lot 70 Winthrop Avenue in

accordance with legislative requirements and the Amended Joint Venture Agreement and to enter

into an Offer and Acceptance in accordance resolved conditions.


NIL


Local Government Act 1995

Standing Orders Local Law 2012

Officer Comments

The Petition has been provided to Council in an effort to call an “extraordinary meeting” of Council

prior to making a decision in relation to the disposal of the site. Prior to receipt of the petition a

20 January 2015


request had been received from another resident for Council to hold a community briefing which

was approved by the Mayor in consultation with the Chief Executive Officer. Whilst it is believed

that the intent of the petition may have been for an electors meeting, the request was not made in

accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1995 and therefore could not be

accepted as such. In discussions with the Mayor, it was considered appropriate that the previously

arranged public forum should continue as planned.

The wording of the Petition is as outlined below

“We, the undersigned, being electors of the City of Bunbury, oppose sale of the

abovementioned property to the proposed Developer, we oppose underhanded procedure

and secrecy surrounding the sale. We oppose sale of the Land without advertised Public

Tender and against interest of the City and Ratepayers.

Your petitioners, therefore respectfully request the Council of the City of Bunbury to have an

Extraordinary Meeting of the City of Bunbury Council and Electors before matter is voted by

the Council.

We respectfully remind Councillors and CEO that they are indeed Servants of the City and

they priority should be the City and its inhabitants, which expressed legitimate concern

pertaining proposed Sale of the Land, we do not understand why matter should go to

Council vote as early (20th Jan 2015) as stated in official communication.”

In responding to the issues contained within the Petition the following matters are relevant:

1. The objection to the sale to the proposed developer is noted;

2. The perception that the proposed disposal is in some way underhanded is refuted by staff.

All staff involved in the process from both Council and the Department of Lands have

always acted in accordance with legislative provisions and the requirements of the Joint

Venture Agreement.

3. The perception that there has been any secrecy in relation to the proposed disposal of the

site is also refuted. Staff have made public all information in relation to the sale, have made

amendments to the advertised sale following a change in potential purchaser and

requested the potential purchase arrange a public meeting to hear community views and

provide responses where possible based on available information.

4. The view that the land should not be disposed of without going to public tender and

against the interest of the City and ratepayers is not supported at this point in time. The

land has been available for many years and formed part of the original joint venture when

the estate was first developed. Whilst there have been many proposals considered for the

site, there has not been a formal proposal to purchase until an approach was made

towards the end of 2014. The Local Government Act 1995 provides that land may be

disposed of without going to public tender if the other requirements of the Act have been

complied with. The process that has been implemented in this instance complies with all

provisions.

5. The request for an Extraordinary Meeting is not something that is covered in either the

Council Standing Orders Local Law or the Local Government Act 1995. If the intent was for

a Special Electors Meeting, the petition does not meet the necessary requirements and

therefore cannot be considered as such. The additional public forum scheduled prior to the

receipt of the Petition is considered to be appropriate to meet the intent of the petitioners.

6. The issue of reminding Councillors and the CEO that they are servants of the City is simply a

statement of position and does not require a response.

20 January 2015


7. The rationale for the consideration of the matter as early as possible is to enable the

proposed purchasers to undertake their commercial due-diligence and assess the viability

of the proposal before spending significant funds on the project.


The proposed disposal of Lot 70 Winthrop Ave College Grove will provide funding for Council to

contribute towards the repayment of the funding agreement for the construction of the Somerville

Drive extension from Hildas Close to Robertson Drive.

Community Consultation

The matter has been publicly advertised and has been the subject of public question time at recent

Council Meetings.


Discussions have been held with relevant staff and also between the Mayor and Chief Executive

Officer.

20 January 2015


10.2.2 Lot 70 Winthrop Avenue




Attachments: Appendix CEO-1: Copy of Letter to residents

Appendix CEO-2: Summary of Submissions Received

Appendix CEO-3: Copy of submissions

Appendix CEO-4: Amended Joint Venture Agreement

Summary


Executive Officer to commence the process for the disposal of Lot 70 Winthrop Avenue in

accordance with legislative requirements and the Amended Joint Venture Agreement and to enter

into an Offer and Acceptance in accordance resolved conditions.

During the public submission period a petition was presented to Council opposing the development

of affordable housing which was further supported by approximately 170 individual submissions.

This report deals with all aspects of the petition, public submissions and recommendations in

relation to the disposal of the site.


Council:

1. Notes the submissions received and thanks the submitters for their contribution.

2. Support the disposal of Lot 70 Winthrop Avenue (by the College Grove Joint Venture) based

on the following conditions:

(a) The current zoning of R15 is to remain with conditional opportunity to increase to

R20 based on acceptable development concept plans;

(b) The preparation of a development concept plan for the site addressing issues of

traffic management, environmental impacts and other relevant sub-division

conditions including the identification of an overall building envelope;

(c) Final sale price to be determined once decontamination plan is completed and

costs of implementation known;

(d) Site remediation costs are to be borne by the purchasers;

3. In the event that the current purchasers are not supportive of proceeding with the

development based on the above conditions, the site be advertised for sale by tender in

accordance with the above conditions.

4. Note the petition opposing the development of Lot 70 for high density social housing and

advise the chief petitioner of the recommendation to dispose of Lot 70 in accordance with

current zoning or potential to increase to R20 maximum.

20 January 2015


Background

Whilst the background to the development of College Grove has been provided previously, it is

considered appropriate to provide an overview of the key aspects of the current Agreement to put

the current disposal proposal into context. The Joint Venture partners (City of Bunbury,

Department of Lands and LandCorp) agreed to terminate the Joint Venture Agreement following

protracted negotiations surrounding the decision to cease development on all lands south of

Somerville Drive. This decision was made following the decision to include the identified land in the

Preston River to Ocean Regional Park. The Termination arrangements included amongst other

things the following key points:

- The State Government providing a funding agreement to allow for the construction of the

Somerville Drive extension from Robertson Drive to Hildas Close

- Payment of compensation for land around the Maidens and Usher areas

- Inclusion of the existing Joint Venture Land

- Transfer of additional parcels of land around the City for future development (referred to

additional Joint Venture Land)

- The formation of a new Joint Venture agreement between the City and the Department of

Lands

The remaining land with the College Grove area covered by the Amended Joint Venture Agreement

are covered by the following clauses and are shown in the diagrams:

Original Joint Venture Land:

(a) Lot 298 on Plan 19467 and being the whole of the land comprised in Certificate of Title

Volume 2180 Folio 812; and

(b) Lot 70 on Plan 18631 and being the whole of the land comprised in Certificate of Title

Volume 1959 Folio 434 and which was formerly Crown land transferred to the City

pursuant to the Original Joint Venture Agreement

20 January 2015


Additional Joint Venture Land:

(a) Lot 743 on Plan 18152 and being the whole of the land comprised in Certificate of Crown

Land Title Volume LR 3110 Folio 509;

(b) Lot 744 on Plan 18152 and being the whole of the land comprised in Certificate of Crown


(c) Lot 761 on Plan 18631 and being the whole of the land comprised in Certificate of Crown


(d) Lots 732 and 733 on Deposited Plan 218194 and being the whole of the land comprised in

Certificates of Crown Land Title Volume 3144 Folios 366 and 367 respectively;

In accordance with the terms of the amended Joint Venture Agreement, the management group

has been progressing on the development and disposal of the remaining lots within the College

Grove area.

The Management Group identified Lot 70 as the first development site which is to be followed by

Lot 298 (both lots from the Original Joint Venture Land). An initial approach was made by a

consortium to develop Lot 70 for affordable housing based on a residential density of R30/40. This

proposal was intended to ensure that the financial analysis could be undertaken by the developers

to make sure that the development of the site was financially viable. The community opposition to

this proposal has been evident through both the submissions and the petition. Whilst there has

never been a formal proposal before Council for consideration, the community has opposed the

development of social housing and an increase in density in this area.

The major areas of concern based on an assessment of the submissions was in relation to traffic

(safety, increase, parking and congestion), opposition to social housing (homes west, Alliance and

Stellar, etc.), opposition to an increase in density followed by opposition to affordable housing and

the overall perceived impact on existing property prices.

20 January 2015


A proposal to proceed with the disposal of Lot 70 was put to the Council meeting of 28 October

2014 after which members of the public were invited to make submissions in writing in relation to

the proposed sale. The City hand delivered the attached letter to residents in the area and also

advertised the intent in the Bunbury Mail, City Focus column for the duration of the submission

period. A copy of the letter and distribution map to residents is attached at Appendix CEO-1.

In addition to the submission period, a public meeting was arranged by Alliance Housing and the

Stellar Group which was held on site on Monday 1 December at 5.30pm. Submissions closed on 3

December 2014 and at the closure, 194 were received. A summary of each of the submissions is

attached at Appendix CEO-2 along with copies of all the submissions. A number of the submissions

were anonymous and a number of others specifically requested that their personal details be

removed prior to publication.

As mentioned in the agenda item considered on 28 October, If Council agrees to dispose of Lot 70,

there are a number of matters that will be undertaken. The City of Bunbury will continue to

coordinate the flora and fauna surveys for Lot 70 as part of other works in the area, but it will

ultimately be the purchaser/developer’s responsibility to prepare, submit and manage any required

state and federal environmental referrals. In relation to the Scheme Amendment, any rezoning

application would be required to commence immediately to enable the future development of the

site.


Not applicable.


Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995 (“the Act”) deals this with the matter of disposing of

property.

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

20 January 2015


The Amended College Grove Joint Venture Agreement (attached as CEO-4) deals with the issue of

development of lands within College Grove.

Delegated Authority


Executive Officer to:

1. Formally commence the process for the disposal of Lot 70 Winthrop Avenue in accordance

with legislative requirement and the Joint Venture.

2. Enter into an Offer and Acceptance in accordance with the following conditions:

- An open due diligence clause of 12 calendar months to enable time to assess the

Flora/Fauna study, Contamination report, Scheme Amendment results, final ruling

on any road works from MRWA and Subdivision approval.

- A negotiated settlement period

- Settlement of the property into the purchasers name (or another entity to be

established) within 21 days of the due diligence clause being waived, with full

payment being delayed until completion of the first stage of the development.

- An agreement by the City of Bunbury to fast track the studies, and the Scheme

Amendment wherever possible

- The purchaser (or another entity to be established) to contribute towards the

expansion of the Flora/Fauna study to take in Lot 70.

- The purchaser (or another entity to be established) to engage a suitable engineer

to prepare the necessary elements of the Scheme Amendment and make

application for such.

- The purchaser (or another entity to be established) to commence other aspects of

the due diligence requirements.

As the CEO does not have the above delegated authority to finalise this matter, there is a need for

the final decision to come back before Council.

Officer Comments

The intent of the current College Grove Joint Venture is to ensure that the City and the Joint

Venture Partner (Department of Lands) are in a position to repay the funds advanced for the

construction of the Somerville Drive extension and to finalise development of the available land

within College Grove area.

Over the years there have been various informal proposals considered in relation to Lot 70

however none of these have progressed to a formal proposal. Council was approached in relation

to Lot 70 by a developer looking to progress a development of affordable housing in a partnership

arrangement. This is consistent with the intent of the objectives of the Amended Joint Venture

Agreement and would provide an opportunity for Council to secure funds and commence the

repayment of the Somerville Drive extension project.

Discussions have been underway with the developer to look at requirements for the site before any

development can occur such as contamination reports, flora and fauna surveys and community

engagement. To that end Council staff have been working on all of these aspects of the disposal,

20 January 2015


not just for Lot 70, but for all land involved in the Joint Venture and this will form the basis of a

separate report.

Discussions with the purchaser have resulted in the group advising they would like to investigate

with the City of Bunbury proceeding with the proposal, in the following fashion;

1. Sign a conditional offer and acceptance, conditional upon;

i. An open due diligence clause of 12 calendar months. This would enable time to

assess the Flora/Fauna study, Contamination report, Scheme Amendment results,

final ruling on any road works from MRWA and Subdivision approval.

ii. An agreement by the City of Bunbury to fast track the studies, and the Scheme

Amendment wherever possible

iii. Settlement of the property into the purchasers name (or another entity to be

established) within 21 days of the due diligence clause being waived, with full

payment being delayed until completion of the first stage of the development (to

be defined).

2. The purchaser will then contribute towards the expansion of the Flora/Fauna study to take

in Lot 70 (amount to be discussed).

3. The purchaser will engage TME (or similar) to prepare the necessary elements of the

Scheme Amendment and make application for such.

4. The purchaser will commence other aspects of the due diligence requirements.

Based on the overall community opposition to the increase in density and affordable housing

proposals it is considered appropriate to review the proposal for development. In discussions with

Alliance Housing, the development of the site at R15 may not be feasible based on the

requirements for remediation of the site and the limited scope for development.


All work associated with the Joint Venture is recoverable from the Joint Venture Reserve and

proceeds of any land sales. Whilst costs are all anticipated to be covered from these sources, there

is unlikely to be any capital return to Council through this process, given the requirements to repay

the advanced funds.

There has been considerable discussion in relation to the development of the site and the potential

for Council to undertake the development in-house and then sell the sites. A preliminary analysis

has been undertaken in relation to the development costs and the following is provided as an

indicative estimate of costs for the development of the balance of land which is approximately

10,000m2.

Assuming development of lots at 600m2 there is potential for around 17 lots. Each of the 17 lots are

estimated to cost between $65,000 and $85,000 to service with power, water, gas,

telecommunications, footpath, landscaping, lighting and road pavement. This equates to

approximately $1,105,000 TO $1,445,000. In addition to the costs for decontamination of between

$400, 000 and $500,000 there are costs for design, all required studies, external agency referrals

and marketing for sales of the lots. These costs are estimated at approximately $10,000 per lot or

$170,000 for the development. Based on these figures and an estimated sale price of between

$150,000 and $200,000 (average $175,000) per lot the overall financial summary for an external

20 January 2015


purchaser is as outlined in the table. Based on a comparison of development costs for a

development based on R30/40 it can be seen how the feasibility of the development is being

considered. It should be noted that these figures are estimates and based on average development

costs and would be subject to final review by external parties.

R15/20 R30/40

Land Value (based on

developer being responsible

for remediation)

$775,000 Land Value (based on

developer being

responsible for

remediation)

$775,000

Development costs for 17

lots @ $85,000 per lot

$1,445,000 Development costs for 30

lots @ $65,000 per lot

$1,950,000

Decontamination costs

(estimate)

$500,000 Decontamination costs

(estimate)

$500,000

Studies, sales and marketing $170,000 Studies, sales and

marketing

$170,000

Income from sales

@$175,000 per lot (average)

$2,975,000 Income from sales

@$125,000 per lot

(average)

$3,750,000


Members of the public were invited to make submissions in writing in relation to the proposed

disposal. The City hand delivered the attached letter to residents in the area and also advertised

the intent in the Bunbury Mail, City Focus column for the duration of the submission period. A site

meeting was arranged by Alliance Housing and Stellar Living and was attended by a number of

Councillors and the Chief Executive Officer.

In addition to the advertising, a public meeting was held on site on Monday 1 December at 5.30pm

to advise residents of Council’s intent to dispose of Lot 70 Winthrop Avenue.

A further public forum is to be held on 13 January 2015 to allow residents to have a further

opportunity for input prior to Council considering the matter.


Members of the College Grove Working Group and Joint Venture partners have been consulted in

the development of the report and recommendations.

20 January 2015


10.2.3 Release of Confidential Report

Applicant/Proponent: Internal

Author: Greg Golinski, Manager Governance


Attachments: Nil

Summary

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider releasing for public inspection a confidential

report that was previously presented to Council.


That Council, pursuant to section 5.95(7) of the Local Government Act 1995, resolves that report

item 15.1.1 from the Ordinary Council Meeting held 30 September 2014 entitled Shanghai

Hippo/Vue Group Production Studio and Training School Proposal and the associated attachment is

no longer considered to be confidential, and that a copy of the report and associated attachment

be made available for public inspection.

Background

At the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 30 September 2014, a confidential report (the report) was

provided to Council for consideration at item 15.1.1. The report was titled Shanghai Hippo/Vue

Group Production Studio and Training School Proposal, which also comprised an attachment, being

a proposal from the Vue Group.

The report was originally marked as confidential under the provisions of section 5.23(2)(c) of the

Local Government Act 1995 (the Act), as it contained information relating to “a contract entered

into, or which may be entered into, by the local government, which relates to a matter to be

discussed at the meeting”.

The City received a Freedom of Information (FOI) application in October 2014, which requested

access to a copy of the report.


There are no Council Policies applicable to this matter.


Section 5.95(7) of the Act makes provision for the Council to agree (by resolution) to make a report

that has been previously prescribed as confidential available for public inspection.

Officer Comments

Section 5.95(7) of the Act makes provision for the Council to agree (by resolution) to make a report

that has been previously prescribed as confidential available for public inspection. Additionally,

clause 6.15(1)(c) of the City’s Standing Orders Local Law (Standing Orders) states that information

withheld by the CEO from the public under regulation 14(2) is to be kept confidential until the

20 January 2015


Council resolves otherwise (note regulation 14(2) covers confidential items provided to Council).

The Act and Standing Orders are consistent in their application in relation to this matter.

In terms of the requested document, Officers consider that as the Memorandum of Understanding

between the City, WA Government, and Shanghai Hippo/Vue Group has now been executed

pursuant to Council Decision 380/13, the content of report item 15.1.1 from the Ordinary Council

Meeting held 30 September 2014 entitled Shanghai Hippo/Vue Group Production Studio and

Training School Proposal, is no longer confidential, and that consideration should be given to its

release as part of the related FOI application.


Nil


This item is presented to Council for consideration.

20 January 2015


10.2.4 Major Projects Update Report for the period 1 July 2014 to 31 December 2014




Attachments: Appendix CEO-5: Major Projects Report 1 July to 31 December 2014

Summary

As an outcome of the Council Decision to disband the Major Projects Committee, the report

attached at Appendix CEO-5 provides an overview of Councils endorsed major projects for the

2014/15 financial year, being the period 1 July 2014 to 31 December 2014.

As a result of Elected Member requests, the report now contains additional minor expenditure

projects which when added together, act as major commitments (including various Withers

projects).


That Council receives and notes the circulated Major Projects update report for the period ending

31 December 2014.

Background

The Major Projects report is a positive tool to help effectively manage and report on current year

Major Projects being undertaken by the City of Bunbury, and will be submitted to Council on a six

weekly interval and to allow time for works to be actioned.

It should be noted that in the list of projects identified in this report that not every project will have

an update due to project delivery and consultation at different stages.


Not Applicable.


Not Applicable

Officer Comments

This report will be circulated to Council for noting and receiving on a 6 weekly basis. It should be

noted that if any Elected Member wishes to receive an update on any major project outside of this

timeframe, this option is still available.


Not Applicable.

20 January 2015



There is no requirement for community consultation.


Not Applicable.

20 January 2015


10.2.5 Development Assessment Panels – Local Government Nominations




Attachments: Nil

Summary

Under regulation 26 of the Planning and Development (Development Assessment Panels)

Regulations 2011, the City of Bunbury is requested by the Director General, Development

Assessment Panels, to nominate four (4) elected members of the Council, comprising two (2) local

government members and two (2) alternate local government members to sit on the local

Development Assessment Panel (DAP) as and when required.

Nominations are required to be put forward by no later than 27 February 2015, using the

prescribed DAP Nomination Form.

It should be noted that nominations for the four (4) local governments DAP nominees must be

supported by a curriculum vitae in addition to the following mandatory information of: name;

address; email; mobile and land line telephone numbers; date of birth; employer(s); position(s).


That Council nominates the following four (4) Councillors as its nominees for local government

members on the South West Joint Development Assessment Panel as determined accordingly:

(a) __________ (member);

(b) __________ (member);

(c) __________ (alternate member); and

(d) __________ (alternate member).

Background

On 1 July 2011, fifteen DAPs came into operation in order to determine development applications

that meet set type and value thresholds (e.g. is of a class prescribed under section 171A(2)(a) of the

Planning and Development Act 2005 and has an estimated cost of $3 million or more but less than

$7 million for optional DAP applications, or $7 million and greater for mandatory DAP applications).

Under the Planning and Development Act 2005, development applications of a prescribed class or

kind must be determined by a DAP as if the DAP were the responsible authority under the relevant

planning instrument, such as the local planning scheme or region planning scheme. Under the Act

and associated DAP regulations, applications that meet the prescribed type and value thresholds

cannot be determined by a local government or the Western Australian Planning Commission

(WAPC).

There are two different types of DAPs:

1. Local Development Assessment Panels (LDAPs), which serves only one local government

within its boundary area, as it is deemed to be a high-growth local government with

20 January 2015


enough development to support its own DAP (i.e. the City of Perth is currently the only

LDAP); and

2. Joint Development Assessment Panels (JDAPs), which service two or more local

governments, of which there are 14 JDAPs in Western Australia.

The South West JDAP covers the following local government areas of Augusta-Margaret River,

Boyup Brook, Bridgetown-Greenbushes, Bunbury, Busselton, Capel, Collie, Dardanup, Donnybrook-

Balingup, Harvey, Manjimup and Nannup.

Each DAP is comprised of five members: three (3) specialist members, one of which is the presiding

member, and two (2) local government members. The role of DAP members is to determine

development applications through consistent, accountable, and professional decision-making.

An expression of interest for DAP specialist members was advertised in the West Australian on 6

and 10 December 2014 and in regional newspapers in the week commencing 8 December 2014.

Nominations for specialist members closes on Friday 23 January 2015 and nominations for local

government members will close on Friday 27 February 2015.

Following receipt of all local government nominations, the Minister for Planning will consider and

appoint all nominees for up to a two (2) year term, expiring on 26 April 2017. All appointed local

members will be placed on the local government member register and advised of DAP training

dates and times. It is a mandatory requirement, pursuant to the DAP regulations, that all DAP

members attend training before they can sit on a DAP and determine applications. Local

government representatives who have previously been appointed to a DAP and have received

training are not required to attend further training.

Local representation is vital to DAPS. If no nominations are received by 13 March 2015, regulation

26 of the Planning and Development (Development Assessment Panels) Regulations 2011, enables

the Director General to include on the local government register a person who is an eligible voter of

the local government district and who has relevant knowledge or experience that will enable that

person to represent the interest of the local community.


Not applicable.


The nomination of local government members to the South West JDAP is in accordance with the

Planning and Development Act 2005 and associated Planning and Development (Development

Assessment Panels) Regulations 2011.

Officer Comments

Previously, the City of Bunbury’s local government members were:

(a) Former Mayor David Smith (Member);

(b) Cr Murray Cook (Member);

(c) Cr Neville McNeil (Alternate Member); and

(d) Cr Michelle Steck (Alternate Member).

20 January 2015


Local government elections may result in a change to local DAP membership if current councillors,

who are DAP members, are not re-elected. In this instance, the alternate local DAP members will

take the place of the former local DAP members. If both local and alternative local members are

not re-elected, the local government will need to re-nominate for the Minister’s consideration of

appointment.

The Director General of DAPs has advised the City of Bunbury in correspondence received on 23

December 2014, that appointments of all local government DAP members expire on 26 April 2015.

Members whose term has expired will be eligible for re-consideration at this time.


There are no direct financial implications however, it should be noted that local DAP members are

entitled to be paid for their attendance at DAP training and at DAP meetings, unless they fall within

a class of persons excluded from payment.

Members who are not entitled to payment of sitting, training and State Administrative Tribunal

attendance fees include Federal, State and local government employees, active or retired judicial

officers and employees of public institutions. These DAP members are not entitled to be paid

without the Minister’s consent, and such consent can only be given with the prior approval of

Cabinet.


Not applicable.


Not applicable.

20 January 2015


10.2.6 Motions Passed at the Annual Meeting of Electors 2014




Attachments: Appendix CEO-6: Minutes of the Annual Meeting of Electors 4.12.2014

Summary

On 4 December 2014, the City’s Annual Meeting of Electors was held pursuant to section 5.27 of

the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act). A copy of the minutes from that meeting are attached at

Appendix CEO-6.

Three (3) motions were carried that require Council consideration pursuant to the provisions of

section 5.33 of the Act, as follows:

1. That Council do more to counter the effect on the CBD, Bunbury Forum, Parks Centre and

Plaza of the Regional Centres Policy adopted in the Greater Bunbury Regional Plan.

2. That Council do more to advance the cause for amalgamations in Bunbury.

3. That Council consider the construction of an attractive bridge over “The Plug” – the area

between the Leschenault Inlet and Koombana Bay.


That Council:

1. Acknowledge the three (3) motions passed at the Annual Meeting of Electors held on 4

December 2014;

2. Consider the matter of the Activity Centres Policy as part of the ongoing development of

Town Planning Scheme 8;

3. Continue to work with the surrounding local governments to progress regional projects and

initiatives; and

4. Refer the matter of the construction of a bridge over the Plug to the Landscape sub-

committee working with the Marine Facilities Alliance for incorporation into the public

consultation process to be undertaken in early 2015.

Background

Section 5.33 of the Act requires that all decisions made at an electors’ meeting be considered at the

next ordinary meeting of the Council. This report fulfils Council’s obligation in this regard.


Nil

20 January 2015



Subdivision 4 of Division 2 of Part 5 of the Act deals with processes and procedures for electors’

meetings.

Officer Comments

Comments are provided individually for each of the 3 motions passed.

Motion: That Council do more to counter the effect on the CBD, Bunbury Forum, Parks

Centre and Plaza of the Regional Centres Policy adopted in the Greater Bunbury

Regional Plan.

Comment: The motion as moved and carried referred to the Regional Centres Policy, however

based on the intent of the motion it is considered that the mover intended the

matter to be the focus of the Activity Centres Policy. The Council has been working

on the development of Town Planning Scheme 8 for some time and through the

changes contained within the working draft it is considered that this matter is going

to be appropriately addressed. The Activity Centres Policy in isolation is not the

major impacting aspect on commercial and retail performance within the City of

Bunbury. There are several contributing factors including costs of in-fill

development, changes in retail trends, deregulation of trading hours and other

matters such as transport, parking and public perceptions.

Motion: That Council do more to advance the cause for amalgamations in Bunbury.

Comment: Council’s position in relation to local government reform and amalgamations dates

back to 29 September 2009, where in its submission to the Minister for Local

Government, Council agreed to support an amalgamation of local governments in

the Greater Bunbury region.

Council subsequently also agreed to enter into a regional transition group (RTG)

with the Shires of Harvey, Capel and Dardanup with a view to formal amalgamation

at its meeting held on 23 March 2010 (refer decision 43/10).

With local government reform and amalgamations currently being implemented in

the Perth metropolitan region, there has been no mandate from the WA

Government for regional areas to entertain similar arrangements. At the officer

level, there has continued to be a focus on shared services, a regional approach to

projects, and looking for opportunities for savings through any other opportunities

as they arise. Recent examples include a regional approach to Library Management

Systems and Waste Management.

In this instance, it is recommended that the Mayor write to the Minister for Local

Government seeking clarification as to whether local government reform and/or

amalgamations are being considered in regional WA, and in particular the Greater

Bunbury region.

Motion: That Council consider the construction of an attractive bridge over “The Plug” – the

area between the Leschenault Inlet and Koombana Bay.

20 January 2015


Comment: The Council is currently working with government agencies in relation to the

planning for the Marine Facilities Alliance Project, which includes the landscaping

of the areas from the Dolphin Discovery Centre through to the Outer Harbour. Part

of this project includes incorporating public access to these areas including access

across “the Plug”. The community will have an opportunity to have input to the

landscaping plan as this progresses, which is considered the most appropriate way

to deal with this request at this point in time.


Nil


This report is based on motions carried at the 2014 annual meeting of electors.


Relevant officers have been consulted during the preparation of this report, which is now

presented to Council for consideration.

20 January 2015


10.2.7 Schedule of Accounts Paid for the Period 1 November 2014 to 30 November 2014

Applicant/Proponent: Internal Report Author: David Ransom, Manager Finance Executive: Andrew Brien, Chief Executive Officer Attachments: Appendix CEO -7: Schedule of Accounts Paid

The City of Bunbury "Schedule of Accounts Paid" covering the period 1 November 2014 to 30

November 2014 is attached at Appendix CEO-7. The schedule contains details of the following

transactions:

1. Municipal Account – payments totalling $6,647,109.02

2. Advance Account – payments totalling $4,881,049.72

3. Trust Account – payments totalling $23,134.32

4. Visitor Information Centre Trust Account – payments totalling $16,060.35

5. Bunbury-Harvey Regional Council Municipal Account – payments totalling $308,388.02

6. Bunbury-Harvey Regional Council Advance Account – payments totalling $203,251.63


The Schedule of Accounts Paid for the period 1 November 2014 to 30 November 2014 be received.

20 January 2015


10.2.8 Financial Management Report for the Period Ending 30 November 2014


Author: David Ransom, Manager Finance

Executive: Andrew Brien, CEO

Attachments: Appendix CEO-8: Balance Sheet to November 2014

Appendix CEO-9: Capital Expenditure Summary to November 2014

Appendix CEO-10: Statement of Financial Activity to November 2014

Appendix CEO-11: Statement of Net Current Assets to November 2014

Appendix CEO-12: Operating Projects Expenditure Summary to

November 2014

Appendix CEO-13: Statement of Comprehensive Income to November

2014

Summary

The following comments are provided on the key elements of Council’s financial performance.

1. Statement of Comprehensive Income (attached at CEO-13)

Actual Financial Performance to 30 November 2014

- Actual income of $43.69M is $221K greater than the year-to-date budgeted income

of $43.47M.

- Actual expenditure of $16.89M is $1.57M less than the year-to-date budgeted

expenditure of $18.46M (refer explanation on next page).

- Actual operating surplus of $26.80M is $1.79M greater than the year-to-date

budgeted operating surplus of $25.01M.

2. Balance Sheet (attached at CEO-8)

Council’s year-to-date and forecast balances are as follows:

Year-to-date Forecast

- Current Assets of $43.07M includes:

- Cash and Investments $30.21M $14.16M

- Rates $11.76M $0.22M

- Other Current Assets $ 1.10M $2.04M

- Current Liabilities of $9.07M includes:

- Trade and Other Payables $4.01M $4.30M

- Annual Leave and LSL Provisions $3.23M $3.70M

- Working Capital

(Current Assets less Current Liabilities) $34.00M $6.41M

- Equity

(Total Assets less Total Liabilities) $452.42M $426.03M

20 January 2015


3. Capital Works (attached at CEO-9)

- Actual capital works of $4.09M is $2.91M less than the year-to-date budgeted

capital works of $7.00M, (refer explanation within report).

4. Operating Project Expenditure (attached at CEO-12)

- Actual operating project expenditure of $1.08M is $702K less than the year-to-date

budgeted operating project expenditure of $1.78M, (refer explanation within

report).


The Financial Management Report for the period ending 30 November 2014 be received.

Background

A financial management report is provided to Councillors on a monthly basis which includes the

following summaries:

- Statement of Comprehensive Income (attached at CEO-13)

- Statement of Financial Activity (attached at CEO-10)

- Statement of Net Current Assets (attached at CEO-11)

- Balance Sheet (attached at CEO-8)

- Capital Works Expenditure Summary (attached at CEO-9)

- Operating Projects Summary (attached at CEO-12)

These summaries include end-of-year forecasts based on a monthly review of year-to-date income

and expenditure for all accounts.


Not applicable.


In accordance with the provisions of Section 6.4 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation

34 (1) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996, a Local Government is

to prepare each month a Statement of Financial Activity (attached at CEO-10) reporting on the

revenue and expenditure as set out in the annual budget under Regulations 22 (1) (d) for this

month.

Officer Comments

The Operating Income, Operating Expenditure and Capital Expenditure graphs provide an overview

on how actual income/expenditure is tracking to budget and the previous financial year. Comments

are provided on each graph regarding the current financial position.

20 January 2015


20 January 2015


The following is an explanation of significant Operating and Capital variances identified in the

Statement of Comprehensive Income and Statement of Financial Activity:

Statement of Comprehensive Income

YTD Actual to

Budget Variance

Operating Income

Rates

Rate Interim Income – Due to an error with a Landgate GRV valuation

this resulted in a rates refund of $50K. No change anticipated to the

end of year forecast.

($36,378)

(50%)

Contributions Reimbursements and Donations

Contribution Income – Favourable variance of $42,395 due to higher

than expected sponsorship income received ($8K) for the Sister Cities

conference which is offset by operating grants and donations income

not received. Insurance rebate ($31K) received that was not

budgeted.

Reimbursements Income – Favourable variance of $52,973, mainly

due to $49K of workers compensation reimbursements not

budgeted, but is offset by payments made to employees.

$90,955

27%

Fees and Charges

Fine and Penalty Fee Income – Favourable variance of $37,339 due to

higher than anticipated parking fines received year-to-date. Any

additional income is transferred into reserves. This will be monitored

on a monthly basis.

$133,607

2%

20 January 2015


Fees and Charges (continued)

Miscellaneous Fee and Charge Income – Favourable variance of

$67,046 due to higher than anticipated dog registrations received

($58K), additional art hire fees received ($7K) and higher than

anticipated wildlife park café sales ($5K).

Operating Expenditure

Employee Costs

Salary Expenses - Actual Employee Costs are $385,305 above budget-

to-date. This is due to payments of employee annual leave, long

service leave and other entitlements. Annual leave and long service

leave entitlements will not affect the end of year surplus as this

expenditure has a matching provision in the balance sheet. This will

even out over the financial year and does not affect the end of year

forecast for employee costs.

Other Employee Related Expense – Actual Employee Related

expenses are currently $233,663 under budget due to the final

workers compensation insurance invoice not yet received.

($151,946)

(2%)

Materials and Contracts

Materials Expense – Favourable variance of $527,715. This is

monitored on a monthly basis.

Contract Employment Expense – Currently over year-to-date budget

by $16,667. This will be monitored on a monthly basis.

Contractors Expense – Favourable variance of $963,253 due to timing

of operating projects. This will be monitored on a monthly basis.

Software Licence or Maintenance Expenses – Favourable variance of

$138,662 due to timing of invoices. Account to be monitored on a

monthly basis.

$1,641,895

26%

Other Expenditure

Miscellaneous Expense – Currently under year-to-date budget due to

the employee training and conferences that have not yet occurred.

$20,485

11%

Statement of Financial Activity

YTD Actual to

Budget Variance

Operating Revenues

See explanation above included in the Statement of Comprehensive

Income variances.

$260,179

2.4%

Operating Expenses

See explanation above included in the Statement of Comprehensive

Income variances.

$1,567,823

8.5%

Capital Expenses

Acquisition of Assets – Variance due to delay in progress of various

projects. Note that there is committed expenditure of $3.17M. Refer

to Capital Expenditure report for project details.

$2,909,910

42%

20 January 2015



This Financial Management Report on the financial performance of the City is provided for

Councillors information and does not have any financial or budget implications.


There is no requirement for community consultation on this report.


Council’s Executive Leadership Team, Department Managers and Finance staff monitor the City’s

monthly revenue and expenditure and (as required) refer any variances requiring remedial action

to Council.

Approved budget amendments are recorded in the financial statements to reflect Council’s current

budget and financial position at all times.

20 January 2015


10.3 Director Corporate and Community Services

10.3.1 National Sister Cities Australia Conference 2014


Author: Stephanie Addison-Brown, Director Corporate and Community Services


Attachments: Appendix DCCS-1: 2014 National Sister Cities Conference Registration

Brochure

Appendix DCCS-2: National Sister Cities Conference Registrations

Appendix DCCS-3: National Sister Cities Conference Survey Results

Appendix DCCS-4: National Sister Cities Conference Budget

Summary

This report sets out the activities and outcomes of the national Sister Cities Australia annual

conference hosted by the City of Bunbury in November 2014.


That Council note the outcomes of the National Sister Cities Australia Conference and the financial

summary.

Background

In 2012, at the suggestion of the Bunbury-Setagaya Sister City Committee, a delegation of four

including the Chief Executive Officer, Bunbury-Setagaya Sister City Officer and two Bunbury-

Setagaya Sister City Committee members attended the national Sister Cities Australia conference in

Devonport to investigate the viability of Bunbury hosting the conference in 2015/16.

Council Decision 255/12 stated:

“Council endorse the development of a feasibility study to host either the 2015 or 2016 National

Sister Cities Conference, including allocating an additional $9,340 to send up to four (4) participants

to attend the National Sister Cities Conference in Devonport Tasmania.”

In February 2013, Council endorsed a proposal for Bunbury to host the 2014 annual conference.


“A. That, the City of Bunbury formally submits a nomination to Sister Cites Australia to host the

Sister Cities Australia 2014 Annual Conference.

B. That Council notes that as per the budget submitted the conference is expected to be held

at no net cost to Council.“

Council later resolved to send a delegation of five people to the 2013 conference in Broken Hill to

present Bunbury’s proposal to the conference, network and encourage delegates to attend the

conference in Bunbury the following year and to consult with delegates and the National

Committee of Sister Cities Australia about the types of themes they would like to see in preparation

20 January 2015


for the 2014 conference in Bunbury. An additional two members of the Committee also chose to

attend at their own expense.


“That Council endorse the attendance of the following members from the Bunbury-Setagaya Sister

Cities Committee at the Sister Cities Australia 2013 National Conference in Broken Hill as delegates

representing the City of Bunbury:

1. Valda Smith, Community Committee Member

2. Jenni Brown, Executive Officer Bunbury-Setagaya Sister Cities Committee

3. Arron Craig, Community Committee Youth Member

4. Stephanie Addison-Brown, Director Corporate and Community Services

5. Dee Smith, Team Leader Events, Tourism and Promotions”


Nil


Nil

Officer Comments

The City hosted the conference at the Bunbury Regional Entertainment Centre from 16 to 19

November 2015 with a range of other Bunbury facilities and tourism attractions being showcased

as part of the conference. The welcome reception was held in the Chapel Gallery at the Bunbury

Regional Art Galleries and a breakfast held at the Dolphin Discovery Centre on one of the mornings.

The full program is attached at Appendix DCCS-1. A youth conference was run in parallel and in

conjunction with aspects of the adult conference including youth delegates from Korea.

The Tourism Team prepared pre and post conference touring options and delegates were

encouraged to book accommodation through the Bunbury Visitor Centre.

The work of the Bunbury-Setagaya Sister City Committee was invaluable prior to and during the

conference. Committee members served as ambassadors for Bunbury and provided support to the

visiting delegates, including the official Setagaya delegation and the Japan Local Government

representatives.

The calibre of speakers was high with a range of presentations reflecting international, national,

state and local perspectives on sister cities and the economic and social/cultural opportunities

presented through friendly international relations. Speakers included Tony Wheeler (founder of

Lonely Planet), Dr Keith Suter (foreign affairs expert and foreign correspondent for Channel 7),

Khoa Do (Young Australian of the Year 2005, film director and brother of Anh Do) and Mary Kane,

global President and CEO of Sister Cities International. In addition, the CEO of Tourism WA was

joined by representatives from local tertiary institutions and the South West Development

Commission to form a panel to discuss opportunities and benefits of sister cities.

The conference was promoted through a number of means. Direct emails and a weekly ‘program

highlights’ e-bulletin were sent to all national Sister Cities Australia members and other local

20 January 2015


Councils which are not members but are known to have sister city relationships. Social media was

used by both the City of Bunbury as well as Sister Cities Australia to promote the conference and

opportunities to register to hear individual speakers. Promotional materials were sent out to

identified target audiences including a ‘save the date’ flyer, the program itself and registration

packs. Some local newspaper adverts were placed to attract people in the south west to attend

individual speaker sessions. The conference was also promoted via radio in the lead up to the

conference. Regular conversations were held with the Bunbury Chamber of Commerce and

Industries and the South West Development Commission.

The number of registrations overall was slightly less than originally hoped for, although it was

understood that it was always going to be harder to attract delegates to regional Western Australia

when in the past most had come from the eastern states. In addition to this, it was noted that

budgets across all Councils have become tighter and the fact two states were holding elections just

prior to the conference would have meant a range of Elected Members who might have been part

of the target audience would not have registered. That being said, the conference managed to

attract delegates from Western Australia, the eastern states and internationally. A list of attendees

is attached at Appendix DCCS-2.

The delegates in attendance felt that despite the numbers being a little lower than expected, the

conference was in fact one of the best yet. Sister Cities Australia have responded thanking the City

for organising the conference and achieving such a high standard of content.

Some excellent connections were made with businesses, between interstate cities and an early

connection was established between the Vietnamese Consul General and Business Manager from

the South West Institute of Technology. New introductions and a the renewal of established

relationships were also made between the Mayor, Councillors, City of Bunbury officers, MLA John

Castrilli and the Bunbury-Setagaya Sister City Committee with the delegation from Bunbury’s sister

city of Setagaya.

Several delegates decided to extend their stay in Bunbury following the conference with a direct

benefit to the local businesses.

At the Gala Dinner and Awards Night, Bunbury was awarded the winner of the Community

Involvement Category for its biennial photography competition, ‘What’s Your ING Thing’, and

photographic exchange with Setagaya. A ‘Highly Commended’ award was also received for the

Bunbury-Setagaya Sister City Committee’s overall program.

Following the conference, an electronic survey was sent to all delegates for feedback.

Overwhelmingly, the responses offered praise for the conference including the overall program,

registration, venue and overall calibre of speakers. Two from the 23 responses reported a low level

of satisfaction.

Some examples of the comments received include:

“Bunbury should be very proud of the conference that was delivered. It is a great shame

that the numbers did not reach the anticipated level.”

“Yes, very good value for money”

“A great conference that covered great topics most of which were very relevant”

20 January 2015


“High praise for the Bunbury organisers. Dee especially was outstanding in her

professionalism in looking after us all. But, thanks to the whole team”

“Of the Sister City Conferences I have attended this one was by far the best for overall

content and quality of the speakers - very well done.”

The survey responses from delegates are attached at Appendix DCCS-3.

Feedback received from this conference will be provided to next year’s host City, Blacktown, for

them to use when preparing their program for 2015.


Summary of costs:

Income: $73,944

Expenditure: $73,471

The final budget for the conference is attached at Appendix DCCS-4.

Staff hours have not been included in the budget breakdown but are estimated to total

approximately 700 hours and are made up from a range of different staff participating in the

planning and coordination of the conference.

The Conference was coordinated using existing resources and no additional staff were employed.


When preparing the program for the conference, previous delegate feedback from previous Sister

Cities Australia conferences was examined and discussed with the National Committee of Sister

Cities Australia. The President and Vice President of Sister Cities Australia visited Bunbury in March

to look at the proposed locations for the overall conference program (including BREC,

accommodation, breakfast and dinner locations etc.).


During the planning phase and lead up to the conference, meetings were held involving the:

Director Corporate and Community Services; Manager Community, Arts and Culture; Team Leader

Events; Team Leader Arts and Culture; Senior Visitor Centre Officer; and the Corporate Marketing

Officer. Cr McCleary was also involved in the final preparation and throughout the conference

itself.

20 January 2015


10.3.2 Creative City Strategy 2015-2020


Author: Stephanie Addison-Brown, Director Corporate and Community Services

Julian Bowron, Manager Community, Arts and Culture


Attachments: Appendix DCCS-5: Creative City Strategy

Appendix DCCS-6: Creative City Strategy Consultation Feedback

Summary

Summary

In February 2014, Council resolved to develop a Creative City Strategy (Council Decision 35/14).

During 2014, research and consultation took place in regard to the development of this strategy.

This report seeks Council’s endorsement of the final Creative City Strategy (attached at appendix

DCCS-5).


1. That Council endorse the Creative City Strategy 2015-2020 and use it as a guide for future

arts and cultural initiatives for Bunbury.

2. That a review of implementation progress and outcomes in accordance with the Strategy

be undertaken and reported to Council by 30 June 2016.

Background

In February 2014, Council made the following decision:

Council Decision 35/14 states:

PART A

1. Council thanks the Bunbury Regional Art Gallery Working Group for its efforts and notes the

recommendations.

2. Given the desire for more creative projects and vibrancy in our community and the

limitations on the Board’s ability to attract additional funding or initiate any change to the

services it delivers, Council no longer funds the Bunbury Regional Arts Management Board.

3. The Bunbury Regional Arts Management Board’s tenure of management of the Bunbury

Regional Art Gallery end at 30th June 2014 and the Board find alternative accommodation

as of 1st July 2014.

4. The management and operational funding of the Bunbury Regional Art Gallery be provided

by the Council’s financial management systems.

5. The Director and Staff employed at the Bunbury Regional Art Gallery be offered

employment with the Council, to be managed by the CEO, or upon his delegation by the

20 January 2015


Director Community Development, at the same rates and conditions as their current terms

and conditions.

6. The CEO of the Bunbury City Council, in conjunction with Art Gallery of Western Australia,

arrange in-house regional consultation and national research to be conducted of

contemporary governance models of Art Galleries, or related Boards and constitutions, that

enables an independent Board to effectively and proactively oversee the management and

functions of the Bunbury Regional Art Gallery, including management of the City of Bunbury

Art Collection.

7. That the CEO submits recommendations for a suitable model of governance to Council prior

to February 2016.

8. The CEO invite the Director of the Bunbury Regional Art Gallery and the General Manager

Bunbury Regional Entertainment Centre, in consultation with the Department for the Arts

and other relevant stakeholders, to participate and guide in-house regional consultation

and national research on the establishment of a "Creative City Strategy" and submit

recommendations to Council by 30th June 2014.

PART B

1. The City of Bunbury arts collection committee be suspended immediately.

2. The City of Bunbury arts collection committee be thanked for their work over the past years.

PART A (number 8), refers to the development of a Creative City Strategy. In response to this, a

project team comprising Cr McCleary, Cr Giles, the Director BRAG (now also the City’s Manager

Community, Arts and Culture), General Manager BREC, Director Corporate and Community

Development and Team Leader Arts and Culture was established to progress the development of

this strategy. A meeting was also held with the Board of the Stirling Street Arts Centre early on in

the development of the strategy as part of the process.

Research was then undertaken including examination of recent strategies developed by the

Department of Culture and the Arts, South West Development Commission and a range of other

places such as Hobart who presented their Creative City Strategy to the Dynamic Cities conference

in Mandurah in late 2013.

Following this initial research, some draft themes were prepared by the project team. A draft

Creative City Strategy document (for consultation purposes only) and proposed consultation

process were endorsed by Council on 22 July 2014 as per Council Decision 259/14 which stated:

“That Council:

1) Endorse the draft Creative City Strategy for consultation purposes; and

2) Endorse the Creative City Strategy Consultation Process as outlined in this report.”

An arts industry and stakeholder workshop was held in August 2014 where the proposed themes

and content were workshopped with a range of representatives from the arts community in

Bunbury and the region.

20 January 2015


Following this, a revised draft Creative City Strategy document was then put out for broader public

consultation in October 2014 and feedback received from this was used to prepare the final

document to ensure the focus was clear, tangible and reflected community aspirations. Both

Councillor Giles and Councillor McCleary were involved with the final proofing of the document.

Concurrently, discussions have also been held between the Manager Community, Arts and Culture,

the Department of Culture and the Arts and representatives from other regional capitals in

Western Australia about the future direction of arts funding across the State.


Nil


Nil

Officer Comments

The Creative City Strategy will be a key document to guide the themes and focus for arts and

cultural facilities and activities across Bunbury for the next five years. It is intended to state the

City’s position as a facilitator and enabler with the intent of engaging and connecting the

community with creative activities and industries for the benefit of the whole community.


The Creative City Strategy will provide a guide for the priorities and themes for arts and cultural

activities into the future.

The costs associated with development of the strategy include staff time, printing (a limited print

run is intended as this strategy will be available electronically) and some initial design work

(although the final design was developed in-house by the City Corporate Marketing Officer and the

Manager Community, Arts and Culture).


The initial team established to progress the Creative City Strategy comprised the General Manager

BREC, the Director BRAG and Councillors Giles and McCleary. The Board of the Stirling Street Arts

Centre was also involved at an early stage and encouraged to participate throughout the process.

An arts industry workshop and survey took place on 16 August 2014 at the BREC which examined

the key themes and proposed content. This was then followed by a broader community

consultation process (survey) carried out in October 2014. The feedback from these sessions and

surveys is attached at Appendix DCCS-6.


Councillors Giles and McCleary have been involved in the development of the strategy from the

start and also steered the final proofing of the document. Other Elected Members have been

briefed on progress through the Elected Member Weekly Updates and had an opportunity to

provide feedback on the draft document.

20 January 2015


10.3.3 Proposed Deed of License to Heather MacFarlane Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Jenny Spencer Trust

Trading as Yours or Mine over a portion of Lot 3 Blair Street, Bunbury

File Ref: L239

Applicant/Proponent: Heather MacFarlane Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Jenny Spencer Trust

Trading as Yours or Mine

Author: Kristen Anderson, Administration Officer Property and Procurement


Attachments: Appendix DCCS-7 Proposed Deed of License – Portion Lot 3 Blair Street

Location Plan

Summary

The City of Bunbury (the “City”) has been approached by Heather MacFarlane Pty Ltd as Trustee for

the Jenny Spencer Trust Trading as Yours or Mine (the “Applicant”) to License a portion of Lot 3

Blair Street, Bunbury to enable a grease trap and bin storage compound to be built. This is in order

to facilitate the establishment of a new restaurant the Applicant is opening, located at 26 Victoria

Street (the “Adjoining Property”) and the legislative and health requirements relating to those

items. A location plan is attached at Appendix DCCS-7.


Council agrees to grant a new Deed of License to Heather MacFarlane Pty Ltd as Trustee for the

Jenny Spencer Trust Trading as Yours or Mine over a portion of Lot 3 Blair Street, Bunbury for the

purpose of grease trap and bin storage compound for a period of five (5) years with a further

option of five (5) years, subject to the terms and conditions as specified in the report, and the

following:

1. Applicant to pay all costs associated with the license application including document

preparation and advertising.

2. Advertising in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act

1995.

Background

The Applicant approached the City in anticipation of establishing a restaurant called ‘Yours or

Mine’, at 26 Victoria Street. The establishment of a ‘food business’ identified the need for a grease

trap and bin storage area to ensure legislative and health requirements relating to a ‘food business’

were able to be met.

The Applicant has advised that the venue will be intimate, displaying an ‘industrial vintage’ theme,

with furniture consisting of quality, new and reclaimed items. A high class food and beverage

service will be offered and it is the aim of Jenny Spencer to bring an intimate and mature drinking

and dining venue to Bunbury.

The creation of this new business in the Bunbury CBD will also offer six (6) full time employment

opportunities with additional casual staff required over the busier summer months.

The Applicant has worked closely with the City’s Environmental Health Department and the

Community Law, Safety and Emergency Management Department to ensure legislative

20 January 2015


requirements can be met and that there is little to no impact on parking and access to the Licensed

Premises. As such, there have been several ‘Special Conditions’ included in the Deed of License,

that the Applicant has agreed to, which cater for issues such as access and aesthetics.

Proposed New License Details

Commencement: 6 February 2015

Term: Five (5) years with a further five (5) year option

Expiry Date: 5 February 2020

Rental: $875.00 + GST per annum

Rent Review: CPI annually, Market Rent Review every third year

Outgoings: Responsibility of the Licensee

Insurance: Licensee to maintain Public Risk and General Insurance cover over the

premises with Public Liability to be set at $10 million

Special Conditions: The Redevelopment Clause has been included

Layout of License Premises

i. the layout of the bin store and grease trap must always remain

within the Licensed Premises;

ii. access to the compound should be only through the North East

corner of the Licensed Premises as indicated on the plan so as not to

impact on parked vehicles;

iii. the Licensed Premises is to have a secure permeable fence with a

lockable access gate. The fence is to be 1.8 metres high;

iv. access to the Licensed Premises is permitted from the entrance to

the car parking area off Victoria Street;

v. servicing of the grease trap or emptying of the bins is to be done

prior to 9.00am or by agreement with the Bunbury Regional

Entertainment Centre Management.

Document

preparation:

The Lessee to pay full cost of document preparation and advertising


Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995

Officer Comments

The Applicant has agreed to meet all ‘Special Conditions’ as set out in the Deed of License, and that

all health related legislative requirements are also met to ensure the operation of their business

located at the Adjoining Property can be conducted in a compliant manner.

20 January 2015



A valuation was carried out by LMW Hegney Property Valuers which valued the rental rate of the

36sqm area at $875.00 per annum excluding GST. The City intends to charge the Applicant the full

valuation amount and the Applicant has agreed.

The rent payable will increase by CPI on an annual basis with a market rent review to be conducted

every three (3) years during the term of the license.


Consultation has been undertaken with the Management Board for the Bunbury Regional

Entertainment Centre (“BREC”) to ensure there is minimal impact and disruption to the operation

of BREC.

Advertising in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995 will

be undertaken.


The proposed Deed of License was tabled with the City’s Development Coordination Unit (“DCU”)

with no objections having been received, so long as, parking issues and health regulations were

complied with.

The Officer, in conjunction with the Community Law, Safety and Emergency Management

Department and Environmental Health Department, has drafted conditions specifically addressing

the layout of the licensed premises to ensure minimal impact on the surrounding area including the

BREC, and so that the relevant health regulations are complied with.

20 January 2015


10.3.4 Dedication of Road Reserve - Bunbury Primary School – Lovegrove Avenue Traffic and Parking

File Ref: Lovegrove Avenue and Reading Street


Author: Jane Dawson, Senior Property Officer


Attachments: Appendix DCCS-8 Dedication of Road Reserve Lovegrove Avenue Traffic

and Parking Plan

Summary

Following extensive consultation with stakeholders, City staff have prepared a design to modify

Lovegrove Avenue to accommodate improved traffic management and parking near Bunbury

Primary School as part of the City’s School Frontage Program. The project requires the dedication

of a strip of land from Reserve to Road Reserve. A location plan is attached at Appendix DCCS-8.


That Council agrees to the dedication of part of Reserve 25941 to Road Reserve in accordance with

section 56 of the Land Administration Act 1997.

Background

Traffic management and parking near the Bunbury Primary School is problematic during morning

and afternoon peak times, particularly on Lovegrove Avenue.

Following an extensive consultation and facilitation process, the City prepared a street frontage

design concept that increases parking by 15 bays, retains five existing street trees, introduces a

raised platform to create a traffic slow point and pedestrian refuge area, widens the western ROW

to 5.5m, replaces the northern path with a new 2.0m path and creates a safer on road

environment. The project also includes the upgrade of the existing drainage line.

The approved design concept was adopted by Council at its 27 May 2014 meeting. Council Decision

181/14 applies.

The approved design concept relies on a widening of the Lovegrove Road Reserve to accommodate

the new infrastructure. The widening is derived from the existing sports oval, which is owned by

the Department of Education, and must be administered through the Land Administration Act

1997.

In accordance with section 56 of the Land Administration Act 1997 (Dedication of land as road):-

If in the district of a local government;

(i) land is reserved or acquired for use by the public, or is used by the public, as a road under

the care, control and management of the local government;

20 January 2015


The local government is to make a request in accordance with the regulations;

(i) prepare and deliver the request to the Minister; and

(ii) provide the Minister with sufficient information in a plan or survey, sketch plan or

document to describe the dimensions of the proposed road.

A request was submitted to the Department of Lands on the 23 September 2014 applying for the

dedication of a part of Reserve 25941 to Road Reserve for additional parking at the Bunbury

Primary School, included with this request was the formal response from the Department of

Education giving consent for the dedication and the survey.


Not Applicable.


Section 56 of the Land Administration Act 1997

Officer Comments

The formalisation of the dedication will ensure the road, drainage and path infrastructure will be

located on road reserve dedicated to the City of Bunbury. This will give the City legal access to its

infrastructure and remove the need for management or vesting orders.

The dedication will ensure that the Bunbury Primary School has access to its land at the oval and

will remove any common ownership issues that arise from time to time where the ownership of

land is not clear.


The City has negotiated with the Education Department to have the land dedicated as Road

Reserve. As such there are no costs associated with the procurement of the land.


A letter to Residents was sent in September 2014 advising of the City’s intent to facilitate a process

to determine a suitable development option to improve traffic movement and parking around

Bunbury Primary School during peak school times. This process culminated in a development

proposal that balances the needs of the school community and retains the aesthetic values of the

streetscape for residents.

The City has been negotiating with the Education Department and received emails of support to

the dedication. These were required to obtain permission to undertake works on the site in the

absence of the completed dedication.

20 January 2015



The proposal was presented to the Council for consideration on the 27 May 2014, the Council

decided (181/14):

“1. That Council adopt Drawing 1-2014-16 (TWO WAY concept) as its preferred development

option for the School Frontage Program at Lovegrove Avenue. (Carried 10/1)

2. That Council note that the construction of 30 parking bays within the School grounds has

not been included in the project unless additional grant funding becomes available. (Carried

8/3)

A. Construction of interim car park of an informal nature be considered as a first step.

B. Work with Bunbury School Board to find funding for permanent upgrade including work

on entry and exit points into the existing staff parking area.

3. City of Bunbury enlarge cul-de-sac to facilitate safe turn around at the top of Reading

Street. Funding for this project to be found from road existing/future road budget and to be

completed as soon as practicable. (Carried 9/2)

4. City of Bunbury review and consider the installation of bollards and footpath extensions to

improve the pedestrian/cyclist crossing points on Stockley Road at the intersections of

Reading Street, Karri Street and the Western Lovegrove. (Carried 10/1)”

20 January 2015


10.4 Director Planning and Development Services Reports

10.4.1 Bunbury War Memorial Conservation Works

File Ref: PR-3390/P09125


Author: Dorothy Harmer, Planning Officer

Executive: Bob Karaszkewych, Director Planning and Development Services

Attachments: Appendix DPDS-1:

Summary

Council previously endorsed an additional $25,000 in the event that Federal ANZAC Centenary Local

Grants funding was not successful (Council Decision 347/14); however, the City of Bunbury was

subsequently successful in securing this grant funding in December 2014.

A site visit to the Bunbury War Memorial and test patch for paint removal undertaken by the

consultant in November 2014 nevertheless found that further works would be required to

complete the restoration at an additional cost of $20,000 (quotation attached at DPDS-1).

In order for works to commence at the beginning of March, a commitment of additional funds is

needed. This will ensure that all works can be completed prior to the ANZAC Centenary

Commemorations.

It is therefore requested that Council approves the expenditure of $14,000 of the already endorsed

funding for the additional conservation works. As this will ensure that the Bunbury War Memorial

is repaired to a presentable standard for the ANZAC Centenary. The further $6,000 required can

then be sourced from available unspent funds within the heritage operational budget.


That Council approves the commitment and expenditure of an additional $14,000 for inclusion in

the February 2015 Budget Review to complete the conservation of the Bunbury War Memorial (PR-

3991).

Background

The cost of undertaking the original scope of conservation works to the Bunbury War Memorial

was quoted at $51,435, which included:

- the test patch,

- schedule of works required by the State Heritage Office,

- removal of the paint from the cenotaph and statue,

- repair of the soldiers hat and nose, and

- supervising heritage architect.

A range of funding sources has been secured as follows:

- $10,000 Lotterywest,

- $27,003 Federal ANZAC Centenary Local Grants, and

- $15,000 from Council (at project initiation).

20 January 2015


The project to undertake the conservation works (restoration and repairs) to the Bunbury War

Memorial (PR-3391) is in accordance with the ANZAC Park Conservation Plan (2011), which has

been adopted by Council.

The consultant has advised that there is likely to be a range of unforseen works needing to be

undertaken during the conservation of the Bunbury War Memorial, including stone repair and re-

pointing.

The consultant will commence works in the first week of March and advises that this is sufficient

time for all works to be completed prior to the ANZAC Centenary Commemorations.

It is important to note that the additional funding will allow for the most cost efficient outcome by

utilising the trades, machinery, scaffolding and equipment already mobilised. Should the additional

funding not be endorsed at this time, the works will still be required at a later date, however with

the additional costs incurred for remobilising the trade specialists and equipment.


All works are recommendations of the adopted ANZAC Park Conservation Plan (2011).


The restoration works returning the Bunbury War Memorial to its original condition is considered

“significant works”, which are required to be referred to the State Heritage Office in accordance

with the Heritage Act of Western Australia 1990.

Officer Comments

Council has demonstrated its commitment to the project and has previously endorsed a greater

level of additional funding than is now being requested, which will represent a cost efficient high

quality outcome.


The cost to complete the project of restoring the Bunbury War Memorial to its original condition is

estimated by the consultant to be an additional $20,000.

Subject to the lesser amount of $14,000 of additional funding being approved by Council, the

remaining $6,000 can be sourced from within the Planning and Development Services operational

budget categories of:

- Manage heritage conservation/promotion of programs, and

- Conduct heritage assessments.

If the funding is not endorsed to undertake the additional works at the same time as the paint

removal and repair of the stone soldier statue, the same works will cost significantly more at a later

date.

20 January 2015



The project has the support of the RSL, Heritage Advisory Group, Regional Heritage Advisor and the

State Heritage Office.


All directorates of Council have been consulted and involved in this project.

20 January 2015


10-4-2 Proposed Structure Plan – Part Lots 120 and 549 South Western Highway, Davenport

File Ref: P14248/PR-2123

Applicant/Proponent: City of Bunbury

Author: Teshome Tadesse, Senior Planning Officer

Thor Farnworth, Manager Sustainability, Planning and Development

Executive: Bob Karaszkewych, Director Planning and Development Services

Attachments: Appendix DPDS-2 Draft Structure Plan

Appendix DPDS-3 Schedule of Submissions

Summary

The draft proposed Structure Plan for Part Lots 120 and 549 South Western Highway, Davenport,

was publicly advertised and is now presented to Council for its consideration to grant final approval

to adopt.

A modified draft proposed Structure Plan was advertised with no objections being received, with

only comments provided by infrastructure service providers and state government agencies on

matters relating to future development proposals on the subject site. Details of the comments

provided by utilities and agencies are attached at Appendix DPDS-3 as a Schedule of Submissions.

The final draft proposed Structure Plan is now at the stage that it can be approved by Council, in

order to serve as a framework to guide future subdivision and development of Part Lots 120 and

549 South Western Highway, Davenport. In particular, it is considered that the draft proposed

Structure Plan will be instrumental in facilitating the development of the future Regional Animal

Pound and Welfare Centre on the subject site.


That Council:

1. In accordance with clause 6.2.5 of the City of Bunbury Town Planning Scheme No. 7,

resolves to adopt the draft proposed Structure Plan – Part Lots 120 and 549 South Western

Highway, Davenport.

2. Notify the Western Australian Planning Commission of Council’s decision to adopt the draft

proposed Structure Plan, and requests that the Commission endorse Structure Plan – Part

Lots 120 and 549 South Western Highway, Davenport.

3. Following the endorsement of the draft proposed Structure Plan by the Western Australian

Planning Commission, resolves to adopt Structure Plan – Part Lots 120 and 549 South

Western Highway, Davenport, in accordance with clause 6.2.5.15 of the City of Bunbury

Town Planning Scheme No. 7.

4. Advise stakeholders of the decision subject to the Western Australian Planning

Commission’s endorsement of the adopted Structure Plan.

20 January 2015


Background

Council resolved the following in relation to the draft proposed Structure Plan – Part Lots 120 and

549 South Western Highway, Davenport, at its Ordinary Meeting of 8 July 2014 (Council Decision:

249/14):

“That Council:

1. Release the draft Structure Plan – Part Lots 120 and 549 South Western High Way,

Davenport, for the purpose of public consultation for a period of 21 days in

accordance with clause 6.2.5.2 (a) of Town Planning Scheme No. 7 (TPS7) subject to

the following modifications:

Part 1 Clause 5.1

It is considered more appropriate to apply ‘D’ (discretionary) to all land uses, given

that there are no development requirements provided in the Town Planning Scheme

No. 7 (TPS7) or the Structure Plan. It should be outlined that all development

proposals will be considered having regard to clause 10.2 of TPS7.

Part 1 Clause 6.

The following additional wording should be included:

“Prior to the lodgement of any subdivision or development application to the relevant

decision making authority, a Fire Management Plan is to be completed to the

satisfaction of the Department of Fire and Emergency Services and the local

government. Following the completion of a Fire Management Plan, the

recommended fire management controls are to be reflected on an updated Structure

Plan and implemented to the satisfaction of the Western Australian Planning

Commission, Department of Fire and Emergency Services and the local government.”

Part 2 Clause 1.2.2

The Structure Plan states that the site is currently vacant; however, it should be

mentioned that the site is currently used by the City of Bunbury for the storage of

green waste.

Part 2 Clause 2.2

Additional wording should be added, given that potential excavation will be required

for septic tanks and or rain water tanks. The potential for ASS disturbance represents

a development constraint and further acid sulphate soil investigation and

management planning should occur if the excavation of 100m³ or more of soil

beneath the natural water table and or drainage works (e.g. dewatering) be

proposed.

Part 2 Clause 2.4

Additional wording should be added in regard to a Fire Management Plan and the

possible requirement of Hazard Reduction Zone and Building Protection Zone buffers

between buildings and bushland, bearing in mind that the existing remnant

vegetation on Lot 549 is not to be cleared and the 100m buffer and or other fire

management controls are to be applied to the proposed development area. Also, the

continuation of the use of the balance of the site for the storage of green waste,

should this be proposed post-development, could further contribute to the fire risk

onsite.

20 January 2015


Part 2 Clause 3.2.5

The Structure Plan states that the existing unsealed road in the road reserve to the

north west of the site will be upgraded as part of the proposed development. It

should be noted that, should this or any other activity warrant the clearing of native

vegetation onsite, a clearing permit under the WA Environmental Protection Act 1986

and/or Ministerial approval under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and

Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 may be required in view of the recognised

environmental values of native vegetation in the area.

Part 2 Clause 2.6

It should be noted that the site supports approximately 30 individual native trees in a

“parkland cleared” (i.e. completely degraded) setting. Native vegetation in WA is

protected under the WA Environmental Protection Act 1986. The Department of

Environment Regulation previously advised in July 2013 that the clearing of these

trees is likely to require a clearing permit; however, it is noted that the construction

of buildings, roads and footpaths is at times exempt under the Act and so it is

recommended that further advice be sought from the department on this issue, as

the proposal has been further developed since the time of the department’s original

advice.

Also, there is an unsubstantiated report of organochlorin pesticide use on the site

during the 1950’s, which may have resulted in site contamination. The City reported

the suspected contaminated site to the Department of Environment Regulation in

2007, which subsequently classified the site as “Report Not Substantiated” under the

WA Contaminated Sites Act 2003 i.e. insufficient evidence to determine the presence

or otherwise of contaminants.

2. Structure Plan

The Structure Plan should not show indicative buildings as the location might change

due to further investigations and Fire Management Plan requirements.

Notes on the Structure Plan:

(a) The first note should be amended to reflect that land uses are ‘D’

(discretionary).

The following notes should be added to the Structure Plan:

(b) Prior to the lodgement of any subdivision or development application to the

relevant decision making authority, a Fire Management Plan is to be

completed to the satisfaction of the Department of Fire and Emergency

Services and the local government.

(c) Following the completion of a Fire Management Plan, the recommended fire

management controls are to be reflected on an updated Structure Plan and

implemented to the satisfaction of the Western Australian Planning

Commission, Department of Fire and Emergency Services and the local

government.

(d) No development shall be located outside of the ‘Development Area’.

3. Advise the applicant of its decision.

The City of Bunbury engaged the private consulting firm Harley Dykstra Pty Ltd to prepare a local

structure plan over Part Lots 120 and 549 South Western Highway, Davenport, in order to facilitate

the development of a future Regional Animal Pound and Welfare Centre on the subject site.

20 January 2015


A modified version of the draft proposed Structure Plan was publicly advertised in accordance with

the Scheme requirements (a copy of the draft proposed Structure Plan, incorporating both text and

map, is included at attached at Appendix DPDS-2). No major issues have been identified that are

considered to be detrimental to the design or implementation of the draft proposed Structure Plan,

or to the ultimate use of the subject site as a Regional Animal Pound and Welfare Centre.


Local Planning Policy: Development within 100m from the toe of the Preston River Levee is relevant

in this case, as it is applicable to new developments within 100m of the Preston River Flood Plain.

However, development on the subject site will only be permitted to occur within a designated

“Development Area” as shown on the draft proposed Structure Plan map, which is located

approximately 150m away from the Preston River in compliance with the policy.


Clauses 6.2.3.1, 6.2.4 and 6.2.5 of the Scheme set out the relevant statutory planning requirements

for this proposal. The draft proposed Structure Plan has been prepared in accordance with the

Scheme, and as such, is considered ready for Council’s consideration for adoption prior to referral

to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) for its determination on the matter.

Officer Comments

The draft proposed Structure Plan provides a sound regulatory framework for the development of

the future Regional Animal Pound and Welfare Centre on Part Lots 120 and 549 South West

Highway, Davenport, which is located within a “Development Investigation Policy Area” under the

Scheme (an extract of the TPS7 Scheme Map can be found on page 5 the Structure Plan Report

attached at Appendix DPDS-2).

The draft proposed Structure Plan has been assessed for its compliance with statutory planning

requirements, notably in relation to the following:

- Greater Bunbury Region Scheme (GBRS); and

- City of Bunbury Town Planning Scheme No. 7 (TPS7).

Greater Bunbury Region Scheme

The proposed Structure Plan area is included in the “Rural Zone” under the GBRS, with the

surrounding land designated as follows:

- “Regional Open Space Reserve” to the north and east;

- “Public Purpose Reserve – Airport” to the south; and

- “Primary Regional Roads Reserve” over the South Western Highway to the west.

The nominated range of land uses listed in the draft proposed Structure Plan are considered to be

consistent with the intent and objectives of the Region Scheme’s rural zoning. Accordingly, the

ultimate use of the subject site as a Regional Animal Pound and Welfare Centre is therefore judged

to be an appropriate animal oriented land use for this location and rural setting.

20 January 2015


The Regional Animal Pound and Welfare Centre requires a relatively large area of land in order to

provide sufficient space for an animal exercising yard and noise and odour buffering to sensitive

land uses such as residential neighbourhoods. A rural environment with adequate separation from

sensitive land uses that is otherwise not suitable for agricultural purposes is considered to be an

ideal location in terms of satisfying these requirements.

City of Bunbury Town Planning Scheme No. 7

A substantial portion of Part Lots 120 and 549 South Western Highway, Davenport, is included in

the “Rural Zone”, with a small portion of the lots to the north west being included in an “Access

Road Reserve” under TPS7. In addition, the proposed Structure Plan area is encompassed by a

“Development Investigation Policy Area”, as shown on the Scheme Map.

A structure plan is required in a “Development Investigation Policy Area” prior to any subdivision

and/or development occurring on site in accordance with clause 6.2.3.1 of the Scheme, which reads

as follows:

The Local Government requires a Structure Plan for a Development Investigation Policy Area, or for

any particular part or parts of a Development Investigation Policy Area, before recommending

subdivision or approving development of land within the Development Investigation Policy Area.

The proposal is assessed to be consistent with the Scheme requirements, as it provides a

technically sound statutory planning framework for facilitating the development of the land for a

Regional Animal Pound and Welfare Centre and other compatible land uses on the subject site as

justified.

Proposed Structure Plan

Land Use and Development

The draft proposed Structure Plan map shows the following:

- a designated “Development Area” – with no development being permitted outside of this

envelope; and

- available infrastructure services (with overhead power located to the north and north east,

and telecommunications located to the west).

The draft proposed Structure Plan text specifies land use permissibility as follows:

Land use permissibility within the Structure Plan area shall be in accordance with the corresponding

zone under the Scheme, with the following exceptions:

The following use classes (as defined in the Scheme) shall be ‘D’ (discretionary) uses within the

Structure Plan area:

- Animal establishment;

- Caretaker’s dwelling;

- Car park;

- Civic use;

- Community purpose;

- Nursery;

20 January 2015


- Storage;

- Veterinary centre.

The permissible range of land uses listed in the draft proposed Structure Plan are considered to be

generally compatible with the intent and objectives of the “Rural Zone”, albeit with the exception

of some uses such as community purpose and car park as stand-alone uses. However, it is

anticipated that the subject site will primarily be developed for a Regional Animal Pound and

Welfare Centre; and therefore, the car park and community purpose uses would be incidental and

ancillary to the primary use of the site. In addition, the draft proposed Structure Plan sets out the

fundamental standards and requirements for the regulation of development (and managing

associated risks and impacts) applicable to the proposed Structure Plan area.

Aboriginal Heritage

The Department of Aboriginal Affairs (formerly Indigenous Affairs) acknowledges that the potential

impact of development on the registered Aboriginal Site DAA 4873 (Bunbury 23) within the

proposed Structure Plan area is likely to be minimal. Nevertheless, the Department of Aboriginal

Affairs has recommended that the City of Bunbury endeavour to analyse historical use of the site

and to refer any application for planning approval for the development of the subject site on to the

department for its comment. As such, it is acknowledged that any future development of the

subject site will need to be in accordance with both the provisions of the Aboriginal Heritage Act

1972 and the recommendations of the Department of Aboriginal Affairs.

Remnant Vegetation

It is appreciated that the proposed Structure Plan area contains remnant vegetation on Part Lot

549 South Western Highway; whereas, the majority of the subject site to be developed has already

been cleared (i.e. Part Lot 120 South Western Highway). Consequently, no development will be

permitted on Part Lot 549 South Western Highway, which is outside of the designated

“Development Area”, as identified on the draft proposed Structure Plan map. The vegetation cover

on Part Lot 459 South Western Highway will serve as a buffer. To ensure protection of the remnant

vegetation in and around the subject site, it is intended that the existing landscape buffer of

established trees within the development site will be retained were practicable.

Bushfire Hazard

The draft proposed Structure Plan also contains the following provisions in relation to the need for

a Fire Management Plan:

2) Prior to the lodgement of any subdivision or development application to the relevant

decision making authority, a Fire Management Plan is to be completed to the satisfaction of

the Department of Fire and Emergency Services and the local government.

3) Following the completion of a Fire Management Plan, the recommended fire management

controls are to be reflected on an updated Structure Plan and implemented to the

satisfaction of the Western Australian Planning Commission, Department of Fire and

Emergency Services and the local government.

It should be noted that in accordance with clause 6.2.8.2 of the Scheme, the provisions of the

adopted Structure Plan shall have effect as if they were the provisions of the Scheme. If an

inconsistency arises between the requirements of the Scheme and the adopted Structure Plan, the

requirements of the Structure Plan will prevail in respect of the proposed Structure Plan area.

20 January 2015


Infrastructure Service Provision

Part Lots 120 and 549 South Western Highway, Davenport, are located in a rural area with limited

infrastructure services available to the lots. The existing access road to the subject site is unsealed

and requires regular maintenance. The City of Bunbury has assured Main Roads Western Australia

(MRWA) that the access road will be maintained to a standard that is acceptable to the MRWA, and

hence, it is considered that the existing access road with regular maintenance by the City of

Bunbury will be adequate to service the subject site.

Telecommunications and electricity services are available nearby; and therefore, these lots can be

provided with these utilities within a reasonable timeframe and cost. With regard to other

essential services such as reticulated water and effluent disposal, the draft proposed Structure Plan

provides for onsite solutions to be developed as required.

A reticulated water system is not presently available to service the subject site; however, the

proposed utilisation of rooftop catchments and rainwater tanks on site in order to provide an

adequate potable water supply for future developments is considered to be a feasible alternative.

The expected total water demand will depend on the ultimate type and scale of development on

the subject site. In this case, the subject site is primarily intended to be used as a Regional Animal

Pound and Welfare Centre. As such, it can be expected that a significant proportion of the total

water demand of this type of premises would be substantially used for cleaning purposes; and

therefore, suitable solutions will be provided onsite for water harvesting that are tailored to

efficiently match the specific water demands of the Regional Animal Pound and Welfare Centre

once known in in accordance with its detailed design and operation.

A reticulated sewerage system is also not presently available to the subject lots, with the only

solution being to establish appropriate onsite effluent disposal systems with sufficient capacity to

meet the needs of the Regional Animal Pound and Welfare Centre and other incidental and

ancillary land uses and development as required.

Stormwater Management

The Department of Water and the Water Corporation (WaterCorp) have advised that stormwater

management arrangements can be adequately dealt with on site at the development stage. As

such, the City of Bunbury will prepare a Stormwater Management Plan as part of the application for

planning approval, which will be referred to these agencies for their comment prior to the granting

of planning approval with conditions.

It is considered that the final draft of the proposed Structure Plan is now ready for Council’s

consideration for adoption. Once the Structure Plan has been adopted by Council, the approved

Structure Plan together with Council’s resolution and Schedule of Submissions will be forwarded on

to the WAPC for its determination.


A breakdown of the funding contributions made towards the development of the Regional Animal

Pound and Welfare Centre is as follows:

- $200,000 received from the Country Local Government Fund (CLGF);

- $150,000 received from the Department of Local Government (DLG); and

20 January 2015


- $100,000 from the City of Bunbury (PR-2123 Construct animal care facility to replace

existing pound facility (Design PR-2368)).

To date investment has already been made in the subject site in terms of site evaluation, surveying,

sourcing quotations for service connection and building design and planning consultancy fees.


The draft proposed Structure Plan was advertised for 21 days from 29 October 2014 to 18

November 2014. No submissions were received from the general public, as it can be assumed, the

location of the subject site is adequately removed from sensitive land uses to not be of any concern

to residents. Seven submissions were received from government agencies, which generally related

to matters concerning future development requirements, such as stormwater management and

vehicular access arrangements (a copy of the Schedule of Submissions is included attached at

DPDDS-3).


A number of discussions have been held internally with affected departments prior to the

finalisation of the draft proposed Structure Plan – Part Lots 120 and 549 South Western Highway,

Davenport.

Delegation of Authority

In accordance with the relevant provisions of the Scheme, a Council determination is required with

respect to the adoption of a proposed Structure Plan.

Relevant Precedents

There are no known proposals that set a precedent in relation to this matter.

20 January 2015


10.5 Director Works and Services Reports

10.5.1 Vittoria Rd/Jeffrey Rd – Proposed Compulsory Acquisition of Land

File Ref: A04445


Author: Nigel Archibald, Team Leader Airport & Design

Executive: Phil Harris, Director Works & Services

Attachments: Appendix DWS-1 – Vittoria Road Plan

Appendix CRUSC-1-1 Confidential



Summary

It is proposed to formally request the Minister for Lands to compulsorily acquire a truncation from

land owned by the Apostolic Church Trust (Grace Christian School) to facilitate the construction of a

roundabout at the intersection of Vittoria Rd and Jeffrey Rd.


That:

1. Pursuant to Part 9, Division 3, Subdivision 2 of the Land Administration Act 1997 Council

requests the Minister for Lands to compulsorily acquire the land shown marked as

“proposed road widening” on DWS-1.

2. Council agrees to indemnify the Minister for Lands against any compensation claim made

under the Land Administration Act 1997 on account of the taking of such land.

Background

It is anticipated that significant residential growth will occur in Glen Iris over the next decade

resulting in a commensurate increase in traffic volumes on Vittoria Rd. The Glen Iris Structure Plan,

adopted by Council in 2010, details the installation of three (3) roundabouts at the intersections of

Vittoria Rd with Jeffrey Rd, Woodley Rd and Erica Entrance to manage and control the increase in

traffic.

The detailed design of a roundabout at the intersection of Vittoria Rd and Jeffrey Rd has been

undertaken which satisfies the existing road layout whilst also catering for the ultimate road layout.

The north eastern corner of this intersection is not currently truncated and it is proposed that a

448m2 truncation be acquired from land currently owned by the Apostolic Church Trust (Grace

Christian School) to facilitate construction of the roundabout and also house a Western Power pad

mounted transformer.

Landgate has provided Council with a valuation of $45,000 based on the site’s current zoning of

‘Development Zone – Residential’ (attached at CRUSC-1-3).

Grace Christian School have engaged Opteon Property Group which has provided a valuation of

$86,240 based on the site’s potential rezoning to ‘Neighbourhood Centre (Mixed Use)’ (attached at

Appendix CRUSC-1-1). Grace Christian School have also stipulated six (6) conditions they require

20 January 2015


Council agreement too (attached at Appendix CRUSC-1-2). Grace Christian School have provided

written advice that their valuation and Council agreement to the six conditions is not negotiable.


No Council policy applies


Pursuant to Part 9, Division 3, Subdivision 2 of the Land Administration Act 1997 the Council is

required to request the Minister for Lands (by formal Council Decision) to compulsorily acquire land

for public works where negotiations have failed.

Officer Comments

Council Officers had hoped to reach a negotiated agreement with Grace Christian School, however

with the school’s alternative valuation and six conditions being not negotiable, this has not been

possible.

Agreement to the school’s alternative valuation and six conditions would impose an additional

financial burden upon the ratepayers.

Compulsory acquisition of the truncation will likely have a longer timeframe for resolution in

comparison to reaching a negotiated settlement.

The land acquisition requirements have only recently been confirmed with Western Power service

relocation requirements.


Grace Christian School have nominated six conditions it requires Council to agree upon. Several

conditions are low obligation/low cost, however Condition 3 which stipulates the construction of an

indented bus bay and Kiss and Drop Zone has an estimated value of $50,000 - $70,000. Condition 4

stipulating construction of a footpath linking Vittoria Rd to the Kiss and Drop Zone has an estimated

value of $30,000.


A meeting was held with Grace Christian School on the 7th March 2014 to discuss the proposed land

resumption. A formal offer was made by letter dated the 9th June 2014 following receipt of the

Landgate valuation. A secondary meeting was held with Grace Christian School on the 10th

December 2014 at which they advised their valuation and conditions were not negotiable.


This issue was discussed at the ELT Meeting held on Monday 15th December 2014 at which it was

accessed that Grace Christian School’s valuation and conditions needed to be referred to Council.

20 January 2015


Relevant Precedents

At the Council Meeting held on the 22nd May 2007, Council Decision 105/07 resolved to request the

compulsory acquisition of two parcels of land to allow the upgrade of Stuart St to two-way traffic.

Council officers are not aware of instances where land acquisitions have been paid at rates above

Landgate valuations.

20 January 2015


10.5.2 Bunbury Timber Jetty – Heritage Interpretation

File Ref: SF/1921


Author: Jason Gick, Manager Engineering

Executive: Phil Harris, Director Works and Services

Attachments: Appendix DWS-2: Bunbury Timber Jetty Design Drawing email from the

Department of Transport

Appendix DWS-3: Bunbury Timber Jetty Funding Conditions proposed

demolition Bunbury Timber Jetty Replica Jetty

Appendix DWS-4: Draft Bunbury Timber Jetty and Sir William Arrol

Crane Interpretation Plan

Appendix DWS-5: Bunbury Timber Jetty Design Drawing 1


Appendix DWS-7: Bunbury Timber Jetty Design Drawing 3 Wayfinders

Appendix DWS-8: Bunbury Timber Jetty Design Drawing 4 Landscape

Plan



Summary

Due to potentially conflicting planning objectives, it is recommended that the Bunbury Timber Jetty

Heritage Interpretation project is deferred and included in a broader master planning exercise for

the precinct.


That the Council:

1. Defer the design and implementation of the Bunbury Timber Jetty Heritage Interpretation

project until the Department of Transport has completed its master planning for the

Casuarina Boat Harbour, including the Jetty Road groyne;

2. Following a decision on the financial commitment to the proposed fishing platform

conclude its financial arrangements with LandCorp and place the balance of funds in

reserve for future works; and

3. Identify surplus Bunbury Timber Jetty materials not required for the Heritage

Interpretation project for sale.

Background

Deconstruction of the Bunbury Timber Jetty was approved by the WAPC under provisions of the

Greater Bunbury Region Scheme. The approval was issued subject to seven Conditions and six

Advice Notes. One of the Advice Notes requires the design and implementation of didactic panels

to the satisfaction of the Heritage Council of WA.

Deconstruction of the jetty is complete. The only outstanding issue is the implementation of

heritage interpretation of the Bunbury Timber Jetty. The City has engaged Savagely Creative

Consultants to prepare a Heritage Interpretation Plan (September 2013), which is attached DWS-4.

20 January 2015


The Heritage Interpretation Plan outlined five development options, to be determined based on

budget constraints:

Option 1: Minimalist – Basic Interpretation ($50k to $100k)

Option 2: Story telling ($100k to $250k)

Option 3: Heritage Precinct ($250k to $1.5M)

Option 4: Small Jetty Replacement Structure ($1.8M to $4.0M)

Option 5: Holistic Koombana/Casuarina Development ($20M to $100M)

Given the budget constraints, the consultant was instructed to prepare a design to accommodate a

moderate ‘Story Telling’ development at the site near the Sir William Arrol crane. A separate

consultant, Creative Spaces, was engaged to prepare design drawings for stakeholder consultation

and pricing.

During the heritage interpretation planning exercise, a separate proposal was put forward by Mr

Kerry Trantham to develop a small fishing platform at the end of the groyne. Mr Trantham is a

volunteer member of Bunbury Sea Rescue and worked with the contractor deconstructing the

Bunbury Timber Jetty, Swan Marine Construction. Mr Trantham has been working with Mr Steve

Woodhouse (structural engineer) from WML consultants to prepare a suitable fishing platform

design.

Mr Trentham’s proposal has gained support from the South West Development Commission

(SWDC), Recfishwest, the remaining members of the Bunbury Timber Jetty Environment &

Conservation Society (BTJE&CS) and the City. As such, the heritage interpretation plan was

modified to include provision for a fishing platform, without the platform or the heritage project

compromising each other.

Conversations regarding an application for funding of $49,000 from the South West Regional Grant

Scheme indicates that the likelihood of funding is promising with further grants being sought from

Lotterywest and Recfishwest for the project. The City has identified a $30,000 contribution with

$20,000 in-kind for materials.

The heritage interpretation design drawings are now in draft form and have been circulated to

stakeholders for comment, as attached at: DWS-5 Bunbury Timber Jetty Design Drawing 1; DWS-6

Bunbury Timber Jetty Design Drawing 2 , DWS-7 Bunbury Timber Jetty Design Drawing 3

Wayfinders ; DWS-8 Bunbury Timber Jetty Design Drawing 4 Landscape Plan; DWS-9 Bunbury

Timber Jetty Design Drawing 5, DWS10 - Bunbury Timber Jetty Design Drawing 6.


Council Policy DCS-4: Integrated Planning applies.

Councils Asset Management Policy applies.


The deconstruction of the Bunbury Timber Jetty was approved on 21 December 2011 by the WAPC

under provisions of the Greater Bunbury Region Scheme with seven Conditions and six Advice

Notes. With respect to the Heritage Interpretation aspect of this project there are a total of four

Conditions and Advice Notes. These are:

20 January 2015


Condition 5:

Prior to demolition works being undertaken satisfactory arrangements being made with the

Heritage Council of Western Australia for a design for a new jetty structure. – Achieved

Condition 6:

Satisfactory arrangements being made with the Heritage Council of Western Australia for a

watching brief to be carried out by a qualified marine archaeologist during demolition works. -

Achieved

Advice Note 5:

The design and content of interpretive didactic panels and its implementation program shall be to

the satisfaction of the Executive Director of the Office of Heritage. – Not Achieved

Advice Note 6:

Retention of as much physical fabric of the jetty as possible for reuse as part of the interpretation. -

Achieved

Officer Comments

Prior to the commencement of the deconstruction project, the heritage aspects of the Bunbury

Timber Jetty were rated as extremely important in the decision making surrounding the options to

deconstruct, demolish or rebuild the jetty. The importance of the heritage aspects of the jetty are

reflected in the statutory Conditions and Advice Notes issued as part of the demolition approval.

During the deconstruction phase there was great emphasis placed on the retention of jetty

materials for future use, particularly in the heritage interpretation project. The City has stored 200

tonnes of best quality timber at the depot as well as numerous bollards, railway line and sleeper

pins, railway trolleys, water pipe, pile repair sleeves and other tools, several examples of repaired

piles, an old workers shed and more. These items are available for use in any display feature and

for reuse on the proposed fishing platform.

Since the completion of the deconstruction project, the focus has been on developing a suitable

Heritage Interpretation Plan and subsequent heritage precinct design. This process has taken

longer than anticipated, as the issue of heritage is subjective and stakeholder groups, and

individuals amongst stakeholder groups, have differing ideas on what is important and how to

prioritise works.

The draft heritage precinct design drawings show about a dozen different elements that could be

delivered subject to prioritisation and budget constraints. Yet stakeholder feedback, at this time,

does not make clear which features are seen as critical, important or optional. Whilst the design

drawings depict a possible precinct layout and nominal designs for the elements, they do not

provide any substance around the interpretive story telling for the jetty. For example, there are

upright timber panel boards shown, but the text and images are not recommended. This was

identified at the 10 November 2014 stakeholder meeting as requiring further development.

The limited budget for the project suggests that any physical works on the site may seem

incomplete. At present the site is not levelled or surfaced and any works may need proper

foundation works to enable them to remain in place should a future project seek to improve the

levels and the surface condition. The elements may need to be built on concrete plinths that can

be removed and reinstated should a bitumen or concrete seal be established at the site.

20 January 2015


The size of the proposed precinct also creates problems with continuity. The remaining project

budget indicates that not all elements could be delivered effectively and there may be significant

spatial gaps between the elements. This may create a disconnect that will not work properly.

The site is likely to continue to attract people using the area for recreational fishing, casual drivers,

recreational walkers and recreational divers. This mix of use of the area may also contribute to a

small and limited precinct becoming “lost” in the large space available.

The Department of Transports most recent advice is that the site could potentially be used for

vehicle turning space to accommodate increased traffic volumes. A plan showing the concept

layout is attached DWS-2 Bunbury Timber Jetty Email from Department of Transport. This suggests

that the City should suspend work on the heritage interpretation site until a clear view of the sites

future is available. This would be prudent as the land depicted for the interpretation area is owned

by the Department of Transport and any works on the site will require Departmental approval.

A more detailed master planning exercise between the City, the Department of Transport and the

Marine Facilities Alliance would ensure that the bigger picture planning for the site, Koombana Bay

and Casuarina Boat Harbour is considered.


PR-1018 has $154,799 in the 2014/15 Budget for the design and implementation of the heritage

interpretation project of which 50% was prefunded by LandCorp. $9,095 has been spent on the

heritage interpretation and design consultants and $12,269 worth of purchase orders remains

outstanding to complete the design work. This leaves $133,435 for physical works, once a

preferred design is accepted.

Given the incompatibility of the City’s draft Heritage Interpretation design and the Department of

Transports proposed development planning for Casuarina Boat Harbour it would be prudent at this

time to suspend the planning process until a broader master plan is developed and approved. This

would mean that the balance of the LandCorp funds may need to be returned with any

uncommitted funding placed into a reserve for future use.

Under a Ministerial commitment issued in letter dated 11 June 2012 attached at DWS-3 the State

Government has committed $3.5M towards the demolition/part restoration of the jetty, on the

basis that the City matches the commitment on a dollar for dollar basis. The commitment is

administered through LandCorp and project has recouped $1.96M in 2012/13 and 2013/14. The

final claim was made in June 2014 on the basis that the City would carry the balance of funds and

spend them in 2014/15.


The Heritage Interpretation project has been subject to stakeholder consultation before, during

and after the preparation of the design drawings.

In preparing the Heritage Interpretation Plan (September 2013) the City, and its consultant,

consulted with the BTJE&CS, the Department of Transport, the State Heritage Office and the

Bunbury Port Authority. The consultation process assisted with the development of the themes

and story options for further development.

20 January 2015


In January 2014, a meeting was convened to discuss the findings and recommendations of the

Heritage Interpretation Plan. The scope of that meeting was expanded to include discussion on Mr

Trentham’s fishing platform proposal. The meeting included the abovementioned stakeholders as

well as the SWDC, Recfishwest and Mr Trantham.

In the lead up to the draft drawings being completed, the City met with Mr Trantham,

representatives of the Department of Transport, the SWDC and Steve Woodhouse to discuss the

proposed location of the platform and the process required to obtain a jetty licence for it. This

meeting took place on site on 14 August 2014. The Department of Transport indicated at that

meeting that it had no objection to the fishing platform, in principle.

During the consultation period for the Heritage Interpretation Design drawings, Mr Phil Smith (past

president of the BTJE&CS) requested a meeting with the City to discuss the design. The meeting on

10 November 2014 was attended by Mr David Smith, Mr Stephen Craddock, Ms Juliette Harrop and

Mr Steve Woodhouse. At this meeting the members requested further information on the design

and outlined priorities. A desire to increase the project funding was emphasised.

More recently, the City has become aware of a major development proposal for Casuarina Boat

Harbour, being developed by the Department of Transport. The development has been mooted

through the Marine Facilities Alliance and requires the development of Jetty Road and the creation

of a vehicle turning head coincident with the space identified for the Heritage Interpretation

project.

The most recent advice from the Department of Transport is that the Heritage Interpretation

project and the Casuarina Boat Harbour project may be incompatible in their current format, and

that further master planning should be undertaken to determine the interface of both projects.


The Bunbury Timber Jetty heritage interpretation project has been ongoing since the

deconstruction of the jetty in 2012 and has involved various Councillors (past and present) and staff

in the project deliberations.

Officers in Engineering and Planning have been involved in the design, consultation and liaison

aspects associated with this project and the proposed fishing platform.

The Executive is aware of the project and supports the recommendation.

20 January 2015


11. Applications for Leave of Absence

No requests for Leave of Absence had been received at the time of printing.

12. Motions on Notice

12.1 Motion on Notice – Cr Steck – Boulters Heights

Applicant/Proponent: Cr Steck

Author: Cr Steck

Executive: If adopted refer to Phil Harris, Director Works and Services

Attachments: Appendix MN-1: Aerial Printout - Boulters Heights

The below Motion from Cr Steck is submitted for consideration at the Council Meeting on 20

January 2015.

That:

1. That council form a Boulters Heights Committee with Community Members to address the

ongoing maintenance and strategy for Boulters Heights.

2. That council fund an initial amount of $50,000 to assist the committee to hold workshops,

construct a strategy, and develop landscaping plans and an operating budget.

Comments – Cr Steck

Typically Council has not managed Boulters Heights very well in the past, yet council has spent a

considerable amount of money with poor result.

Boulters Heights traditionally was covered in European plants and during that time the hill was well

maintained.

During my time on council I have seen the waterfall turned off, the total destruction of the plants

which were originally on the hill, by Council striping the hill bare and replanting with native plants.

The hill was terrible for some time.

Today the hill is full of weeds and dry grass with only a few natives. Native species are not the right

plants for the hill because of the oils native species contain. Oils in native species burst during fire

and cause a greater heat load which causes the fire to burn furiously.

Boulters Heights is unique in that it is a large sand hill and requires daily watering to water plants

and reduce the risk of fire hazard. It is not really possible to follow the normal council policy in

regards to bushfire inspection, the hill requires ongoing maintenance.

20 January 2015


The infrastructure such as paths, wooden stairs and rails require regular maintenance, council has

virtually left them to rot.

A dedicated community group would find better outcomes for the hill, such as Botanical gardens or

a general community garden. A strategy needs to be constructed and adopted by the committee.

The budget should contain annual funds set aside for the committee to have available funds to

operate. Such as purchasing plants, watering equipment etc., the operational budget should be

developed by the committee with approval from council.

Last week the City of Bunbury had a fire on Boulters Heights which erupted in seconds and

destroyed a large area of the hill. Council was lucky the wind was blowing in the direction of the

hill rather than towards the houses. Otherwise, all homes would have been destroyed including

vehicles.


At present there are no funds allocated for this project and any budget allocated to this would need

to be sourced from the deletion of another pre-existing project. The matter will be listed as a

potential project for consideration in the 2015/16 budget considerations if the motion is supported

by Council.

Executive Comments

The work undertaken on Boulters Heights has been restricted due to the requirements for

compliance with OSH requirements and limited budgets over several years. In conjunction with the

staff from Corrective Services work has been undertaken in previous years to address both planting

and pedestrian access issues.

An aerial photograph of Boulters Heights is attached at QN-1

DFES have a document which details a reference of fire retardant species of plants which can be

used as potential guide. This can be found at:

http://www.dfes.wa.gov.au/safetyinformation/fire/bushfire/BushfireProtectionPlanningPublication

s/FESA%20Plant%20Guide-BP%20Zone-Final-w.pdf

The Team Leader Community Safety and Emergency management advises that investigation on the

potential cause of the fire on Sunday 11 January 2015 was the prevailing wind was NNE. This then

pushed the fire towards the south, with the natural tendency for fire to travel more quickly uphill,

lead to the ultimate fire shape. Arguably then, this was the worst case scenario for Cr Steck’s

property, other than the potential for stronger winds to push the fire harder to the south.

Available bushfire fuels were fully cured and available for burning. Other plant species may retard

the fire rate of spread, if they remained green and moisture laden.

The fire risk assessments that have been completed for 4 Turner Street, do not identify a high

bushfire risk from the Boulter’s Heights reserve, due in the main, to that property being down-hill

and some 14 metres from the nearest vegetation. Adjacent properties would be higher.

20 January 2015


A bushfire risk rating of 75 is a ‘moderate’ risk level, with 150 being the upper acceptable limit. BAL

29 is the currently accepted level of radiant heat yield, under the Bushfire Policy.

There are other properties which are at higher risk (such as 2 Picton Crescent). Clearly, it would

then be appropriate to consider fire risk in any planning activity that may result from this enquiry.

An alternative recommendation is proposed to address the issue of financial resourcing of the

project which allows for the formation of the group to start some initial planning and subject to

available funds being allocated through the budget process works could potentially be commenced

during 2015/16.

That:

1. That Council support the formation of a Boulters Heights Working Group with Community

Members to address the ongoing maintenance and strategy for Boulters Heights.

2. That funding be included for consideration as part of the 2015/16 budget.

13. Questions on Notice

13.1 Response to Previous Questions from Members taken on Notice

Nil.

13.2 Questions from Members

The following questions were submitted by Cr Steck on 14 January 2014. An extract from Bushfires

Act 1954 (attached at Appendix QN-1) and the Council Policy: Bushfire Inspection and Mitigation

(attached) at Appendix QN-2) are provided. Responses are provided below:

1. Has Council complied with the bushfires Act of 1954 and inspected all Crown Land for

potential fire hazards?

20 January 2015


Yes, there is an ongoing commitment to bushfire risk management. Our emergency risk

management study from 2013, indicated that bushfire is currently the third highest risk to

our community.

Whilst the Bush Fires Act (1954) does not ‘bind the Crown’ [s7(2)] and as the City of

Bunbury is a Crown entity there is no requirement for Council to undertake any specific

action, however the City has done a formal bushfire risk assessment for all properties that

are within 100 metres of bushland areas that are greater than 1 hectare. Council policy has

recognised an interim benchmark of a Bushfire Attack Level (BAL) 29 (Australian Standard

3950-2009 – Construction of Buildings in Bushfire Prone Areas), as the upper acceptable

limit. Bushfire risk ratings are then used to populate the City’s Bushfire Risk register, to

inform mitigation priorities against the available budget.

In most cases, Council has the responsibility to manage bushfire risk on Crown Lands, with

DFES having a fire risk mitigation responsibility for some reserves. Environmental

Protection legislation does limit what work can be done to reduce bushfire risk, with a

general exemption to permit 3 metre wide, peripheral fire breaks only. Prescribed burning

remains an option for local governments in some areas but, is an expensive, labour

intensive and often unpopular treatment option.

Many reserves have already had work completed within them this year, to enhance or

increase fire protective infrastructure.

2. Does Council conform to the “COUNCIL POLICY: Bushfire Inspection and Mitigation”?

Yes the City does conform to this policy.

Council adopted a new policy in mid-2014, to reflect the adoption of a holistic risk

assessment process, to inform mitigation strategies. The preliminary work on the risk

assessments, have been completed and owners/occupiers of properties with BAL 40 or BAL

FZ (Flaming Zone) exposure have all received notices advising them of this assessment.

Copies of the City of Bunbury ‘First and Final Fire Notice’, were sent to all owner/occupiers

within the City in October this year, rather than with rate notices in July.

Bushland that has been found to present high risk has been signalled out for treatment and

on three occasions, agencies (other than the City of Bunbury) have undertaken works to

reduce this risk exposure. The City of Bunbury reduced the risk to Ocean Close, from the

Maiden’s Reserve, from BAL FZ (in some cases) to BAL 29. Department of Housing and WA

Planning Commission have done like-wise in Glen Iris and the southern end of Ocean Close,

after being presented with our assessments.

Inspections and orders for remedial works are being undertaken currently, where

compliance to the requirements from the above policy, is not observed.

20 January 2015


14. New Business of an Urgent Nature Introduced by Decision of the Meeting

It is requested that this matter be dealt with as urgent business as a Council Decision is required in

order for this application to progress and Australia Day occurs prior to the Council Briefing of the

next round. To allow time for a Development Application to be processed, it is requested that this

business be considered as a late item rather than deferring the matter to the next round.

Recommendation

That Council pursuant to section 5.4 of Councils Standing Orders, agree to receive the item 14.1

entitled “Street Trading Licence application – Helicopter Joy Flights, Lot 882 Koombana Drive,

Bunbury” as a matter of urgent business.

14.1 Street Trading Licence application - Helicopter Joy Flights, Lot 882 Koombana Drive, Bunbury

File Ref: P13963

Applicant/Proponent: Eddy Gobby, Bunbury Helicopters

Author: Bob Karaszkewych, Director Planning, Development and Regulatory

Services

Executive: Bob Karaszkewych, Director Planning, Development and Regulatory

Services

Attachments: Appendix DPDS-4: Site Map Lot 882 Koombana Drive

Summary

The City has received a Street Trading Licence application to conduct Helicopter Joy Flights on three

(3) days on the Australia Day weekend. Helicopter joy flights are often undertaken as a one (1) day

event with past minimal complaint from residents.

The proposal to operate over three (3) days on the Australia Day weekend is unprecedented; the

basis of the recommendation to approve the application is on a ‘trial basis’ to gauge resident’s

response.

The applicant proposes to similarly conduct joy flights on the Aqua Spectacular weekend in March

2015, which is not the subject of this agenda item.


That Council approve a Street Trading Licence to operate Helicopter Joy Flights upon Crown land

described as being Lot 882 Koombana Drive, Bunbury. The specific location is the grassed area on

the western side of the car park, opposite the Dolphin Discovery Centre in accordance with the

following conditions:

1. Operating days and times being limited to 10:00am to and inclusive of 4:30pm Saturday 24

and Sunday 25 January 2015.

2. Operating helicopter flights on Monday 26 January 2015 is limited to 10:00 to 3:00pm. The

reason for this is to allow for Aero Club flight demonstrations; water bomber display at

4:45pm; and that a condition of the fireworks permit is that no aircraft is to fly over the

launch area for fireworks.

20 January 2015


3. Setup located a minimum of 30 metres away from members of the public and as far away

as possible from Koombana Bay Caravan Park and adequately fenced to prevent public

access.

4. An appropriate fire extinguisher is to be provided on site at all times during the licence

period.

5. A wind indicator is to be provided on site at all times during the licence period.

6. Public parking is to be provided and managed along the service road and the gate locked at

conclusion of each day of trading.

7. Prevention of public access to the storage area of AVGas. Bunding of the storage area is to

be provided and a spill kit is to be onsite and readily available, if required. A management

plan detailing measures of cleaning up spills is to be provided to the City by 5pm Thursday

22 January 2015.

8. Any damage caused to the existing turf, vegetation, reticulation or ground levels by the

constant landing and take-off of the helicopter shall be reinstated to pre-existing conditions

by Licensee.

9. To satisfy CASA requirements to conduct the flight operation take-off and landing should

be over Koombana Bay and adjacent mangroves avoiding any noise sensitive premises,

including residential areas.

10. Public notification must be provided to all residents of the Koombana Bay Caravan Park

(including permanent residents in park homes) and residents living in Koombana Cove area

by Thursday 22 January 2015. Notification is to include the proposed trading days and

times and include a contact number for the Licensee should residents wish to call.

11. All rubbish to be removed from site at the conclusion of each day.

12. The Licensee shall provide a public liability insurance of not less than $10 million at all

times in the name of Licensee by 5:00pm Thursday 22 January 2015.

13. No food or drinks or other items are to be sold in association with this licence.

Background

The applicant has previously sought approval to operate Helicopter joy flights on the subject land

including Lucianna Park with minimal resident complaint.

Previous approval has been granted for a one day event due to the potential risk associated with

noise. Helicopter noise is exempt from the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997,

however noise associated with the continual take-off and landing operations can be unreasonable

and may result in complaints being received from noise sensitive premises.

As a result of complaints associated with the noise from helicopter joy flights previously conducted,

an internal work procedure “WP 16.10 Approval of Helicopter Joy Flights” was developed in 2011

and implemented “to manage requests from helicopter operators to conduct joy flights in close

proximity to noise sensitive premises (residential areas) by balancing the needs of the tourism

industry and the intrusiveness of the noise on nearby premises”.


Not applicable.


Not applicable.

20 January 2015


Officer Comments

Having regard to the licence granted last year, a three (3) day trial (Saturday 24, Sunday 25 and

Monday 26 January 2015) is considered reasonable and can be used to gauge public response on

the operation of joy flights on three consecutive days. Noise requirements for Sundays and public

holidays are stricter than for Monday – Saturday.

The applicant will be refuelling the helicopter on site with a product known as AVGas (60 litres of

AVgas) a hazardous substance with the potential to present significant environmental and human

health risks. There is some concern that the refuelling operations may present risks if not

adequately managed by the operator.

TPS7 exempts the requirements for a planning approval for 48 hours or less. Trading for three (3)

days will require the applicant to submit a Development Application. Should the Council grant a

Street Trading Licence for a period exceeding 48 hours, the applicant is required to lodge a

Development Application (with requisite fees) for assessment. A conditional approval would issue

referencing the above recommended conditions of Street Trading Licence approval.

A copy of the location map is attached at Appendix DPDS-4.


Nil


A condition of Licence references notification to all adjacent residents of the Koombana Caravan

Park with an opportunity to monitor and comment on the activities to the City.


Elected members had been earlier notified of the proposal. Comments received have expressed

support; and concerns on the duration of this event, operations and public amenity.

20 January 2015


15. Meeting Closed to Public

15.1 Matters for which the Meeting may be Closed

Nil.

15.2 Public Reading of Resolutions that may be made Public

16. Closure

150120 council agenda - city of bunbury

Documents