new ordinary meeting of council agenda · 2015. 3. 11. · ordinary meeting of council agenda 25...

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL

AGENDA

25 FEBRUARY 2014

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL AGENDA 25 FEBRUARY 2014

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY .............................................................................. 2

2 DECLARATION OF OPENING ............................................................................................... 2

3 ATTENDANCE ........................................................................................................................... 2

4 RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE ....................... 3

5 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME ...................................................................................................... 3

6 APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE ...................................................................... 3

7 PETITIONS, DEPUTATIONS OR PRESENTATIONS ......................................................... 3

8 DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ............................................................ 3

9 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEETING – AS

CIRCULATED ............................................................................................................................ 4

10 ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE CHAIR (WITHOUT DISCUSSION) ................................... 5

11 REPORTS OF COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE ............................................................ 7

CI067 ROAD DEDICATION – BRAND HIGHWAY REALIGNMENT PROJECT,

GREENOUGH RIVER BRIDGE .................................................................................. 7 CI068 RFT01 1314 ART GALLERY HVAC REFURBISHMENT .......................................... 10

12 REPORTS OF CORPORATE & COMMERCIAL SERVICES .......................................... 13

CCS031 WRITE OFF RATES INTEREST CHARGE 21 BONAMIA ROAD ............................. 13 CCS033 STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITY TO 31 JANUARY 2014 ........................... 16

13 REPORTS OF CREATIVE COMMUNITIES ....................................................................... 18

CC142 HERITAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMUNITY REPRESENTATION ........... 18 CC146 MULTI-USER FACILITY/SOUNDSHELL AND YOUTH PRECINCT DESIGN

PRINCIPLES .............................................................................................................. 21 CC147 10 YEAR CAPITAL WORKS PLAN ............................................................................ 27

14 REPORTS OF OFFICE OF THE CEO .................................................................................. 37

15 REPORTS OF SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES ................................................................ 38

SC133 FINAL ADOPTION OF LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT AND LOCAL

STRUCTURE PLAN – VERITA ROAD, RUDDS GULLY .......................................... 38 SC134 AMENDED POLICY CP049 COMMUNITY GROUP LAND LEASE/LICENCE ...... 46 SC135 LEASE PORTION RESERVE 30329 – AQUARENA CAFE ....................................... 49

16 REPORTS TO BE RECEIVED ............................................................................................... 52

17 ELECTED MEMBERS MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN

GIVEN ........................................................................................................................................ 54

NOTICE OF MOTION – PUBLIC TOILET STRATEGY ............................................................ 54

18 QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN .............. 56

19 URGENT BUSINESS APPROVED BY PRESIDING MEMBER OR BY DECISION OF

THE MEETING ........................................................................................................................ 56

20 CLOSURE ................................................................................................................................. 56

APPENDIX 1 – ATTACHMENTS AND REPORTS TO BE RECEIVED ..................................... 57


2

CITY OF GREATER GERALDTON

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, 25 FEBRUARY 2014 AT 5.30PM

CHAMBERS, CATHEDRAL AVENUE

A G E N D A DISCLAIMER: The Chairman advises that the purpose of this Council Meeting is to discuss and, where possible, make resolutions about items appearing on the agenda. Whilst Council has the power to resolve such items and may in fact, appear to have done so at the meeting, no person should rely on or act on the basis of such decision or on any advice or information provided by a Member or Officer, or on the content of any discussion occurring, during the course of the meeting. Persons should be aware that the provisions of the Local Government Act 1995 (Section 5.25(e)) and Council’s Standing Orders Local Laws establish procedures for revocation or recision of a Council decision. No person should rely on the decisions made by Council until formal advice of the Council decision is received by that person. The City of Greater Geraldton expressly disclaims liability for any loss or damage suffered by any person as a result of relying on or acting on the basis of any resolution of Council, or any advice or information provided by a Member or Officer, or the content of any discussion occurring, during the course of the Council meeting.

1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

I would like to acknowledge the traditional owners of the land on which we meet, and pay respect to the Elders and to knowledge embedded forever within the Aboriginal Custodianship of Country.

2 DECLARATION OF OPENING 3 ATTENDANCE

Present: Officers: Others: Members of Public: Members of Press: Apologies: Mayor I Carpenter Cr J Clune Leave of Absence:


3

4 RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE Nil.

5 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Questions provided in writing prior to the meeting or at the meeting will receive a formal response. Please note that you cannot make statements in Public Question Time and such statements will not be recorded in the Minutes. Our Local Laws and the Local Government Act require questions to be put to the presiding member and answered by the Council. No questions can be put to individual Councillors.

6 APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Existing Approved Leave

Councillor From To (inclusive)

Nil.

Mayor I Carpenter request for leave of absence for 26 February 2014 to 7 March 2014 be approved. Cr J Clune request for leave of absence for the period 26 February 2014 to 3 March 2014 be approved. Cr S Keemink request for leave of absence for 18 March 2014 be approved. Cr N McIlwaine request for leave of absence for the period 24 March 2014 to 28 March 2014 be approved. Cr N McIlwaine request for leave of absence for the period 7 April 2014 to 11 April 2014 be approved. Cr L Graham request for leave of absence for the period 16 April 2014 to 23 April 2014 be approved.

7 PETITIONS, DEPUTATIONS OR PRESENTATIONS

8 DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST


4

9 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEETING – as circulated RECOMMENDED that the minutes of the Ordinary meeting of Council held on 28 January 2014 as previously circulated, be adopted as a true and correct record of proceedings.


5

10 ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE CHAIR (WITHOUT DISCUSSION) Events attended by the Mayor or his representative

DATE FUNCTION REPRESENTATIVE

29/01/2014 National Broadband Network - Public Hearing, Parliament House

Mayor Ian Carpenter

30/01/2014 Grants Commission Meeting, Perth

Mayor Ian Carpenter

30/01/2014 Regional Capitals Australia Teleconference

Mayor Ian Carpenter

31/01/2014 Geraldton Guardian, Meeting Mayor Ian Carpenter

31/01/2014

Mid West Joint Development Assessment Panel

Mayor Ian Carpenter

31/02/2014 Event Nation Launch – Jodi McQuire

Mayor Ian Carpenter

03/02/2014 Geraldton Guardian Interview, Nation Broadband Access

Mayor Ian Carpenter

03/02/2014 Local Members and City of Greater Geraldton, Meeting

Mayor Ian Carpenter

03/02/2014 Batavia Coast Marine Institute Mayor Ian Carpenter

03/02/2014 Annual Meeting of Electors Mayor Ian Carpenter

04/02/2014 Melissa Price MP, Member for Durack

Mayor Ian Carpenter

04/02/2014 Opening of Sports House, Minister Waldron

Mayor Ian Carpenter

04/02/2014 Concept Forum 2014 – Behind Closed Doors

Mayor Ian Carpenter

05/02/2014 Interview, National Apology Day Mayor Ian Carpenter

05/02/2014 “Our Club Rules”, Club Makeover Program

Mayor Ian Carpenter

06/02/2014 Independent Review Committee Mayor Ian Carpenter

06/02/2014 Walk through Beachlands – view issues

Mayor Ian Carpenter

08/02/2014 Community Panel Mayor Ian Carpenter

10/02/2014 Maley’s Bridge meeting – Shane Hill

Mayor Ian Carpenter

10/02/2014 Discussion Crime Statistics, Geraldton

Mayor Ian Carpenter

10/02/2014 Operations of Visitors Centre with Cr D Caudwell

Mayor Ian Carpenter

11/02/2014 National Broadband Network – Peter Gurney

Mayor Ian Carpenter

12/02/2014 Meeting with Shane Love, Mullewa

Mayor Ian Carpenter

14/02/2014 Isolated Children’s Parent Association, Link to Mullewa Office

Mayor Ian Carpenter


6

15/02/2014 Community Panel Mayor Ian Carpenter

17/02/2014 Public Transport Authority, Perth

Mayor Ian Carpenter

17/02/2014 Country Reform Policy Forum - Perth

Mayor Ian Carpenter

18/02/2014 Clontarf Foundation Mayor Ian Carpenter

18/02/2014 David I’Anson – Sydney Memorial

Mayor Ian Carpenter

18/02/2014 Agenda Forum – Public Meeting Mayor Ian Carpenter

19/02/2014 GWN Interview, Rotary Birthday Mayor Ian Carpenter

19/02/2014 Public Toilet Strategy with Cr S Van Styn

Mayor Ian Carpenter

19/02/2014

Andrew Vlahov – Ultimate Golf presentation

Mayor Ian Carpenter

19/02/2014 MWCCI – Business After Hours Mayor Ian Carpenter

20/02/2014 WA Museum Geraldton Community Advisory Committee Meeting

Mayor Ian Carpenter

22/02/2014 Rotary Internationals 109th Anniversary, Perth

Mayor Ian Carpenter


7

11 REPORTS OF COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE

CI067 ROAD DEDICATION – BRAND HIGHWAY REALIGNMENT PROJECT, GREENOUGH RIVER BRIDGE

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-14-8905 AUTHOR: M Atkinson, Manager Infrastructure

Planning & Design EXECUTIVE: N Arbuthnot, Director Community

Infrastructure DATE OF REPORT: 5 February 2014 FILE REFERENCE: GR/10/0007 APPLICANT / PROPONENT: Main Roads WA ATTACHMENTS: Yes (x1) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: As part of the Brand Highway Realignment Project, it is necessary for Main Roads WA (MRWA) to excise a portion of land from Reserve 50504 (with a Management Order in favour of the City) and subsequently dedicate the land as road reserve. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to section 56 of the Land Administration Act 1997 RESOLVES to:

1. AGREE to the excision and dedication of a portion of Reserve 50504 (as shown on Main Roads WA Drawing: 1160-177) as road.

PROPONENT: The proponent is Main Roads WA. BACKGROUND: The section of Brand Highway through Greenough between Hamersley Road south of Company Road includes several 90km/hr horizontal curves. At the northern end of this section is the Greenough River bridge and low level floodway. Short term flooding and the associated road closures are of concern with flooding of the Greenough River closing Brand Highway in January 2006 for a period of 65 hours restricting supplies and access to essential facilities in Geraldton. Since January 2007 five people have died in crashes within this section of road, and the Mid West Industry Road Safety Alliance recently identified the bridge as the region’s highest priority road safety project. On 3 December 2012 the State Government announced that it would invest $18,000,000 into replacement of the ageing Greenough River Bridge. Main Roads WA is currently planning improvement works associated with the replacement of the bridge. To accommodate the works it is necessary to acquire land (approximately 6,000m2) from the “C” Class Reserve 50504 which currently has a Management Order in favour of the City for the purpose


8

of “Public Recreation”. The land will then be dedicated as road to form part of the Brand Highway road reserve. Main Roads WA Drawing: 1160-177 is included as an attachment, which details the land required. ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: The project will result in reduced travel time, and enhanced amenity for tourist traffic. This project will also support efficient road freight transport by permitting a larger variety of combination vehicles to operate and reduce the impact of medium to large scale flood events. Social: Social impacts (largely local property accessibility) have been minimised as far as practicable in order to deliver the best regional outcome. Environmental: Detailed flood modelling has been undertaken by Main Roads WA in addition to obtaining all approvals required to facilitate construction. Cultural & Heritage: Cultural or heritage issues have been addressed by MRWA and approvals where necessary have been obtained. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: Council at its Special Meeting held on 4 November 2013 resolved to dedicate a number of other portions of land in the immediate area for road as part of the project. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: There have been no consultations undertaken by the City, although Main Roads WA have liaised with affected property owners. Councillors received a presentation from the Regional Manager of Main Roads WA regarding the project at the October 2013 Concept Forum. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Section 56 of the Land Administration Act 1997 provides for the dedication of land for road purposes. FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: There will be no cost to Council and Main Roads WA will indemnify Council against all costs and charges relating to the dedication. There will be local road connections constructed as part of the project that will become assets to the City. These local road connections replace existing road connections.


9

INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:

Title: Economy Transportation

Strategy 4.2.1 Developing more efficient transport options that are secure and safe to sustain our lifestyle.

REGIONAL OUTCOMES: The Brand Highway realignment project is a vital transport infrastructure upgrade that will offer various benefits to the region, including a significant improvement in road safety. RISK MANAGEMENT: There are significant risks associated should Council not agree to the land requirements. The Greenough River Bridge project is the region’s highest priority road safety project and there have been fatalities within the section of road. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED: The Brand Highway realignment project is an important and much-needed transport infrastructure upgrade for the region and it represents a significant investment in road safety and serviceability by the State Government. The option to not approve the excision and dedication is not supported as the project will result in reduced travel time, and enhanced amenity for tourist traffic. This project will also support efficient road freight transport by permitting a larger variety of combination vehicles to operate and reduce the impact of medium to large scale flood events. The option to defer the matter could delay the entire project and is not supported as it is the region’s highest priority road safety project


10

CI068 RFT01 1314 ART GALLERY HVAC REFURBISHMENT

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-14-11903 AUTHOR: G Sherlock, Manager Project Delivery &

Infrastructure Management EXECUTIVE: N Arbuthnot, Director Community

Infrastructure DATE OF REPORT: Tuesday 11 February 2014 FILE REFERENCE: PM/8/0016 APPLICANT / PROPONENT: City of Greater Geraldton ATTACHMENTS: Yes – 1 Confidential

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s endorsement for the Chief Executive Officer’s decision to award the contract for RFT01 1314 Art Gallery HVAC Refurbishment to the preferred tenderer. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION; That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to section 3.57 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. ENDORSE the action of the Chief Executive Officer to award the contract for RFT01 1314 – Art Gallery HVAC Refurbishment to the preferred tenderer; and

2. RECORD the tendered price in the minutes. PROPONENT: The proponent is The City of Greater Geraldton. BACKGROUND: Located in central Geraldton, the Geraldton Art Gallery opened in 1984 and is housed in the former Town Hall. After preliminary renovations, the Art Gallery became the first regional A-Class venue in Western Australia. In 1997 the building was listed on the State Register of Heritage Places in Western Australia. The current climate control system has reached the end of its effective life and at present the Art Gallery cannot host any national collections or shows. Temperature and climate controlled environments are essential for the preservation of historic works held in collections, with the current conditions at the Art Gallery there is considerable risk of deterioration to existing collections as a result of unnecessary fluctuations in temperature and humidity. The City of Greater Geraldton seeks a Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) system that will provide both long-term financial and environmental savings, including removal of the existing system’s dependency on HCFC R-22, a high cost greenhouse gas. In order to facilitate this, and in order to enable the Art Gallery to maintain an A-Class rating, a tender was sought for design services based upon these two goals. In March 2013 WSP Pty Ltd was awarded the contract for design services. Tenders


11

were called for the supply and installation of the system in accordance with the tender documentation. Two tenders were received in response to the advertisements:

1. Cramer & Neill Refrigeration 2. Atlas Air-conditioning Pty Ltd

ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: The project will reduce peak electrical loads by 25% - 40%. There will be a reduction in maintenance costs and water use. Social: The refurbishment of the HVAC system will ensure better air-flow and humidity controls to ensure even temperature throughout the Art Gallery, this will ensure the future protection of all art assets stored at the Gallery and allow hosting of national collections. Environmental: There will be a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions and water usage. Cultural & Heritage: The Art Gallery is currently listed on the State Heritage Office Inventory (place number P1058) of Heritage Places. The Art Gallery dates to 1907 when it was designed by Oldham and Cox Architects as the Geraldton Town Hall building and is considered a significant heritage structure. The project has evolved over the past thirteen (13) years, in 2000 a conservation plan was prepared by John Taylor Architect and a Schematic Master Plan by Philip Griffiths Architect in August 2011. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: There are no relevant precedents. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: The Chief Executive Officer has consulted with Councillors due to the urgency of this project and no issues were raised. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: There are no legislative or policy implications. FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: The Art Gallery Recreation HVAC system is to be funded by a $940,000 contribution from the Country Local Government Fund (CLGF) and the balance is to be contributed by the City. The full design scope of works can be undertaken for the available funding based on the executive recommendation.


12


Title: Culture Our Heritage

Strategy 1.1.1 Recognising and protecting our history and restoring heritage sites and buildings

REGIONAL OUTCOMES: The project will upgrade the 27 year old air conditioning system with the first geo-thermal heat exchange system installed by the City of Greater Geraldton which will ensure effective regulation of air-flow and humidity in the Art Gallery. RISK MANAGEMENT The most significant risk faced by the City is the loss of the A-Class permanent rating for the Art Gallery should the Art Gallery’s air conditioning system not be upgraded. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED Alternative technical solutions were considered nevertheless the HVAC system provides the most cost effective and reliable system investigated. The option of not proceeding with the project was considered which would ultimately deny Geraldton the diversity of hosting national collections and exhibitions. This option was considered unacceptable as there are no alternative venues within the region for hosting national exhibitions and collections.


13

12 REPORTS OF CORPORATE & COMMERCIAL SERVICES

CCS031 WRITE OFF RATES INTEREST CHARGE 21 BONAMIA ROAD

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-14-06821 AUTHOR: J Reynolds, Finance Projects Officer EXECUTIVE: B Davis, Director Corporate and

Commercial Services DATE OF REPORT: 3 February 2014 FILE REFERENCE: A18720 APPLICANT / PROPONENT: City of Greater Geraldton ATTACHMENTS: No

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This report seeks Council approval to write off a portion of the rates penalty interest on 21 Bonamia Road Utakarra, a property which has had outstanding rates since the early 90’s. The owner of the property has a potential buyer and will sell if it is agreed with the Water Corporation and the City that the proceeds from the sale will finalise the debt with both organisations. The Water Corporation has agreed to write-off 50% of the Corporation debt. The amount remaining from the proceeds of the sale will be sufficient to pay the rates debt to the City with the exclusion of the majority of the accrued interest debt. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION; That Council by Absolutely Majority pursuant to the provisions of Section 6.12 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. APPROVE the write off for the balance of the rates debt remaining after receipt of the City’s portion of the proceeds of sale of 21 Bonamia Road Utakarra; and

2. MAKES the determination based on the following reason: a. to be determined by the Council.

PROPONENT: The proponent is the City of Greater Geraldton. BACKGROUND: The owner of the property at 21 Bonamia Road Utakarra declared bankruptcy in 1993 and abandoned the property assuming the National Australia Bank, with whom the mortgage was held, would take possession. The owner has recently discovered that the property title remains in their name. The City has been contacted by lawyers Lewis Blyth & Hooper who are acting on behalf of the property owner. The property has been listed on the market since October 2013 and has recently received an offer for $35,000.


14

The current rates debt owing to the City is $36,398.69 including $18,074.03 in interest charges. The Water Corporation debt recovery team has recommended to their management that they write off 50% of the debt which will reduce it to $12,610.65. The Corporation have previously attempted to sell the land for debt recovery through the State Magistrates Court but were unable to secure a buyer. Assuming the above reduction of Water Corporation debt the funds remaining from the sale will be $22,389.35 less costs. This amount will be made available to cover the rates debt owed to City. Any outstanding balance would need to be written off. This amount would be less than the penalty interest owing on the debt therefore the write-off would only consist of some of the interest portion and not the rates outstanding. ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: There are no economic issues. Social: The property has been dilapidated since being abandoned in the 90’s. The sale of the property would hopefully result in the property being cleaned up or demolished by the new owners which would have a positive impact on surrounding homes. Environmental: There are no environmental issues. Cultural & Heritage: There are no cultural and heritage issues. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: At its ordinary meeting on 28 August 2012 ( item TF 016 -1 Clarkson Street) Council by a majority of 14/0 approved the write off debts of $11,000 comprising mainly of interest and legal fees. However, the property is yet to be sold. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: There has been no Community or Councillor consultation. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Section 6.12 (1)(c) of the Local Government Act 1995. FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: Approval to write-off some of the interest debt will enable the owner to sell the property at 21 Bonamia Road Utakarra and result in the City being able to


15

reduce rates outstanding by around $20,000. The buyer would also become a new paying ratepayer. INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:

Governance Inclusive civic and community engagement and leadership

Strategy 5.2.7

Ensuring efficient and effective delivery of service.

REGIONAL OUTCOMES: The recovery of outstanding rates and service charges ensures equality in citizens’ contribution to local services and facilities. RISK MANAGEMENT Should the Council decide not to endorse the reduction of the rates interest debt on the property, the owner will not accept the recent offer of sale on the property. The rates debt will remain unpaid and interest penalties will continue to accrue. There is a risk that other ratepayers may make a similar request based on the precedent set by waiving the interest on this property however Council has agreed previously to write off interest so this would not be the first instance. It would need to be made known to anyone that makes such a request that such a write-off is only made in extenuating circumstances. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED An alternative would to be for the City to take possession of the property under the Local Government Act – (Section 6.64), however this would be time consuming and costly as it has been over 3 years since an attempt was made to recover the debts through the court, meaning another attempt would first need to be made and even after eventually taking possession, there is no guarantee of securing a buyer.


16

CCS033 STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITY TO 31 JANUARY 2014

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-14- 08675 AUTHOR: K Chua, Manager Accounting Services EXECUTIVE: B Davis, Director of Corporate and

Commercial Services DATE OF REPORT: 7 February, 2014 FILE REFERENCE: FM/17/0001 APPLICANT / PROPONENT: City of Greater Geraldton ATTACHMENTS: Yes x1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The attached financial reports provide a comprehensive report on the City’s finances to 31 January 2014. The statements include no matters of variance considered to be of concern. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION; That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Regulation 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 RESOLVES to:

1. RECEIVE the January 2014 monthly financial activity statements as attached.

PROPONENT: The proponent is the City of Greater Geraldton. BACKGROUND: The financial position to the end of January 2014 is detailed in the attached report and summarised as follows relative to year-to-date budget expectations: Operating Income $ 415,674 0.7% Negative Variance Operating Expenditure $1,430,583 2.9% Positive Variance Net Operating $1,014,909 15.0% Positive Variance Capital Expenditure $1,480,302 8.4% Positive Variance Capital Revenue $54,184 17.2% Positive Variance Cash at Bank - Municipal $11,216,332 Cash at Bank – Reserve $23,665,329 Total Funds Invested $32,914,462 Net Rates Collected 87.9%

Receivables Outstanding $1,491,516

The attached report provides explanatory notes for items greater than 10% or $50,000. This commentary provides Council with an overall understanding of how the finances are progressing in relation to the adopted budget.


17

The financial position represented in the January financials shows a positive variance of $1,014,909 in the net operating result. The closing funding surplus is $2,612,277 and is due to higher takings in fees and charges and other revenue. Additionally, capital expenditure is understated due to a lesser amount of buildings, roads, plant & equipment, repayment of debentures and land held for development acquired. ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: There are no economic issues. Social: There are no social issues. Environmental: There are no environmental issues. Cultural & Heritage: There are no cultural or heritage issues. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: Council is provided with financial reports each month. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: No community consultation was undertaken. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Section 6.4 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 require that as a minimum Council is to receive a monthly Statement of Financial Activity. FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: Any issues in relation to expenditure and revenue allocations or variance trends are identified and addressed each month. INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:

Title: Governance Planning and Policy

Strategy 5.2.7 Ensuring efficient and effective delivery of service

REGIONAL OUTCOMES There are no regional outcomes associated with monthly reporting. RISK MANAGEMENT There are no risks to be considered. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED No alternatives are available. Monthly reporting is a regulatory requirement.


18

13 REPORTS OF CREATIVE COMMUNITIES

CC142 HERITAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMUNITY REPRESENTATION

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-14-08857 AUTHOR: S Smith, Manager Libraries and Heritage EXECUTIVE: A Selvey, Director Creative Communities DATE OF REPORT: 20 January 2014 FILE REFERENCE: GO/6/0015 APPLICANT / PROPONENT: Heritage Advisory Committee ATTACHMENTS: Yes {x 1 confidential}

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This report seeks a Council resolution regarding the community representatives of the Heritage Advisory Committee. The purpose of the committee is to provide advice to Council on heritage matters. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION; That Council by Absolute Majority pursuant to Section 5.10 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. ACKNOWLEDGE the recommendations of the Heritage Advisory Committee;

2. APPOINT _______________ and ________________ as community representatives on the Heritage Advisory Committee; and

3. DETERMINE the appointments to apply until October 2015. PROPONENT: The proponent is The City of Greater Geraldton. BACKGROUND:

At the City of Greater Geraldton Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Tuesday 26 November 2013 the following was resolved in reference to the re-establishment of Council Committees.

That the Council by Absolute Majority under Section 5.8 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to: 1. RE-ESTABLISH the Heritage Advisory Committee;

2. APPOINT as members of the Committee:

a. Cr S Keemink

b. Cr J Clune

c. Cr T Thomas

d. Reappoint the External Members which are: 2 Nominees from the General Community; City Heritage Advisor (ex-officio); Representative from the Aboriginal Community (ex-officio); Manager, WA Museum, Geraldton (ex-officio); National Trust Representative (ex-officio); City of Greater Geraldton staff as required (ex-officio); One representative from the Geraldton Greenough Historical


19

Society; One representative from the Community Group of Greenough; One representative from the Walkaway Station Museum Inc.

Following the Council resolution, expressions of interest from prospective community representatives on the Heritage Advisory Committee (HAC) were sought. An advertisement was placed in the Public Notice section of the Mid West Times on Thursday 12 December 2013, as well as the Geraldton Guardian on Friday 13 December 2013. Notices were placed on public noticeboards at the Geraldton Regional Library, Mullewa District Office and Cathedral Avenue reception area. Letters of appreciation were also sent to retiring 2013 HAC community members explaining that expressions of interest were being sought for the newly formed committee. Four nominations were received by the closing date of 19 December 2013 (please see confidential attachment). All nominations were discussed at the Heritage Advisory Committee on 23 January and two preferred candidates are recommended by the Committee (see page 1 of the confidential attachment). ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: Cultural and Heritage Tourism has a significant economic impact. Social: The City has a strong sense of place and history and is proud to make heritage an important part of its broader mission to enhance and celebrate its diverse community. Heritage is defined as “something inherited from the past and valued enough today to leave for future generations”, (National Trust of Australia, WA 2007 Sharing Our Stories). The social significance placed on a landscape, a building, a site, object or collection plays an important role in heritage. Environmental: There are no environmental issues Cultural & Heritage: Heritage interpretation is about sharing memories and experiences. It respects the connections between people and place. It involves partnerships between interpreters and a range of different stakeholders, including Indigenous and other communities, scientists, historians and artists. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS:

Following council approval for the formation of a Heritage Advisory Committee on 24 May 2011, expressions of interest were sought for community representatives on the committee.


20

COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: The HAC discussed applications received from four community members at a meeting held on Thursday 23 January 2014 and has made recommendations for preferred candidates in the confidential attachment. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: CP023 Heritage Policy will be a guiding policy for relevant issues brought before this committee. FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial or budget implications. INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:

Title: Culture Heritage

Strategy 1.1.1 Recognising and protecting our history and restoring heritage sites and buildings

Regional Outcomes: There are no regional outcomes RISK MANAGEMENT There are no inherent risks to the City. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED No other alternative options were considered.


21

CC146 MULTI-USER FACILITY/SOUNDSHELL AND YOUTH PRECINCT DESIGN PRINCIPLES

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-14-10125 AUTHOR: A Selvey, Director of Creative

Communities EXECUTIVE: A Selvey, Director of Creative

Communities DATE OF REPORT: 18 February 2014 FILE REFERENCE: GO/6/0015 APPLICANT / PROPONENT: The City of Greater Geraldton ATTACHMENTS: Yes x1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The report seeks Council endorsement for the design principles of the Multi-user Facility/Soundshell and Youth Precinct. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION; That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 5.20 of the Local Government Act RESOLVES to:

1. ENSORSE the Design Principles for the Multi-user Facility/Soundshell and the Youth Precinct.

PROPONENT: The proponent is the City of Greater Geraldton. BACKGROUND: The Multi-user Facility (MUF) and Soundshell have been part of the planning for the Foreshore Redevelopment since the Foreshore Redevelopment project inception in the early 2000s. Due to resource constraints the ‘West End’ section of the Foreshore was not finished as part of the initial phase. In 2012 the City secured $4.9million from RDAF Round 2 funding to progress the redevelopment of the West End component of the foreshore project, inclusive of the MUF, Soundshell and Youth Precinct. When the City was advised that RDAF funding of $4.9million for the West End project had been approved, along with a successful grant application for $1million from Lotterywest specifically for the MUF/Soundshell and Youth Precinct, more detailed investigations into the needs and requirements for the MUF commenced. The stakeholders were identified as follows; Geraldton and Districts Offshore Fishing Club;

Geraldton Angling Club;

TS Morrow (The Navy League of Australia);

Sail Inn Snack Bar;

Geraldton Senior College;

Geraldton Volunteer Sea Rescue Group; and

Geraldton Yacht Club.


22

Current lease agreements for these stakeholders are as follows: Sail Inn Snack Bar – Current lease agreement due to expire on 30 June

2016 including the further term option as resolved by Council.

TS Morrow (The Navy League of Australia) - The Registered Lease expired on 30 June 2010 and the club has been exercising Clause 8 ‘Holding Over’ of the lease since that expiry.

Geraldton and Districts Offshore Fishing Club Incorporated - The Registered Lease expired on 30 June 2010 and the club has been exercising Clause 22 ‘Holding Over’ of the lease since that expiry.

The Geraldton Volunteer Marine Rescue currently occupy premises at located above the toilet block at Point Moore. The premises are situated on an A Class Reserve with the City having no power to lease the site to the group. Changes to the reserve management order would require consideration by both houses of parliament, a lengthy process even if supported by parliament.

The Council resolution of 27 August 2013 was based on a preliminary layout potential (see attachment A). This preliminary layout as endorsed by Council has formed the basis of the design brief for the architect. Given the inter-connection and preference for a holistic and coordinated approach to the precinct, it is the view of the Executive that detail design should incorporate both the MUF and the adjacent Youth Precinct. Design Principles Include; Multi-User Facility (MUF) Installations and structures must relate to the context of the site in all

aspects and environmental conditions.

Facilities must be fit for purpose.

Facilities must maximise sharing and multiuse as far as practicable.

The various components must interact with other aspects of the foreshore while still remaining singularly significant.

Functionality must be combined with aesthetics including a public art component.

Selected materials and finishes must minimise whole of life costs and ongoing maintenance requirements.

Use of ecological sustainable design initiatives and passive solar design principles should be incorporated where possible.

Soundshell A soundshell/stage for outdoor concerts and events, ranging in scale from

small community events with a few hundred people through to larger events catering for an audience of up to four thousand (4,000) people, must be included as part of MUF.

The soundshell must be suitable for use by different community groups for activities ranging from fitness classes and music to art and performance groups.


23

The Soundshell must include good acoustics and access for persons with restricted mobility must be incorporated in to the design.

Public toilets must be included as part of the MUF concepts.

Youth Precinct Play equipment for older children including a new merry-go-round

structure.

Equipment must consider “Universal Accessibility” and access and enjoyment by disabled children.

Public Art.

Shade and wind structures.

Gardens and planting.

It is envisaged that the existing merry-go-round will remain in situ, immobilised but be presented in a sympathetic fashion and include interpretation of the literary heritage of Randolph Stow and the historical significance of the precinct.

General Facilities must be fit for purpose and suit and reflect the environmental

circumstances and conditions of the foreshore.

Facilities must incorporate “Design out Crime – Crime Prevention through Environmental Design”.

The final designs should combine functionality with aesthetics and public art while minimising whole of life costs and ongoing maintenance requirements.

ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: The West End Recreation and Entertainment Precinct Revitalisation project will capitalise on a growing range of tourism infrastructures in Geraldton, some government, some private, to produce the maximum tourism benefit for the City. These other tourism showpieces include the WA Museum Geraldton, the HMAS Sydney Memorial and the development of the Indian Ocean Drive. The infrastructure provided under the project will be a stimulus to attracting future private investment into Geraldton. Social: The West End Recreation and Entertainment Precinct Revitalisation Project adds further to the social infrastructure and social benefit component, producing quintuple bottom line outcomes for Geraldton and the region.


24

Environmental: The design principles include encouraging the incorporation of ecological sustainable design initiatives and passive solar design principles where possible. Cultural & Heritage: With further enhanced public spaces, the Geraldton community can expect an increase in community events, opportunities for community groups to display their talents and the chance for the community to come together as one on more occasions. Additionally, the Merry Go Round has cultural heritage significance as a replica of a heritage icon. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: At the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 27 August 2013, Council resolved the following:

1. ENDORSE the proposed overall direction for the layout of the Multi-user Facility/Stage Design as the basis upon which to invite tenders for the Detail Design and detailed cost estimates; and

2. ENSURE that the final scope and scale of facilities does not exceed the funding available for this element of the project.

COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: The City has been in negotiation with user groups regarding the MUF since at least February 2006. Workshop notes from stakeholder meeting on 1 February 2006 state; “General consensus by all groups that they could see the benefits in relocating into a new facility through a staged development process”. TS Morrow, the Angling Club and Offshore Fishing Club, the Geraldton Senior College and Yacht Club were all represented at that meeting. More recently, (Feb 2012 and August 2012, November 2012. February 2013 and July 2013) the City has met with the Geraldton & Districts Offshore Fishing Club; Geraldton Angling Club; TS Morrow; Sail Inn Snack Bar; Geraldton Senior College; Geraldton Yacht Club; and Geraldton Volunteer Marine Rescue. There have also been a series of workshops and surveys, immediately following the fixing of the existing Merry-Go-Round in 2011, that have informed the preliminary layout. In addition to the information provided to Council at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 27 August 2013, Councillors were provided with a Briefing Note and presentation at the 4 February 2014 Concept Forum. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: There are no legislative or policy implications.


25

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: The anticipated budget for both projects, based on preliminary QS Costings, is as follows:

Multiuser Facility/Soundshell – QS Costings: $4.75m

RDAF $3.17m

City of Greater Geraldton $1.08m

Lotterywest $500k

Youth Precinct/Merry Go Round – QS Costings $1.94m

City of Greater Geraldton $440k

RDAF $1m

Lotterywest $500k


Title: Social Recreation and Sport

Strategy 3.1.2 Encouraging informal recreation through well planned and developed public open spaces, cycle/walk paths and green streetscapes.

REGIONAL OUTCOMES: As the capital of the Mid West region, a boost to the desirability of Geraldton as a place to both visit and do business does have spin off effects for the entire region. RISK MANAGEMENT Not progressing with architectural design in the very near future will jeopardise the timeframes and milestones required by the funding agencies. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED It is essential for the detailed design to be progressed as soon as possible to allow this project to meet timeframes required by external funding partners such as Regional Development Australia and Lotterywest.

Regional Development Australia Fund: Built into the Regional Development Australia Fund Agreement for the West End Project are milestone payments that have been set to specific timelines. In relation to the Multi-User Facility, the current requirement is to have progressed substantially on the construction component by 28th October 2014. At this time and as per the funding agreement both the Multi-User Facility and Merry Go Round Precinct are required to be completed by 31st March 2015. Even if Council agrees to the Design Principles at the 25 February 2014 Ordinary Meeting allow tenders to be advertised immediately, adjustments to timelines are likely to be required and the City will be requesting a variation to milestones and their associated timelines from RDAF. Indications are that some extensions will be acceptable to RDAF, however, it is essential to show progress is being made.


26

Lotterywest: The timeframe for initial drawdown of the Lotterywest Grant is 12 months from date granted, being July 2014, on the provision of payment details to show expenditure.


27

CC147 10 YEAR CAPITAL WORKS PLAN

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-14-10197 AUTHOR: M Atkinson, Manager Infrastructure

Planning & Design EXECUTIVE: A Selvey, Director Creative Communities DATE OF REPORT: 10 February 2014 FILE REFERENCE: GO/1/0005 APPLICANT / PROPONENT: City of Greater Geraldton ATTACHMENTS: Yes x2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The objective of this report is to seek Council endorsement of the Executive response to the final recommendations of the #changesCGGCommunity 10yr Capital Works Plan Community Panel; and the joint prioritised listed based on the combined score of the Community Panel and the Executive. A comprehensive community engagement/deliberative process has been undertaken by the City through the formation of a Community Panel to deliver two primary outcomes:

A draft 10 Year capital works program and;

A project evaluation methodology.

The Community Panels’ report has now been reviewed in detail by the City. One of the recommendations of the panel was to combine the scores of the panel (which were largely based on community values and heavily weighted towards social, cultural and environmental outcomes) with the executive scores (based more on matters of safety, legislative compliance, strategic alignment and funding availability, under the broad heading of ‘Governance’) to create the final combined ranking and prioritisation. This combined ranking has been completed and the final combined score and priorities, which have been discussed with and received the unanimous support of members of the panel, are now presented for Council consideration. Other recommendations made by the panel, and the executive response to these recommendations are also presented for Council consideration. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION; That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 5.20 of the Local Government Act RESOLVES to:

1. RECEIVE the Participatory Budgeting Community Panel 10 Year Capital Works Plan Recommendations and Report to the City of Greater Geraldton from Community Panel;

2. ENDORSE the Executive Response to the Community Panel Recommendations; and

3. ENDORSE the ranking of capital works projects based on the combined scores of the Community Panel and the Executive.


28

PROPONENT: The proponent is The City of Greater Geraldton. BACKGROUND: The City of Greater Geraldton has substantially invested in infrastructure and community facilities over many years. The City is responsible for buildings that, if replicated today, would cost some $90 million and are now held on the City’s balance sheet at depreciated value of some $85.7M. Fair value assessment of the City’s Roads infrastructure exceeds $513 million, held at depreciated value today of $385M. Recreation infrastructure is valued around $27M. The City also has car parks, waste management and airport assets. The City is obliged to renew and maintain that asset base, on behalf of the Community. The existing asset base provides the foundations for the local economy, community amenity, liveability, safety and lifestyle. Maintaining the hard and soft infrastructure capacity of the City goes beyond regulatory obligations to plan expenditure to renew assets – it is a societal obligation to current and future generations of residents. A Capital Works Plan is a plan to acquire or construct new capital assets, expand or upgrade existing assets in order of merit. The City has determined that a forward estimate of ten years provides a long term view and allows for forward planning, while in a timeframe within which reasonable assumptions can be made – recognizing that in the ‘out-years’ assumptions become less reliable and may need to change according to changing circumstances. Capital assets include facilities, (e.g. libraries, roads and sporting infrastructure, halls) that are owned by the City. It is essential to develop a forward capital works plan because it:

Allows for long term financial planning;

Forces rigour in the lifecycle of project development from concept and preliminary estimates, through design and documentation, quantity survey and development of cost estimates;

Gives the community some level of certainty about what will and will not be delivered and, at least in the medium term 3-5 years, when delivery may occur; and

Ensures decisions about investments in infrastructure are based on sound planning – and not made on an ad-hoc basis.

In preparing the City’s 10 Year Capital Works Plan, the City made a commitment to work collaboratively with the community to develop and weight assessment criteria and to develop a plan that meets community aspirations, while ensuring the plan is able to be delivered within the constraints of the City’s Long Term Financial Plan. In working with the community, Council endorsed a Participatory Budgeting approach. Participatory Budgeting (PB) is a democratic, decision-making process that entrusts citizens to deliberate and negotiate over the distribution of public resources. This requires a robust understanding of the City’s obligations,


29

current and predicted financial resources and community expectations. With this information, a randomly sampled, demographically stratified Community Panel collaborated in an intensive deliberative process over four workshops to:

develop a carefully considered Draft 10 Year Capital Works Plan that represents community aspirations and is deliverable with the constraints of the Council adopted Long Term Financial Plan; and

an assessment framework, including criteria and their weighting, for the evaluation of future capital works projects that have not yet been identified.

The development of the 10 Year Capital Works Plan was conducted in parallel with two other programs:

a participatory budgeting project to review and recommend the City’s range and level of services; and

an internally focussed strategy using contemporary change leadership (at the personal, team and enterprise levels) and transition management (effective group processes for improved performance and results) practices to transform the organisational culture so that individuals, teams and the organisation can perform to the peak of their capacity (motivation and ability).

The 10 Year Capital Works Plan project and the Range and Level of Services Project are being delivered under the #changesCGGcommunity banner, and the internal change leadership program is being delivered under the #changesCGGstaff banner. The 10 Year Capital Plan Community Panel handed over their report to Council on the 17th December 2013 to be considered by the City’s Executive Management Team (EMT). EMT has now completed their review of the Panels’ recommendations and the responses are as follows:

1a. We recommend that Council adopt our Community Panel criteria and ranking of the 10 Year Capital Works projects. (See Community Panel Criteria and Assessment System followed by the Capital Works Rating and Priority Listings – pages 12 – 17 in Attachment, Community Panel Report). Executive Response: The Community Panel’s criteria are supported in full by the Executive, including their criteria weightings and scoring for each project. 1b. We recommend that both City Executive and Community Panel criteria be applied separately to each project. Each project then be assigned a City rank and a Community rank, presented in separate columns. The scores of the top ranks then be normalised to be equal and the statistical normalisation process then be applied to the full list of projects. A new set of ranks be created from the combined scores of City and Community scores added together to give final ranked list. Allow Council to view both


30

City and Community and total scores side by side to facilitate debate in the decision making process.

Executive Response: The Executive agrees that both the City’s and Community Panel’s criteria be applied separately to each project. The Community Panel’s scoring for each project and weighting has not been altered. The Community Panel’s six criteria have been assigned a 50% total weighting. The City’s five criteria were assigned the balance weighting of 50%, with initially 10% assigned to each criterion. Rather than establishing a separate City and Community rank for each project, statistically normalising the full list and then generating a new list, the Executive has recommended a variation of this approach. With regard to the normalisation process recommended by the community, the Executive gave this proposal genuine consideration and in fact consulted with a mathematician who is currently contracted to the City to provide comment. The Executive perceived the proposal to be unnecessarily complex which could potentially make using the criteria less intuitive for staff without adding any significant integrity to the process. The mathematician was asked to provide his own independent opinion and he advised that normalisation would not be appropriate for this type of exercise and was unsure as to why any adjustment of score was necessary. If the scoring eligibility behind each criterion are well-defined and followed, there should be no need for further manipulation, other than by initially fixing the final weightings of the City criteria to ensure a reasonable final priority is obtained for each project through a balanced consideration of merit. As the Community Panel’s criteria had very limited focus on governance and a generally high focus on social, cultural and environmental project merit, the City decided to address the imbalance by increasing its governance weighting to 30% whilst reducing each of its remaining criteria to 5% each. This provided a more balanced evaluation of each project as the social, cultural and environmental merits of each project were so comprehensively addressed by the Community Panel’s criteria. Total weighted scores from Community and City criteria evaluation were added to establish a total weighted score out of 50, with higher scores identifying higher priority discretional projects.

2. We recommend that Council supports community participation in future long term capital works planning by: Panel Recommendations:

a) Implementing a randomly sampled Community Panel every two to four years to revisit the criteria and rankings of long term capital works projects.

b) Keeping the existing Panel involved via 6 monthly meetings to ensure that the criteria established by the Panel are being


31

utilised. Continue to involve the existing Panel to support and mentor future Panel.

c) Broadening community knowledge and awareness of existing and future projects, in particular those about to commence via local media, council webpage and social media; and provide opportunities for community feedback via the council webpage.

Executive Response:

a) The Executive supported establishing randomly-sampled community panels in the future to review community evaluation criteria. The Executive proposes that this occurs in intervals no greater than reviews of the Strategic Community Plan.

b) The City agrees that members of the existing panel should have some involvement with a future community panel, however does not support 6 monthly meetings to ensure criteria is being utilised correctly. As long as the scoring eligibility behind each criterion is well-defined, which the Executive believes is the case, there should be no reason to re-convene. In considering this recommendation, the Executive also noted that the value of the panel came from its random selection and that it was representative of the broader community. With time the panel will (and already has) become smaller and less representative as people move away or become otherwise unable to participate.

c) The City agrees with broadening awareness of projects within the community. This is being addressed through the City’s draft Project Management Framework.

3. Based on our experience and learning, we recommend that future Community Panels consider the following: Panel Recommendations:

a) Experience a similar process of learning as this Panel, since

community values may change in the future (e.g. keeping a small town feel may not be a priority).

b) We recommend that good deliberation be an essential element of the process. This should include the following aspects:

c) Participants respect the views of others, represent those outside themselves, are willing to make compromises and maintain an open mind.


32

d) The workshop environment enables participants to speak openly and that their opinions are recognised as valuable.

e) Participants are equipped with all the information needed to make sound judgements and deliberations.

f) Panel members are encouraged to think outside the box and not to be afraid to diverge from strict processes (e.g. by creating subgroups for deeper deliberation).

g) Ensure prospective panel participants receive in-time information, clear logistics and an outline of the expected process (in particular, a flow chart documenting each step in the panel deliberation process).

h) Enable participants to learn new information and gain broader and deeper knowledge by participating in the process, including better understanding of how the City and Council operate, and how decisions are made.

i) Keep it simple. Don't get caught up in the semantics of it, remember the purpose of the exercise.

Executive Response: The Executive acknowledges and supports all of the above in 3. This level of community engagement and depth of topic is essentially unprecedented in Australia and was most certainly a learning exercise for the City also. This feedback is incredibly valuable and will no doubt guide the planning of subsequent community engagements of this nature. 4. We support the City’s Executive Management Team response to the criteria our Panel developed: Panel Recommendations:

a) That the City will revise their own criteria to rate the 10 year capital works projects, so the City's criteria will focus on those areas not covered by the Community Panel criteria, for example, Governance, availability of external funding, safety and other issues.

b) That the City will create groups of capital works projects where feasible (e.g. parks), allocating a pool of money for each grouping.

Executive Response:

a) The Executive has addressed this by increasing Governance weighting to 30%, whilst reducing its other criteria to 5% each. This is in recognition of the Community Panel’s comprehensive social, cultural and environmental merit focus.

b) Certain annual “programs” have been proposed, evaluated and prioritised in the priority listing.


33

The Executives’ review of the Community Panel’s recommendations was presented to Council at Concept Forum on Tuesday 4 February, 2014, for the information of Councillors. A special meeting of the Community Panel was held on 10 February to discuss the final proposed priority listing and Executive’s responses to the Panel’s recommendations. ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: The economic benefits of establishing a forward capital works program and project evaluation methodology are:

Ensures project priorities are affordable within the Long Term Financial Plan.

Priority projects are well investigated and their detailed business case is sound, understood and accepted, prior to any significant financial commitment.

The merit-based rigour associated with project evaluation ensures that projects undertaken will not adversely affect the local economy.

Social: 50% of the project evaluation methodology has been developed by the community panel, who are representative of the greater community. The criteria developed by the community focuses largely on social, environmental and cultural aspects and the City has supported these criteria in full. Future projects to be added to the forward capital works program will be evaluated on this criteria meaning that projects will be interrogated not simply on perceived social benefit but on the specific social benefits the project offers to the Geraldton community. Environmental: 50% of the project evaluation methodology has been developed by the community panel, who are representative of the greater community. The criteria developed by the community focuses largely on social, environmental and cultural aspects and the City has supported these criteria in full. Future projects to be added to the forward capital works program will be evaluated on this criteria meaning that projects will be interrogated not simply on perceived environmental benefit but on the specific environmental benefits the project offers to the Geraldton community.


34

Cultural & Heritage: 50% of the project evaluation methodology has been developed by the community panel, who are representative of the greater community. The criteria developed by the community focuses largely on social, environmental and cultural aspects and the City has supported these criteria in full. Future projects to be added to the forward capital works program will be evaluated on this criteria meaning that projects will be interrogated not simply on perceived cultural and heritage benefit but on the specific cultural and heritage benefits the project offers to the Geraldton community. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: At the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 24 September 2013, Council approved the change leadership and transition management strategy - #changesCGG. The strategy defined Council’s roles and responsibilities as:

1. To approve the implementation of #changesCGG. 2. Consider all recommendations from the Community Panels. 3. Adopt the recommendations of the Community Panels to the

greatest possible extent. 4. Clearly communicate to the Community Panels the reasons why

any recommendations cannot be adopted. 5. Work with the Community Panels to determine alternative solutions

where Community Panels’ recommendations cannot be adopt COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: A randomly selected Community Panel that reflected the broad demographics of our community met over four full-day workshops each Saturday through November 2013 to develop an assessment criterion and to rank the projects on the capital works list based on their criterion. The process began with 36 participants with a core 28 participants remaining throughout the process. The broader community was also invited to submit nominations for projects to be included on the capital works plan. In total 158 submissions were received. Some submissions did not relate to City assets or new Capital works and others were included in annual programs. Each person who made a submission was individually contacted via telephone and were advised how their submission was going to be progressed and invited to a community information session. All those who made submissions that were both new capital works for City owned infrastructure were invited to present to the Panel in person. The brooder Community submissions were presented to the Panel to assess in the same manner as the City led submissions. Councillors endorsed #changesCGG at the ordinary meeting of Council on 24 September 2013. Councillors were kept informed throughout the process via weekly briefing notes detailing the outcomes from the Community Panel workshops. Council were also briefed on the Community Panel 10 Year Capital Works Plan Recommendations at the 04 February 2014 Concept Forum.


35

LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Local Government Act (1995) 5.56 Planning for the Future. Local Government (Administration) Regulations (1996) Division 3 Planning for the Future, 19DA, Corporate Business Plans, requirements for. The City’s Corporate Business Plan, under the Local Government Act and under the guidance of the Integrated Planning Framework requires a Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP). Part of the LTFP is related to future capital works investment and the outcomes of this #changes project will inform the population of the LTFP. FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: The broader and more significant financial benefit is that through development of this forward capital works program, the City now has real certainty and control of its capital investment future that it has not had in the past. There will be no ad-hoc investment decisions as projects will need to demonstrate merit through the rigour of the new evaluation process before receiving any financial commitment. This responsible financial governance initiative will ensure that the City’s Capital Works are guided by the LTFP. It was clearly articulated to the Community Panel that the priority ranking will not necessarily determine the order in which projects are delivered, large, complex projects which are a higher priority may be delivered after lower ranked priority projects given success around funding (internal & external) availability, complexity in planning and design. The Community Panel fully comprehends this will impact delivery timelines. INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:

Title: Governance 5.1 Community Engagement

Strategy 5.1.2

Promoting community involvement in decision making so it is collaborative and transparent

REGIONAL OUTCOMES: There are no impacts to regional outcomes. RISK MANAGEMENT The risk in not endorsing the forward capital works program and project evaluation methodology is that capital investment is likely to continue as it has in the past, with; limited understanding of project risk, no consideration of project merit in the context of organisation-wide capital initiatives; no consideration of project merit in context of importance or priority the community places on a project and the likelihood of projects being progressed with no clear prioritisation and a lack of transparent decision making.


36

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED This process could have been established in-house with the usual public advertising period prior to seeking Council endorsement. With the City’s commitment to best-practice community engagement, the City decided on a Participatory Budgeting (PB) approach that deeply engages the community. The use of this process, particularly for capital works decision-making is as far as the City is aware, is a world-first. As such, other alternatives that may have been utilised in order to establish the forward capital works program and project evaluation methodology were discounted on the basis that the PB process is the most comprehensive and transparent of which the community is deserving of.


37

14 REPORTS OF OFFICE OF THE CEO Nil.


38

15 REPORTS OF SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES

SC133 FINAL ADOPTION OF LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT AND LOCAL STRUCTURE PLAN – VERITA ROAD, RUDDS GULLY

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-14-07504 AUTHOR: M Connell, Manager Urban & Regional

Development EXECUTIVE: P Melling, Director Sustainable

Communities DATE OF REPORT: 5 February 2014 FILE REFERENCE: LP/15/0011 & LP/11/0009 APPLICANT / PROPONENT: City of Greater Geraldton ATTACHMENTS: Yes (x3) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The advertising period has concluded for Scheme Amendment No. 12 and the associated Local Structure Plan which proposes to amend the current zoning of Lot 9 Verita Road, Rudds Gully to the ‘Development’ zone and guide the light industrial, service commercial, district sporting and residential subdivision and development of the land. This report recommends final approval of the Amendment and that it be forwarded to the Minister for Planning for its endorsement, and additionally, the final approval of the Local Structure Plan and that it be forwarded to the WA Planning Commission for its endorsement. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: Part A: That Council by Simple Majority, pursuant to Part 5 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 RESOLVES to:

1. DETERMINE the submissions as outlined in the ‘Schedule of Submissions’;

2. ADOPT for final approval Scheme Amendment No. 12 to Local Planning Scheme No. 5 (Greenough); and

3. SEEK final approval of the Scheme Amendment from the Minister for Planning.

Part B: That Council by Simple Majority, pursuant to clause 5.17 of Local Planning Scheme No. 5 (Greenough) RESOLVES to:

1. DETERMINE the submissions as outlined in the ‘Schedule of Submissions’,

2. ADOPT the Local Structure Plan over Lot 9 Verita Road, Rudds Gully; and

3. FORWARD the Local Structure Plan to the WA Planning Commission for its endorsement.


39

PROPONENT: The proponent is Cardno on behalf of the City of Greater Geraldton. BACKGROUND: Council purchased Lot 9 Verita Road in December 2011 in order to acquire land in the southern suburbs of the City for a regional sporting precinct. In 2010 Council committed to directly link the residential development and subdivision of the ‘Olive Street’ Reserve with the proposed development of the Southern District Sports Precinct. Both developments are therefore explicitly linked and the clear intention of Council is that the Southern District Sports Precinct should be developed concurrently with the proposed Olive Street subdivision and land sales process. At the same time the City is presented with a unique opportunity to subdivide the remainder of Lot 9 Verita Road and eventual land sales will generate funding for essential infrastructure and community facilities. The site: Lot 9 is located approximately 6km south east of the Geraldton CBD and has a total size area 176.34ha. The site is located with the unmade Scott Road reserve to the east and the Seacrest Estate in Wandina to the west. The site is on the southern fringe of the existing residential area of Geraldton. It is bordered by the Narngulu Industrial Estate to the east, which already accommodates significant industry. To the west is the Seacrest residential estate within the suburb of Wandina. The proposed Verita Road alignment will eventually separate development on Lot 9 from Seacrest. The proposal: The proposal is to rezone the entire Lot 9 land parcel, including the future Verita Road alignment, from its current zoning of ‘Rural’ and ‘Road’ local scheme reserve to ‘Development’. It is proposed that the entire site be rezoned upfront to ensure that no anomaly occurs between the zoning and future Verita Road alignment which is under construction. It is intended to develop the Southern Districts Sports Facility on part of Lot 9, establish a road reserve for the future Verita Road and allow for the opportunity to subdivide and develop the balance of the land for light industry, service commercial and affordable housing. The Local Structure Plan provides a framework for the future development of the subject land and establishes a context for its future subdivision. An approximate total of 371 lots are proposed; 14 for light industrial use, 57 for service commercial and 300 residential lots. The proposed layout of land uses over the site means that Lot 9 will act as a transitional area which separates the residential estates of Wandina and Rudds Gully to the south and west from the General Industrial uses within the Narngulu Industrial Estate located on the eastern periphery.


40

Extracts from the Amendment document is included as Attachment SC133A, and extracts from the Local Structure Plan is included as Attachment SC133B. ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: The Amendment will potentially facilitate the development of a range of uses which includes ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Light Industry’, active and passive ‘Recreation’, landscape protection and ‘Residential’. Social: Under the Building Better Regional Cities program and the ‘Karloo-Wandina’ project the City will ensure that affordable housing lots will be provided in the development of the residential area. The development will also provide district open space for the community as part of the Southern Districts Sports Precinct. Environmental: The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) advised that the Amendment should not be assessed under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 however did provide the following advice: Vegetation: The EPA notes that the subject area contains native vegetation mapped in the Geraldton Regional Flora and Vegetation Survey and has local conservation significance. The EPA supports the retention of the vegetation for conservation. The Local Structure Plan proposes to protect this vegetation in a ‘Landscape Protection’ area as depicted on the Local Structure Plan Map. Land Use Conflicts: The EPA notes that the site is located in close proximity to the Narngulu Industrial Estate. Potential land use conflicts is a key planning issue that planning authorities are best positioned to resolve, having regard for local planning directions and knowledge, and the results of accredited technical studies. The Local Structure Plan contains specific technical studies regarding potential noise impacts from Verita Road and the Narngulu Industrial Estate. No noise attenuation measures are required for existing residences and the residential development area for Lot 9 lies outside the Narngulu Industrial Estate 1km buffer, which is sufficient to ensure compliance with regulations. Cultural & Heritage: There are no cultural and heritage issues.


41

RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: Council at its meeting held on 14 September 2011 gave final approval to Amendment No. 4 to Local Planning Scheme No. 5 (Greenough). This amendment rezoned a large portion of land to the north of the current site to ‘Development’ zone. The Minister for Planning granted final approval to the amendment on 13 January 2012. Council at its meeting held 11 December 2007 gave final approval to Amendment No. 128 to Town Planning Scheme No. 4 (Greenough). This amendment rezoned the portion of land to the south east of the site to ‘Development’ zone. The Minister for Planning granted final approval to the amendment on 08 March 2009. There are no other relevant precedents set by previous Council. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: The Amendment and Local Structure Plan were publicly advertised concurrently in accordance with the provisions of the Planning and Development Act 2005 and the City of Greater Geraldton Local Planning Scheme No. 5 (Greenough). Advertising commenced on 31 October 2013 and concluded on 13 December 2013. The submission period was extended to allow for the Department of Education to provide comment. Advertising involved the following:

1. All landowners within a 100 – 200m radius were written to and advised of the proposed Amendment and Local Structure Plan;

2. A public notice appeared in the Midwest Times 31 October 2013; 3. A sign was placed on site; 4. The Amendment and Local Structure Plan details were available on

the City’s website; 5. The Amendment and the Local Structure Plan were referred to the

following:

Department of Environmental Regulation;

Department of Education;

Department of Health;

Department of Indigenous Affairs;

Department of Water;

Department of Fire and Emergency Services;

Main Roads Western Australia;

Mid West Chamber of Commerce and Industry;

Mid West Development Commission;

Water Corporation;

Western Power;

Department of Housing;

Iluka; and

Landcorp.


42

There have also been various media releases and newspaper article relating to the ‘Karloo-Wandina’ project which involves the construction of Verita Road. Submissions: As a result of the advertising, a total of 13 submissions were received (3 objecting). Listed below is a summation of the main comments/concerns raised for the public comment period.

Not needed in the area;

Sufficient residential land available;

Light industrial should not be situated in such an area as it is too close to residential dwellings and the CBD;

Service commercial should not be situated near residential dwellings;

Insufficient information regarding expected use of service commercial area;

Concern regarding volume of traffic and noise;

Increased litter and light pollution;

Effect on wildlife with loss of bushland;

The area between Mandalay Loop and Verita Road should be planted to create an aesthetic buffer;

The information provided is of a high standard and sufficient to guide future development and the preparation of urban water management plans;

The proposal is inconsistent with Local Planning Scheme No. 5 and the Narngulu Industrial Area Strategic Land Use Directions;

The site is partly within the Narngulu Waste Water Treatment Plant Special Control Area 3 and proposes Sensitive Land Uses;

The proposal fails to consider land supply and demand issues and the economic impacts of releasing almost 70 hectares of land for Service Commercial, Mixed Business and Light Industrial uses;

The proposal is inconsistent with the strategic planning framework as regional road access is unresolved, due to the absence of the North-South Highway;

There are already plans for a high standard intersection between the North-South Highway and the east-west distributor road shown in the plans capable of accommodating large traffic volumes;

The Water Corporation has buffer information sheets that include a guide as to compatible land uses within buffers;

Encourage an investigation into utilising wastewater directly from the Narngulu Wastewater Treatment Plant; and

The primary school site identified for Lot 9 be removed and relocated to another more suitable site.

A ‘Schedule of Submissions’ is included as Attachment No. SC133C and copies of the actual submission are available to Council upon request.


43

Council has previously been consulted with regard to the original land acquisition of Lot 9 and also more recently with regard to the funding received from the Building Better Regional Cities program for the ‘Karloo-Wandina’ project. The Amendment was previously considered by Council at the meeting held on 28 August 2013 when the rezoning was initiated. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The subject property is currently zoned ‘Rural’ and ‘Road’ local scheme reserve. The primary intent behind the amendment is to allow the area to be developed for a mix of transitional land uses. These proposed land uses include ‘Service Commercial’, ‘Light Industry’, passive and active ‘Recreation’, ‘Residential’ and landscape protection. The area will also include the creation of the Verita Road alignment. The proposed ‘Development’ zone will require the subject land to be progressively developed in accordance with an endorsed structure plan as per clause 5.17 of Local Planning Scheme No. 5 (Greenough). Part 5 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 provides for the amendment of a Local Planning Scheme. FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial and resource implications involved with the Amendment or Local Structure Plan however there are financial and resource implications involved with the funding obtained from the Building Better Regional Cities program with the ‘Karloo-Wandina’ project and the future development of Lot 9. INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:

Title: Governance Planning and Policy

Strategy 5.2.1 Responding to community aspirations by providing creative yet effective planning and zoning for future development.

REGIONAL OUTCOMES: Geraldton Region Plan (1999) and Greater Geraldton Structure Plan (2011): This plan seeks to provide a framework for the future management, protection and coordination of regional planning in the region. The Region Plan incorporates a structure plan for the Greater Geraldton area. The subject land is identified as ‘future industrial and service commercial’ and ‘development investigation area 11’ on the structure plan. The development investigation area is described in the report as per the following:

“This area is currently ‘rural’ and the most appropriate future land use for it is yet to be identified.


44

Interface issues between the adjacent ‘future industrial and service commercial’ and ‘urban’ areas will be critical considerations in the determination of the most appropriate land use. Any future uses will need to be compatible with adjoining land uses.”

The proposed Amendment is consistent with the objectives of the “Development Investigation Area 11”, as the “Development” zone will allow the preparation of a structure plan to ensure compatible uses between industrial and residential areas. The Local Structure Plan itself proposes a layout of land uses that will act as a transitional area which separates the residential estates of Wandina and Rudds Gully to the south and west from the General Industrial uses within the Narngulu Industrial Estate. Narngulu Industrial Area Strategic Land Use Directions (2010): This study reviews the current strategic planning framework for the Narngulu industrial area and to provide direction for future planning and development. The subject land is located within ‘Precinct A’ of the plan and is identified as ‘future light industry/service commercial/mixed business’, ‘future light industry’ and ‘rural’ on the strategic land use directions plan. The south eastern portion of the site is covered by a ‘notional special design area subject to further planning’ which generally matches the location of the remnant vegetation and the area identified to be protected as ‘Landscape Protection’ under the Local Structure Plan. RISK MANAGEMENT: By not approving the Amendment and Local Structure Plan the City would essentially be reneging on its commitments in regard to the ‘Karloo-Wandina’ project and the delivery of the Southern Districts Sports Precinct. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED: The primary purpose behind the Amendment and the Local Structure Plan is to facilitate the development of the subject land in accordance with the Greater Geraldton Structure Plan 2011 and the Narngulu Industrial Area Strategic Land Uses Directions plan. The rezoning will allow for greater flexibility in terms of co-ordinating subdivision and development of the site, whilst the Local Structure Plan provides the statutory framework and demonstrates the preferred land uses and movement network. The land uses proposed are appropriate to the location and respond to the constraints arising from buffer relating to the industrial development within the Narngulu Industrial Estate by providing a transition between established and proposed residential areas and the industrial area. The option to refuse the Amendment and Local Structure Plan is not supported as both the Amendment and Local Structure Plan are consistent with the regional planning direction and local planning policy framework as it applies to the area.


45

The option to defer the matter is not supported as there is considered sufficient information for Council to determine the matter and in any event Council is committed to delivering on the ‘Karloo-Wandina’ project.


46

SC134 AMENDED POLICY CP049 COMMUNITY GROUP LAND LEASE/LICENCE

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-14-08369 AUTHOR: L MacLeod, Coordinator Land and

Property Services EXECUTIVE: P Melling, Director Sustainable

Communities DATE OF REPORT: 6 February 2014 FILE REFERENCE: PM/4/0022 APPLICANT / PROPONENT: City of Greater Geraldton ATTACHMENTS: Yes x 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s adoption of the amended Policy CP049 Community Group Land Lease/License (formally Sporting Group Leases). EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION; That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 5.20 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. ADOPT the amended Policy CP049 Community Group Land Lease/Licence.

PROPONENT: The proponent is the City of Greater Geraldton. BACKGROUND: Policy CP049 Sporting Group Leases, in its current form contains a number of variables that may limit the future expansion of clubs and organisations by the implementation of restrictive guidelines such as short term lease tenure. The existing Policy is included as Attachment No. SC134A. The amended policy provides clear and concise guidelines to not-for-profit organisations wishing to lease or licence real property from the City of Greater Geraldton. The proposed draft Policy is included as Attachment No. SC134B. This draft policy has been developed through extensive research of other regional and metropolitan local government authorities and is in line with Legislative requirements. The lease / licence fees will be in accordance with the City’s Schedule of Fees and Charges for Sporting and Community Groups as adopted by Council unless otherwise resolved by Council.


47

ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: There are no economic issues. Social: There are no social impacts. Environmental: There are no environmental impacts. Cultural & Heritage: There are no cultural, heritage or indigenous impacts. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: There are no relevant precedents. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: Correspondence was sent to all community groups with a copy of both the current policy and the amended draft policy requesting written comments to be submitted by 4 February 2014. At the close no submissions were received, however this department received some phone enquiries from sporting groups seeking clarification on the draft policy. Extensive consultation has been conducted with City of Wanneroo, City of City of Joondalup, City of Stirling, City of Bunbury, City of Melville and the City of Albany in regard to their policies. The amended Policy CP049 was presented to Councillors at the Concept Forum on 3 December 2013. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The following statutory implications are applicable:

Part 3, Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995 which describes how Local Government is to dispose of property;

Part 6, Division 5, Subdivision 2 of the Local Government Act 1995 determines that a Local Government may impose fees and charges;

Part 6, Regulation 30 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 describes exemptions pursuant to Section 3.58 of the LGA;

Part 6 of the Land Administration Act 1997 determines Sales, Lease and Licences of Crown land; and

Section 3.18 of the Local Government Act 1995 relating to the adoption of policies by Council.

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial or budget implications.


48


Title: Governance Inclusive civic and community engagement and leadership.

Strategy 5.2.7


REGIONAL OUTCOMES: There are no impacts to regional outcomes. RISK MANAGEMENT Maintaining the Policy in its current form will impose the risk of inequitable leasing and licencing procedures amongst community and sporting groups. The new draft policy mitigates this risk by ensuring all community groups are treated with the same due process. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED The alternative option is to leave the policy in its current form however this was rejected as the adoption of the amended policy will enable the City to move forward by entering into new lease agreements with groups whose leases have either expired or are about to expire and promote equity across all community group lease/licences.


49

SC135 LEASE PORTION RESERVE 30329 – AQUARENA CAFE

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-14-08941 AUTHOR: L MacLeod, Coordinator Land and

Property Services EXECUTIVE: P Melling, Director Sustainable

Communities DATE OF REPORT: 6 February 2014 FILE REFERENCE: PM/4/0001 APPLICANT / PROPONENT: Marlene and Robert Fitzgerald ATTACHMENTS: Yes x 2 Confidential

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of this report is to seek Councils support to enter into a lease agreement with the successful respondent following an Expression of Interest for the lease of the Aquarena Café. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. GIVE local public notice of the intent to lease a portion of Crown Reserve 30329 for the purpose of Café to Marlene and Robert Fitzgerald;

2. MAKE the determination subject to: a. advertising notice period of not less than 14 days inviting public

submissions; b. consent from the Minister for Lands;

3. SET the proposed conditions as: a. enter into a five (5) year lease agreement with a further term

option of five (5) years commencing 1 March 2014; b. adjust the lease fees annually as at 1 July in line with the

preceding March Consumer Price Index for Perth; c. set the commencement lease fee at $23,900 plus GST per

annum; d. conduct a current market revaluation prior to any further term

option to establish the lease fee; 4. THE Lessee being responsible for separately paying;

a. all applicable rates, taxes and other utilities; b. legal expenses associated with the preparation, execution and

registration of the lease; and 5. REFER the matter back to Council for final consideration if any

submissions are received. PROPONENT: The proponent is Marlene and Robert Fitzgerald. BACKGROUND: The City conducted and Expression of Interest (EOI) to establish interest from individuals, businesses and community groups in operating the Café.


50

The Aquarena is located on Crown Reserve 30329 and is vested in the City of Greater Geraldton for the purpose of Aquatic and recreation Centre with the power to lease subject to Ministerial consent. A current market valuation was conducted by a licenced valuer prior to the EOI and a lease fee of $23,900 (+GST) was determined as fair and reasonable. The EOI commenced on 6 December 2013 and closed on 13 January 2014. One submission was received at the close of the EOI. This submission was from the current lessees, Marlene and Robert Fitzgerald. See Confidential Attachment SC135A. The evaluation panel recommended accepting this submission. See Confidential Attachment SC135B. ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: There are no economic impacts. Social: There are no social impacts. Environmental: There are no environmental impacts. Cultural & Heritage: There are no cultural, heritage or indigenous impacts. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: The City currently leases area at the Geraldton Airport for café purposes and Crown Reserves for a variant of purposes. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: Should Council agree to grant approval to enter into a lease agreement with Marlene and Robert Fitzgerald, that intention will be advertised and public submissions will be invited for a period of not less than 14 days pursuant to Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995 (as amended) – Disposing of Property

Section 3.58: (1) In this section –

“dispose” includes to sell, lease, or otherwise dispose of, whether absolutely or not; “property” includes the whole or any part of the interest of a local government in property, but does not include money

(3) A local government can dispose of property other than under subsection (2) if, before agreeing to dispose of the property – (a) it gives local public notice of the proposed disposition –


51

(i) describing the property concerned; and (ii) giving details of the proposed disposition; and (iii) inviting submissions to be made to the local government

before a date to be specified in the notice, being a date not less than 2 weeks after the notice is first given; and

(b) it considers any submissions made to it before the date specified in the notice and, if its decision is made by the council or a committee, the decision and the reasons for it are recorded in the minutes of the meeting at which the decision was made.

(4) The details of a proposed disposition that are required by subsection (3)(a)(ii) include —

(a) the names of all other parties concerned; and (b) the consideration to be received by the local government for

the disposition; and (c) the market value of the disposition —

(i) as ascertained by a valuation carried out not more than 6 months before the proposed disposition; or

(ii) as declared by a resolution of the local government on the basis of a valuation carried out more than 6 months before the proposed disposition that the local government believes to be a true indication of the value at the time of the proposed disposition.

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: A commencement lease fee of $23,900 (+GST) will be charged and increased by CPI annually as at 1 July. A current market valuation will be conducted prior to any further term option to establish the lease fee. INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:

Title: Governance Inclusive civic and community engagement and leadership.

Strategy 5.2.7


REGIONAL OUTCOMES: There are no impacts to regional outcomes. RISK MANAGEMENT There are no consequent risks inherent in approving – or not approving – the recommendation. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED As the current lessees were the only respondents to the EOI therefore no alternative options have been considered.


52

16 REPORTS TO BE RECEIVED

REPORTS TO BE RECEIVED

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-14-10163 AUTHOR: K Diehm, Chief Executive

Officer DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST: No FILE REFERENCE: GO/6/0002 DATE OF REPORT: 10 February 2014

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: To receive the Reports of the City of Greater Geraldton. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: PART A That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 22.(2) of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to

1. RECEIVE the following appended reports: a. Reports – Creative Communities

i. CC143 - Australia Day 2014 Committee Minutes – 21 January 2014;

ii. CC144 - Heritage Advisory Committee Minutes – 23 January 2014;

iii. CC145 - Geraldton Regional Art Gallery - Extraordinary Meeting Minutes 23 January 2014; AND

b. Reports – Sustainable Communities: i. SCD0 83 – Delegated Determinations.

PART B That Council by Simple Majority, pursuant to Sections 5.13 and 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 RESOLVES to:

1. RECEIVE the following appended reports:

a. Reports – Corporate and Commercial Services: i. CCS034 – Report - Confidential Report Accounts for

Payment January 2014. PROPONENT: The proponent is City of Greater Geraldton. BACKGROUND: Information and items for noting or receiving (i.e. periodic reports, minutes of other meetings) are to be included in an appendix attached to the Council agenda. Any reports received under this Agenda are considered received only. Any recommendations or proposals contained within the “Reports (including Minutes) to be Received” are not approved or endorsed by Council in any way. Any outcomes or recommendations requiring Council approval must be


53

presented separately to Council as a Report for consideration at an Ordinary Meeting of Council. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: Not applicable. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Not applicable.


54

17 ELECTED MEMBERS MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

NOTICE OF MOTION – PUBLIC TOILET STRATEGY

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-14-11940 AUTHOR: Cr S Van Styn DATE OF REPORT: 10 February 2014 FILE REFERENCE: GO/6/0008 APPLICANT / PROPONENT: Council ATTACHMENTS: No

Councillor Comment It is to be commended that the City is achieving such great large scale projects as the Eastern Breakwater, Verita Road and Flores/Place road, but it is also important that we don’t forget some of the smaller things; things such as public toilets. One of the most frequently asked questions I get as a Councillor is when will we get a toilet here, when will we get a toilet there. There are many areas where people call for toilets including in the CBD and in my ward of Tarcoola, at Derna parade Park to name just a couple. I am therefore seeking to request an in-house, public toilet strategy be developed by the City to be presented to Council so that we can in a systematic way determine the needs of our whole community when it comes to public toilets during budget deliberations. Executive Comment A draft Public Toilet Strategy was prepared in 2009. This Strategy has not been presented to Council and will require reviewing and updating. The draft covers levels of service, growth and demand, operating and maintenance costs and design among other factors to be considered in deciding the number and location of toilets for public use. The document can be reviewed and updated by the April meeting cycle. COUNCILLOR MOTION: That Council by Simple Majority RESOLVES to:

1. DIRECT the Executive to table a draft public toilet strategy for

possible adoption by Council by no later than the Ordinary Meeting of Council April 2014;

2. MAKES the determination on the following grounds: a. public toilets are one of the core requirements of civilisation. It is

imperative that we are able to cater to the needs of a growing population;

b. getting people active and moving around our suburbs, whether via walking or taking their kids out to play in our parks, requires ablutions that can be accessed by the public;

c. lack of public toilets can prevent people from travelling to certain locations for fear of not being able to find a toilet easily. Public


55

toilets could therefore be seen as an access issue for people with various health issues; and

d. the provision of accessible toilets in our CBD would be assist with attracting people to the CBD.


56

18 QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

19 URGENT BUSINESS APPROVED BY PRESIDING MEMBER OR BY DECISION OF THE MEETING

20 CLOSURE


57

APPENDIX 1 – ATTACHMENTS AND REPORTS TO BE RECEIVED Attachments and Reports to be Received are available on the City of Greater Geraldton website at: http://www.cgg.wa.gov.au/your-council/meetings

http://www.cgg.wa.gov.au/your-council/meetings

new ordinary meeting of council agenda · 2015. 3. 11. · ordinary meeting of council agenda 25...

Documents