ordinary meeting of council - shire of denmark · 1/19/2016 · ordinary meeting of council 19...

SHIRE of DENMARK

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL

TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 953 SOUTH COAST HIGHWAY, DENMARK ON

TUESDAY, 19 JANUARY 2016.

Contents Page No.

DISCLAIMER 2 1. DECLARATION OF OPENING/ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS 3 2. RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/APPROVED LEAVE OF ABSENCE 3 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE PERSON PRESIDING 3 4. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 4

4.1 RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE 4 4.1.1 MR ADRIAN BAER – ITEM 4.2.23 (FORMER FRAIL AGED LODGE

REFURBISHMENT) 4

4.1.2 MRS DEBORAH FELD – ITEM 4.2.1 (DENMARK THRILLS ADVENTURE PARK) 4

4.2 PUBLIC QUESTIONS 6

4.3 QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN 8

4.4 PRESENTATION, DEPUTATIONS & PETITIONS – Nil 8

4.4.1 MR RYAN CHRISTOPHERS – 2014 LEADERSHIP AWARD 8

5. APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE 9

6. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 9 6.1 ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING – 22 DECEMBER 2015 9

7. ELECTED MEMBERS MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN 9

7.1 CR WHOOLEY – CONSTRUCTION OF THE WOW WALK 9

8. REPORTS OF OFFICERS 12 8.1 DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & SUSTAINABILITY 12 8.1.1 SCHEME AMENDMENT 140 – REZONING NO.738 (LOT 1) OCEAN BEACH ROAD, OCEAN

BEACH FROM “RURAL” TO “TOURIST” 12

8.1.2 PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT – NO. 3 (LOT 200) STRICKLAND STREET, DENMARK

19

8.2 DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY & REGULATORY SERVICES - Nil 30

8.3 DIRECTOR OF INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES - Nil 30

8.4 DIRECTOR OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION 31

8.4.1 FINANCIAL STATEMENT FOR THE MONTH ENDING 31 NOVEMBER 2015 31

8.5 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 34

8.5.1 APPOINTMENT OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS ON COUNCIL COMMITTEES & CHANGE OF COUNCIL DELEGATE

34

8.5.2 WAROONA AND DISTRICT FIRES APPEAL DONATION 38

9. COMMITTEE REPORTS & RECOMMENDATIONS - Nil 41

10. MATTERS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS 41

11. NEW BUSINESS OF AN URGENT NATURE INTRODUCED BY DECISION OF MEETING 42

11.1 APPOINTMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 42

12. CLOSURE 45

Ordinary Meeting of Council 19 January 2016

2

Ordinary Council Meeting

19 January 2016

DISCLAIMER

These minutes and resolutions are subject to confirmation by Council and therefore prior to relying on

them, one should refer to the subsequent meeting of Council with respect to their accuracy.

No responsibility whatsoever is implied or accepted by the Shire of Denmark for any act, omission or

statement or intimation occurring during Council/Committee meetings or during formal/informal

conversations with staff.

The Shire of Denmark disclaims any liability for any loss whatsoever and howsoever caused arising out

of reliance by any person or legal entity on any such act, omission or statement or intimation occurring

during Council/Committee meetings or discussions. Any person or legal entity who acts or fails to act in

reliance upon any statement does so at that person’s or legal entity’s own risk.

In particular and without derogating in any way from the broad disclaimer above, in any discussion

regarding any planning application or application for a license, any statement or limitation or approval

made by a member or officer of the Shire of Denmark during the course of any meeting is not intended

to be and is not taken as notice of approval from the Shire of Denmark. The Shire of Denmark warns

that anyone who has an application lodged with the Shire of Denmark must obtain and should only rely

on WRITTEN CONFIRMATION of the outcome of the application, and any conditions attaching to the

decision made by the Shire of Denmark in respect of the application.


3

1. DECLARATION OF OPENING/ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS 4.00pm – The Shire President, Cr Morrell, declared the meeting open. 2. RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/APOLOGIES/APPROVED LEAVE OF ABSENCE

MEMBERS: Cr David Morrell (Shire President) Cr Kelli Gillies (Deputy Shire President) Cr Yasmin Bartlett Cr Ceinwen Gearon Cr Jan Lewis Cr John Sampson Cr Roger Seeney Cr Rob Whooley STAFF: Mr Cliff Frewing (Chief Executive Officer) Mr Kim Dolzadelli (Director of Finance & Administration) Mrs Annette Harbron (Director of Planning & Sustainability) Mr Gregg Harwood (Director of Community & Regulatory Services) Mr Gilbert Arlandoo (Director of Infrastructure Services) Ms Claire Thompson (Executive Assistant) APOLOGIES: Nil ON APPROVED LEAVE(S) OF ABSENCE: Cr Dawn Pedro (pursuant to Council Resolution No. 301215) ABSENT: Nil VISITORS: Members of the public in attendance at the commencement of the meeting: 8 Members of the press in attendance at the commencement of the meeting: Nil DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST:

Nil

Name Item No Interest Nature

Cr Whooley 8.1.2 Impartiality Potential future civil design.

3. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE PERSON PRESIDING

The Shire President announced that former Councillor, Mr Adrian Hinds’ wife had recently passed away. Cr Morrell expressed his condolences for Mr Hinds and his family on behalf of the Council.


4

4. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

4.1 RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE

4.1.1 Mr Adrian Baer – Item 4.2.23 (Former Frail Aged Lodge Refurbishment) At the meeting held on Tuesday, 1 December 2015, Mr Baer asked when the

refurbishment of the former Frail Aged Lodge was expected to be completed. Council Officers have investigated the matter in order to respond adequately

to Mr Baer and the Director of Community & Regulatory Services has provided the following written response;

“With regard to the question that you asked during public question time at the Council meeting held on 1 December 2015 and further to our initial response dated 11 December 2015, stating that the matter was being investigated, I can now provide the following response; Question – When will the refurbishment of the former Frail Aged Lodge be expected to be completed? Response: Council Officers are currently in the process of negotiating an agreement between via Howard & Heaver (the project Architects), Denmark Arts and the builder regarding what works will be included in the completed project. The renovations should be completed within a month of these discussions being completed. Should you require further information or advice on this matter please contact the undersigned on telephone (08) 9848 0300 or email [email protected].”

4.1.2 Mrs Deborah Feld – Item 4.2.1 (Denmark Thrills Adventure Park) At the meeting held on Tuesday, 22 December 2015, Mrs Feld asked whether

the sea containers on site would be painted black and in earth tones as per the applicants plan. [Note: Mrs Feld has requested that the words “and clad in timber” be added after the words “earth tones” in the Minutes, refer Item 6.1 – Confirmation of Minutes]

The Acting Chief Executive Officer took the question on notice and has

responded in writing as follows;

“With regards to your letter dated 17 December 2015 (received in our office on 21 December 2015) and subsequent question taken on notice at the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 22 December 2015 in relation to the above matter, I advise as follows. Notwithstanding that the application documentation provided some general information in relation to the proposed colours and materials schedule for the café, reception and toilet buildings on-site, Condition 10 of Planning Approval 2014/97 stated:

mailto:[email protected]


5

“Prior to the submission of a Building Permit for the café, reception and/or toilet buildings, a Colours & Materials Schedule shall be submitted and approved by the Shire of Denmark (Planning Services)”. In this regard I can advise that on the 3 December 2015 Planning Services approved the use of paint colours “Megara” and/or “Midnight Myth” (both colours from the Accent Exterior Palette Colour Range and essentially being khaki/moss green and dark grey colour respectively) for the buildings (i.e. no cladding of the buildings to occur, only painting). In considering the appropriateness of the colours and materials proposed, I advise the following was taken into consideration:

no specific direction was provided in the condition as to what colours and materials would or would not be appropriate as such for the development;

there is no colour requirement for ‘Rural’ zoned land as per Town Planning Scheme No. 3;

As per Council Policy P100608: Town Planning Scheme No. 3 – Colour Interpretations (copy attached), the proposed colours would comply with the references of ‘natural earth’, ‘subtle earth’, ‘natural hues’ or ‘sympathetic’ colour – which were colour references identified in submissions received on the proposal;

The adjoining Special Rural (SR 13) estate to the east of the development site and the Special Residential (SRes 4) to the south of the development site colour provisions that apply, being: Special Rural (SR13:

o Special Provision (viii) All buildings constructed within the zone shall be sympathetic to existing landscape elements (namely landform and vegetation) in terms of their design, materials and colour. Zincalume and other coloured external wall and roof materials which would not, in the opinion of Council, blend in with the rural landscape of the area, will not be permitted.

Special Residential (SRes 4):

o Special Provision (ix)(a) All buildings constructed within the zone shall be sympathetic to existing landscape elements (namely landform and vegetation) in terms of their location, scale, height, building materials and colour.

o Special Provision (ix)(b) Buildings shall be constructed of roof and external wall materials comprising natural earth or olive green colours. Zincalume or other similar cladding will not be permitted. Other roof and external wall materials which would, in the opinion of Council, prejudice the landscape amenity of the area, will not be permitted.

I trust that the above information adequately answers your question and I advise that a copy of this response will be included in the agenda and minutes for the Ordinary Meeting of Council to be held on 19 January 2016. Should you have any queries or require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact Planning Services on telephone (08) 9848 0313 or email [email protected].”

mailto:[email protected]


6

4.2 PUBLIC QUESTIONS In accordance with Section 5.24 of the Local Government Act 1995, Council conducts

a public question time to enable members of the public to address Council or ask questions of Council. The procedure for public question time can be found on the wall near the entrance to the Council Chambers or can be downloaded from our website at http://www.denmark.wa.gov.au/council-meetings.

Questions from the public are invited and welcomed at this point of the Agenda. In accordance with clause 3.2 (2) & (3) of the Shire of Denmark Standing Orders Local

Law, a second Public Question Time will be held, if required and the meeting is not concluded prior, at approximately 6.00pm.

Questions from the Public

4.2.1 Mr Brian Humphries – Council Meetings Mr Humphries referred to a question on notice that he had sent through to the Executive Assistant, noting that she had been on leave, and asked whether Councillors had received copy. Councillors responded that they had not received a copy. Mr Humphries referred to his questions on notice which was whether the Council would agree to adopt full transparency in all decision making. Mr Humphries stated that he had since become aware that should Council agree then it would require a resolution of Council and asked that Council consider the matter as an item of new business. Mr Humphries referred to a meeting of business owners which was convened by the Denmark Chamber of Commerce in June 2015 and the recommendations from that meeting urging Council to resume its two meetings per month, being one discussion and one decision making meeting, and to abandon the briefing sessions. Mr Humphries referred to advice notes from the Department of Local Government and stated he believed that having closed briefing sessions did not give the community the opportunity to witness debate and that it created a perception of secrecy. Cr Gillies thanked Mr Humphries for his previous two public open letters regarding similar matters and noted that to reduce the meeting format to a discussion and decision making meeting once a month would in fact reduce the number of meetings per year. Cr Gillies stated that she believed that the briefing forums should continue but be open to the public and that the Council had tools to close meetings if necessary. The Shire President stated that he agreed with Cr Gillies and that the briefings were strategic not decision making meetings. Cr Morrell added that the Council were already considering ways of dealing with public perceptions on the matter. The Chief Executive Officer stated that strategic briefings were normal process for local governments and entered into some discussion with Mr Humphries about other Council’s Committee processes. The Chief Executive Officer added that he had met with the Chief Executive Officer and President of the Chamber recently and that the outcomes of the

http://www.denmark.wa.gov.au/council-meetings


7

business community meeting in June 2015 had not been raised and therefore he did not consider them to of a current concern. With respect to Mr Humphries request that his question be considered as an item of new business, Mr Frewing stated that he did not believe that the matter was of an urgent nature and would recommend that Council not consider it as new business. Mr Frewing noted that Council had considered its meeting cycle twice since the new Council was elected in October 2015 and had not resolved to change the discussion / decision meeting, monthly cycle. Mr Frewing added that he was aware of the Department of Local Government’s guideline to which Mr Humphries had referred and that he believed that the briefings conducted were in keeping with those guidelines as no decisions were made. Mr Humphries stated that he disagreed and that he had Freedom of Information documents to the contrary with the Chief Executive Officer’s comment that no decisions were made at Strategic Briefing Sessions as he had Freedom of Information documents to the contrary. The Chief Executive Officer that he would be providing some observations to Elected Members in due course about the current meeting procedures and that he would also be recommending that they keep any business behind closed doors to a minimum.

4.2.2 Ms Liz Jack – Council Meetings Ms Jack, Chief Executive Officer of the Denmark Chamber of Commerce, stated that they had had a meeting with the Council’s Chief Executive Officer the day before and that the Council briefing sessions were not mentioned however they did discuss matters concerning ongoing community engagement. Ms Jack stated that she would like to see opportunities for conversations regarding some matters before they are considered by Council and then advertised for public comment.

4.2.3 Ms Jack – Approval for Fireworks Ms Jack referred to a recent application for fireworks at Southern End and asked whether Council had a position statement regarding approvals for fireworks within the Shire over the summer period. In asking the question, Ms Jack wished to clarify that the Denmark Chamber of Commerce had no objection to fireworks. The Director of Community & Regulatory Services stated that they had recently received advice that an application had been made to the Department of Mines and Petroleum for fireworks at a wedding to be held at Southern End in Denmark on the 23 January 2016. Mr Harwood stated that the Community Emergency Services Manager and the Chief Bush Fire Control Officer had looked through the application and applied conditions relating to fire unit attendance and climate conditions but, in the final instance, Shire approval had been refused as we had received two substantive complaints from adjoining property occupiers indicating that the contractor/function centre had not adequately consulted with surrounding property owners. Mr Harwood stated that he did believe there was benefit in Council discussing to consider establishing a position on future firework applications.

CORRECTION TO MINUTES.

Pursuant to Council Resolution No. 010216


8

The Shire President suggested that the matter be placed on the next Strategic Briefing Session Agenda for discussion.

4.2.4 Mr Graeme Robertson – Item 8.1.2 (Proposed Mixed Use Development – No. 3 (Lot 200) Strickland Street, Denmark Mr Robertson referred to a street model of the development and explained the ways in which the proposal had changed since it has first been presented to Council. Mr Robertson asked whether the Officer could have delegated authority to advertise future development proposals for public comment prior to it being considered by the Council. Cr Lewis and Cr Gillies asked some questions of Mr Robertson and the Shire President referred Mr Robertson’s initial question to the Director of Planning & Sustainability. Mrs Harbron responded stating that there were some instances where Officers did have such delegated authority however in this instance it was not possible as Council had previously resolved that the density code of R30 to apply to this site whereas the current proposed is seeking Council apply the R40 density code. Mr Robertson provided some background to his request for reimbursement of fees paid highlighting the benefits that a number of his developments had brought to Denmark over the years.

4.2.5 Mr Mark Allen – Item 8.1.1 (Scheme Amendment 140 – Rezoning No. 738

(Lot 1) Ocean Beach Road, Ocean Beach from “Rural” to “Tourist” Mr Allen stated that they had owned the block on and off for 40 years and that they had received in principle support for the rezoning two years ago. Mr Allen thanked the Shire for its due diligence regarding the proposed and urged Council to support the Officer’s Recommendation.

4.3 QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

Nil

4.4 PRESENTATIONS, DEPUTATIONS & PETITIONS In accordance with Section 5.24 of the Local Government Act 1995, Sections 5, 6 and 7 of the Local Government (Administration) Regulations and section 3.3 and 3.13 of the Shire of Denmark Standing Orders Local Law, the procedure for persons seeking a deputation and for the Presiding Officer of a Council Meeting dealing with Presentations, Deputations and Petitions shall be as per Council Policy P040118 which can be downloaded from Council’s website at http://www.denmark.wa.gov.au/council-meetings. In summary however, prior approval of the Presiding Person is required and deputations should be for no longer than 15 minutes and by a maximum of two persons addressing the Council. 4.4.1 Mr Ryan Christophers – 2014 Leadership Award

Mr Christophers, who was awarded the 2014 Shire of Denmark Leadership Award, made a presentation on the chosen activity that he undertook as a result of winning the Award which was an abseiling course held in the Stirling Range National Park. Mr Christophers stated that it had been an amazing experience which had given him a lot of confidence and the ability to work well within a team.

http://www.denmark.wa.gov.au/council-meetings


9

Mr Christophers thanked Council for providing him with the Award which had enabled him to undertake the activity.

5. APPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE LEAVE OF ABSENCE

A Council may, by resolution, grant leave of absence, to a member, for future meetings. 6. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

6.1 ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

COUNCIL RESOLUTION & OFFICER RECOMMENDATION ITEM 6.1 MOVED: CR SEENEY SECONDED: CR GEARON

That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on the 22 December 2015 be confirmed as a true and correct record of the proceedings, subject to the following amendments; 1. Page 7 – Item 4.2.1, paragraph one, add the words “and clad in timber” after the

words “earth tones”.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: 8/0 Res: 010116

7. ELECTED MEMBERS MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

7.1 Cr Whooley – Construction of the WOW Walk Cr Whooley comment: The ideal time for constructing this walk is March and April. Deferring the construction pending a review of the budget should have no negative impact.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION ITEM 7.2 MOVED: CR WHOOLEY SECONDED: CR GEARON

That Council defer work on the construction of the WOW walk pending the mid-year financial review.

ADJOURNMENT MOTION MOVED: CR GILLIES SECONDED: CR SEENEY

That the motion be adjourned until the January 2016 meeting.


CEO comment: The WOW Walk and Ride project is currently included in the Great Southern Development Commission (GSDC) Blueprint and incorporated into a Business Case as part of a broader strategic trail network. Council Officers are currently awaiting assessment of four concurrent grant applications that may fund 50% of the estimated construction cost of the trail, with the Council currently budgeting for its 50% contribution over the financial years of 2015/16 and 2016/17. It is not intended to commence construction until or if the Council or the GSDC is successful with one or more of its grant applications. If the Council is successful with any grant the matter would be referred to Council for acceptance or rejection of the grant. Construction would thereafter be scheduled, however would indicatively not commence until approximately March 2016. If, with this information the Notice of Motion is still desired to be put, it may be prudent for the Council to defer consideration of the Notice of Motion until all Councillors have been able to be briefed on the strategic importance of the trail.


10

Postscript comment from the Chief Executive Officer:

In January 2016, the Shire received advice that the grant application submitted to the Tourism Demand-Driver Infrastructure (TDDI) Competitive Grant Program was selected to receive $250,000 funding ($200,000 in 2015/2016 and $50,000 in 2016/2017); in addition advice was also received that the funding application lodged under Round 2 of the National Stronger Regions Fund was not successful. Given that the funding application to the TDDI Program was for $350,000 (for total project cost of $700,000) and the funding allocation received is $250,000, Shire officers are currently reviewing the grant conditions to ascertain the ability to reduce the scope of works and/or are investigating additional grant funds sources. As this process is still underway, the TDDI grant funding has not been accepted to date and it is anticipated that a report will be prepared for the 9 February 2016 Ordinary Meeting of Council for Council’s consideration of accepting the grant. Having regard for the above it is considered that the Notice of Motion is not necessary because Council has not yet agreed to commence the work as funding has not yet been finalised. These issues will be the subject of a future report to the Council before any work is commenced.

19 January 2016 – Debate resumed on the original motion which was then put and LOST: 5/3 3/5 Res: 020116

Pursuant to Resolution No.031115 all Councillors’ votes on the above resolution are recorded as follows; FOR: Cr Whooley, Cr Gearon and Cr Bartlett.

AGAINST: Cr Sampson, Cr Gillies, Cr Seeney, Cr Morrell and Cr Lewis.

The Shire President announced that there were some members of the public who had just entered the room and clarified with them that they had not been aware that the meeting commencement time had changed back from 5.00pm to 4.00pm. Cr Morrell noted that there had been an error regarding the commencement time in the Agenda and advised that he would allow the members of the public wishing to address Council to do so at this point of the meeting.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION MOVED: CR SEENEY SECONDED: CR GILLIES

That Standing Orders be suspended to allow members of the public to ask questions at this point of the meeting given that there was an error on the Agenda which stated that the commencement time for the meeting was 5.00pm.


Mrs Deborah Feld – Denmark Thrills Adventure Park Mrs Feld referred to Item 4.1.2 on the Agenda and, whilst she thanked the Director for her response, stated that she did not believe that it adequately answered her query regarding the sea containers on the site. Mrs Feld stated that the sea containers referred to in the response were for the café, reception and/or toilet building however her question related to the ones to be used for the launching and retrieval areas of the orb run. Mrs Feld referred to the original, approved application for planning consent where the applicant had listed that the colours would be black and earth tones and that the walls would be cladding materials as timber with colours timber and black. Mrs Feld asked the following questions;

CORRECTION TO MINUTES.

Pursuant to Council Resolution No. 010216


11

· Why have the conditions changed from the original conditions that were accepted and passed when these provided specific information relating to colours in the application and approval?

· Have these particular very visible sea containers, not mentioned in your reply, also been approved for the same paint colours without timber cladding?

· Has the Shire received and approved a car parking plan? The Director of Planning & Sustainability responded by taking the first two questions on notice and in relation to the third question advised yes, a car parking plan had been approved. Ms Josie Mitchell – Denmark Thrills Adventure Park Ms Mitchell referred to the response provided to Mrs Feld in Item 4.1.2 stating that there was no specific direction provided in the condition as to what colours and material would or would not be appropriate as such for the development. Ms Mitchell stated that she did not believe this to be the case as detailed information on colours and cladding was listed in the signed and dated application which was approved by Council. Ms Mitchell referred to condition j) of the Council Resolution which stated that a colours and materials scheduled being submitted and approved by Planning Services prior to the issue of a Building Permit. Ms Mitchell stated that she did not believe that this condition referred to the Orb launch and retrieval sea containers that were highly visible on the site. Ms Mitchell referred to a statement in the Report submitted to Council with the Development Application, noting that it had mentioned that natural vegetation would form a key part of the development and that the activities proposed would not be visually obtrusive. Ms Mitchell stated that she did not believe that the sea containers were low key and that she believed them to be absolutely visually obtrusive. Ms Mitchell asked the following questions;

· Why has the timber cladding been removed when it was clearly part of the approval conditions?

The Director of Planning & Sustainability responded that condition j) was meant to refer to all of the sea containers and the omission of the orb launch and retrieval was an oversight.

· Given that the sea container at the orb launch is now significantly bigger than described in the approved plan surely it is more important that it be timber clad?

The Director of Planning & Sustainability responded that the property was in a rural zone and that there were no colour and material conditions that applies to the rural zone.

· My understanding is that as the buildings are to be utilised for private recreation and not for rural/farming practice then they are not considered to be rural buildings. Is this right?

The Director of Planning & Sustainability responded that that was correct.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION MOVED: CR SEENEY SECONDED: CR GILLIES

That Standing Orders be resumed.



12

8. REPORTS OF OFFICERS 8.1 Director of Planning & Sustainability

8.1.1 SCHEME AMENDMENT 140 – REZONING NO.738 (LOT 1) OCEAN BEACH ROAD, OCEAN BEACH FROM “RURAL” TO “TOURIST”

File Ref: TPS3/SA140 (A790)

Applicant / Proponent: Williams Consulting on behalf of S Allen

Subject Land / Locality: No. 738 (Lot 1) Ocean Beach Road, Ocean Beach

Disclosure of Officer Interest: Nil

Date: 5 January 2016

Author: Marieke de Vries, Senior Planner

Authorising Officer: Annette Harbron, Director of Planning & Sustainability

Attachments: 8.1.1 – Proposed Scheme Text Provisions, Zoning Map and Local

Development Plan

Summary:

Planning Services have received a request to initiate a Scheme Amendment to Town Planning Scheme No. 3 (TPS No. 3) to rezone No. 738 (Lot 1) Ocean Beach Road, Ocean Beach from “Rural” to “Tourist” to facilitate a boarding house and chalet development on-site. Having due regard to the relevant provisions of TPS No .3, the Shire’s adopted Local Planning Strategy (2011) and the numerous State Planning Policies and Town Planning Scheme Policies that are relevant to this proposal, it is recommended that Scheme Amendment No. 140 be initiated subject to minor administrative modifications being undertaken to the Scheme Text provisions and the Local Development Plan to ensure consistency with the initiation wording, where relevant, and compliance with the Local Development Plan framework provisions.

Background: Current Application A request to initiate a Scheme Amendment to TPS No. 3 to rezone the subject lot from “Rural” to “Tourist” was lodged with Planning Services in November 2014. It should be noted that since lodgement, the Scheme Amendment documentation has been the subject of an internal review by the Shire’s Development Co-ordination Unit where a number of key modifications/issues were identified that Shire officers considered needed to be addressed in the Scheme Amendment documentation prior to the matter being referred to Council for consideration of initiation. Attached at Attachment 8.1.1 are the proposed Scheme Text provisions, Zoning Map and Local Development Plan. Due to the size of the document, a copy of the Scheme Amendment report documentation is available for Councillors via Dropbox or USB, with a printed version available for Councillors upon request. In summary, the proposed Scheme Text provisions and the Local Development Plan provide for the subject lot to develop a boarding house (maximum of 30 guests) as well as 10 chalets.

Scheme Amendment Request (SAR) At the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 17 June 2014, Council considered the SAR request to rezone the subject lot from “Rural” to “Tourist” and resolved as follows (En Bloc Resolution No: 040614): “That with respect to the Scheme Amendment Request to rezone No. 738 (Lot 1) Ocean Beach Road, Ocean Beach from ‘Rural’ to ‘Tourist’, Council resolves to: 1. Support in principle the “Tourist” zoning subject to the following matters being specifically

addressed/included in a formal Scheme Amendment document:


13

a) Tourist demand assessment; b) Detailed Tourist Development Plan with consideration given to the demand for tourist

facilities as well as detailing land uses, building locations, access arrangements, buffer zones etc;

c) Agricultural impact assessment; d) Bush fire risk assessment and fire management plan in accordance with Planning for

Bushfire Protection Guidelines; e) Detailed land capability studies demonstrating that the land is suitable for the proposed

intensification of development, particularly in terms of stormwater management and onsite effluent disposal;

f) Relevant provisions to ensure that any development on-site is located above the 2.5m AHD contour;

g) Strategies to manage land use conflicts with agricultural activities occurring on surrounding properties with due regard being given to the Department of Health’s Guidelines for Separation of Agricultural and Residential Land Uses: Establishment of Buffers (August 2012);

h) Bushland and wetland management plan which details appropriate measures to maintain and enhance significant vegetation and wetlands;

i) Assessment of visual, landscape and amenity impacts in accordance with WAPC’s Visual Landscape Planning in Western Australia Manual (2007);

j) Traffic access/egress assessment; k) Weed management plan; and l) Acid sulphate soils assessment and management plan (if required).

2. Advise the proponent that depending on their client’s timing, due consideration may wish to be given to undertaking the preliminary work required for this proposal (being the matters identified in Point 1 above) such that the Shire of Denmark may consider addressing the zoning of the site (and any amendment to the Local Planning Strategy as required) as part of Local Planning Scheme No. 4 rather than undertaking an amendment to Town Planning Scheme No. 3.”

Consultation: In accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, public advertising of a ‘standard amendment’ (refer explanation under ‘Statutory Obligations’) is required to be undertaken for a minimum period of 42 days once the Environmental Protection Authority have considered the Scheme Amendment.

External Consultation

Williams Consulting (applicant)

Internal Consultation

Development Co-ordination Unit

Statutory Obligations:

Planning and Development Act 2005 – TPS No. 3 is an operative Local Planning Scheme under the Act;

Town Planning Scheme No. 3 – the subject land is currently zoned “Rural”; and

Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 – The Regulations set the procedure for amending a town planning scheme The Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 provide for complex, standard and basic amendments. In relation to Scheme Amendment No. 140, it is considered to be a standard amendment having regard to Regulation 34 which is defined as: “(a) an amendment relating to a zone or reserve that is consistent with the objectives identified

in the scheme for that zone or reserve;


14

(b) an amendment that is consistent with a local planning strategy for the scheme that has been endorsed by the Commission;

(c) an amendment to the scheme so that it is consistent with a region planning scheme that applies to the scheme area, other than an amendment that is a basic amendment;

(d) an amendment to the scheme map that is consistent with a structure plan, activity centre plan or local development plan that has been approved under the scheme for the land to which the amendment relates if the scheme does not currently include zones of all the types that are outlined in the plan;

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

(f) an amendment that does not result in any significant environmental, social, economic or governance impacts on land in the scheme area;

(g) any other amendment that is not a complex or basic amendment.”

Policy Implications: The following policies have been given due consideration in relation to this proposal:

State Planning Policy No. 1: State Planning Framework Policy

State Planning Policy No. 2.5: Land Use Planning in Rural Areas

State Planning Policy No. 2.9: Water Resources

State Planning Policy 3.7: Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas

Planning Bulletin 83/2013: Planning for Tourism

Draft Country Sewerage Policy

Town Planning Scheme Policy No. 5: Minimum Setbacks

Town Planning Scheme Policy No. 7: Second Dwellings/Additional House and Chalet Development on Rural Zoned Lots

Town Planning Scheme Policy No. 29: Rural Settlement Strategy

Shire of Denmark Tourism Planning Strategy – Stage 1

Council Policy P130201: Tourism Budget / Financial Implications: Fees associated with the amendment have been paid as per Council’s operative Fees and Charges Schedule. Strategic Implications: The site is designated in the adopted Local Planning Strategy as ‘General Agriculture’. Due regard has been given to the relevant Local Planning Strategy provisions within Scheme Amendment No. 140, noting previous advice on this matter that “as there is no agricultural use associated with this site, the use of the property for tourism purposes is deemed acceptable. Whilst not identified in the Strategy as a tourist site, the subject site is in close proximity to an existing tourist site and is ideally located for a tourism development of this nature”. The report and officer recommendation is consistent with Council’s adopted Mission and Vision and assists achieve the following specific adopted Strategic Objectives & Goals: Social Objective: Denmark’s communities, people and places are connected and creative, vibrant and dynamic, healthy and safe. Social Goal: Lifestyle – that the Shire of Denmark endeavour to maintain and improve the standards and style of living, together with the creative and vibrant culture, that residents and visitors have come to expect.


15

Environment Objective: Denmark’s natural environment is regionally significant, wild and beautiful, yet so inviting and fragile that its protection and enhancement is carefully balanced in meeting the needs of current and future generations’ lifestyle, development and tourism needs. Environment Goal: Natural Environment – that the Shire of Denmark acknowledge the importance of the natural environment to the residents of Denmark and the region, and works with residents and all relevant agencies to maintain a high standard of environmental protection and its integration with community life. Environment Goal: Waterways – that the Shire of Denmark acknowledge the importance of rivers, inlets and coastline to residents, visitors and the local economy, and implements and advocates for policies with other relevant authorities and organisations to maintain these to a high standard of health and amenity. Economic Objective: Denmark’s economy is diverse and vibrant – its primate industries of tourism and agriculture rely on and enjoy natural and other assets that are sensibly managed and promoted. Economic Goal: Development – that the Shire of Denmark closely monitor development and associated infrastructure needs in the region, and acts in conjunction with other authorities and agencies to plan development which is sensitive, timely and appropriate to the community’s needs. Economic Goal: Tourism – that the Shire of Denmark acknowledge the importance of tourism to the region, and, by innovative policies, practices and partnerships, facilitates and encourages the greater year-round sustainability of tourism, whilst monitoring and managing its impacts. Governance Objective: The Shire of Denmark provides renowned leadership in sustainability, is effective with both its consultation with its people and its management of its assets, and provides transparent and fiscally responsible decision making. Governance Goal: Planning – that the Shire of Denmark work with other relevant authorities and agencies to develop and implement planning policies and decisions that not only reflect the wishes of the community, but also provide the region with appropriate development options.

Sustainability Implications: Governance: There are no known significant governance considerations relating to the report or officer recommendation. Environmental: There are no known significant environmental considerations relating to the report or officer recommendation, noting that the proposed Scheme provisions address the relevant environmental related matters for the development of the site (e.g. identification of indicative building locations and associated Bushfire Protection Zone’s, tree retention areas, wetland management, effluent disposal arrangements, fire protection measures etc.). Economic: Tourism developments are recognised as major contributors to the local economy. Social: There are no known significant social considerations relating to the report or officer recommendation.


16

Risk:

Risk

Risk Likelihood (based on history and

with existing controls)

Risk Impact / Consequence

Risk Rating (Prior to

Treatment or Control)

Principal Risk Theme

Risk Action Plan (Controls or Treatment proposed)

That Council not initiate Scheme Amendment No. 140

Unlikely (2) Minor (2) Low (1-4) Inadequate Engagement - Community / Stakeholders / Crs

Accept Officer Recommendation

Comment/Conclusion: Scheme Amendment No. 140 proposes to rezone the subject lot from “Rural” to “Tourist (T13)" zone to facilitate the development of a range of tourist accommodation on-site. As per current TPS No. 3 provisions, all of the proposed landuses can be considered independently under the current “Rural” zoning of the property, however it is considered appropriate that a “Tourist” zone is introduced given the extent of development proposed on-site and the associated development criteria that relates. The provision of a “Tourist” zone provides the mechanism for a Local Development Plan to guide the development form on-site. From a Planning Services perspective it is considered that the proposed Local Development Plan for the site and the associated Scheme provisions are generally appropriate, subject to minor administrative modifications being undertaken to the Scheme Text provisions and the Local Development Plan to ensure consistency with the initiation wording, where relevant, and compliance with the Local Development Plan framework provisions. It is therefore recommended that Council initiate Scheme Amendment No. 140 to TPS No. 3 accordingly.

Voting Requirements: Simple majority.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION & OFFICER RECOMMENDATION ITEM 8.1.1 MOVED: CR GILLIES SECONDED: CR SEENEY

That with respect to the request to initiate a Scheme Amendment to rezone No. 738 (Lot 1) Ocean Beach Road, Ocean Beach from “Rural” to “Tourist”, Council: 1. Pursuant to Section 75 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 initiate Town Planning

Scheme No. 3 Amendment No. 140 by: a) Rezoning No. 738 (Lot 1) Ocean Beach Road, Ocean Beach from “Rural” zone to

“Tourist (T13)” zone and part “Parks and Recreation” local scheme reserve and amending the Scheme Maps accordingly.

b) Inserting Tourist T13 provisions in Appendix XIII – Schedule of Tourist Zones as follows:

Column 1 – Particulars of the Land T12 No. 738 (Lot 1) Ocean Beach Road, Ocean Beach

Column 2 – Tourist Use Notwithstanding any other provisions of the scheme, the following land uses are the only permitted (P) land uses and shall include: i. Holiday Accommodation ii. Holiday Home iii. Boarding House (maximum 30 guests)


17

iv. Single House IP uses shall include: i. Caretakers/Managers Residence ii. Reception/Office

Column 3 – Condition of Tourist Use 1. Development and subdivision shall generally be in accordance with the Local

Development Plan (Ref:14-001-001D) dated 7 Sept 2015 or any minor variation to that plan approved by Council. Subdivision of Lot 1 shall be by way of strata title only.

2. All development shall be connected to an on-site effluent disposal system installed to the satisfaction of the Health Department of WA and Council, and shall utilise multiple Alternative Treatment Units (ATU) or a central ATU(s) treatment system. All effluent disposal systems shall be situated a minimum of 100m from the Wilson Inlet high water mark.

3. All development shall be connected to a reticulated potable water supply source to the satisfaction of Council.

4. All new development shall be setback a minimum of:

50 metres from the front boundary

20 metres from all other boundaries. 5. All buildings within the zone shall be designed and constructed to be sympathetic

to the existing landscape in terms of colour finishes, location and height, to the satisfaction of Council. Zincalume, white and off-white colours are prohibited.

6. All building heights are limited to single storey. 7. The development of all new buildings shall be undertaken to comply with the

requirements of AS3959-2009 Construction of Buildings in Bushfire Prone Areas (as amended).

8. No development shall be permitted within the Development Exclusion Area(s), Tree Retention Area(s) or on land below 2.5m AHD as shown on the Local Development Plan with the exception of a boardwalk/pathway proposed in accordance with the recommendations of any Council approved Wetland Management Site for the site.

9. The proponent shall implement the recommendations of the Bushfire Management Plan prepared by Bushfire Safety Consulting dated 24 September 2015 (or any approved amended bushfire management plan) to the satisfaction of Council as a condition of development approval or subdivision approval.

10. The proponent shall prepare and implement the recommendations of an approved Stormwater Management Plan to the satisfaction of Council as a condition of development approval or subdivision approval.

11. The proponent shall prepare and implement the recommendations of an approved Landscaping Plan to the satisfaction of Council as a condition of development approval or subdivision approval. Matters that the landscaping plan is to specifically address include:

Rehabilitation/replanting of the area identified as ‘Future Managed Wetland’; and

Future on-site landscaping to assist with screening the development from Ocean Beach Road.

12. The proponent shall implement the recommendations of the Bushland Management Plan prepared by PGV Environmental, dated 25 September 2015 (or any approved amended bushland management plan) to the satisfaction of Council as a condition of development approval or subdivision approval.

13. The proponent shall implement the recommendations of the Weed Management Plan prepared by PGV Environmental, dated 25 September 2015 (or any approved amended weed management plan) to the satisfaction of Council as a condition of development approval or subdivision approval.


18

14. All fencing (internal and boundary) shall be of rural construction such as pine/steel posts and wire to the satisfaction of Council.

2. Determine that Town Planning Scheme No. 3 Scheme Amendment No. 140 is a ‘Standard

Amendment’ as per the provisions of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 for the following reasons: a) It is an amendment relating to the ‘Tourist’ that is consistent with the objectives identified

in Town Planning Scheme No. 3 for the ‘Tourist’ zone; b) It is an amendment that is generally consistent with a local planning strategy that has

been endorsed by the Western Australian Planning Commission; c) It is an amendment that is considered will have minimal impact on land in the scheme

area that is not the subject of the amendment; d) It is an amendment that is considered will not result in any significant environmental,

social, economic or governance impacts on land in the scheme area; and e) Is not a complex or basic amendment.

3. Request the applicant to undertake the minor administrative modifications to the Scheme Text provisions and the Local Development Plan to ensure consistency with the initiation wording, where relevant, and compliance with the Local Development Plan framework provisions, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning & Sustainability.

4. Refer Town Planning Scheme No. 3 Scheme Amendment No. 140 to the Environmental Protection Authority in accordance with Section 81 of the Planning and Development Act 2005.

5. Resolve to proceed to advertising of Town Planning Scheme Amendment No. 140 as per Regulation 47 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.



19

Prior to consideration of Item 8.1.2, Cr Whooley declared that he could potentially be providing future civil design for the development and as a consequence there may be a perception that his impartiality on this matter may be affected. Cr Whooley declared that he would consider this matter on its merits and vote accordingly.

8.1.2 PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT – NO. 3 (LOT 200) STRICKLAND STREET, DENMARK

File Ref: A1483 (2015/216)

Applicant / Proponent: Williams Consulting on behalf of Nostrebor Holdings Pty Ltd, Frenesi Pty Ltd & S Robertson

Subject Land / Locality: No. 3 (Lot 200) Strickland Street, Denmark



Author: Annette Harbron, Director of Planning & Sustainability

Authorising Officer: Annette Harbron, Director of Planning & Sustainability

Attachments:

8.1.2a – Development Application 2015/216 Documentation 8.1.2b – SAT’s Published Reasons for Determination 8.1.2c – Approved Plans relating to Development Application 2013/241

(July 2014) 8.1.2d – Table 4 of the R-Codes

Summary: The proponent is seeking Development Approval for a mixed use development (eight (8) tenancies at ground level for commercial (shop/office) usage and eight (8) multiple dwellings (first floor permanent residential units) on No. 3 (Lot 200) Strickland Street, Denmark.

Prior to formal consideration of the Development Application, the following matters require Council’s preliminary consideration:

The appropriate density code to apply to this proposal - noting that the current proposal is seeking Council determine that the ‘R40’ density coding apply having regard to Clause 5.3.3 of Town Planning Scheme No. 3 (TPS No. 3) whereas when considering a development proposal for the site in July 2014 Council determined that the ‘R30’ density coding was to apply; and

The landowner’s request for a refund of the Development Application fees of $5,555.00 paid to date.

Having due regard to the two (2) preliminary matters relating to this proposal, it is recommended that the development proposal be advertised for public comment on the basis of an ‘R40’ density coding applying, and that the request for refund of development application fees be refused. Background: Current Development Application An application for Development Approval was lodged with Planning Services in November 2015 for a mixed use development comprising eight (8) tenancies at ground level for commercial (shop/office) usage and eight (8) residential units on the first floor – refer Attachment 8.1.2a for the plans and the accompanying Planning Report. Request for Council to Refund Development Application Fees Associated with Development Application 2015/216 As per the 2015/2016 Fees & Charges Schedule, the applicable Development Application fee for the subject proposal with a development cost of $2 million is $5,555.00 (GST Exempt). This fee was paid by the landowner on 24 November 2015 (on the basis that the application is deemed ‘incomplete’ until such time as the relevant fees have been paid), with the landowner subsequently requesting Council’s consideration to refund the entire Development Application fee paid for the current application on the following basis:


20

“I seek the Council support to deal with this proposal in the light of the fees previously paid last year.

The change reflects an effort to reduce the building cost to enable a street level commercial space of 60 sq m with an upstairs 2 bed, 2 bath accommodation unit, both on the same title for around $450,000.

The new councillors would not be aware of the $20,000 in legal costs which I suffered to prove that the Shire did, under its current scheme, have the right to vary and approve the ratio of residential to commercial in a mixed development such as this.

I believe this proposal will be an asset to Denmark in line with the various past developments over the last 30 years, all of which have had a significant benefit, as this will, with an increased rate base.

To be blunt, I shouldn’t have to pay another DA fee for this proposal.”

History of Previous Development Approval 2013/241 An application for Development Approval was lodged with Planning Services in December 2013 for a mixed use development compromising a café, four (4) tenancies at ground level for commercial (office) or residential usage (depending on the future owner’s requirements) and seven (7) residential units on the first floor.

Council considered this matter at the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 21 January 2014 and resolved as follows (Res No: 060114):

That the item be adjourned to the next meeting of Council on Tuesday, 11 February 2014, pending consideration of receipt of the proponent’s legal advice and reconsideration of Council’s legal advice.

This matter was re-considered at the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 11 February 2014 wherein Council resolved as follows (Res No: 040214):

That Council with respect to the planning application for the Proposed Mixed Use Development on No. 3 (Lot 200) Strickland Street, Denmark resolves to: 1. Refuse Planning Approval for the ‘multiple dwelling’ component of the development for

notwithstanding as per Clause 3.2.5 of Town Planning Scheme No. 3 the proposed use of ‘multiple dwelling’ may be consistent with the purpose and intent of the ‘Commercial’ zone, the extent of the residential development proposed is not consistent with the R25 density coding that applies to the site as per Town Planning Scheme No. 3 in that the maximum permissible number of dwellings is four (4) as per Part 5 and Table 1 of State Planning Policy 3.1: Residential Design Codes;

2. Advise the applicant that: a) The office and restaurant (café) components of the development are permitted land uses

for the site as per Town Planning Scheme No.3, however a full assessment of the appropriateness of these components of the development having regard to the relevant Town Planning Scheme No. 3 provisions (i.e. setbacks, car parking requirements etc) has not been undertaken at this stage given that the overall design philosophy for the site is for a mixed use development incorporating residential development on-site and it is considered that approval to these elements of the development without the residential development on-site is not in keeping with the development proposal for the site, and if residential development was not proposed then the development form on-site is likely to be entirely different.

b) The Shire of Denmark is prepared to consider a proposal for a mixed use development on-site that proposes a maximum of four (4) grouped and/or multiple dwellings subject to


21

compliance with the relevant Town Planning Scheme No. 3 and State Planning Policy 3.1: Residential Design Code provisions.

c) Should the owner wish to pursue a proposal that provides for residential development on-site that does not comply with the R25 density coding that applies to the site, the following options are available: i) Lodge a Scheme Amendment Request to TPS No. 3 as per Council Policy P100601; ii) Lodge a formal Scheme Amendment to TPS No. 3 to alter the density coding of R25 that

currently pertains to residential development on-site; iii) Seek, via discussions with Councillors and staff to have scheme provisions within Town

Planning Scheme No. 4 that achieve the owner’s desired outcome(s) for the site; or iv) Lodge a submission when Town Planning Scheme No. 4 is advertised for public

comment should the proposed scheme provisions not achieve the owner’s desired outcome(s) for the site.

Following Council’s resolution, the applicant lodged a Right of Review with the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT). From the Directions Hearing held on 11 April 2014 on this matter, it was determined that the issue for determination as a preliminary issue was “Whether there is power for the Council to vary the density code in relation to the development application under Clause 5.3.3 of Shire of Denmark TPS 3”.

The hearing of the preliminary issue was considered on the 14 May 2014 before Deputy President his Honour Judge Parry, wherein SAT issued an Order as per the following:

1. The preliminary issue is answered as follows: “The respondent has power to vary the density code in relation to the development application

under Clause 5.3.3 of the Shire of Denmark Town Planning Scheme No. 3”. 2. The matter is referred to mediation at the respondent’s office on a date to be set. 3. By 16 May 2014 the applicant is to advise the Tribunal of mutually available dates for a one

day mediation.

Attached at Attachment 8.1.2b for Council’s information is a copy of the Tribunal’s published reasons in relation to the above determination.

Following issuance of the above SAT Order, both parties’ lawyers liaised regarding Orders 2 & 3 of the SAT Order and the best way to move forward on this application. As a result, both parties agreed to a Minute of Consent Orders being made as follows:

1. Orders 2 & 3 made by the Deputy President, his Honour Judge Parry on 14 May 2014 for the matter to be referred to mediation, and for available dates to be advised to the Tribunal, are hereby cancelled.

2. Pursuant to s.31(1) of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), the Council of the Shire of Denmark is invited to reconsider its decision in the above matter at the next available Ordinary Council Meeting on or before 31 July 2014.

3. The matter is listed for a further directions hearing on Friday, 1 August 2014. Following the finalisation of the Minute of Consent Orders, the applicant lodged amended drawings for a mixed use development compromising a restaurant (café), four (4) tenancies at ground level for commercial (shop/office) usage and seven (7) multiple dwellings (first floor permanent residential units) – refer Attachment 8.1.2c.

These amended plans, following a period of public advertising on the basis that ‘Multiple Dwellings’ are a “Use Not Listed” in accordance with TPS No. 3, were considered by Council at the Ordinary Meeting held on 29 July 2014 wherein Council resolved as follows (Res No:210714):

That Council, pursuant to section 31 of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA) in respect of SAT Application DR 76 of 2014 relating to the planning application for the Proposed Mixed Use


22

Development (Restaurant (Café), Four (4) Commercial Units (Shop/Office) and Seven (7) Dwellings) on No. 3 (Lot 200) Strickland Street, Denmark resolves to:

1. Determine, as per Clause 5.3.3 of Town Planning Scheme No. 3, that the appropriate density code to apply for development requirement purposes for the subject site is “R30” – noting that Council is prepared to give due consideration to variations to Building Height having due regard to the ‘Design Principles’ criteria as opposed to Table 4 (being the ‘Deemed-to-Comply’ provisions) of the Residential Design Codes

2. Grant planning approval subject to the following: Conditions a) Development shall be in accordance with the attached stamped approved plans dated 9

June 2014, including the following modifications: i. The verandah over the Strickland Street footpath being modified in width such that there

is a 600mm setback to verandah posts from the face of the kerb – refer Advice Note a). ii. The verandah over the Strickland Street footpath having a minimum height of 2.75

metres. b) The vehicle crossovers to North Street and Mackay Lane (noting left out only turn movement

is permissible) to be constructed, drained and sealed (concrete, asphalt or brick paved) to the satisfaction and specifications of the Shire of Denmark (Infrastructure Services).

c) A minimum of sixteen (16) car parking bays being provided on-site, with all car parking bays and vehicle accessways complying with the requirements of Australian Standard AS2890.1:2004 Parking Facilities – Off Street Car Parking, the Building Code of Australia and Australian Standard AS2890.6:2009 Parking Facilities Part 6: Off-street Parking for People with Disabilities.

d) Prior to the issuance of any Occupancy Certificate for the development, a cash in lieu contribution for the shortfall of twelve (12) car parking bays on-site is to be paid to the Shire of Denmark, with such payment to be calculated as per Council’s operative Schedule of Fees & Charges applicable at the time of payment (refer Advice Note b).

e) All vehicle parking, manoeuvring and circulation areas shall be suitably constructed, sealed (asphalt, concrete or brickpavers), drained, kerbed, marked, signed (where required) and thereafter maintained.

f) All car parking areas and access ways shall be maintained for their stated purpose at all times and shall not be used for display or general storage purposes.

g) No parking or display of vehicles and/or equipment shall occur within the adjoining road verge area(s) at any time.

h) The loading and unloading of goods to and from the premises shall be carried out entirely within the site at all times and shall be undertaken in a manner so as to cause minimum interference with other vehicular traffic.

i) The installation of any outdoor lighting on the building and/or in the car parking area(s) shall be in accordance with the requirements of Australian Standard AS4282-1997: Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.

j) Seating occupancy for the restaurant (café) component of the development being limited to 32 persons (refer Advice Note c).

k) The existing footpaths on North Street and Strickland Street road reserves being modified, at the developer’s expense, such that they provide for a continuous footpath from the road carriageway through to the property boundary line, with all required modifications being approved by the Shire of Denmark (Infrastructure Services).

l) Existing infrastructure located within the North Street and Strickland Street road reserves shall be retained and protected during the construction period with any damage to the infrastructure to be repaired by the developer at their expense to the satisfaction of the Shire of Denmark (Infrastructure Services).

m) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, engineering plans providing details on crossovers, car parking, vehicle accessways, footpath (internal and external of the site), bicycle racks and associated infrastructure works being submitted to and approved by the Shire of Denmark (Infrastructure Services).


23

n) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a stormwater management plan being submitted to and approved by the Shire of Denmark (Infrastructure Services), with such stormwater plan to be in accordance with water sensitive urban design principles.

o) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a landscaping plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Shire of Denmark (Sustainability Services), with the landscaping areas being those identified on the approved site plan. The landscaping plan shall be submitted at a scale of 1:200 or 1:100 and shall detail the following: i. Proposed trees and shrubs to be planted including species, number and size of plants

(NB: emphasis should be on native plants because of their general hardiness and low water requirements). Trees and plants are to be shown in exact location using clear symbols.

ii. Site layout and context including property boundaries, street names, building/s, parking areas, paved areas, adjacent verges, existing trees and vegetation to be retained.

iii. Reticulation methods. iv. Maintenance arrangements. v. Weed control measures (if applicable) associated with any existing weed infestations

on-site. vi. Details of any hard landscaping, paving materials, street furniture, bollards, bins,

lighting etc. p) Prior to occupancy of the development, all landscaping shall be carried out in accordance

with the approved landscaping plan and thereafter shall be maintained as landscaping at all times.

q) External clothes drying area(s) appurtenant to the dwelling(s) shall be provided in a location such that they are screened from public view from the street. Mechanical driers are available to be used as an alternative to external clothes drying area(s).

r) Balconies facing Strickland Street & North Street associated with the multiple dwellings shall not be used for clothes drying purposes at any time.

s) Any fencing proposed on-site in the vicinity of the North Street/Strickland Street intersection shall be open/permeable type fencing to the satisfaction of the Shire of Denmark (Planning Services).

t) Prior to the occupancy of the development, the landowner(s) shall provide written evidence to the Shire of Denmark that they have suitable public liability insurance that can indemnify the Shire of Denmark against any claim should an accident occur involving the verandah constructed over the Strickland Street footpath.

u) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a waste management plan shall be submitted and approved by the Shire of Denmark (Infrastructure Services/Health Services). Such plan is to detail how all refuse generated from the site will be dealt with, including the location and design of all refuse storage areas having regard to the requirements of the Shire of Denmark’s Health Local Laws 2008 (as amended) and the means by which waste disposal vehicles will access the bins (noting that generally the Shire’s rubbish collection service does not extend to utilising private property for rubbish collection).

v) A Construction Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Shire of Denmark (Planning/Building Services) as part of the Building Permit application, with such plan to address the following: a) Access to and from the site. b) The delivery of materials and equipment to the site. c) The storage of materials and equipment on the site. d) The parking arrangements for contractors and sub-contractors. e) Management of construction waste. f) Dust and sand mitigation measures. g) Construction times (if proposing different times to the relevant Regulations) and

associated noise prevention measures. h) Other matters likely to impact on surrounding properties.


24

w) The provision of all services, including augmentation of existing services, necessary as a consequence of any proposed development shall be at the cost of the developer and at no cost to the Shire of Denmark.

x) The development is to be connected to a reticulated water supply provided by a licensed water provider.

y) The development shall be connected to sewer. z) No signage has been approved as part of this planning application – refer Advice Note d). aa) At the time of lodgement of the building permit application, the developer to pay the

Development Contributions for Road Infrastructure fee as per the Shire of Denmark’s Operative Fees and Charges Schedule (refer Advice Note e).

bb) As per Town Planning Scheme Policy No. 42: Public Art, the developer shall incorporate public art within the development or contribute financially to the Shire’s Public Art Fund, with the value being determined on the basis of 0.5% of the value of the construction cost of development.

Should the developer seek to comply with this condition by incorporating public art within the development, prior to the issuance of a building permit, details of the proposed public artwork/s (having regard to Clause 6.3.1 of Town Planning Scheme Policy No. 42: Public Art) are to be submitted to and approved by the Shire of Denmark (Planning Services) – refer Advice Note 8.

Should the applicant/developer seek to comply with this condition via a financial contribution, such payment shall be made prior to the issuance of a building permit.

cc) Immediately prior to the occupation of the development for its approved purpose, the developer shall notify the Shire of Denmark (Planning Services), in writing, of the effective completion of the approved development such that a Final Inspection can be carried out to determine compliance with the conditions contained on this Planning Approval.

Advice Notes: a) In relation to Condition a), the Strickland Street footpath is only 2.28 metres from the back of

the footpath (which is the boundary line) and the face of the kerb (not 3 metres as per the survey plan lodged with the planning application documentation – noting that this feature survey pre-dates the demolition of the building on-site (which occurred in 2009) and the streetscape improvement works undertaken by the Shire in 2011). The car parking configuration in this area provides for vehicle overhang over the kerb thus the requirement for the verandah posts to have a setback of 600mm from the face of kerb.

b) In relation to Condition d), in accordance with Council’s 2014-2015 Fees & Charges Schedule, cash in lieu of car parking is calculated as per the following: Shortfall x [(Bay Size x Land Value per m2) + Construction Cost]

Definition of formula terms: “Bay Size” = 27m2 “Construction Cost” = $2,215 per bay “Land Value per m2” = as determined by a licensed valuer, and agreed to by the Shire of

Denmark “Shortfall” = difference between the number of car parking bays required to be provided

on-site as per TPS 3 and the number of car parking bays to actually be provided c) In relation to Condition j), the seating capacity of the restaurant (café) has been determined on

the basis of car parking requirements. Should the restaurant (café) wish to seek approval to increase the seating capacity of the café in the future (assuming toilet numbers allow for consideration of such), then it is likely that additional car parking requirements will apply (being in the form of cash-in-lieu given there is no ability to provide additional car parking on-site).

d) In relation to Condition z), consultation should occur with the Shire of Denmark (Planning Services) regarding approval requirements for signs having regard to Town Planning Scheme No. 3 and Town Planning Scheme Policy No. 32: Signs.


25

e) In relation to Condition aa), as per the Council’s 2014/15 Fees & Charges Schedule, the applicable development contribution fee is $1,850 per residential dwelling and $1,850 per 1000m2 of land or commercial floorspace, whichever is greater.

f) It is the responsibility of the developer to ensure that building setbacks correspond with the legal description of the land. This may necessitate re-surveying and re-pegging the site. The Shire of Denmark will take no responsibility for incorrectly located buildings.

g) It is the responsibility of the developer/owner to search the title of the property to ascertain the presence of any easements and/or restrictive covenants that may apply.

Consultation: The Officer has considered the requirement for consultation and/or engagement with persons or organisations that may be unduly affected by the proposal and considered Council’s Community Engagement Policy P040123 and the associated Framework, and the relevant provisions of TPS No. 3 and the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, and consequently the development application is required to be the subject of public advertising prior to any formal determination by Council on the basis that the proposed land use of ‘Multiple Dwellings’ is a “Use Not Listed” in TPS No. 3.

Statutory Obligations: Development Application TPS No. 3 and the R-Codes (State Planning Policy 3.1) specify the pertinent planning provisions for the proposal.

In accordance with TPS No.3, the subject site is zoned “Commercial (R25)”, and given the proposal is for a mixed use development, as per Clause 5.3.3 of TPS No 3 Council is to determine the applicable density code that relates to the development proposal (notwithstanding the designation on the Scheme map).

Request for Refund of Development Application Fees The Council’s operative Fees & Charges set the fees applicable to a Development Application, with the Planning and Development Regulations 2009 setting the maximum application fee that a local government can charge.

Policy Implications: Town Planning Scheme Policy No. 15: Townscape Policy, Town Planning Scheme Policy No. 31: Commercial Strategy and Town Planning Scheme Policy No. 42: Public Art are relevant to this development application and will be considered accordingly in the formal assessment of the application in due course.

Budget / Financial Implications: Should Council wish to refund the development application fees of $5,555.00 for this development, the Shire of Denmark’s Procedure OP040228: Council Approved Discounts, Donated Fees or Products, Waivers or Reduced Rental/Lease Charges states:

Where the Council by resolution, Council Policy or CEO under delegation, approves of a reduced, discounted or donated / waived fee, rental, lease or charge to apply to a particular external applicant (generally community groups) the value of the subsidy or discount shall be still ‘credited’ to the appropriate income account via either general journal effected by the Finance Directorate (requested by whichever Directorate is responsible for implementing the decision) or via cheque request to Council (note for administrative efficiency and reduced cost, journals are supported over cheque requests).

This same principle also applies to leased property to community groups that pay a significantly reduced fee to Council less than valuation or market (for example $1 pa for a building). Note that whilst ‘commercial’ valuations are often helpful to ascertain the value of the discount, the cost of


26

obtaining these valuations makes it counterproductive. A ‘best guess’ estimate of the rental value or an estimate obtained from a real estate agent would suffice in this instance.

In this way the following benefits accrue;

the service that had to ‘bear’ the Council / CEO determination to reduce the fee or charge will not be disadvantaged (in terms of reduced income to the relevant service area) and;

the true cost of providing a particular service or facility is acknowledged and;

there is less likelihood of one service area of Council subsidising another and as a result potentially being seen as less ‘sustainable’ and;

Council appreciates (and has to budget for) the true cost of providing discounted / reduced fees and charges.

The expense account ‘drawn’ from will generally be debited (costed) to a relevant Members Donations Account under Administration – Members of Council.

As at 11 January 2016, the current expenditure for Account 1410082 was $9,351.54 – noting that the 15/16 Municipal Budget provides for a total expenditure of $20,284.00.

Strategic Implications: The site is designated ‘Town Centre – Inner Core’ in the Local Planning Strategy (2011). As per the Local Planning Strategy (2011) one of the ‘Future Retail’ objectives is “To ensure that the Denmark town centre continues to be the focus for all forms of commercial activity that support a vibrant town centre and to ensure that future development enhances its village character”. The report and officer recommendation is consistent with Council’s adopted Mission and Vision and assists to achieve the following specific adopted Strategic Objectives and Goals.

Economic Objective: Denmark’s economy is diverse and vibrant – its primate industries of tourism and agriculture rely on and enjoy natural and other assets that are sensibly managed and promoted.

Economic Goal: Development – that the Shire of Denmark closely monitor development and associated infrastructure needs in the region, and acts in conjunction with other authorities and agencies to plan development which is sensitive, timely and appropriate to the community’s needs.

Governance Objective: The Shire of Denmark provides renowned leadership in sustainability, is effective with both its consultation with its people and its management of its assets, and provides transparent and fiscally responsible decision making.

Governance Goal: Planning – that the Shire of Denmark work with other relevant authorities and agencies to develop and implement planning policies and decisions that not only reflect the wishes of the community, but also provide the region with appropriate development options.

Sustainability Implications: Governance: Staff do not have delegation to waiver, refund or reduce development application fees.

Environmental: There are no known significant environmental considerations relating to the report or officer recommendation; noting that the officer recommendation recommends Planning Approval with conditions imposed to address the environmental related matters (e.g. stormwater management).

Economic: There are no known significant economic considerations relating to the report or officer recommendation; noting however that the development, both during and after construction, will provide local employment opportunities.


27

Social: There are no known significant social considerations relating to the report or officer recommendation; noting that the officer recommendation recommends Planning Approval with conditions imposed to address social issues such as car parking and amenity.

Risk:

Risk






Principal Risk

Theme

Risk Action Plan (Controls or Treatment

proposed)

That Council not support the

application of the R40 density coding at this point in time

Possible (3) Minor (2) Moderate (5-9)

Inadequate Engageme

nt - Community

/ Stakeholde

rs / Crs

Accept Officer Recommendation at this

stage as is recommending public

advertising of the proposal occur; noting

that Council will be required to make a final

determination on the density coding after the close of the advertising

period and in light of any issues arising from the full assessment of the

proposal.

That Council support the request for the refunding of the development application fees

Possible (3) Insignificant (1)

Low (1-4) Inadequate Financial,

Accounting or

Business Acumen

Accept Officer Recommendation to

refuse refunding of fees

Comment/Conclusion: Prior to formal consideration of the Development Application, the following matters require Council’s preliminary determination:

The appropriate density code to apply to this proposal; and

The landowner’s request for a refund of the Development Application fees of $5,555.00 paid to date.

Each of these issues is discussed in detail below.

The appropriate density code to apply to this proposal - noting that the current proposal is seeking Council determine that the ‘R40’ density coding apply having regard to Clause 5.3.3 of Town Planning Scheme No. 3 (TPS No. 3) whereas when considering a development proposal for the site in July 2014 Council determined that the ‘R30’ density coding was to apply to the site; and

Density Coding As per the SAT determination on the former development proposal for the site, as per Clause 5.3.3 of TPS No. 3 the Council has the ability to determine the applicable density code that is to relate to the development proposal notwithstanding the designation on the Scheme map.

The subject proposal is seeking approval for the development of eight (8) multiple dwellings on-site, in addition to eight (8) commercial (shop/office) units – which with a plot ratio of 0.45 and being a two-storey development would result in the R40 density coding applying to the site.


28

In determining the appropriate density coding to apply to this particular proposal, Council should initially give due regard to the ‘R25’ designation provided on the Scheme map, the ‘R30’ density coding that was applied to the development proposal approved by Council in July 2014 (noting that this approval has not been enacted to date (valid until 4 August 2016) and should this development proposal be approved by Council it would supersede the July 2014 approval) and then consider whether the subject proposal warrants any variation to the density coding as a result – taking into account a range of factors including but not limited to building bulk, scale, height, provision of appropriate facilities (e.g. car parking, open space) and relationship to adjoining developments. In relation to what density code is appropriate for the site, the following is provided for Council’s preliminary consideration:

The density coding of ‘R25’ to the town centre (including the subject lot) was introduced via Amendment No. 59 to TPS No. 3 – noting that Amendment No. 59 reviewed all residential density codings in the vicinity of the Denmark townsite to allow development to a higher density coding in appropriate areas. Prior to Amendment No. 59 the site had a density coding of ‘R15’.

If the ‘R25’ density coding was to be applied to the subject site, as per Table 1 of the R-Codes the maximum permissible number of dwellings (single house, grouped dwelling or multiple dwelling) that could be developed on-site is four (4).

In July 2014 Council granted Development Approval to a mixed use development on the site consisting of seven (7) multiple dwellings on-site in addition to a restaurant (café) and four (4) commercial (shop/office) units. The density coding that Council applied to this development was ‘R30’ (maximum plot ratio of 0.5 – proposed 0.34; two-storey development); noting at the time of approval of this development in July 2014 the R-codes did not have minimum site area requirements for multiple dwellings with a density coding of R30 and above – that is the extent of development was guided by requirements such as plot ratio, setbacks, building height, car parking and open space. This approach essentially provided for a ‘building envelope’ within which a development proposal could be considered rather than taking the approach that development on-site is initially governed by a limit on the number of residential units – thus providing for the design to respond accordingly utilising design principles.

In October 2015, the R-Codes were amended such that a minimum site area requirement for multiple dwellings now applies to ‘R30’ density coded land; subsequently resulting in the maximum permissible number of dwellings (single house, grouped dwelling or multiple dwelling) that could be developed on-site being five (5) in line with Council’s previous determination that the ‘R30’ density coding is to apply to development on-site.

From a Planning Services perspective, mixed use developments in a town centre environment whereby activation and vitality is encouraged is appropriate. The key is to ensure that overall a good development outcome is achieved, and it is acknowledged in some part that the application of a ‘R25’ or ‘R30’ density coding to the residential component could be a limiting factor in achieving a good design outcome for the site.

Table 4 of the R-Codes (attached at Attachment 8.1.2d) is utilised to assess multiple dwelling applications in areas coded R40 or greater as per the ‘Deemed-to-Comply’ provisions of the R-Codes (that is if the development complies with such provisions then there is no ability for the Council to refuse the proposal as such).

This proposal is for a development with a plot ratio of 0.45, thus on this basis alone it would comply with the maximum plot ratio provisions for the density codings ranging from R40 – R160.

Plot ratio provisions should not be considered in isolation of other development requirements when determining an appropriate density coding to apply, thus Table 4 of the R-Codes also references setback and height requirements (noting however that TPS No. 3 setbacks will apply in this instance).


29

The maximum height provisions that relate to R40 density codings effectively provides for two-storey development as-of-right, whilst the maximum height provisions that relate to R50 density codings and above provide for three-storey development as-of-right and so on. The current proposal provides for a maximum top of wall height of 7.5 metres and a maximum top of roof height of 9.0 metres thus does not comply with the ‘Deemed-to-Comply’ maximum wall height provisions that would relate to R40 density codings (refer Attachment 8.1.2d).

From a Planning Services perspective it is considered that these minor encroachments should be dealt with utilising the ‘Design Principles’ criteria of the R-Codes rather than applying a higher density coding to the site for applying a higher density coding effectively approves three-storey developments as-of-right – noting that this is the approach that Council took when considering the development proposal in July 2014.

When assessing the current proposal in terms of building bulk, scale and height only, it is considered that the proposal as presented is a reasonable development outcome that has been able to be achieved utilising the R40 density coding applying to the site and the minor height encroachments being supported via assessment of ‘Design Principles’ criteria.

Having regard to all of the above, Planning Services recommend that Council should acknowledge that applying the ‘R25’ and ‘R30’ density coding for the subject site could be a limiting factor in achieving the desired outcomes for mixed use development in the Denmark CBD area and that application of the ‘R40’ density coding provides the opportunity for a two-storey mixed use development to be considered on-site. Specifically in relation to the suitability of the development form for this site and compliance with the relevant TPS No. 3 and R-Codes provisions, a full assessment of the proposal has not been undertaken yet; however as the application is required to be advertised for public comment prior to determination (on the basis of the ‘Multiple Dwelling’ component of the development being classified as a ‘Use Not Listed in TPS No. 3), it is recommended that Council advertise the current proposal as presented and formally determine the applicable density code after the completion of the public advertising period and in context of the full assessment of the development proposal (noting that from a preliminary assessment there are some concerns/further considerations needed with respects to the parking layout which may result in a car parking shortfall greater than the one (1) car parking bays referenced in the accompanying planning report, on-site disabled car parking provision, relationship to the proposed subdivision of the site into four (4) freehold lots and subsequent survey-strata subdivision etc). Refund of Development Application Fees As per the 2015/2016 Fees & Charges Schedule, the applicable Development Application fee for the subject proposal with a development cost of $2 million is $5,555.00 (GST Exempt). For an application to be considered complete the fees are required to be paid, thus the landowner paid the fees on 24 November 2015. In relation to the refund request the following information is relevant for Council’s consideration:

The fees provided for in the Shire’s operative Fees & Charges Schedule are the maximum planning service fees that a local government can charge as per Part 7 of the Planning and Development Regulations 2009. The premise for a maximum fee was introduced by the State Government in 2009 as many local governments across the State were charging different fees and since the introduction of the Regulations the Shire of Denmark has imposed the maximum planning service fees – noting that these fees were, and continue to be, the subject of scrutiny by the development industry, local governments and WA Parliamentary Joint Standing Committee for fees of this nature need to be reflective of a cost recovery/fee for service model. The last increase to the maximum planning service fees in the Regulations occurred on 1 July 2013 – wherein this was a 6.25% CPI rate for the previous two years.


30

From the author’s experience, on average the fees paid for development applications would cover the time spent on assessment – noting that on some applications additional time is spent whereas on others less time is spent.

This proposal does represent a new application for the site, and given that the proposal will be the subject of two (2) reports to Council, public advertising and assessment by the Shire’s Development Co-ordination Unit, it is appropriate that the full application fees apply – noting that there has been substantial additional time to date by Planning Services staff providing preliminary comment spent on the proposal that has not been charged for.

The Shire of Denmark spent $26,260.01 (GST exclusive) on legal advice and representation on the legal matters pertinent to the previous development proposal for the site; noting that in relation to any matter the subject of Right of Review to the State Administrative Tribunal is undertaken at each parties own expense.

The proposal to proceed with a different application for the site is the landowner’s decision alone and did not arise from a decision of the Shire’s; therefore the landowner is responsible for all associated implications from not proceeding with the former development proposal and seeking approval for a new development that is substantially different to the previous proposal.

Having regard to the above it is recommended that Council not refund the development application fee associated with this development proposal. Voting Requirements: Simple majority.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION & OFFICER RECOMMENDATION ITEM 8.1.2 MOVED: CR GILLIES SECONDED: CR GEARON

That Council with respect to the development application for the Proposed Mixed Use Development on No. 3 (Lot 200) Strickland Street, Denmark: 1. Advertise the development proposal for a minimum period of 21 days in light of the ‘Multiple

Dwelling’ component of the development being a ‘Use Not Listed’ as per Town Planning Scheme No.3 and the proposed R40 density coding to apply, with the application to be referred back to Council accordingly for final consideration;

2. Advise the proponent that a full assessment of the development application having regard to the relevant provisions of Town Planning Scheme No. 3, the Residential Design Codes and any submissions received on the proposal will be undertaken in due course – with the ‘R40’ density coding forming the basis for the assessment considerations; and

3. Advise the proponent and landowner that the request to refund the Development Application fees of $5,555.00 associated with Development Application 2015/216 has been denied on the basis that: a) The proposal lodged is a new application that is substantially different to the former

development proposal thus requiring a full assessment by the Shire; b) The fees provided for in the Shire of Denmark’s 2015/2016 Fees & Charges Schedule

are in accordance with the maximum prescribed fees provided for in the Planning and Development Regulations 2009; and

c) The lodgement of a new development application for the site has not arisen as a result of a decision of the Shire of Denmark’s, therefore all associated development costs are the responsibility of the landowner.


8.2 Director of Community & Regulatory Services Nil 8.3 Director of Infrastructure Services

Nil


31

8.4 Director of Finance & Administration

5.32pm – The Director of Planning & Sustainability left the room.

8.4.1 FINANCIAL STATEMENT FOR THE MONTH ENDING 31 NOVEMBER 2015 File Ref: FIN.1

Applicant / Proponent: Not applicable

Subject Land / Locality: Denmark


Date: 16 December 2015

Author: Steve Broad, Accountant

Authorising Officer: Kim Dolzadelli, Director of Finance And Administration

Attachments: 8.4.1 – November Monthly Financial Report

Summary: It is a requirement of the Local Government Act 1995 that monthly and quarterly financial statements are presented to Council, in order to allow for proper control of the Shire’s finances. In addition, Council is required to review the Municipal Budget on a six monthly basis to ensure that income and expenditure is in keeping with budget forecasts. It should be noted that the budget is monitored on a monthly basis in addition to the requirement for a six monthly review.

The attached financial statements and supporting information are presented for the consideration of Elected Members. Council staff welcome enquiries in regard to the information contained within these reports.

Background: In order to prepare the attached financial statements, the following reconciliations and financial procedures have been completed and verified;

Reconciliation of all bank accounts.

Reconciliation of the Rates Book, including outstanding debtors and the raising of interim rates.

Reconciliation of all assets and liabilities, including payroll, taxation and postal services.

Reconciliation of the Sundry Debtors and Creditors Ledger.

Reconciliation of the Stock Ledger.

Completion of all Works Costing transactions, including allocation of costs from the Ledger to the various works chart of accounts.

Consultation: Nil

Statutory Obligations: Local Government Act 1995 Section 5.25 (1) Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996

The attached statements are prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1995.

Policy Implications: Policy P040222 - Material Variances in Budget and Actual Expenditure, relates

For the purposes of Local Government (Financial Management) Regulation 34 regarding levels of variances for financial reporting, Council adopt a variance of 10% or greater of the annual budget for each program area in the budget, as a level that requires an explanation or report, with a minimum dollar variance of $10,000.


32

The material variance is calculated by comparing budget estimates to the end of month actual amounts of expenditure, revenue and income to the end of the month to which the financial statement relates.

This same figure is also to be used in the Annual Budget Review to be undertaken after the first six months of the financial year to assess how the budget has progressed and to estimate the end of the financial year position.

A second tier reporting approach shall be a variance of 10% or greater of the annual budget estimates to the end of the month to which the report refers for each General Ledger/Job Account

in the budget, as a level that requires an explanation, with a minimum dollar variance of $10,000.

Budget / Financial Implications: There are no significant trends or issues to be reported.

Strategic Implications: The report and officer recommendation is consistent with Council’s adopted Mission and Vision and assists achieve the following specific adopted Strategic Objectives and Goals.

Governance Objective: The Shire of Denmark provides renowned leadership in sustainability, is effective with both its consultation with its people and its management of its assets, and provides transparent and fiscally responsible decision making.

Sustainability Implications: Governance: There are no known significant governance considerations relating to the report or officer recommendation. Environmental: There are no known significant environmental implications relating to the report or officer recommendation. Economic: There are no known significant economic implications relating to the report or officer recommendation. Social: There are no known significant social considerations relating to the report or officer recommendation. Risk:

Risk




Risk Rating

(Prior to Treatment or Control)


Risk Action Plan (Controls or

Treatment proposed)

Not meeting Statutory

Compliance

Rare (1) Moderate (3) Low (1-4) Failure to meet Statutory,

Regulatory or Compliance

Requirements


Financial mismanagement

and/or Budget overruns.

Rare (1) Moderate (3) Low (1-4) Inadequate Financial,

Accounting or Business Acumen

Control through robust systems with internal controls and appropriate reporting

mechanisms


33

Comment/Conclusion: As at 30 November 2015 total cash funds held total $10,083,632. Shire Trust Funds total $180,330 with the amount of $170,717 invested for 91 days with the National Bank, maturing 19 December 2015 at the quoted rate of 2.75%. Reserve Funds total $4,131,331 and have been placed on investment for 90 days with the National Bank, maturing 3 December 2015 at the quoted rate of 2.80%. Municipal Funds total $5,771,971 with the amount of $4,406,592 invested with the National Bank, maturing on various dates up to the 19 December 2015 at an average rate of 2.60% (refer note 4 for detail). Key Financial Indicators at a Glance The following comments and/or statements provide a brief summary of major financial/budget indicators and are included to assist in the interpretation and understanding of the attached Financial Statements.

Taking into consideration the adopted Municipal Budget and subsequent amendment identified, the estimated 30 June 2015 end of year position is estimated to be $1,087, as per budget projections (Note 5).

Operating revenue and expenditure is slightly higher than that predicted for 30 November 2015 (Statement of Financial Activity).

Rates Collection percentage of 76.78% is in keeping with historical collection rates (Note 6).

The 2015/16 Capital Works Program is 9.51% complete as at 30 November 2015 (Note 12).

Various transfers to and from Reserve Funds have not yet been made for 2015/16 and are generally undertaken in the latter half of the financial year, depending on specific projects to which these transfers relate.

Salaries and Wages expenditure is in keeping with budget estimates (not reported specifically in Financial Statement).

Budget Amendments and Variances (Note 5 and 5a) As detailed in Note 5a.

Voting Requirements: Simple majority.

5.38pm – The Director of Planning & Sustainability returned to the room.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION & OFFICER RECOMMENDATION ITEM 8.4.1 MOVED: CR SEENEY SECONDED: CR GILLIES

That with respect to Financial Statements for the month ending November 2015, Council; 1. Receive the Financial Reports, incorporating the Statement of Financial Activity and other

supporting documentation. 2. Endorse the Accounts for Payment for November 2015 as listed.



34

8.5 Chief Executive Officer

8.5.1 APPOINTMENT OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS ON COUNCIL COMMITTEES & CHANGE OF COUNCIL DELEGATE

File Ref: Various

Applicant / Proponent: Various

Subject Land / Locality: Not applicable



Author: Claire Thompson, Executive Assistant Teiga Murray, Administration Officer

Authorising Officer: Cliff Frewing, Chief Executive Officer

Attachments: 8.5.1a – Community Member Nominations 8.5.1b – Committee Charters

Summary:

This report recommends that Council review the attached nominations for Community Members on Council Committees, with appointments to the following Council Committees for a two (2) year tenure with terms expiry in October 2017, unless the member resigns before the end of the tenure:

Disability Services Advisory Committee - four (4) Community Member vacancies and one (1) Professional vacancy;

Paths & Trails Advisory Committee – three (3) Community Member vacancies;

Cemetery Advisory Committee – three (3) Community Member vacancies; and

Seniors Advisory Committee – one (1) Community Member vacancy. The report also recommends, as a separate officer recommendation, the change of Council Delegate on the Seniors Advisory Committee, pursuant to a requested received from Cr Gillies and Cr Bartlett. Background: Following the meeting held on 20 October 2015, Council advertised for Community Member vacancies on a number of its Advisory Committees. Advertising commenced on 30 October 2015 (Denmark Bulletin from 5 November 2015) for a period of four (4) weeks. On Wednesday 11 November 2015, Deputy Shire President Cr Kelli Gillies requested a change to the Council Delegate for the Seniors Advisory Committee and Denmark Arts Inc., to result in Cr Bartlett becoming the new Council Delegate for the Seniors Advisory Committee and Cr Gillies to become the new Council Delegate for Denmark Arts Inc. The change of Delegate to Denmark Arts has been made (Councillors were notified via email on 13 November 2015) and Denmark Arts were advised accordingly however, there are statutory requirements relating to the appointment of members to Council Committees which is why a formal resolution is required with respect to the Seniors Advisory Committee delegate. Consultation: The vacant Community Member positions were advertised in the Denmark Bulletin, Shire of Denmark Notice Boards, Website and Facebook page and letters were sent to all previous community members thanking them for their past service and inviting them to reapply during October and November 2015. Statutory Obligations: Section 5.10 of the Local Government Act 1995 relates to the appointment of committee members.


35

“5.10. Committee members, appointment of

(1) A committee is to have as its members —

a) persons appointed* by the local government to be members of the committee (other

than those referred to in paragraph (b)); and

b) persons who are appointed to be members of the committee under subsection (4) or

(5).

* Absolute majority required.

(2) At any given time each council member is entitled to be a member of at least one

committee referred to in section 5.9(2)(a) or (b) and if a council member nominates

himself or herself to be a member of such a committee or committees, the local

government is to include that council member in the persons appointed under

subsection (1)(a) to at least one of those committees as the local government decides.

(3) Section 52 of the Interpretation Act 1984 applies to appointments of committee

members other than those appointed under subsection (4) or (5) but any power

exercised under section 52(1) of that Act can only be exercised on the decision of an

absolute majority of the local government.

(4) If at a meeting of the council a local government is to make an appointment to a

committee that has or could have a council member as a member and the mayor or

president informs the local government of his or her wish to be a member of the

committee, the local government is to appoint the mayor or president to be a member of

the committee.

(5) If at a meeting of the council a local government is to make an appointment to a

committee that has or will have an employee as a member and the CEO informs the

local government of his or her wish —

a) to be a member of the committee; or

b) that a representative of the CEO be a member of the committee,

the local government is to appoint the CEO or the CEO’s representative, as the case

may be, to be a member of the committee.” Policy Implications: There are no policy implications. Budget / Financial Implications: There are no known financial implications upon either the Council’s current Budget or Long Term Financial Plan. Strategic Implications: There are no known significant strategic implications relating to the report or the officer recommendation. Sustainability Implications: Governance: Action in accordance with Division 5 of the Local Government Act 1995. Environmental: There are no known significant environmental implications relating to the report or officer recommendation.


36

Economic: There are no known significant economic implications relating to the report or officer recommendation. Social: Community members on Council Committees and Working Groups provide an important ‘community’ perspective on Council functions, service provisions and strategic direction. Community representatives on Council Committees provides an additional conduit between the Council and the community. Risk:

Risk








Treatment proposed)

That Council choose not to

appoint Community Members to various Council Committees Rare (1) Minor (2) Low (1-4)

Not Meeting Community expectations


That Council not agree to the

appointment of Cr Bartlett as Council Delegate for the Seniors Advisory

Committee. Rare (1) Minor (2) Low (1-4)

Ineffective People

Management Accept Officer

Recommendation

Comment/Conclusion: Following is a summary of the nominations received for the Community Member vacancies on each Council Committee. Copies of the nominations are attached (refer Attachment 8.5.1a). Copies of the Committee Charters are attached as Attachment 8.5.1b. Where there are fewer nominations than vacant positions Council have the option to;

Appoint the members who have nominated and advertise for the outstanding vacant positions; or

Appoint the members who have nominated and amend the Committee Charter(s) to reduce the number of community member vacancies – should Council wish to exercise this option, the Author recommends that the matter be referred to the respective Advisory Committee, at their first meeting, for them to discuss the matter and make recommendation back to Council; or

Not appoint members and re-advertise all or some of the positions. CEMETERY ADVISORY COMMITTEE (3 vacancies)

Colin CAYLESS (former member)

Beth FRANZ (former member)

Judy ROSS (former member) DISABILITY SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE (4 vacancies + 1 professional vacancy)

Peter BOYES (former member)

Dale FEWINGS (former professional member) PATHS & TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE (3 vacancies)

Andrew ADAMS (former member)

Diane HARWOOD (former member)


37

SENIORS ADVISORY COMMITTEE (1 vacancy)

Valerie HEATH

Ian MULHOLLAND (former member as Denmark Over 50s Association President)

Given there is only one Community Member vacancy but two nominations for the Seniors Advisory Committee, Council will be required to select its preferred representative. Voting Requirements: Absolute majority.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION & OFFICER RECOMMENDATION ITEM 8.5.1a MOVED: CR GILLIES SECONDED: CR GEARON

That with respect to the nominations received for Community Member vacancies on Council Committees, Council: 1. Appoint the following community members;

a) Colin Cayless, Beth Franz and Judy Ross to the Cemetery Advisory Committee; b) Peter Boyes and Dale Fewings to the Disability Services Advisory Committee; c) Andrew Adams and Diane Harwood to the Paths & Trails Advisory Committee; and d) Ian Mulholland to the Seniors Advisory Committee.

2. Advertise locally and seek nominations for the remaining vacancies for the following committees:

a) Disability Services Advisory Committee (2 + 1 vacancies); and b) Paths & Trails Advisory Committee (1 vacancy).


COUNCIL RESOLUTION & OFFICER RECOMMENDATION ITEM 8.5.1b MOVED: CR GILLIES / CR SEENEY

That with respect to the request of Cr Gillies and Cr Bartlett, Council approve the change of delegate to Council’s Seniors Advisory Committee from Cr Kelli Gillies to Cr Yasmin Bartlett.


COUNCIL RESOLUTION & OFFICER RECOMMENDATION ITEM 8.5.1c MOVED: CR GILLIES / CR GEARON

That with respect to the request of Cr Gillies and Cr Bartlett, Council endorse the change of delegate to the Denmark Arts Council Inc. from Cr Yasmin Bartlett to Cr Kelli Gillies.



38

8.5.2 WAROONA AND DISTRICT FIRES APPEAL DONATION

File Ref: PBR.10


Subject Land / Locality: Shires of Waroona & Harvey



Author: Gregg Harwood, Director of Community & Regulatory Services


Attachments: 8.5.2 – Article from The West Australian – 11January 2016 and City of Perth Media Release 8 January 2016

Summary: Given the recent devastating fires that have occurred near Waroona, in the town of Yarloop and the surrounding districts, it is considered appropriate for Council to consider a donation to assist the victims of these bush fires. At the time of writing these bushfires which were lit by lightning on Wednesday, the 6th January 2016 had killed two men, destroyed at least 143 properties and razed the town of Yarloop had by Monday the 11th burned through more than 71,000 hectares of land.

Background: An appeal for donations to assist those who are affected by the fires has been established by the City of Perth, who are developing criteria for the disbursement of funds.

In 2010 Council donated $2,000 to the Shire of Toodyay Bushfire Appeal.

In January 2011 Council donated $2,500 to the Gascoyne and Midwest Flood Appeal and an additional $2,500 to the Queensland Flood Appeal. In December 2011 Council donated $2500 to the devastating Augusta-Margaret River Fires Appeal. In December 2015 Council donated $2500 to the devastating Esperance Fires Appeal.

Comment: At the time of writing these bushfires which were lit by lightning on Wednesday, the 6th January 2016 had killed two men, destroyed at least 143 properties and razed the town of Yarloop had by Monday the 11th burned through more than 71,000 hectares of land and the locality has been declared a catastrophe by the Insurance Council of Australia (ICA).


39

The following is extracted from the website www.watoday.com.au “It was confirmed on Saturday 121 homes were lost as the bushfire, which continues to menace other locations in the shires of Harvey and Waroona, swept through the town. Fire and Emergency Services commissioner Wayne Gregson told gathered media on Friday that the loss estimate included numerous other public buildings, including historical town site buildings, workshops, factories, three quarters of the school, the post office and adjacent stores and the fire station. A Yarloop community meeting was held at 10am, and since then most remaining residents, including some who initially chose to stay and defend their homes, have been evacuated by air and by road.”

http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/wa-fires-homes-buildings-lost-in-yarloop-as-waroona-blaze-continues-to-threaten-20160107-gm1kli.html#ixzz3wvCirJwX

Consultation: The officer has considered the Council’s Community Engagement Framework and believes that no consultation with the community on this matter is necessary. Statutory Obligations: Given the Budget contains adequate financial provision, via a relevant specified account, there are no relevant statutory obligations. Policy Implications: Policy P040233 (Donation of Funds to Emergency & Disaster Recovery) relates and reads as follows;

In considering financial assistance to various emergency and disaster relief efforts and to accommodate funding for such unforeseen requests during a budget year the following budget provisions be made;

Allowance for 1 x annual Local and State Emergency/Disaster - up to $10,000; and

Allowance for 1 x annual National Emergency/Disaster – up to $5,000; and

International Emergency/Disaster - Nil and the CEO be authorised to advise proponents of requests for international disaster relief that Council’s Policy is to refer such requests to State & Federal Governments, whose jurisdiction includes international relations.

http://www.watoday.com.au/

http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/wa-fires-homes-buildings-lost-in-yarloop-as-


40

Budget / Financial Implications: At the time of preparing this Report, $2,500 had been expended for the current financial year leaving $2,500 that can still be donated (Ledger Account 1530262 has a $5,000 Budget) and it is the view of the author that a donation of the remaining $2,500 could be made without any undue impact on the account the southwestern fire season has already commenced and should be all but over by the end of March. Strategic Implications: The report and officer recommendation is consistent with Council’s adopted Mission and Vision as follows;

“Denmark in the year 2031 is a leading example of a dynamic, connected, caring and cohesive community, in tune with its environment.” Sustainability Implications: Governance: There are no known significant governance considerations relating to the report or officer recommendation. Environmental: There are no known significant environmental implications relating to the report or officer recommendation. Economic: There are no known significant economic implications relating to the report or officer recommendation. Social: The Western Australian community as a whole have displayed enormous generosity in donating to this appeal and highlights the ability of the State to unite in times of tragedy. It is the view of the author that the Shire of Denmark community would expect Council to contribute to such an appeal, given the widespread devastation that has occurred. Risk:

Risk

Risk Likelihood (based on

history and with existing controls)


Risk Rating

(Prior to Treatment or Control)


Risk Action Plan (Controls or Treatment proposed)

That the Council not make a donation at this

time for whatever reason and the Council is

considered or perceived by the media and or

residents / ratepayers (of not just this local

authority) as either uncaring or

inconsiderate. Almost Certain

(5) Moderate (3) High (10-

16)

Not Meeting Community

expectations Accept Officer

Recommendation

That the Council make a donation and

subsequently requires to make additional

donations to other subsequent disasters

within the next 5 months of the financial year. Possible (3)

Insignificant (1) Low (1-4)

Not Meeting Community

expectations


to donate the remaining portion

of the budget allocation.


41

Comment/Conclusion: In the view of the author, a donation at this time would be seen as appropriate, timely, caring and responsive by both the residents and ratepayers of the Shire of Denmark, Waroona and Harvey and is in keeping with the purposes of the Council’s Policy with respect to such donations. An excerpt from the City of Perth’s 8 January 2016 LMDRF Waroona and District Fires Appeal, media release reads as follows: “The Board Chair, Lord Mayor Lisa Scaffidi, said the catastrophic fires have razed much of the township of Yarloop, and damaged parts of Waroona. “Initial media reports suggest a significant number of houses have been lost, as well as buildings and infrastructure,” Ms Scaffidi said. “I hope and pray people remain safe until the fire threat passes.” The Fund has been activated to raise and coordinate donations to support the victims of the fires. “Just as people supported the community of Esperance recently, we need to pull together to assist residents of Yarloop and Waroona,” Ms Scaffidi said. “This blaze has caused as much damage, if not more, than recent fires in Esperance, Parkerville and Roleystone combined.” Through the Lord Mayor’s Distress Relief Fund, the community can help those who are affected by this disaster to rebuild their lives.” A donation of $2,500 is proposed, which is the remaining 50% of the allocation for this financial year. Councillors should note that they are at liberty to increase or decrease this suggested amount via an absolute majority decision to amend Account # 1530262. Voting Requirements: Simple majority.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION & OFFICER RECOMMENDATION ITEM 8.5.2 MOVED: CR SAMPSON SECONDED: CR LEWIS

That Council allocate $2,500 to the Lord Mayor’s Distress Relief Fund for the Waroona Bushfires to be funded from Account # 1530262 Local & State Emergency Disaster Relief.


9. COMMITTEE REPORTS & RECOMMENDATIONS Nil

10. MATTERS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS Nil


42

11. NEW BUSINESS OF AN URGENT NATURE INTRODUCED BY DECISION OF THE MEETING

11.1 APPOINTMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

File Ref: PER.19


Subject Land / Locality: Not applicable



Author: Cliff Frewing, Chief Executive Officer


Attachments: 11.1 – Draft Position Description and Key Performance Indicators

Summary: The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval to commence the recruitment process for the position of Chief Executive Officer. In addition it is proposed to consider the appointment to an external recruitment agency to assist in the recruitment process and to adopt a draft position description including key performance indicators as an initial draft guide.

Background: The Local Government Act 1995, Division 4 specifies the requirements in relation to appointing Senior Staff and in particular the position of Chief Executive Officer. In order to assist local governments, the Department of Local Government and Communities has prepared a local government operational guidelines document which outlines the process that local governments should follow when appointing a CEO. The guidelines have been circulated to Elected Members for information. In order to commence the appointment process submissions were sought from the two local government employment agencies located in WA that can be used to assist Council in appointment of the CEO. Submissions have therefore been received from WALGA recruitment and Lo-Go Appointments and also made available to Elected Members. As an interim measure and to commence the process an informal meeting of Elected Members and the interim CEO was held on the 12 January 2016 during which the process of appointment of a substantive CEO was discussed. The following matters were discussed;

Appointment of a recruitment agency;

Whether or not the full Council or a select Committee should be appointed to oversee the process;

Future meetings; and

Position Description / Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). Consultation: The Officer has considered the requirement for consultation and/or engagement with persons or organisations that may be unduly affected by the proposal and considered Council’s Community Engagement Policy P040123 and the associated Framework and believes that other than that provided in this report, no additional external/internal engagement or consultation is required. Statutory Obligations: Compliance with Division 4 of the Local Government Act 1995 is required to be followed. Policy Implications: There are no policy implications.


43

Budget / Financial Implications: The cost of the salary of the CEO is included in the 2015/16 Budget. Whilst the cost of engagement of a suitable employment agency has not been specifically allowed for the in 2015/16 Budget it can be accommodated within GL Account Number 1420322 being Strategic Planning & General Consultancies which has a total budget of $40,000, of which $31,702 remains unspent at the time of this report. Strategic Implications: The report and officer recommendation is consistent with Council’s adopted Mission and Vision and assists achieve the following specific adopted Strategic Objectives and Goals. GOVERNANCE OBJECTIVE - The Shire of Denmark provides renowned leadership in sustainability, is effective with both its consultation with its people and its management of its assets, and provides transparent and fiscally responsible decision making. The Shire is required to appoint a Chief Executive Officer. Sustainability Implications: Governance: There are no known significant governance considerations relating to the report or officer recommendation. Environmental: There are no known significant environmental implications relating to the report or officer recommendation. Economic: There are no known significant economic implications relating to the report or officer recommendation. Social: There are no known significant social considerations relating to the report or officer recommendation. Risk:

Risk








Treatment proposed)

That Council delay commencing the

process of appointing a CEO. Rare (1) Major (4) Low (1-4)

Ineffective People

Management Accept Officer

Recommendation

Comment/Conclusion: Appointment of an Employment Agency It is considered important that the appointment process is commenced as soon as possible as the process could take many months to finalise before the substantive CEO commences employment at the Shire. On this basis, two quotations were sought and have been received from specialist local government employment agencies that focus on executive recruitment services to local government.


44

1. WALGA Recruitment – WALGA Recruitment is an experienced division of WALGA and has been in the recruitment business for many years and represents many local governments in the State in executive appointments. The proposal outlines a methodology involving a timeline which is anticipated to take up to ten weeks following appointment of the organisation to obtaining a Council Resolution to appoint the successful applicant. WALGA Recruitment has proposed a fixed fee of $12,985 (including GST). WALGA Recruitment will liaise with Council during the entire process and conduct actions such as reviewing applications, short-listing preferred applicants, conducting preliminary interviews and background checks, discussion with Council and agree on short list and assisting with interview questions and background checks etc.. The cost of advertising is excluded and is estimated to cost $4,000.

2. Similarly LO-GO Appointments is an experienced firm and has been a specialist in local government recruitment services for many years. LO-GO Appointments commenced business in Western Australia and now has businesses in New South Wales and Queensland. Again, LO-GO Appointments has presented a comprehensive methodology that deals with the appointment process and is similar to WALGA Recruitment. LO-GO Appointments’ fee is based on the cash component of the salary package and is likely to be in the order of $12,800 (excluding GST). This fee also excludes advertising costs of approximately $4,000.

Both organisations are experienced and equipped to assist the Council is recruitment of a CEO. Given that the Council has sought advice from WALGA in relation to the appointment of an interim CEO and the fee proposals are similar, it is proposed to recommend the appointment of WALGA Recruitment to assist Council in the appointment of a CEO. Council or a Select Committee Consideration needs to be given to what structure the Council will use to progress the appointment process. There are a limited number of commonly adopted structures;

Council to manage the whole process;

Delegate to a fit for purpose Committee the responsibility to progress the appointment without any delegated power to make decisions (referring all preferred courses of action to Council to make the final decision); and

Delegate to a fit for purpose Committee to make all decisions relating to the process which would include appointment of CEO.

Future Meetings On the basis that Council adopts the proposition above, the most suitable method of progressing the appointment process is for Special Council Meetings to be held (unless relatively simple matters can be dealt with at Ordinary Council Meetings). Position Description / KPIs It is necessary to prepare a Position Description (PD) and set Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for the appointment. A draft document has been prepared as a base for discussion with the appointed recruitment agency. A copy of this document is attached (refer Attachment 11.1). The document should only be regarded as an initial draft document and can be modified following relevant consultation and further input. Voting Requirements: Simple majority.


45

COUNCIL RESOLUTION & OFFICER RECOMMENDATION ITEM 11.1 MOVED: CR GILLIES SECONDED: CR LEWIS

That with respect to the appointment of a CEO, Council; 1. Engage WALGA Recruitment to assist Council in the recruitment of CEO at a cost of

$12,985, excluding GST and advertising costs. 2. Agree that full Council administer in the process of appointment of CEO and make the

necessary decisions at key milestones as outlined in the WALGA Recruitment submission; and

3. Adopt the attached Position Description and KPIs as an interim document pending further discussion and consultation.


12. CLOSURE OF MEETING 5.54pm – There being no further business to discuss the Shire President, Cr Morrell, declared the meeting closed.

The Chief Executive Officer recommends the endorsement of these minutes at the next meeting. Signed: ______________________________________________

Cliff Frewing – Chief Executive Officer

Date: ________________________________ These minutes were confirmed at a meeting on the ____________________________________. Signed: _____________________________________________ (Presiding Person at the meeting at which the minutes were confirmed.)

ordinary meeting of council - shire of denmark · 1/19/2016 · ordinary meeting of council 19...

Documents