Ordinary Council - Shire of Augusta-Margaret River · Manager Asset Management : Mr David Nicholson...

Ordinary Council

MINUTES

FOR THE MEETING HELD WEDNESDAY, 10 SEPTEMBER 2014 IN AUGUSTA COUNCIL CHAMBERS,

ALLNUTT TERRACE, AUGUSTA COMMENCING AT 5:30PM

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 10 SEPTEMBER 2014

1

Meeting Notice

Dear Councillor I advise that an Ordinary Council Meeting of the Shire of Augusta Margaret River will be held in the Augusta Council Chambers, 66 Allnutt Terrace, Augusta, on Wednesday 10 September 2014, commencing at 5:30pm. Yours faithfully

GARY EVERSHED CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


2

ATTENTION/DISCLAIMER

These minutes will be confirmed at the next Ordinary Council Meeting. The minutes should be read to ascertain the decision of the Council. In certain circumstances members of the public are not entitled to inspect material, which in the opinion of the Chief Executive Officer is confidential, and relates to a meeting or a part of a meeting that is likely to be closed to members of the public. No responsibility whatsoever is implied or accepted by the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River for any act, omission, statement or intimation occurring during Council or Committee meetings. The Shire of Augusta-Margaret River 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 of intimation occurring during Council or Committee meetings. Any person or legal entity who acts or fails to act in reliance upon any statement, act or omission made in a Council or Committee meeting 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 licence, any statement or intimation of approval made by any member or Officer of the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River during the course of any meeting is not intended to be and is not taken as notice of approval from the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River. The Shire of Augusta-Margaret River advises that anyone who has any application lodged with the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River 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 Augusta-Margaret River in respect of the application. The Shire of Augusta-Margaret River advises that any plans or documents contained within these minutes may be subject to copyright law provisions (Copyright Act 1968, as amended) and that the express permission of the copyright owner(s) should be sought prior to their reproduction. It should be noted that Copyright owners are entitled to take legal action against any persons who infringe their copyright. A reproduction of material that is protected by copyright may represent a copyright infringement.


3

TABLE OF CONTENTS ITEM NO. SUBJECT PAGE NO.

1. DECLARATION OF OPENING ............................................................................................ 5

2. ATTENDANCE...................................................................................................................... 5 2.1. APOLOGIES ......................................................................................................................... 5 2.2. APPROVED LEAVE OF ABSENCE ..................................................................................... 5

3. DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST ........................................................................................... 6

4. PUBLIC QUESTIONS ........................................................................................................... 6 4.1. RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE ......................... 6 4.2. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME ................................................................................................... 6 4.2.1 MR ROSS FIMISTER (TURNER ST, AUGUSTA) – AUGUSTA PUBLIC OPEN

SPACE .................................................................................................................................. 6

5. APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE ..................................................................... 6 5.1 CR FELICITY HAYNES – 24 SEPTEMBER AND 8 OCTOBER 2014 ................................. 6

6. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING ................................................ 7 6.1 ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING HELD 27 AUGUST 2014 ................................................ 7

7. DEPUTATIONS..................................................................................................................... 7 7.1 ITEM 11.2.2 SCHEME AMENDMENT 25 AND STRUCTURE PLAN FOR FINAL

APPROVAL – MR MARC HALSALL ................................................................................... 7

8. PETITIONS ........................................................................................................................... 7

9. ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM THE PRESIDING MEMBER ................................................... 7 9.1 EVENTS RECENTLY ATTENDED BY THE SHIRE PRESIDENT ....................................... 7

10. QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN .............................................. 8

11. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES AND EMPLOYEE REPORTS ............................................. 8

11.1. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ........................................................................................... 10 11.1.1 ICON EVENT FUNDING REPORT - STATE MOUNTAIN BIKING

CHAMPIONSHIPS AND THE CAPE TO CAPE MOUNTAIN BIKE EVENT ....................... 10

11.2. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................... 19 11.2.1 DRAFT CAR-PARKING STRATEGY - FOR APPROVAL TO ADVERTISE. ...................... 19 11.2.2 SCHEME AMENDMENT 25 AND STRUCTURE PLAN FOR FINAL APPROVAL ............. 26 11.2.3 AMENDMENT 19 TO LPS1 - LOT 100 BROCKMAN HIGHWAY, KARRIDALE;

WAPC MODIFICATIONS .................................................................................................... 35 11.2.4 STRUCTURE PLAN FOR LOTS 9500 AND 9501 BUSSELL HIGHWAY AND

WAVERLEY ROADS, COWARAMUP - WAPC MODIFICATIONS .................................... 41 11.2.5 STRUCTURE PLAN MODIFICATIONS - LOT 449 MILYEANNUP COAST

ROAD, SCOTT RIVER ........................................................................................................ 43 11.2.6 RECONSIDERATION OF DAM APPROVAL CONDITIONS - 55 (LOT 1) DIANA

ROAD, AUGUSTA .............................................................................................................. 45

11.3. INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES ........................................................................................ 54 11.3.1 HARDY INLET FORESHORE MANAGEMENT PLAN ....................................................... 54 11.3.2 PROPOSED CLOSURE OF BOULTER ROAD, FOREST GROVE ................................... 61

11.4. CORPORATE AND COMMUNITY SERVICES .................................................................. 68 11.4.1 MINUTES OF BUSH FIRE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING HELD 20

AUGUST 2014 .................................................................................................................... 68 11.4.2 LOCAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 12

AUGUST 2014 .................................................................................................................... 71

12. MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN ...................................... 73

13. MOTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION AT NEXT MEETING ................................................. 73


4

14. NEW BUSINESS OF AN URGENT NATURE .................................................................... 73 14.1. MEMBERS .......................................................................................................................... 73 14.1.1 LETTER OF THANKS TO MINISTER OF REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT – CR

LYN SERVENTY ................................................................................................................. 73 14.2. CEO ..................................................................................................................................... 73 14.2.1 COUNCILLOR REPRESENTATION ON THE AUGUSTA MARITIME ADVISORY

COMMITTEE ....................................................................................................................... 74

15. CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS .............................................................................................. 77

16. CLOSURE OF MEETING ................................................................................................... 77


5

Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on Wednesday 10 September 2014, in Council Chambers, 66 Allnutt Tce, Augusta, commencing at 5.30pm.

1. DECLARATION OF OPENING

The Chair welcomed all in attendance and declared the meeting open at 5.32pm.

2. ATTENDANCE

Shire President : Cr Mike Smart Leeuwin Ward Councillors : Cr Kim Hastie Leeuwin Ward

Cr Ian Earl North Ward Cr Lyn Serventy North Ward Cr Neville Veitch Town Ward Cr Felicity Haynes Town Ward

Chief Executive Officer : Mr Gary Evershed Director Sustainable Development : Mr Iliya Hastings Director Corporate and Community Services : Ms Annie Riordan Director Infrastructure Services : Mr Johan Louw Manager Planning and Development : Mr Nick Logan Manager Asset Management : Mr David Nicholson Marketing and Events Officer : Ms Amanda Russell Minute Secretary : Ms Zoe Cunningham

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC 9 MEMBERS OF THE PRESS Augusta Margaret River Mail : Nil Augusta Margaret River Times : Warren Hately

2.1. Apologies

Cr Kylie Kennaugh, North Ward

2.2. Approved Leave of Absence

Nil


6

3. DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

3.1 Declaration of Financial Interest – Item 11.2.2 Scheme Amendment 25 and Structure Plan for Final Approval – Cr Neville Veitch

Cr Veitch wrote to Shire President, Cr Mike Smart, to disclose an interest in Item 11.2.2 Scheme Amendment 25 and Structure Plan for Final Approval. Cr Veitch’s brother Peter owns lot 118 Orchid Ramble, and as Cr Veitch and his brother share ownership of a property in the town, he wished to declare a financial interest.

4. PUBLIC QUESTIONS

4.1. Response to Previous Public Questions Taken on Notice

Nil

4.2. Public Question Time

4.2.1 Mr Ross Fimister (Turner St, Augusta) – Augusta Public Open Space

Mr Ross Fimister of Turner Street, Augusta, asked Council the following questions in regards to the sale of Augusta’s public open space: Q1: Given the strong local community response against the Council’s proposed policy to

sell Public Open Space in Augusta, what happens next and where do we go from here? The Shire President, Cr Mike Smart, responded to Mr Fimister, noting that Council has been through the process of advertising the Open Space policy and has made a decision. Director Sustainable Development, Mr Iliya Hastings added that the Public Open Space Policy had been advertised for 60 days to allow for public responses, which were addressed in the report to Council. The decision has been made by Council to dispose of some POS land and the Shire are now awaiting endorsement from the WAPC before commencing the process to rezone and convert to freehold. Q2: Is there any guarantee that the money from the sale of the Augusta Public Open Space

will go back into Augusta? Cr Mike Smart responded to the question, noting that there are requirements for proceeds from the sale of Public Open Space to be expended on open space in Augusta. It is the Council’s intention and has been reflected in the documentation on this issue prepared to date 5. APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

5.1 Cr Felicity Haynes – 24 September and 8 October 2014

Cr Haynes requested that Council grant her leave of absence for the Ordinary Meetings of Council which will be held on 24 September and 8 October 2014. MOTION / COUNCIL DECISION

CR VEITCH, CR SERVENTY OM2014/196 That Council approve leave of absence for Cr Felicity Haynes for the 24 September 2014 and 8 October 2014 Ordinary Meetings of Council. CARRIED 6/0


7

6. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

6.1 Ordinary Council Meeting held 27 August 2014

MOTION / COUNCIL DECISION

CR EARL, CR VEITCH OM2014/197 That the minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held 27 August 2014 are confirmed to be a true and correct record of the meeting. CARRIED 6/0

7. DEPUTATIONS

7.1 Item 11.2.2 Scheme Amendment 25 and Structure Plan for Final Approval – Mr Marc Halsall

Mr Marc Halsall of Halsall and Associates Town Planning Consultants and residing at 10 Freycinet Way Gnarabup, addressed the meeting in relation to Item 11.2.2 Scheme Amendment 25 and Structure Plan for Final Approval, Margaret River. A summary of his deputation is as follows: Today I am making a brief presentation on behalf of 13 landowners in relation to the proposed Scheme Amendment and Structure Plan which will effect minor modifications to the current town planning framework for the Isaac’s Ridge tourist site. Councillors may be aware that the proposal was initiated formally via the Council and advertised publicly recently. The proposal was originally commenced in 2008 and has obviously been an objective of the group for many years. Tonight’s decision is therefore very important to the owners. During the advertising of the proposal a number of submissions of objection were received, however general support from the Government agencies was provided. One particular important issue was fire management, and this resulted in a meeting on site with the Department of Fire and Emergency Services, a Shire planner and the fire consultant to discuss the fire management planning for the site. This resulted in minor alterations to the Fire Management Plan and support for its objectives from DFES. The Shire planner’s report takes into account the general support of the Government agencies and makes sound comment in relation to the concerns raised in some of the public submissions. We obviously support the Shire planner’s recommendation and respectfully request the Council to support the officer’s recommendation too. If supported, the amendment would provide impetus for rebuilding the development and ongoing management of the site by the strata company. The Chair called for questions from Council and thanked Mr Halsall for his presentation.

8. PETITIONS

Nil

9. ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM THE PRESIDING MEMBER

9.1 Events recently attended by the Shire President

On Thursday 4 September, the Shire President and CEO attended the Margaret River Region 2014 Business Awards, presented by the Margaret River Chamber of Commerce and AMRTA, at Aravina Estate. Local business Morries Anytime collected the Large Business of the Year award, with several other local businesses also picking up prizes. On Friday 5 September, the Shire President attended the annual National Party sundowner function at Lake Cave, which was organised by AMRTA and was well received by all delegates. The Shire President also attended the National Party State Conference welcoming address in Margaret River on Saturday 6 September, on behalf of the AMRS Council. He joined state parliamentarians and the Acting Prime Minister, Warren Truss, as the Minister for Regional


8

Development, the Hon Terry Redman, announced $60 million in funding for the Margaret River Perimeter Road.

10. QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

Nil

11. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES AND EMPLOYEE REPORTS


9

11.1 Chief Executive Officer


10

11.1. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 11.1.1 ICON EVENT FUNDING REPORT - STATE MOUNTAIN BIKING CHAMPIONSHIPS AND

THE CAPE TO CAPE MOUNTAIN BIKE EVENT

LOCATION/ADDRESS Shire of Augusta Margaret River APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Zubini Marketing & Management,

Margaret River Off Road Cycling Association FILE REFERENCE REC/22 REPORT AUTHOR Amanda Russell, Position Title AUTHORISING OFFICER Gary Evershed, Chief Executive Officer

IN BRIEF

Icon Events are large scale events deemed to be of state, national and/or international significance, which demonstrate the ability to generate economic activity (tourism, trade, investment).

The Shire’s Icon Event sponsorship policy facilitates up to 1% of rates to sponsor Icon Events per financial year. At the 25 June 2014 Ordinary Meeting, Council endorsed an allocation of 0.7% of rates income, or $120,000 for Icon Events, for the 2014/15 financial year.

Council has already allocated $81,000 of the 2014/15 Icon Events budget in prior resolutions - Margaret River Surf Pro ($20,000), Augusta Adventure Fest ($10,000), Augusta River Festival ($5,000), the Margaret River Tennis Pro ($15,000), Emergence Creative Festival ($6,000), Tour of Margaret River Cycling ($15,000), and Open Studios ($10,000).

The CEO has allocated a further $10,000 of Icon Events funding to secure a National Basketball League preseason game to be played at the Margaret River Recreation Centre.

Council is required to consider two applications for cash funding for the State Mountain Biking Championships ($5,000) and the Cape to Cape Mountain Bike Event ($15,000) from the remaining funding pool of $29,000.

The Shire is likely to receive further Icon Event funding requests for the 2014/15 financial year from organisers of the Illuminate, the Readers and Writers Festival and an Indigenous food event to be held at the Margaret River Education Campus in conjunction with Gourmet Escape.

CinefestOz has indicated they will withhold any request for funding until the 2015/16 financial year.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Notes previous Icon Event funding commitments for the 2014/15 financial year as follows:

Event Funding Fee waivers Comments

Augusta Adventure Fest 10,000 2,400 OMC 27/6/12

Drug Aware Surf Pro 20,000 8,000 OMC 12/6/13

Augusta River Festival 5,000 - OMC 25/6/14

Tennis Pro 15,000 - OMC 25/6/14

Emergence Creative 6,000 - OMC 25/6/14

Tour of Margaret River 15,000 - OMC 25/6/14

Open Studios 10,000 - OMC 25/6/14

NBL basketball preseason 10,000 CEO allocation

TOTAL 91,000 10,400

2. Commits $15,000 Icon Events funding as follows:

Event 2014/15

Cape to Cape Mountain Bike 10,000


11

State Mountain Bike Championships 5,000

TOTAL 15,000

subject to: a. Event organisers meeting, and continuing to meet, internal accountability measures b. The negotiation on a benefits and sponsorship package between the Shire and funding

recipients c. The Shire being invoiced in the 2014/15 financial year

3. Notes the CEO will determine the remaining $14,000 in the 2014/15 Icon Events budget in

accordance with Council policy.

LOCATION PLAN NA TABLED ITEMS Nil FUNDING REQUESTS The Shire of Augusta Margaret River has received two funding requests pertaining to events scheduled to be held in the region in 2014/15 as follows:

Margaret River Off Road Cycling Association (MRORCA) has requested $5,000 to assist with trail construction to facilitate the State Mountain Biking Championships. The event requires the trails to be rerouted due to the planned logging of a portion of the Pines (north of Carters Rd, west of Rails to Trails).

Zubini Marketing and Management is requesting $15,000 in funding for the Cape to Cape Mountain Bike race. The funding will contribute to the prize pool to assist in attracting high profile athletes to the event.

BACKGROUND Icon Event Policy Council has adopted an Icon Events Policy to facilitate for the funding of major events that are large scale, deemed to be of state, national and/or international significance and demonstrate the ability to generate economic activity (tourism, trade, investment). The policy states a maximum of 1% of rate payers income can be allocated to major events sponsorship each financial year. The policy defines Icon Event criteria as: Primary Criteria Management Planning, Sustainability, Access and Opportunity, Consultation. Secondary Criteria Economic impacts, Media coverage, Tourism Activity, Co-Cash Contributions, Prestige, Community Involvement, Capacity Building (upskilling the community), Social Justice (affordability of social engagement), Environmental Impacts, Education and Conservation. As stated in the policy, the intent of Icon Events funding is to provide seed support for establishing and growing events with the overall objective that they become self-sufficient over time. Furthermore, to be considered for Icon Event funding the event should be geographically located within the Shire of Augusta Margaret River Local Government Area OR promote and position the region to a target external audience to achieve economic activity objectives.


12

Recent funding 2012/13 In the 2012/13 financial year, $74,000 in Icon Events funding was allocated as follows:

Event 2012/13

Anaconda 12,000

Cape to Cape MTB 9,000

Cinefest Oz 14,000

Emergence Creative Festival 4,000

Drug Aware Pro 20,000

Tennis Pro event 15,000

2013/14 In the 2013/14 financial year, $97,000 was allocated as follows:

Event 2013/14

Anaconda (Augusta Adventure Fest) 11,000

Cinefest Oz 15,000

Tennis Pro 15,000

ARTN – tourism conference 10,000


Drug Aware Pro Surf Event 20,000

Illuminate 2,000

AMRTA – Regional Producers Book 4,000

WAM – Album 4,000

Shire Community Event 6,000

A further $5,000 in funding was allocated to the Augusta River Festival from the Community Contributions fund and $6,000 was allocated to Emergence Creative Festival from the CAPEROC budget. Allocations for 2014/15 At the 25 June 2014 Ordinary Meeting, Council approved the allocation (pending adoption of the budget) of 0.7% of rates income towards Icon Event funding equating to $120,000 and committed to $51,000 in 2014/15 Icon Event funding for the Augusta River Festival ($5,000), the Margaret River Tennis Pro ($15,000), Emergence Creative Festival ($6,000), the Tour of Margaret River Cycling ($15,000), and Open Studios ($10,000). At the 27 June 2012 Ordinary Meeting, Council entered a three-year deal to sponsor Anaconda (renamed Augusta Adventure Fest). The final year of the agreement pertains to the 2014/15 financial year.

Event 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Augusta Adventure Fest 12,000 11,000 10,000

At the 12 June 2013 Ordinary Meeting, Council entered a three-year deal to sponsor the Drug Aware Surf Pro. The second year of the agreement pertains to the 2014/15 financial year.

Event 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

Drug Aware Pro 20,000 20,000 20,000

In July 2014 the CEO allocated a further $10,000 of Icon Events funding to secure a National Basketball League preseason game to be played at the Margaret River Recreation Centre.


13

A summary of funding requests and commitments for 2014/15 financial year is as follows:

Event Previously committed

New funding request

Fee waivers

Comments




Tennis Pro 15,000 - OMC 25/6/14




NBL basketball preseason

10,000 CEO allocation

State MTB 5,000


TOTAL 91,000 20,000 10,400

Fee waivers None of the new Icon Event proposals Council is required to consider have requested fee waivers, however in the interest of context the following information is supplied. At the 27 June 2012 meeting Council resolved to grant fee waivers for the Augusta Adventure Fest to align with three-year sponsorship deal. At the 12 June 2013 meeting Council agreed to three-year fee waiver deal for the Surf Pro ending 2015/16. A summary of the approved waivers, including $10,400 allocated for the 2014/15 financial year is as follows:

Assessment A report was compiled for each of the two new event proposals as follows: State MTB Championships – Trail reconfiguration BACKGROUND MRORCA has requested $5,000 to assist with trail construction to facilitate the State Mountain Biking (MTB) Championships, scheduled to be held on Sunday 28 September 2014 in the Pines to the north of Carters Rd. A new trail is required to be constructed to due to the planned logging of a portion of the Pines (north of Carters Rd, west of Rails to Trails) interrupting the existing circuit prior to the event. MRORCA advises the connector trail will be 2km in length and will run from the north-eastern point of the Pines, along the eastern boundary, to the south-eastern point to achieve a continual loop. MRORCA advises the value of the reconstruction is valued at $50-60,000 based on the industry standard of $25-30 per metre, however is proposing to complete the construction for under $10,000 through the predominant use of volunteers. MRORCA proposes to use the Shire’s contribution for a project manager and machinery to complete the works and has sought a co-contribution from DPaW, who have approved the works and contributed $70,000 towards new trail development following the complete logging of the Pines over the next 12 months. It is estimated 200 visiting riders will participate in the State Mountain Biking Championships event. MRORCA is providing a major volunteer contribution to the event assisting with marshalling and is offering local club members the opportunity to gain accreditation as race commissaries. The new trails constructed for the event will be retained for use by the community for the next 12 months during the

Event

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 Comments

Anaconda (Augusta Adventure Fest)

2,200 2,300 2,400 Resolution 27/6/12

Drug Aware Surf Pro 8,000 8,000 8,000 Resolution 12/6/13


14

transitional phase of the Pines being logged to the opening of the new mountain biking facilities in the Bramley National Park in late 2015. CONSULTATION AND ADVICE

MRORCA

DPaW DISCUSSION/OFFICER COMMENTS A $5,000 investment by Council will initially assist in the execution of the State MTB Championships. This event is valuable to the shire in that it instigates visitation from approximately 200 participants and their partners, families and support crews. The event will also assist in the promotion of Margaret River Region as a mountain biking destination to a target audience. The event creates opportunities for local engagement through volunteering, offers capacity building through the opportunity to gain a race commissary qualification and is a free for people to spectate. The investment in the event by Council will also result in trail that will be retained by the community as asset for the next 12 months and enable the unlogged portion of the Pines to be utilise in a full circuit. Statistics provided by MRORCA indicates the Pines trail were accessed by riders 20,000 times over the previous 12 months and the construction of a full circuit will assist in retaining these trail usage numbers during the transitional period between the logging of the pines and the new opening of the new trails. A survey in the draft South West MTB Trail Master Plan indicates the value of cycling tourism with with results indicating approximately 65% people using the trails are visitors to the region. Furthermore, both Tourism Australia and Tourism WA recognise cyclists as a key emerging tourism market. The South West Development Commission identifies trail infrastructure in the South West as a priority tourism project. It should be noted Council will not be able to enter a sponsorship agreement with State MTB event organisers as a result of this funding due to the proposed agreement being with MRORCA. The benefits for Council will be the extended retainment of an infrastructure asset which is both valuable and heavily utilised both the local community and tourists. Given the value of the trails to the local economy, the value of the event to instigating tourism and the considerable volunteer input being contributed by MRORCA to complete the works, it is recommended that Council fund $5,000 for the trail reconnection. STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS N/A STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Aligns with KPIs as identified in the Community Strategic Plan 2033.

Vibrant and diverse economy – Increased participation at Icon Events

Vibrant and diverse economy – Increase in tourist numbers visiting the Shire FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The allocation of $5,000 from the 2014/15 Icon Event funding pool. SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental The event and proposed works are being conducted with the approval of DPaW in an existing pine plantation. There is not expected to be any impact to surrounding bushland. Social The event is a positive promotion of health and recreational pursuits for all ages. The retainment of the trails for the community will assist in encouraging the sport of mountain biking by local residents and visitors to our region.


15

Economic The event will attract an estimated 200 riders to the region from around the State. The event is being marketed to mountain bikers both with the State and around Australia and will encourage repeat visitation.

Cape to Cape Mountain Bike BACKGROUND Zubini Marketing and Management has requested $15,000 in Icon Event funding from the Shire to assist in the running of the 2014 Cape to Cape Mountain Bike (C2CMTB) event. C2CMTB is a four-day mountain bike event held in the South West between 23 and 26 October 2014. The event begins at Cape Leeuwin Lighthouse and riders spend the first three days of the ride in the Shire of Augusta Margaret River. On the fourth day riders depart Colonial Brewery and head north to complete the ride at Dunsborough Sports Club. The event is designed for both elite and recreational riders who are looking for a challenge. Entry options are flexible with participants able to complete the whole course, half the course or any one-day stage. The Shire of Augusta Margaret River sponsored the C2CMTB as an Icon Event to the value of $9000 in the 2012/13 financial year and $10,000 in the 2013/14 financial year. The objectives for the event in 2014 include increasing participation to 1500 (up from 1365 last year), bringing higher profile riders to the event, instigating more media exposure on a state, national and international level, promoting active participation, and positioning the South West as a mountain biking destination to an interested market. CONSULTATION AND ADVICE

Margaret River Off Road Cycling Association

Zubini Marketing and Management

City of Busselton

Augusta Margaret River Tourism Association OFFICER DISCUSSION The C2CMTB is aligned with the Shire’s strategic objectives, predominantly takes places within the Shire, it is of state calibre and promotes the region on state, national and international platforms, and facilitates for the promotion of Shire marketing messages. C2CMTB is facilitating an increased interest and awareness of the Shire of Augusta Margaret River as a mountain biking destination. In 2014, event marketing activities will include regional and state newspaper coverage, niche magazines, Channel 10 sports coverage and a one hour Cape to Cape documentary to appear on Fox Sports, Fuel TV, GWN, SBS and internationally through ESPN. The Shire of Augusta Margaret River sponsored the C2CMTB as an Icon Event to the value of $9000 in the 2012/13 financial year and $10,000 in the 2013/14 financial year. The event is highly valuable in contribution to the exposure of the region as a mountain biking destination and encouraging visitation for the event and repeat visitation. The event offers opportunity to participate, spectate and volunteer. The organisations have a good working relationship with local cycling associations, including MRORCA, who offer their support to the event. Event organisations assist the Shire’s Youth Advisory Council to conduct fundraising by packing the registration bags for participants. It recommended to provide $10,000 in Icon Event funding to the event. STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS N/A STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS

Vibrant and diverse economy – Increased participation at Icon Events

Vibrant and diverse economy – Increase in tourist numbers visiting the Shire


16

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Provision of $10,000 from the 2014/15 Icon Event budget allocation. SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental The event is conducted on approved trails. Social The event offers valuable social engagement opportunities and promotes the ‘be active’ message. Economic It is estimated the 2014 event will directly contribute $3.18m to the local economy.

Event funding summary Should Council adopt as per the officer’s recommendation, a full summary of event cash funding, fee waivers and funding requests for 2014/15 would be:

Event Icon Event funding Fee waivers Comments




Tennis Pro 15,000 - OMC 25/6/14





State MTB 5,000 New request

Cape to Cape MTB 10,000 New request

TOTAL 106,000 10,400

Remaining unallocated 14,000 -

The $14,000 unallocated would remain in the funding pool for allocation later in the financial year. Organisers of the Readers and Writers Festival, Illuminate and a food event have indicated interested in applying for funding in the coming months. It is expected the CinefestOz Film Festival will again apply to finding through Council but will do so next financial year. VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Notes previous Icon Event funding commitments for the 2014/15 financial year as follows:





Tennis Pro 15,000 - OMC 25/6/14





TOTAL 91,000 10,400


17


Event 2014/15



TOTAL 15,000

subject to: a. Event organisers meeting, and continuing to meet, internal accountability measures b. The negotiation on a benefits and sponsorship package between the Shire and funding

recipients c. The Shire being invoiced in the 2014/15 financial year


accordance with Council policy. ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT Nil ATTACHMENTS Nil

RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION

CR EARL, CR VEITCH OM2014/198 That Council: 1. Notes previous Icon Event funding commitments for the 2014/15 financial year as follows:





Tennis Pro 15,000 - OMC 25/6/14




NBL basketball preseason

10,000 CEO allocation

TOTAL 91,000 10,400


Event 2014/15



TOTAL 15,000

subject to: a. Event organisers meeting, and continuing to meet, internal accountability

measures b. The negotiation on a benefits and sponsorship package between the Shire and

funding recipients c. The Shire being invoiced in the 2014/15 financial year


accordance with Council policy. CARRIED 6/0


18

11.2 Sustainable Development


19

11.2. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 11.2.1 DRAFT CAR-PARKING STRATEGY - FOR APPROVAL TO ADVERTISE.

LOCATION/ADDRESS Shire Wide APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Various FILE REFERENCE TPT/46 REPORT AUTHOR Matt Cuthbert, Strategic Project Officer AUTHORISING OFFICER Iliya Hastings, Director Sustainable Development

IN BRIEF

A draft Car-parking Strategy has been prepared as recommended by the Integrated Transport Strategy 2012.

Its purpose is to assess and make recommendations on the efficacy of existing car parking requirements and to guide the future development and management or car parking, particularly in the town centre.

The Strategy has been reviewed by an independent expert consultancy (Luxmoore), who generally supports its content and have made additional recommendations for inclusion.

It is recommended that the draft Strategy be advertised for public comment subject to modifications as suggested by Luxmoore.

RECOMMENDATION That Council advertises the draft Car-Parking Strategy for the purposes of public consultation for a period of 21 days.

STUDY AREA The draft Car-parking Strategy considers the parking requirements for development across the Shire, however applies particular focus on the Margaret River town centre, where parking issues are most acute (see Figure 1). TABLED ITEMS Review of draft Car-parking Strategy – Luxmoore BACKGROUND In 2012, the Integrated Transport Strategy (ITS) was prepared as a necessary document informing the Supertown Growth Plan, funded through the Royalties for Regions programme. The ITS investigated and made recommendations on all manner of transport related items, including car-parking. Notwithstanding the broad recommendations contained in the ITS, the need for a more detailed study was identified in relation to car-parking. The Strategy is prepared at the time of a paradigm shift wherein transport demand management is becoming the primary tool for responding to increased parking demand, rather than the construction of more parking. This requires the Shire to set in place a new strategy to guide future decision making and urban planning. Notwithstanding, the primary mode of travel to the Town Centre continues to be the private motor vehicle and thus sufficient parking remains a critical component of future planning for the town. The recommendations contained within the Car-parking Strategy attempt to find a balance between adequate parking supply and demand to ensure the prosperity of the businesses within the Shire and the trend towards more efficient use of transportation infrastructure and transport demand management techniques.


20

Figure 1 - Margaret River Town Centre THE PROPOSAL The objectives of the Car-parking Strategy are to: a) Review the efficacy of existing car-parking standards contained in LPS1; b) Investigate the adequacy of existing car-parking; c) Achieve maximum utilisation of existing car-parking bays; d) Ensure an adequate supply of future car-parking spaces can be provided that are conveniently

located and are easily accessible to support the desired growth of the town centre; e) Ensure that the provision of car-parking facilities does not diminish the urban character,

or result in a poor urban design outcome; and f) Ensure that an over-supply of car-parking does not occur to the extent that it discourages

alternative forms of transport and actively promote sustainable modes of transport within the town centre.

PLANNING FRAMEWORK The following documents have set a framework for the development of the draft Car-parking Strategy. Local Planning Scheme No. 1 (LPS1) LPS1 sets out the minimum amount of parking to be provided for any new development or change of landuse. Clause 5.8.1 ‘Car parking requirements’ states: “(a) Land within the Scheme Area shall not be used or developed for any of the purposes requiring planning approval under the Scheme unless car parking is provided on the site in accordance with the provisions of Schedule 12…….” Examples of minimum standards contained at Schedule 12 are as follows: Retail: 1 bay per 25m

2


21

Showroom: 1 bay per 50m2

Office: 1 bay per 25m2 (with street frontage) 1 bay per 40m

2 (first floor and above)

Local Planning Strategy Recommendations of the Local Planning Strategy relevant to car-parking are: “3.13.7 Development will be required to provide car parking in line with the provisions set out in Local Planning Scheme No. 1 and any relevant local planning policies. The provision of semi-permeable car parking surfaces and planting of trees to provide shade to parking areas should also be taken into consideration. 3.13.8 A comprehensive parking strategy will be developed by the local government to address future parking supply needs, car park locations, access arrangements, management strategies and funding mechanisms (including cash-in-lieu contributions), for settlements within the Shire.” Supertown Growth Plan Section 3.7.2 of the Supertown Growth Plan is applicable in that it relates to car-parking. It states: “There are currently over 1,100 parking spaces within 400 metres of the centre of the townsite and available for public use (GHD 2012). A parking assessment undertaken by GHD in December 2011 suggested that parking space occupancy is about 60%. An additional retail anchor tenant (Woolworths) will add a further 208 vehicle spaces to parking provision in the centre of the townsite by mid-2013. Opportunities exist to provide additional parking in a number of locations throughout the Townsite, including Churchill Avenue and Town View Terrace.” Integrated Transport Strategy (ITS) The ITS makes the following relevant recommendations: “The Local Planning Scheme should be amended to revise the townsite centre parking standards for commercial and residential developments within 400m of the centre of the townsite. The proposed commercial parking standard is one space per 30m

2. The residential car parking standards

proposed are: maximum of one car parking space per one/two bed dwelling, and a maximum of two spaces per three or more bed dwelling Schedule 12 of the Local Planning Scheme should apply for other land uses.” “There is potential for an additional 600-800 parking spaces that could be provided within decked car parks in the centre of the townsite. This will require further study to determine the engineering and visual constraints of these structures.” “Therefore, for the purposes of this strategy a cash-in-lieu payment of $30,000 per space is appropriate for the Shire of Augusta Margaret River, but this should be confirmed following the design and costing of the decked car parking areas.” DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS Key Findings The key findings of the draft Strategy which have been utilised in the formulation of its recommendations are as follows:

Parking is a relatively expensive commodity incorporated into the cost of development, and added as a hidden surcharge to the price of effectively any good or service.

Contemporary transport planning favours transport demand management as the primary tool for responding to increased parking demand, rather than the construction of more parking.

There are currently over 1300 car bays within the Margaret River Town Centre area, available for public use.

On average, 1 car bay per 25m2 of generic (all landuses) floor space is currently in place.

There is currently no shortage of car-parking available in the Margaret River Town Centre, except at peak times of the year (Christmas / Easter).

Conventional practice is not to provide parking supply to meet demand on the busiest day of the year which would be uneconomical because parking supply would exceed demand for all but one day of the year. Likewise, it would be inappropriate to link the supply of parking to the demand on an average day, as this would mean that there would be insufficient parking available on half the days of every year.

If current population growth and rates of development continue into the future an additional 500-700 car-parking bays will be required between 2014 and 2035.


22

The car-parking requirements of the operative town planning scheme have remained generally unchanged since 1985 (Scheme 11).

Recommendations The Recommendations of the draft Strategy are as follows: 1. Parking rates for all non-residential land uses in the Margaret River Town Centre be

reduced via modification to LPS1. The adequacy of existing car-parking in the town centre, and the Shire’s initiatives aimed at facilitating a shift towards non-motorised forms of transport, provide the opportunity to reduce car-parking rates. It has been recognised that an oversupply of parking promotes the use of private vehicles and thus would run counter to the Shire’s objectives. The existing parking standards contained within LPS1 require 1 bay per 25m

2 for most commercial uses. The recommended parking rates if adopted will

provide for a 20% reduction in parking provision as follows: Ground floor commercial - 1 bay per 30m

2 NLA

Upper floor office space - 1 bay per 40m2 NLA

2. The parking rates for all ‘hospitality’ land uses in the Margaret River Town Centre be

reduced via modification to LPS1 The following recommended parking rates for hospitality businesses provide a similar reduction in car-parking as provided to other land uses by recommendation 1: Restaurant/Café - 1 space per 5 seats or 1 space per 30m

2 nla whichever is the greater.

Hotel/Tavern, Small Bar, Brewery - 1 bay per unit of accommodation where applicable plus 1 bay per 7.5m

2 of bar space (areas occupied by customers, excluding servery areas).

It is considered that the intended reduction will not lead to a shortage of parking. This is because the peak demand times associated with hospitality uses differs from other uses in the Town Centre. On a typical day the fall in demand for bays by office workers corresponds with a peak in demand by restaurants. As such, some reciprocal use of other available bays can occur. Reciprocal use results in the most efficient use of car-parking bays as it extends the period for which they are occupied. 3. Undertake detailed evaluation of cost and feasibility of decked parking and application

of cash in lieu rate. The best available estimate of the cost of constructing a decked car-park (excluding land costs and subject to the number of bays) is $30,000 per bay. However, prior to adopting a fixed rate for cash in lieu, a detailed study of the cost and feasibility of constructing a decked car park should be undertaken to ensure that cash in lieu contributions are sufficient to meet their intended purpose. 4. Subject to the outcome of recommendation 3, 25% of car-parking obligations for any

development requiring over 4 bays, may be discharged via the payment of cash in lieu of parking.

Based upon the analysis provided in the draft strategy, it is predicted that a parking rate of 1 bay per 30m

2 for most commercial landuses will deliver adequate parking to cater for average demand over

the course of the next 20 years. This provides the opportunity for the Shire to adopt a position whereby 25% of all required parking could be taken as cash in lieu. Such an approach would:

Not detract from the timely provision of car-parking by developers in line with the construction of

new commercial establishments;

Make more land available for commercial development to meet the needs of the community;

Potentially provide over $5 million in revenue (based upon 20,000m2 of new commercial floor

space being developed) with which to buy or construct strategically located car-parking; and

Allow the Shire to maximise the utilisation of land already identified and used for car-parking

through the introduction of decked parking.

5. LPS1 be amended to allow for a reduction in the amount of car-parking otherwise required, where a developer prepares and implements an active transport plan, to the satisfaction of the Shire.

Active transport refers to non-motorised forms of transport and can include public transport where walking or cycling forms part of the journey. Developers should be encouraged to maximise the extent to which buildings support active transport. One way of achieving this would be to provide for a


23

reduction in car-parking bays subject to preparation by the developer of an ‘active transport plan’ inclusive of end of trip facilities to be incorporated into the development. The cost of so doing would be offset by the reduction in space required to be set aside for car-parking, its construction and maintenance, noting that many bicycles can be accommodate within the space necessary to accommodate just one vehicle. 6. Time limited parking in the town centre should not be introduced, until/unless supported

by the business community. The key issue presently facing the Town Centre is not a lack of bays (except at peak times) but whether or not available bays meet with user needs in the sense that they are located within relative proximity of the intended destination. With over 200 bays having recently been constructed at the Woolworths development, it could be the case that shoppers are prepared to park, and walk to access other destinations. Whilst the relatively compact nature of the town centre makes walking feasible, it would be at odds with the culture of ‘parking at the door’ which has developed over time. Therefore, the impact of a lack of car-parking bays in prime parking location would affect retailers most of all. Despite this, retailers have previously indicated that they do not support timed parking. 7. Parking rates applicable to residential development in the Town Centre should be left

unchanged. The Integrated Transport Strategy recommends “a maximum of one car parking space per one/two bed dwelling, and a maximum of two spaces per three or more bed dwelling Schedule 12 of the Local Planning Scheme should apply for other land uses”. When compared to the existing standards, the recommendations of the ITS are slightly more for single bedroom dwellings, and slightly less for larger dwellings. The difference is so marginal (0.25 bays in both instances) that it does not warrant the Shire modifying LPS1 to change the parking standard. 8. The Shire monitors parking in centres outside of Margaret River, in particular Augusta,

to determine whether alternative parking rates (see recommendations 2 and 3) should be applied.

The majority of recommendations contained within the draft Strategy relate most particularly to the Margaret River town centre where parking issues are most acute. However, parking in the secondary settlements within the Shire, particularly Augusta should be monitored over time so that specific action can be taken in response to issues that may arise. 9. Subject to availability of funds received from ‘cash in lieu’ contributions, the Shire

consider purchase of privately constructed car bays where excess bays over and above the LPS1 requirements are provided, and where the location of such bays are strategically located and will be available for use by the general public.

It would be practical for the Local Government to partner with retailers where both are looking to provide significant new parking opportunities. As such it is recommended that the Shire adopts a position that it will buy surplus bays arising from any new development wherein bays over and above the LPS1 requirements are provided, and where the location of such bays are strategically located and will be available for use by the general public. Peer Review A detailed review and gap analysis of the Shire’s draft Strategy was undertaken by Luxmoore Traffic Consultants. The outcomes of the review provide support to all of the recommendations contained within the Shire’s draft Strategy as discussed above, with the exception of recommendation 5 relating to timed parking. In this regard Luxmoore recommend that: “Time limited parking should be introduced to ensure the available parking spaces are used in accordance with a parking hierarchy. The trigger for the introduction of time restrictions should not depend primarily on the support of the business community, but rather the need for access and parking priority afforded to different user groups. Access should be prioritised to incorporate the allocation of more central locations for short-stay parking with employee and other long-stay parking encouraged to park further away.” Luxmoore also recommend the following, which relate to pay/timed parking: It is suggested that a parking user hierarchy be established and applied to planning decisions in AMR. Policies should be implemented to achieve the parking hierarchy through time regulations, enforcement and pricing. When time restricted and other parking regulations are introduced,


24

additional parking enforcement resources should be engaged to ensure a high degree of compliance with parking regulations. Notwithstanding Luxmoore’s advice, no change to recommendation 5 is suggested. It is clear that (according to retailers) parking availability has not become so scarce that timed parking needs to be introduced to increase the turnover of priority bays with the best access to their establishments. This sentiment may change over time as parking availability becomes more constrained and at that time, this matter can be re-examined. Gap Analysis Of the suggestions put forward by Luxmoore the following two recommendations relating to way-finding and maintenance are recommended for inclusion in the strategy: Parking plans should be developed for specific users including motorcyclists, drivers of vehicles towing boats, caravans and trailers and the disabled. These plans should extend to advertising the location of such parking via way-finding signage, the website and other media, especially for visitors. Parking way-finding refers to a system of static signs, directories and other design features which provide an early warning navigational aid. Drivers, especially visitors, want to know where to look for way-finding information when they need it, understand the way the information is communicated and obtain the information quickly and without fuss. A single, consistent system should guide drivers to all car-parks in the Town Centre. This involves the provision of information on parking availability using signage, brochures, maps, websites and apps (iPhone applications). Good parking information tends to reduce motorist delay and frustration, and increase the satisfaction of drivers visiting and parking in a town centre. An annual audit should be undertaken of all public car-parks and a detailed list of improvements provided which are to be prioritised. In particular, the location, sufficiency and use of disabled bays should be given high regard. Once parking is constructed it is important that it be maintained over time. In order to achieve this it is recommended that the Shire undertake an annual audit of all public car-parks to determine necessary improvements and maintenance as may be necessary.

CONSULTATION It is recommended that the community be invited to view and make submissions on the draft Strategy prior to it being considered by Council for final approval. STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS If adopted, the Strategy will be used as a basis for making changes to the car-parking requirements of LPS1. STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Goal 3 - Managing Growth Sustainably Key Projects: Upgrade of roads and intersections parking strategies and infrastructure as identified in Growth Plan. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The draft Strategy will assist in coordinating car-parking related expenditure. Adoption of the Strategy will not bind the Shire to any significant financial commitments. SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental An oversupply of parking can provide an additional incentive to the use of the private motor vehicle which is a major emitter of greenhouse gases. Social Parking management can create an environment which is more conducive to walking and cycling as modes of transport, which if adopted are likely to have a positive impact on the health and wellbeing of the community.


25

Economic A reduction and simplification of the car parking requirements contained within LPS1 has the potential to increase the viability of development and thus foster economic growth. VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council advertises the draft Car-Parking Strategy for the purposes of public consultation for a period of 21 days. ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT Nil ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Car-parking Strategy RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION

CR SERVENTY, CR HAYNES OM2014/199 That Council advertises the draft Car-Parking Strategy for the purposes of public consultation for a period of 21 days.

CARRIED 6/0


26

11.2.2 SCHEME AMENDMENT 25 AND STRUCTURE PLAN FOR FINAL APPROVAL

LOCATION/ADDRESS Lot 118 Orchid Ramble, Margaret River APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Halsall & Associates Town Planning Consultants FILE REFERENCE LND/1/25SASP REPORT AUTHOR Matt Cuthbert, Strategic Project Officer AUTHORISING OFFICER Iliya Hastings, Director Sustainable Development

Cr Veitch disclosed a financial interest in the item and left chambers at 5.56pm. IN BRIEF

The Proposal is a Scheme Amendment and associated Structure Plan which provides for a re-subdivision of the existing strata titled tourism lot into 13 strata lots and associated common property. Permanent occupation of the lots is proposed via a change to the Scheme provisions which relate to the land.

The site is zoned “Chalet and Camping” and was previously developed with 10 chalets and an office. Nine of the chalets were destroyed in the 2011 fires.

The lot has an area of 2.24ha and the submitted Structure Plan proposes 13 strata lots generally equivalent to a residential density of R10.

Staff have previously recommended support to the proposal to allow rezoning to provide for permanent residential use, but only on the basis that the site could be subdivided to a density which reflects that which surrounds it (5-7 green title lots).

Council however have previously granted ‘in-principle’ support, and subsequently resolved to initiate the amendment which provides for a lot yield which generally reflects the current ownership arrangements (13 lots).

Whilst a number of objections were received during the consultation period, the issues raised do not warrant a reversal of Council’s previous position. As such, the Amendment is recommended for final approval.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Pursuant to the Planning and Development Act, 2005 (as amended), and Part 17 (2) of the Town

Planning Regulations (1967), adopts Amendment No. 25 to Local Planning Scheme No. 1 for the purpose of: a) Amending the Scheme maps by removing the ‘Additional Use 38’ designation from Lot 118

Orchid Ramble; b) Modifying Schedule 2 - 'Additional Uses' by deleting text relating to 'Additional Use 38'; c) Applying a ‘Tourism’ (‘T20’) designation to the land; d) Adding the following to Schedule 16 - 'Special Conditions relating to Tourist Zones'; and

NO. DESCRIPTION OF LAND

CONDITIONS

T20 Lot 118 Orchid Ramble, Margaret River

1. Subdivision and development shall be generally in accordance with an approved Structure Plan. 2. The permitted uses are: Chalet - 'P' use Grouped Dwelling - 'A' use 3. Development on any strata lot is not to exceed 150m2 in floor area and 7m in height. 4. Subdivision and development is to comply with an approved


27

Fire Management Plan. 5. All applications for subdivision and development are to be accompanied by a survey which identifies the location of priority species 'Bossiaea disticha'. Applicants will be required to demonstrate protection measures which are then to be implemented in conjunction with subdivision, fire management and development.

2. In accordance with clause 6.2.6.7 of Local Planning Scheme No.1, adopts the proposed structure

plan for Lot 118 Orchid Ramble dated March 2014.

SITE AND SURROUNDS The site is accessed from Orchid Ramble, with a reserve strip fronting Wooditch Road preventing permanent legal access from this frontage. The location of the site is shown at Figure 1 below. To the west of the site is a rural residential development with an average lot size of approximately 1.5ha. The south and south east the site adjoins special residential development with an average lot size of 3550m

2. To the north and north east the site adjoins land zoned ‘General Agriculture’ where lots

range from 7ha to 25ha, with some of this land having rural residential development potential under the LPS and LNRSPP. The site is approximately 2.24ha in area and is divided into 12 strata lots, consistent with existing development and approvals (see Figure 2). The balance of the land is common property. Prior to the 2011 fires, Lots 1 – 10 accommodated the tourist chalets and Lot 13 the office. Lot 11 has an approval for a restaurant development and is the site on which other additional uses as provided for under the current zoning (additional use A38) could be developed. This includes; eating house / reception centre (maximum seating capacity of 100), art and craft manufacturing (cottage industry), studio and sales. The remaining chalet on the site is located on strata lot 3. Vegetation within the common property lot has regrown strongly since the fire and an internal sealed road provides access to the strata lots. TABLED ITEMS Scheme Amendment No. 25 and Structure Plan document – November 2013


28

Figure 1: Location Plan BACKGROUND Lot 118 Orchid Ramble was created as part of a clustered subdivision in the late 1990’s. The subdivision resulted in the creation of 17 rural residential lots and the subject tourist site, with the bulk of the land area retained in a 16ha landscape protection lot (Lot 501). A 15m wide ‘drainage and public recreation’ reserve for the purpose of landscape buffer and vegetation protection was also created along Wooditch Rd. The site was subsequently developed with 10 chalets and an office and then strata subdivided to create individual lots for the chalets and office, an additional ‘facilities’ lot and common property. Approval was issued for the development of a restaurant on the facilities lot but this approval has not been implemented. The applicant has advised that a number of discussions have been held with Shire Officers since 2007 on proposals to allow permanent residential occupation as an additional use on the site. This was prompted by the chalet owners receiving diminished investment returns. In late 2011 the complex was essentially destroyed in the Margaret River bushfire with only one chalet surviving. The applicant has advised that the owners have received their insurance payments for loss of the buildings and at this time do not intend to rebuild until the issue of allowing permanent residential development is resolved. In 2012 a 14 lot green title subdivision proposal was put forward by the proponent but withdrawn from the Council agenda. Council granted ‘in-principle’ support to the current proposal at its meeting of 24 April 2013 and subsequently initiated the Amendment on 26 February 2014.

Subject Land


29

Figure 2. Site Plan (note – all strata lots have the parent title lot number – 118) THE PROPOSAL The proposal has 2 primary components being:

Rezoning of the site to provide for permanent residential use in conjunction with retaining the potential for dwellings to be used for short stay purposes (unrestricted length of stay), and subject to this being achieved;

Retention of lots 1 through 10 inclusive and re-subdivision and redevelopment of the ‘facilities’ and ‘office’ lot (existing strata lots 11 and 13). Re-subdivision of the ‘facilities lot’ (existing strata lot 11) is proposed to yield two lots of 960m² each, and the ‘office lot’ (existing strata lot 13) to be 252m². A structure plan has been prepared to guide the future subdivision, use and development on the land (see Attachment 1).

PLANNING FRAMEWORK Local Planning Scheme No. 1 (LPS1) The Site is zoned ‘Chalet and Camping’ under LPS1 and has an additional use provision (A38). This zoning provides for the development of a maximum of 10 chalets or a 40 ‘guest’ guesthouse and restaurant / reception and associated facilities, and a caretakers dwelling. Any development is also required to comply with a number of conditions including, in summary:

The primary objective is to allow tourist uses which are subservient to the amenity and landscape quality of the area. The secondary objective is to ensure synergy between the tourist use and special residential use.

Development setbacks shall be 10 metres from the lot boundary adjacent to Wooditch Road, i.e. a 25m setback to the road reserve, and 15 metres from the lot boundary adjoining Orchid Ramble.

Any eating house or reception facility to have a maximum capacity of 100 seats. Local Planning Strategy (LPS) The LPS acknowledges the existing zoning of the subject site and identifies the land for tourism purposes. The Strategy requires that proposals to change the zoning of tourism sites be considered against the requirements of the Local Tourism Planning Strategy.


30

Local Tourism Planning Strategy (LTPS) The LTPS does not identify the subject site as being a ‘key tourism site’. As such, proposal for alternative uses may be considered. In accordance with the LTPS, such proposals may only be supported where: 1. The site no longer has an existing or potential tourism function. 2. Development of surrounding land uses is no longer compatible with tourism. 3. There is a substantial and enduring change to the tourism market/demand situation. 4. Rezoning will not have an adverse impact on surrounding amenity. 5. It will not be a significant loss to the tourism market, i.e. not a key tourism site. The subject proposal will not completely remove the ability for dwellings to be used for tourism purposes. As such the criteria set out in the LTPS for ‘Residential Development on Tourism Zoned Land’ are relevant. Criteria of particular relevance include:

Whether the site has the capacity to be developed for a mix of uses and can also deliver a sustainable tourism outcome that will result in the size, type and quality of tourist accommodation appropriate to the site and location.

The suitability and sustainability of residential development within the broader planning and settlement context of the site.

Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge State Planning Policy (LNRSPP) The LNRSPP provides a statement of intent and a number of policies for tourism, rural residential development and settlement patterns more generally. These are generally focussed on the provision of a range of tourism opportunities that take advantage of the natural and agricultural attractions of the area and that they are located appropriately respective to their scale. No specific policies are provided to guide the rezoning of sites away from tourism, although the importance of tourism to the economy of the area is generally acknowledged as is the need to protect those cultural, landscape and environmental values that provide tourism opportunities. As noted above the site is located within the area identified in the LNRSPP plan as designated for Rural Residential land use. Policy provisions of the LNRSPP related to Landscape, Nature Conservation and Settlement place a high priority on avoiding development in areas of high fire risk, reducing impact of fire management related clearing (PS 1.11 and PS2.6 /7), protecting landscape character (PS 3.1 – 3.8) and provide a general presumption against clearing of remnant vegetation (PS 2.2). The strategy also encourages development in designated rural residential areas to take on a clustered form to assist in the retention of landscape values, as occurred with the creation of this tourist site and the adjacent Special Residential subdivision. CONSULTATION Of the 32 submissions received during the consultation period, 9 were from government agencies or service providers all of which raised no objections. Importantly, the Department of Fire and Emergency Services support the proposed Bushfire Management Plan. Of the twelve public submissions of support for the proposal, 10 were from the various owners of the subject land, and two were from nearby residents. A total of 11 public submissions of objection were received from surrounding residents. The issues of primary concern can be summarised as:

Permanent residential use will increase activity on the site and impact negatively upon amenity.

Proposal will increase traffic, noise and lights from vehicles.

Density of development is too high.

Development will not be sympathetic to the landscape.

A detailed response to each submission can be found at Attachment 2 – Schedule of Submissions. The main issues of concern to surrounding residents are also discussed in the ‘Officer Comments’ section of this report. DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS Permanent Residential Use.


31

The consultation process has revealed that surrounding residents regard the current tourism use of the site as being low intensity and quiet and without negative impact upon the amenity of surrounding properties. It is considered that when development of the site under the current planning framework is compared with permanent residential use as proposed, the level of impact upon surrounding residents by way of noise, traffic, light and general land use intensity, would be similar.

Residential Density If the site was approached without reference to its existing strata subdivision and fragmented ownership structure, it would most logically be subdivided to a density which would make it consistent with that which surrounds it, being ‘Residential R2.5’ (4,000m

2 lot size).Development at this density

would also address many of the issues of objection. In recognition of the existing ownership structure, Council have given support to re-subdivision to a total of 13 strata lots. In order to achieve 13 strata lots, the existing strata will need to be modified so that the existing ‘office’ lot is reduced in size from 375m

2 to 252 m

2 to be consistent with the other

(existing) strata lots, and the ‘facilities’ lot divided into two lots of 960m2. This will result in a strata

scheme consisting of:

11 lots each of 252m2;

2 dwelling lots of 960m2; and

A common property lot of 1.64 ha. If the density of residential development was to be consistent with that which surrounds the site, a yield of 5-7 lots would be appropriate. This is still the preferred position of staff given it is consistent with the density and planning framework for the locality. Notwithstanding this, an increased yield has previously been supported by Council for the purposes of community consultation. The submissions received during the consultation period do not raise issues which would warrant a departure from Council’s previous position. This is on the basis that the physical extent of development and its potential impacts are considered to be similar to that which would eventuate if the site was fully developed for short stay purposes under the current planning framework. Building Design The Amendment proposes design parameters to ensure that future development retains its small scale and ability to be used for both tourist and permanent accommodation. For example, a maximum floor area of 150m

2 is proposed which is the maximum size of a chalet allowed by LPS1. The

structure plan contains a requirement for design guidelines to be prepared to ensure that the development exhibits a cohesive style. The intention is that redevelopment of the site will look feel and function as it would have as a purely tourism development. Bushfire Management Given the location of the site, it is subject to a high threat of bushfire, notwithstanding any amount of onsite bushfire management which might be undertaken. Initially, DFES raised some issues with the proposal, however following an onsite meeting and subsequent changes to the proposed management plan, DFES now support the proposal and have approved the Bushfire Management Plan (BMP). In summary, the BMP requires the following actions be under taken in conjunction with strata subdivision and development:

Reinstatement of fire hydrant connected to the reticulated water supply;

Each dwelling to have a building protection / hazard separation zone;

All dwellings to be fitted with reticulated rooftop sprinkler systems;

The implementation of a firewise landscaping plan inclusive of low reticulated lawn adjacent to dwellings;

Dwellings will be constructed to the Australian Standard applicable to their Bushfire Attack Level (BAL); and

A secondary access is provided to Wooditch Drive for emergency escape/fire fighting vehicles.


32

Modification A minor modification to the proposed Scheme text (Structure Plan Condition No. 5) is recommended in order to clarify the way in which the priority species 'Bossiaea disticha' is to be protected. STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Goal 3 – Managing Growth Sustainably “Implement Local Planning Scheme No 1 (LPS1) and Local Planning Strategy” Comment: the proposal will provide for additional residential accommodation in an area already committed for development. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Nil SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental Vegetation on the site was destroyed by the 2011 fires but has since regrown strongly. Vegetation will need to be cleared for fire safety, however measures are in place to ensure there is a balance between the safety of inhabitants, landscape and screening objectives and the maintenance of native vegetation and biodiversity. Social Whilst the reduction in available tourist facilities may generate some concern, the removal of the potential for restaurant and commercial facilities may result in less amenity (noise/traffic) concerns from surrounding residents. Economic The implementation of the proposal will not require Council expenditure, with all necessary infrastructure to be provided by the landowners.

CONCLUSION The proposal complies with the Local Tourism Planning Strategy criteria which guide proposals seeking to allow alternative use of tourism sites. The site is not considered to be of strategic tourism value and has therefore not been identified by the LTPS as a ‘key tourism site’. The proposal as presented will allow for both short stay and/or permanent use of the site, at the discretion of individual owners. The density of development, whilst generally reflective of that which existed on the site pre the 2011 fires, is not consistent with the density of residential development which surrounds. Staff continue to hold concerns in respect to this issue. However, Council have initiated the amendment at this density. Given Council’s previous decision and that the proposed density does not represent an outcome that will adversely impact on the amenity of the area, it is recommended that the proposal be adopted. VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Pursuant to the Planning and Development Act, 2005 (as amended), and Part 17 (2) of the Town

Planning Regulations (1967), adopts Amendment No. 25 to Local Planning Scheme No. 1 for the purpose of: a) Amending the Scheme maps by removing the ‘Additional Use 38’ designation from Lot 118

Orchid Ramble; b) Modifying Schedule 2 - 'Additional Uses' by deleting text relating to 'Additional Use 38'; c) Applying a ‘Tourism’ (‘T20’) designation to the land; d) Adding the following to Schedule 16 - 'Special Conditions relating to Tourist Zones'; and


CONDITIONS


1. Subdivision and development shall be generally in accordance with an approved Structure Plan.


33

2. The permitted uses are: Chalet - 'P' use Grouped Dwelling - 'A' use 3. Development on any strata lot is not to exceed 150m2 in floor area and 7m in height. 4. Subdivision and development is to comply with an approved Fire Management Plan. 5. All applications for subdivision and development are to be accompanied by a survey which identifies the location of priority species 'Bossiaea disticha'. Applicants will be required to demonstrate protection measures which are then to be implemented in conjunction with subdivision, fire management and development.

2. In accordance with clause 6.2.6.7 of Local Planning Scheme No.1, adopts the proposed structure

plan for Lot 118 Orchid Ramble dated March 2014. ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT Nil ATTACHMENTS 1. Structure Plan 2. Schedule of Submissions RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION

CR EARL, CR HASTIE OM2014/200 That Council: 1. Pursuant to the Planning and Development Act, 2005 (as amended), and Part 17 (2) of the

Town Planning Regulations (1967), adopts Amendment No. 25 to Local Planning Scheme No. 1 for the purpose of: a) Amending the Scheme maps by removing the ‘Additional Use 38’ designation from Lot

118 Orchid Ramble; b) Modifying Schedule 2 - 'Additional Uses' by deleting text relating to 'Additional Use 38'; c) Applying a ‘Tourism’ (‘T20’) designation to the land; d) Adding the following to Schedule 16 - 'Special Conditions relating to Tourist Zones';

and


CONDITIONS


1. Subdivision and development shall be generally in accordance with an approved Structure Plan.

2. The permitted uses are:

Chalet - 'P' use Grouped Dwelling - 'A' use

3. Development on any strata lot is not to exceed 150m2 in floor area and 7m in height. 4. Subdivision and development is to comply with an approved Fire Management Plan. 5. All applications for subdivision and development are to be accompanied by a survey which identifies the location of priority species 'Bossiaea disticha.' Applicants will be required to demonstrate protection measures which are


34

then to be implemented in conjunction with subdivision, fire management and development.

2. In accordance with clause 6.2.6.7 of Local Planning Scheme No.1, adopts the proposed

structure plan for Lot 118 Orchid Ramble dated March 2014. CARRIED 4/1

CR SERVENTY VOTED AGAINST THE MOITION

Cr Veitch returned to Chambers at 6.02pm.


35

11.2.3 AMENDMENT 19 TO LPS1 - LOT 100 BROCKMAN HIGHWAY, KARRIDALE; WAPC MODIFICATIONS

LOCATION/ADDRESS Lot 100 Brockman Highway, Karridale APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Michael Swift & Associates Town Planners Pty Ltd FILE REFERENCE LND/1/19SASP REPORT AUTHOR Nick Logan, Manager of Planning and Development AUTHORISING OFFICER Iliya Hastings, Director of Sustainable Development

IN BRIEF

At the Ordinary Meeting on 11 December 2013, Council resolved to adopt Amendment 19 and the associated Structure Plan providing for future development of Lot 100 Brockman Highway, Karridale.

The updated Amendment and Structure Plan was referred to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC). The WAPC has sought that Council modify the Amendment/Structure Plan documents in accordance with an attached Schedule of Modifications before final approval is given.

The final modifications to the Amendment/Structure Plan are presented to Council with a recommendation for final adoption.

RECOMMENDATION That Council adopts Amendment No. 19 and the associated Structure Plan with modifications required by the WAPC.

TABLED ITEMS Amendment and Structure Plan documents BACKGROUND At the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 11 December 2013, Council resolved to adopt Amendment 19 and a Structure Plan for Lot 100 Brockman Highway, Karridale subject to modifications. The proposal was subsequently forwarded to the WAPC together with a summary of submissions, comments received during advertising and Council’s recommendation to approve. On 12 August 2014 the WAPC advised the Shire that Amendment 19 and the associated Structure Plan was finally endorsed subject to additional modifications in accordance with a Schedule of Modifications. The Schedule of Modifications is included as Attachment 1. DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS The modifications required to Amendment 19 do not change the intent or practical implementation of the previous decision of Council. The modifications to the Structure Plan likewise do not change the intent of the previous Council decision relating to the Structure Plan. Changes are fully detailed in Attachment 1. The main purpose of these changes is to bring the Structure Plan into the recently adopted model structure plan format of the WAPC and to reflect some of the associated provisions spatially on the Structure Plan Map. In addition, the Fire Management Plan has now been finalised and endorsed by DFES and supporting documentation is to be updated. STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Because amendments and structure plans must be adopted by a resolution of Council, any subsequent modifications which are required, apart from minor changes such as correcting typographical errors, must also be the subject of a formal Council resolution. Furthermore, under the Local Government Act, any Council resolutions associated with an amendment can only be rescinded or altered by way of a further Council resolution.


36

There is however, no scope in this part of the process to revisit earlier decisions or the modifications required by the WAPC. The modifications are effectively a direction of the WAPC to the Council. PLANNING FRAMEWORK In accordance with the provisions of regulations 21(2) and 25 of the Town Planning Regulations, 1967 (as amended), Council is required to return the executed modified scheme/amending documents to the WAPC within 42 days of being notified of the Minister’s decision. VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Pursuant to the Planning and Development Act, 2005 (as amended), and Part 17(2) of the Town

Planning Regulations, 1967, adopts Amendment 19 to Local Planning Scheme No. 1 for the purpose of: (a) Amending the scheme maps by rezoning portion of Lot 100 Bussell Highway, Karridale from

‘Priority Agriculture’ to the ‘Future Development’ zone as depicted on the scheme amendment maps.

(b) Amending the scheme maps by including portion of Lot 100 Bussell Highway, Karridale in a Structure Plan Area (SPA) designated SPA28 as depicted on the scheme amendment maps.

(c) Modifying ‘Schedule 15 – Structure Plan Area’ by including the following schedule:

Area No. (SPA)

Desc

rip

ti

on

of

Lan

d

Are

a

Lan

d U

se

Exp

ecta

ti

on

Matters to be Addressed in Structure Plans (in addition to clause 6.2.4)

Associated Provisions

28 Lot 100 Brockman Highway, Karridale

Orderly and proper expansion of the Karridale Townsite to be generally in accordance with the Karridale Hamlet Settlement Strategy.

The following issues are to be investigated and methods of resolution/implementation are to be addressed by the Structure Plan:

Provision of sustainable servicing options.

Staging of subdivision.

Preparation of a Local Water Management Plan.

Drainage based on water sensitive design principles.

Protection of remnant vegetation through future development and fire management protection should not compromise the environmental values of this vegetation.

Facilitation of efficient access to commercial development and the community node at Chapman Road.

Buffering to Bussell and Brockman Highways to mitigate visual impact on the function of these roads as travel route corridors.

Investigation and preparation of a detailed development contribution Scheme in accordance with the Karridale

1. Land use and development shall be generally in accordance with the endorsed Structure Plan.

2. Notwithstanding the Zoning Table and land use definitions within Schedule 1 in the Local Planning Scheme No. 1 a Home Business is permitted to be carried out ancillary to an existing dwelling in a separate building.

3. Within the Rural Residential zone as identified on the Structure Plan, Home Based Trade is an ‘A’ use and is defined as follows:

Home Based Trade means a business, service or profession carried out in a dwelling or separate building or on land around a dwelling by an occupier of the dwelling which:


37

Hamlet Settlement Strategy.

Preparation of design guidelines to address built form and integrated sustainability measures appropriate to the rural and historic context of Karridale.

Preparation of a comprehensive public open space strategy.

Preparation of detailed fire management planning providing an acceptable mitigation of risk from the threat of wild fire without compromising the integrity of areas of remnant vegetation.

i. is located on a property greater than 1.0ha;

ii. does not employ more than 2 people not members of the occupiers household;

iii. will not cause injury to or adversely affect the amenity of the neighbourhood;

iv. does not occupy an area greater than 200 square metres;

v. does not involve the retail sale, display or hire of goods of any nature;

vi. in relation to vehicles and parking, does not result in traffic difficulties as a result of the inadequacy of parking or an increase in traffic in the neighbourhood;

vii. does not involve the use of an essential service of greater capacity than normally required in the zone;

viii. does not involve the parking or storing of freezer/refrigerated type vehicles that require the cooling system to be operational; and

ix. does not involve the parking of more than one truck for each employee/employer with a total of more than two trucks at any one time.


38

2. Authorises affixing of the Common Seal to Amendment 19. 3. Adopts the Structure Plan pursuant to Clause 6.2.6.15 of Local Planning Scheme No. 1 subject to

the modifications required by the Western Australian Planning Commission. ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT NA ATTACHMENTS 1. WAPC Schedule of Modifications RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION

CR HASTIE, CR SMART OM2014/201 That Council: 1. Pursuant to the Planning and Development Act, 2005 (as amended), and Part 17(2) of the

Town Planning Regulations, 1967, adopts Amendment 19 to Local Planning Scheme No. 1 for the purpose of: (a) Amending the scheme maps by rezoning portion of Lot 100 Bussell Highway, Karridale

from ‘Priority Agriculture’ to the ‘Future Development’ zone as depicted on the scheme amendment maps.

(b) Amending the scheme maps by including portion of Lot 100 Bussell Highway, Karridale in a Structure Plan Area (SPA) designated SPA28 as depicted on the scheme amendment maps.

(c) Modifying ‘Schedule 15 – Structure Plan Area’ by including the following schedule:

Area No. (SPA)

Desc

rip

ti

on

of

Lan

d

Are

a

Lan

d U

se

Exp

ecta

ti

on

Matters to be Addressed in Structure Plans (in addition to clause 6.2.4)

Associated Provisions

28 Lot 100 Brockman Highway, Karridale

Orderly and proper expansion of the Karridale Townsite to be generally in accordance with the Karridale Hamlet Settlement Strategy.

The following issues are to be investigated and methods of resolution/implementation are to be addressed by the Structure Plan:

Provision of sustainable servicing options.

Staging of subdivision.

Preparation of a Local Water Management Plan.

Drainage based on water sensitive design principles.

Protection of remnant vegetation through future development and fire management protection should not compromise the environmental values of this vegetation.

Facilitation of efficient access to commercial development and the community node at Chapman Road.

Buffering to Bussell and Brockman Highways to mitigate visual impact on the function of these roads as travel route corridors.

Investigation and preparation of a detailed

1. Land use and development shall be generally in accordance with the endorsed Structure Plan.

2. Notwithstanding the Zoning Table and land use definitions within Schedule 1 in the Local Planning Scheme No. 1 a Home Business is permitted to be carried out ancillary to an existing dwelling in a separate building.

3. Within the Rural Residential zone as identified on the Structure Plan, Home Based Trade is an ‘A’ use and is defined as follows:

Home Based Trade means a business, service or profession carried out in a dwelling or separate building or on land around a


39

development contribution Scheme in accordance with the Karridale Hamlet Settlement Strategy.

Preparation of design guidelines to address built form and integrated sustainability measures appropriate to the rural and historic context of Karridale.

Preparation of a comprehensive public open space strategy.

Preparation of detailed fire management planning providing an acceptable mitigation of risk from the threat of wild fire without compromising the integrity of areas of remnant vegetation.

dwelling by an occupier of the dwelling which:

i. is located on a property greater than 1.0ha;

ii. does not employ more than 2 people not members of the occupiers household;

iii. will not cause injury to or adversely affect the amenity of the neighbourhood;

iv. does not occupy an area greater than 200 square metres;

v. does not involve the retail sale, display or hire of goods of any nature;

vi. in relation to vehicles and parking, does not result in traffic difficulties as a result of the inadequacy of parking or an increase in traffic in the neighbourhood;

vii. does not involve the use of an essential service of greater capacity than normally required in the zone;

viii. does not involve the parking or storing of freezer/refrigerated type vehicles that require the cooling system to be operational; and

ix. does not involve the parking of more than one truck for each employee/employer with a total


40

of more than two trucks at any one time.

2. Authorises affixing of the Common Seal to Amendment 19. 3. Adopts the Structure Plan pursuant to Clause 6.2.6.15 of Local Planning Scheme No. 1

subject to the modifications required by the Western Australian Planning Commission. CARRIED 6/0


41

11.2.4 STRUCTURE PLAN FOR LOTS 9500 AND 9501 BUSSELL HIGHWAY AND WAVERLEY ROADS, COWARAMUP - WAPC MODIFICATIONS

LOCATION/ADDRESS Lots 9500 and 9501 Bussell Highway and Waverley Roads,

Cowaramup APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Rps Australia Pty Ltd FILE REFERENCE LND/149SP REPORT AUTHOR Matt Cuthbert, Strategic Project Officer AUTHORISING OFFICER Iliya Hastings, Director Sustainable Development

IN BRIEF

At the Ordinary Meeting on 26 March 2014, Council resolved to adopt a Structure Plan providing for future development on Lots 9500 and 9501 Bussell Highway and Waverley Roads, Cowaramup.

The Structure Plan was referred to the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC). The attached Schedule of Modifications before final approval is given.

The final modifications to the Structure Plan are presented to Council with a recommendation for final adoption.

RECOMMENDATION That Council adopts the Structure Plan for Lots 9500 and 9501 Bussell Highway and Waverley Roads, Cowaramup pursuant to Clause 6.2.6.15 of Local Planning Scheme No. 1 subject to the modifications required by the Western Australian Planning Commission.

LOCATION PLAN Nil TABLED ITEMS Structure Plan documents BACKGROUND At the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 26 March 2014, Council resolved to adopt a Structure Plan for Lots 9500 and 9501 Bussell Highway and Waverley Roads, Cowaramup subject to modifications. The proposal was subsequently forwarded to the WAPC together with a summary of submissions, comments received during advertising and Council’s recommendation to approve the Structure Plan. On 29 July 2014 the WAPC advised the Shire that the Structure Plan was finally endorsed subject to additional modifications. The Schedule of Modifications is included as Attachment 1. CONSULTATION AND ADVICE External Consultation Nil Internal Consultation Nil DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS The modifications to the Structure Plan required by the WAPC all relate to minor formatting and wording changes which do not have any material effect on the intended outcomes as endorsed by Council. The exception is a minor increase to the road widening sought by Main Roads, from 10m (as supported by Council) to 15m. The additional road widening is not in itself objectionable, however Council had previously considered that insufficient justification had been provided by Main Roads to support the increase.


42

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Because structure plans must be adopted by a resolution of Council, any subsequent modifications which are required, apart from minor changes such as correcting typographical errors, must also be the subject of a formal Council resolution. There is, however, no scope in the part of the process to revisit earlier decisions or the modifications required by the WAPC. The modifications are effectively a direction of the WAPC to the Council. STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Nil PLANNING FRAMEWORK Nil FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Nil SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental Nil Social Nil Economic Nil VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council adopts the Structure Plan for Lots 9500 and 9501 Bussell Highway and Waverley Roads, Cowaramup pursuant to Clause 6.2.6.15 of Local Planning Scheme No. 1 subject to the modifications required by the Western Australian Planning Commission. ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT NA ATTACHMENTS 1. WAPC modifications RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION

CR EARL, CR HAYNES OM2014/202 That Council adopts the Structure Plan for Lots 9500 and 9501 Bussell Highway and Waverley Roads, Cowaramup pursuant to Clause 6.2.6.15 of Local Planning Scheme No. 1 subject to the modifications required by the Western Australian Planning Commission.

CARRIED 6/0


43

11.2.5 STRUCTURE PLAN MODIFICATIONS - LOT 449 MILYEANNUP COAST ROAD, SCOTT RIVER

LOCATION/ADDRESS Lot 449 Milyeannup Coast Road, Scott River APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Blue Whale Farm Plantation Pty Ltd FILE REFERENCE LND/91SP REPORT AUTHOR Nick Logan, Manager of Planning and Development AUTHORISING OFFICER Iliya Hastings, Director of Sustainable Development

IN BRIEF

At the Ordinary Meeting of 13 June 2012 Council resolved to adopt a Structure Plan providing for the future subdivision and development of Lot 449 Milyeannup Coast Road, Scott River. The Structure Plan was recommended to be significantly modified prior to final endorsement.

The Structure Plan was referred to the Western Australian Planning Commission, who have adopted the Structure Plan subject to a range of modifications, generally consistent with those required by the Shire.

The final modifications to the Structure Plan are presented to Council with a recommendation for final adoption.

RECOMMENDATION That Council adopts the Structure Plan for Lot 449 Milyeannup Coast Road, Scott River, pursuant to Clause 6.2.6.15 of Local Planning Scheme No. 1, subject to modifications required by the Western Australian Planning Commission.

TABLED ITEMS Modified Structure Plan BACKGROUND At the Ordinary Meeting of 13 June 2012 Council resolved to adopt a Structure Plan providing for the future subdivision and development of Lot 449 Milyeannup Coast Road, Scott River. The Structure Plan was recommended to be significantly modified prior to final endorsement. The Structure Plan is the first significant proposal for the Southern Ocean Foreshore Protection Zone along the southern coast of the Shire. The Structure Plan sets the framework for future subdivision and development, implementing the direction set by the Augusta-Walpole Coastal Strategy. Significant issues include the protection of vegetation, and the creating and management of a foreshore reserve. On 25 July 2014 the WAPC advised the Shire that the Structure Plan was finally endorsed subject to modifications. This Schedule of Modifications is included as Attachment 1. DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS The modifications to the Structure Plan required by the WAPC are generally reflective of the modifications that were previously required by the Council, including the creating a foreshore reserve adjacent to the coast and vesting of that land in the Conservation Commission. STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Because the Structure Plan was adopted by resolution of Council any subsequent modifications which are require, apart from minor changes such as correcting typographical errors, must also be the subject of a formal Council resolution.


44

There is however, no scope in this part of the process to revisit earlier decisions or the modifications required by the WAPC. The required modifications are effectively a direction of the WAPC to the Council. STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Nil PLANNING FRAMEWORK The process for considering Structure Plans is established by Part 6.2 of LPS1. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Nil VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council adopts the Structure Plan for Lot 449 Milyeannup Coast Road, Scott River, pursuant to Clause 6.2.6.15 of Local Planning Scheme No. 1, subject to modifications required by the Western Australian Planning Commission. ATTACHMENTS 1. WAPC Required Modifications.


CR HASTIE, CR HAYNES OM2014/203 That Council adopts the Structure Plan for Lot 449 Milyeannup Coast Road, Scott River, pursuant to Clause 6.2.6.15 of Local Planning Scheme No. 1, subject to modifications required by the Western Australian Planning Commission.

CARRIED 6/0


45

11.2.6 RECONSIDERATION OF DAM APPROVAL CONDITIONS - 55 (LOT 1) DIANA ROAD, AUGUSTA

LOCATION/ADDRESS 55 (Lot 1) Diana Road, Augusta APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Wayne English/Katharine-Louise Anna FILE REFERENCE PTY/3322 REPORT AUTHOR Amelia Englert, Planning Legal Officer/Johan Pienaar, Statutory

Planning Coordinator AUTHORISING OFFICER Iliya Hastings, Director Sustainable Development

IN BRIEF

On 10 April 2013 Council approved an application for an existing dam (Approval) at 55 (Lot 1) Diana Road, Augusta (Site) subject to conditions.

Mr Wayne English (Applicant) then lodged an application with the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) seeking a review of the conditions relating to the setback of the dam, the dam walls and fencing of the dam.

On 16 April 2014 SAT ordered that Council reconsider its original decision and ordered that the Applicant provide the Shire with additional information regarding the dam setback and stabilisation of the dam walls.

In June and July 2014 the Applicant provided the Shire with some additional information which the Shire considered to be insufficient.

SAT made further orders on 17 July 2014 that the Applicant provide the Shire with specific detailed information and that Council reconsider its original decision at its meeting of 10 September 2014.

The Applicant has provided the Shire with some further information i.e. structural certification since the SAT orders made on 17 July 2014. A detailed landscaping plan was not provided.

The structural certification demonstrates the structural integrity of the existing dam wall, which is reasonable justification for the dam to remain in its existing location without having a detrimental impact on the adjoining property.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: a. Reconsiders its original decision pursuant to section 31(1) of the State Administrative Tribunal Act

2004 (WA); and b. Varies its decision made on 10 April 2013 by replacing the original set of conditions with other

relevant conditions.


46

LOCATION PLAN

TABLED ITEMS Nil BACKGROUND The Site The Site is located in a rural residential area to the north west of Augusta. It is approximately 3 hectares, gently slopes down from west to east and contains remnant vegetation in its central and western portions. A dwelling, ancillary outbuildings and a dam have been developed on the Site. It is directly adjoined by other rural residential lots to the north and east and a rural property to the south with a vegetated reserve located across Diana Road to the west. The surrounding area consists of rural residential lots of a similar size and nature to the subject Site. Development within the surrounding area consists of dwellings, ancillary buildings and small dams. Compliance Action In 2010 the neighbouring landowner to the east of the Site informed the Shire that a dam had been constructed close to his boundary of 24 (Lot 3) Matthews Road, Augusta (Lot 3). The neighbour was primarily concerned about the safety of his children. The Shire advised the Applicant, in writing, that planning approval was required for the development of the dam. Due to a lack of response, on 17 February 2011 the Shire issued a section 214 Notice (Notice) pursuant to the Planning and Development Act 2005 which required the Applicant to fill in the dam and restore the area to its original condition. The Applicant failed to respond to the Notice causing the Shire to initiate court proceedings. These proceedings were adjourned when the Applicant submitted a planning approval application. Planning Application The Shire received an application in August 2012 for the approval of the existing dam which provided the following information:

The dam is located in the same position as a refilled dam that had been constructed in the 1970s;

It is setback 15m from the northern boundary and approximately 2m from the eastern boundary (as shown on the plan submitted with the application and shown at Attachment 1);

It is approximately 24m x 15m across and 3-4m deep (varying seasonally) with a granite rock ladder on the western internal face; and

It is used for the purposes of watering gardens, flushing toilets and fire fighting. ATTACHMENT 1

Dam

Subject Site


47

On 10 April 2013 a report was presented to Council, which recommended approval of the dam subject to the following conditions which addressed setback, overspill and fencing:

2. A minimum setback of 2m from the eastern boundary shall be maintained to prevent encroachment onto the adjoining property

3. Existing overspill onto the adjoining property shall be removed to the

satisfaction of the Shire. 4. The soak shall be fenced on all sides to the requirements of the Shire and

thereafter maintained to the satisfaction of the Shire (refer to advice note ‘c’) 5. The works required under Conditions 3 and 4 shall be completed within 60

days of the date of this approval. 6. The proponent shall notify the Shire on completion of the required works for a

final inspection.

ATTACHMENT 2 Council voted against the recommendation and amended the recommended conditions by:

Changing the required setback in condition 2 to 5m;

Including an extra condition which states that: The walls of the soak shall be sloped, in accordance with the specifications of a suitably qualified person and to the satisfaction of the Shire to prevent collapsing and improve safety; and

Amending condition 5 so that all works (including the sloping of the walls) are undertaken in accordance with a certified design.

Council’s reason for the amendments was to ensure improved safety of the dam. SAT Application The Applicant lodged an application with SAT seeking a review of conditions relating to the setback of the dam, the sloping of the dam walls and fencing of the dam and gave the following reasons:

If the dam is relocated to provide for a 5m setback the spring that feeds the dam would be covered and the dam rendered useless.

The walls of the dam are steep to capture more water and any works to decrease the incline of the internal face of the dam walls would cover the spring and render the dam useless.

A fence has been constructed around three sides of the dam however the Applicant has not been able to repair the dividing fence on the eastern boundary because the neighbour has failed to remove trees and branches on their side to allow repairs to be undertaken.

On 16 April 2014 the Shire attended mediation at the Site and photos of the dam taken during the mediation are shown at Attachment 3. The following facts were noted during this site visit:

The wall of the dam directly abuts the dividing fence between the Site and Lot 3 which means that there is a nil setback (assuming the fence is located on the boundary);

The inside face of the dam wall is approximately 2m from the dividing fence;

The soil overspill within the boundaries of Lot 3 which was noted on a previous site visit is no longer noticeable; and

The Applicant had fenced north, south and west of the dam;

Trees located on Lot 3 overhang the dividing fence and are causing damage to the fence by placing pressure on the fence and by falling branches.

ATTACHMENT 3

At the mediation SAT ordered that Council reconsider its original decision at its meeting on 25 June 2014 and that the Applicant provide the Shire with additional information demonstrating existence of the spring and measures to stabilise the dam walls. The Applicant submitted some information in June and July 2014 which the Shire considered to be insufficient in its lack of detail. This information is considered in more detail in the ‘Discussion’ section of this report. SAT made further orders on 17 July 2014 specifically outlining the information required from the Applicant and that Council reconsider its


48

decision at its meeting on 10 September 2014. The Applicant has provided the Shire with some further information i.e. structural certification since the SAT orders made on 17 July 2014. A detailed landscaping plan was not provided. CONSULTATION AND ADVICE A SAT order to reconsider a Council decision does not require further advertising. External Consultation Neighbours The original application was advertised to the adjoining landowner at Lot 3. The neighbour objected to the dam for the following reasons:

The dam wall protrudes across the boundary;

The dam has been constructed with steep banks which poses a safety concern for children; and

The dam should be fenced with child proof fencing and it is the proponent’s responsibility to construct a child proof boundary fence.

The neighbour suggested that the proponent create a 7.5m land buffer between the dam and the boundary with a child proof fence constructed around the entire dam. Internal Consultation Nil STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS State Administrative Tribunal Process At the first directions hearing SAT usually refers the matter to mediation unless an agreed outcome is not possible. Mediation is a private and confidential process facilitated by a SAT member and, as a result of the mediation process between the Shire and the Applicant, SAT ordered that the Shire be invited to reconsider its decision pursuant to section 31(1) of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA) (SAT Act). SAT expects Council to treat this invitation to reconsider the decision seriously and conscientiously and under the SAT Act Council may –

Affirm the decision;

Vary the decision; or

Set aside the decision and substitute a new decision. Dividing Fences Act 1961 (WA) (DFA) Under the DFA the cost of repairing or providing new boundary fences is usually shared equally between the adjoining neighbours. However section 15(7)(c) of the DFA provides an exception where the fence is damaged or destroyed by a falling tree (or branch) located on the neighbour’s property and caused by that neighbour’s neglect. The, at fault, neighbour is required to repair or renew the damaged or destroyed fence as soon as practicable and at their own cost. The Shire does not administer the DFA. STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Community Strategic Plan 2033 (CSP) The main considerations under CSP are the Shire’s goals of valuing the natural environment and managing growth sustainably. PLANNING FRAMEWORK Local Planning Scheme No. 1 (LPS1) Under LPS1 the Site is zoned ‘Rural Residential’ and a dam is defined as the following:

“dam” means any man made structure or excavation designed and constructed to intercept, accumulate and impound water flowing across, through or under any land and includes an off-stream dam, an on-stream dam, a gully-wall dam, a turkey-nest dam, an excavated soak and any structure, excavation or other device designed to act either solely or partly as a nutrient stripping basin.

A dam is listed in the Zoning Table as an ‘A’ use within the ‘Rural Residential’ zone which means that the Shire can exercise its discretion to approve it, subject to advertising. The setbacks for


49

development in the ‘Rural Residential’ zone are 30m from the front boundary, 30m from the rear boundary and 10m from the side boundaries. Clause 5.5 grants the Shire discretion to approve a development application where it does not comply with a requirement of LPS1. This discretion can only be exercised if the Shire is satisfied that the development:

Is appropriate having regard to clause 10.2 of LPS1; and

Will not adversely affect users of the development, inhabitants of the locality or the future development of the locality.

Under clause 10.2 the Shire is to have due regard to the following relevant matters:

The aims and provisions of the Scheme;

The requirements of orderly and proper planning;

Any local planning policy;

Preservation of the amenity of the locality;

The relationship of the proposal to development on adjoining land;

Any relevant submissions received; and

Any other planning consideration the local government considers relevant. ‘Amenity’ is defined under LPS1 as:

“amenity” means all those factors which combine to form the character of an area and include the present and likely future amenity.

The objectives of the ‘Rural Residential’ zone recognise the conservation of the significant landscape values and environmental attributes of the land and support a range of ancillary and related pursuits. The relevant aims of LPS1 are:

Environmental values;

Landscape and visual qualities; and

Sustainable land use and development. Clause 4.21.5 of LPS1 provides the following provisions in regards to the development of dams in the ‘Rural Residential’ zone:

(a) Dams are prohibited on lots within the Rural-Residential Zone unless planning approval is granted by the local government following a period of public advertisement in accordance with the provisions of clause 9.4 and, as appropriate, consultation with or approval by the Department of Water.

(b) Where constructed, dams shall be provided with ready access for fire tenders to enable easy refilling of water tanks for fire fighting purposes.

(c) All spoil from dam construction and earth works that does not form part of the dam

must be removed or levelled.

(d) All dams located on a watercourse must be provided with an overflow or by-pass to facilitate the passage of water through or past the dam to maintain supplies to the remainder of the watercourse.

Local Planning Policy 4 – Boundary Fencing (LPP4) LPP4 sets out the required elements of a ‘sufficient fence’ for the purposes of the DFA. In rural areas of the Shire a ‘sufficient fence’ consists of the following elements:

May be constructed of post and wire or timber;

To be of a minimum of 5 plain wire construction and may incorporate barbed wire; and

Be sufficient to contain stock on properties.


50

Local Planning Strategy (LPS) LPS states that the construction of dams constitutes development and the determination of water volumes and storage capacities is not a relevant planning consideration as this is managed by the Department of Water. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If Council affirms its decision for the dam to be setback 5m from the boundary the matter may result in a final hearing at SAT which will have cost and resource implications. SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental The dam does not present any environmental impacts. Social The neighbour’s submission indicated that he was not satisfied with the design and location of the soak. The recommended conditions of approval and additional information that was provided by the Applicant are considered suitable in addressing the neighbour’s concerns. However responsibility for the dividing fence is required to be in accordance with the DFA. Economic There are no economic implications from the Shire’s perspective. DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS Dam Setback After the on-site mediation the Applicant provided the Shire with some additional information which included a plan showing the location of a spring and written confirmation from the dam excavator that he had sited the spring. This information is shown at Attachment 4. This information was provided to support the Applicant’s argument that if the dam is moved it will not have access to the spring and will be unusable. The Shire considered the plan to be insufficient because it was hand drawn and not to scale and requested the Applicant to provide another plan with specific details. This plan has not been provided. Although there is written confirmation from the excavator that the spring is in this location there is no other information to show that this is the only spring on the Site.

ATTACHMENT 4 The Applicant has submitted a structural certification since the SAT orders made on 17 July 2014. The certification confirms the dam wall, as constructed, is structurally stable and indicates that “…there are no unwarranted potential hazards associated with the dam”. Although this certification is not the only information that was requested it is considered sufficient demonstrate that the dam could remain in its existing location without having a detrimental impact on the adjoining property. The structural certification is shown at Attachment 6.

ATTACHMENT 6

Safety of dams is not a consideration within any relevant planning documents and for that reason is not a relevant planning consideration. The relevant aims of LPS1 are:

Environmental values;

Landscape and visual qualities; and

Sustainable land use and development. The Shire also notes that there are safety concerns surrounding the location of the neighbour’s own dam which is located approximately 3m from the deck of his house. Fencing The dam is not subject to legislation that would require it to be fenced similar to a swimming pool. LPP4 does not provide any guidance for fencing within properties but only provides guidance for dividing fences and a post and wire fence is considered to be sufficient in the ‘Rural Residential’ zone. It is recommended that condition 5 be removed from the approval because fencing for safety purposes does not have a planning purpose because it has been imposed to address safety. If the neighbour had serious concerns regarding safety he would ensure that the dividing fence was in


51

sufficient repair particularly given his responsibilities relating to damage caused from trees and falling branches as provided for in the DFA. Dam Walls Dam walls are normally battered at a certain angle to ensure stability of the sides of the soak rather than a safety consideration and the steepness of the sides is determined by soil type and whether the water flows in from the sides or rises from the bottom. The internal faces of the dam are steep, especially the side closest to the eastern boundary and there was evidence of some collapse during the mediation site visit and shown at Attachment 3. The Applicant has provided some landscaping information, as shown at Attachment 5, however this information was considered insufficient for lack of detail and did not demonstrate that the dam walls will be suitably stabilised. Although the recently submitted structural certification addresses the overall stability concerns of the dam wall it is considered relevant to require the submission of a detailed landscaping plan, as part of any approval, to further stabilise the internal face of the dam wall. The implementation of the landscaping plan would address the collapse that was noticed during the mediation site visit.

ATTACHMENT 5 Conclusion The Applicant has recently provided the Shire with a structural certification for the dam, which demonstrates the dam will not have a detrimental impact on the adjoining property if it remains in its current location. This certification is considered sufficient to recommend that Council reconsider the condition for the dam to be setback 5m from the eastern boundary. It is recommended that the following amendments be made to the original conditions:

Condition 2 should be removed as it is considered that the dam could remain in its current location without having a detrimental impact on the adjoining property.

Condition 3 should be removed because the overspill is now negligible.

In condition 4 should be removed as certification was obtained that the dam in its current form is structurally stable.

Condition 5 should be removed because it has been imposed for safety which is not relevant.

Condition 6 should be removed as it relates to conditions 3, 4 and 5, which are recommended for removal.

Advice note c. should also be removed as it relates to the fencing. VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council: a. Reconsiders its original decision pursuant to section 31(1) of the State Administrative Tribunal Act

2004 (WA); and b. Varies its decision made on 10 April 2013 by replacing the original set of conditions with the

following conditions: CONDITIONS 1. The development at 55 (Lot 1) Diana Road, Augusta is to be carried out in compliance with the

plans and documentation listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent:

Plans and Specifications P1 received at the Shire on 21 August 2012

2. All development shall be contained within the boundaries of Lot 1 Diana Road. 3. The walls of the dam shall be landscaped, in accordance with an approved landscaping plan

prepared by a suitably qualified person, to prevent collapsing and to improve stability of the internal face of the dam wall.

4. The works required under condition 3 shall be completed within 90 days of the date of this approval and the proponent shall notify the Shire on completion of the works so that the Shire can undertake a final inspection.


52

ADVICE NOTES a. Noise from the petrol pump used to water the Site should not exceed the assigned levels

prescribed in the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997. (H) b. Please note that a dam owner may have liabilities to other people in common law, depending on

the circumstances. All dams present a level of risk to persons, especially children wandering around the Site (whether entry to the Site is authorised or not) and any features that may present and unacceptable risk, for example, steep slopes, should be clearly identified and addressed.

ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT Nil ATTACHMENTS 1. Planning application plan received on 21 August 2012 2. Conditions of approval - 10 April 2013 3. Photos of dam and dividing fence 4. Plan showing spring and written confirmation 5. Plan showing landscaping RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION

CR EARL, CR VEITCH OM2014/204 That Council: a. Reconsiders its original decision pursuant to section 31(1) of the State Administrative

Tribunal Act 2004 (WA); and b. Varies its decision made on 10 April 2013 by replacing the original set of conditions with

the following conditions: CONDITIONS 1. The development at 55 (Lot 1) Diana Road, Augusta is to be carried out in compliance with

the plans and documentation listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent:

Plans and Specifications

P1 received at the Shire on 21 August 2012

2. All development shall be contained within the boundaries of Lot 1 Diana Road. 3. The walls of the dam shall be landscaped, in accordance with an approved landscaping

plan prepared by a suitably qualified person, to prevent collapsing and to improve stability of the internal face of the dam wall.

4. The works required under condition 3 shall be completed within 90 days of the date of this approval and the proponent shall notify the Shire on completion of the works so that the Shire can undertake a final inspection.

ADVICE NOTES a. Noise from the petrol pump used to water the Site should not exceed the assigned levels

prescribed in the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997. (H) b. Please note that a dam owner may have liabilities to other people in common law,

depending on the circumstances. All dams present a level of risk to persons, especially children wandering around the Site (whether entry to the Site is authorised or not) and any features that may present and unacceptable risk, for example, steep slopes, should be clearly identified and addressed.

CARRIED 6/0


53

11.3 Infrastructure Services


54

11.3. INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES 11.3.1 HARDY INLET FORESHORE MANAGEMENT PLAN

LOCATION/ADDRESS Shire of Augusta Margaret River APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Shire of Augusta Margaret River FILE REFERENCE LND/44 REPORT AUTHOR Merryn Delaney, Environmental Officer

David Nicholson, Manager Assets AUTHORISING OFFICER Johan Louw, Director Infrastructure

IN BRIEF

The Shire of Augusta Margaret River commissioned a draft Management Plan for the Hardy Inlet foreshore area. The objective of the commission is to produce a Foreshore Management Plan for: - The foreshore area at Turner Caravan Park (Reserve 41117); - The reserve verge area on the west side of the existing pathway between the Turner Street

Caravan Park and the Ellis Street Jetty; and - Possible future options for a pathway north of the Ellis Street Jetty in Reserve 37811.

The Plan provides for the long term maintenance of the foreshore reserve and seeks to reinforce the ecological and landscape values of the river reserve, whilst also retaining adjacent landholder access and existing views to the Hardy Inlet.

It is proposed that recommended works be progressively implemented over the next five years, as funding and resources permit, and that the plan be reviewed after that time.

Significant consultation has been undertaken with landholders that neighbour the foreshore reserve. Their comments and suggestions have been taken on board in the drafting of the Plan.

RECOMMENDATION That Council releases the Draft Hardy Inlet Foreshore Management Plan for public comment for a period of 21 days.

LOCATION PLAN

Turner Caravan Park Foreshore


55

West pathway precinct

Future pathway alignment north of Ellis Street TABLED ITEMS Nil BACKGROUND Each year the Shire prepares a Management Plan for a reserve. The purpose of these plans is to determine management requirements for the reserve to guide future allocation of limited funds and resources. Reserves are selected based on their environmental values (i.e. biodiversity) and social values (i.e. recreational use). In 2013/14 it was resolved to prepare a foreshore management plan for the Hardy Inlet foreshore between Turner Caravan Park and the Ellis Street Jetty. This reserve is considered to be of high conservation value due to its frontage to the Hardy Inlet and it is also a very popular recreation area for walking, fishing and kayaks. In 2008/09 a shared pathway was constructed along the Hardy Inlet Foreshore from the Turner Street Caravan Park to the Ellis Street Jetty. The pathway is very popular with Augusta residents and visitors. It provides opportunities for all to experience the beauty of the Hardy Inlet and to enjoy the natural values of the foreshore ecosystem. Since the pathway was constructed, hundreds of


56

volunteer hours have been committed to managing weeds and undertaking revegetation on the east side of the pathway. Following the success of the pathway and the associated restoration works, the environmental values of the foreshore can be further enhanced by extending the restoration program to the west of the path. The Foreshore Management Plan sets out to achieve this aim. This width of foreshore reserves 30498 and 22251 from the river to private lots varies from approximately 19 to 55 metres. Much of this reserve has not been actively managed by the Shire in the past. Therefore many of the home owners adjoining the reserve have taken on the care and maintenance of this area as an extension of their own gardens. In some cases, large areas of lawn have been planted. There are also some areas where the native understory vegetation is largely intact but requires additional weed control and some enhancement planting. It is important that foreshore vegetation not be limited to a narrow strip on the east side of the pathway. However it is also important that the foreshore area is maintained to a high standard and any works proposed only be undertaken with the ongoing maintenance requirements and achievable goals in mind. The preparation of the Foreshore Management Plan required consideration to be given to the ongoing maintenance of the proposed planting. This could require the installation of weed barriers that would help prevent ongoing weed encroachment (particularly grasses) into the planted areas. It is proposed that any areas to be planted be completed to a high standard and be well maintained. Planting should not be undertaken until resources are available to adequately establish and maintain the area, therefore only small sections of the revegetation will be undertaken at any one time. The preparation of a Foreshore Management Plan was commissioned to determine the best way to manage the reserve area with the aim of reinforcing the ecological and landscape values of the foreshore reserve. Consultants William James Landscape Architects in association with Nicole Sieman Associates were appointed to prepare the plan. Public consultation was an important aspect of the plan in order to gain community support and assist with implementation of the project. The neighbouring landholder’s feedback has been given careful consideration. The proposed Plan provides some achievable outcomes for the next five years working with landholders that are willing to participate. It is proposed that the Shire continue to work with neighbouring landholders over time to improve the values of the foreshore reserve and then review the plan in five years’ time. Appendix B of the Foreshore Management Plan proposes some options for the foreshore area which could be considered when the Plan is reviewed. The Turner Caravan Park Foreshore area was also addressed in the Foreshore Management Plan. It was identified that any future upgrade to the existing sea wall should consider the opportunity to improve the amenity of the caravan park foreshore area by extending the existing boardwalk. The extension of the existing river foreshore pathway north of the Ellis Street Jetty is identified in the Shire Path Plan (2004) and in the Augusta Interpretation Plan. The consultants were required to

investigate options for possible routes to extend the river walkway. CONSULTATION AND ADVICE External Consultation Significant consultation was undertaken during preparation of the draft plan. On-site meetings were conducted with interested parties and specific input requested from adjacent landholders.

The landholders adjoining the foreshore reserve were invited to attend a community workshop on 12 July 2014 and 19 people attended. The initial concepts were tabled, which proposed significant planting on the west side of the pathway which was designed not to obstruct the landholder’s views or access to the estuary. Following input from the participants of the workshop, landholders were sent additional information and provided with an opportunity to submit their thoughts and design ideas for the section of the foreshore reserve in front of their property. Fourteen of the 23 landholders provided a written response and a further two submitted comments via telephone.


57

The landholder’s comments have been taken into consideration in preparing the draft report. The intention of the Foreshore Management Plan was not to forcibly require rehabilitation in any area, but to assist those landholders who were interested in extending the values of the foreshore reserve. There was a mixed response to the proposal with some strongly opposed to the proposal and others supportive. Shire Officers propose to commit our limited resources to work firstly with those neighbours who support the proposal over the next 5 years. Internal Consultation Asset Services, Parks and Gardens, Turner Caravan Park, Planning Services. The following table of submissions provides comment from the land owners that directly neighbour the foreshore reserve. Table 1 Summary of submissions

Ref Officer Comments

I/168153 No objection to weed control and revegetation along the river bank. Requested no planting on private land.

Noted.

I/168309

Requests no additional planting along the verge. Is willing to mow and maintain area. Children use area to play and planting may attract snakes. Artists use area to draw pelicans.

Noted.

I/168229 Opposed to proposal. Currently maintains the area believes public would be opposed to planting and the associated costs when they get something better for nothing.

Opposition noted - no planting proposed.

I/167720 Agree to some reed planting and weed control in existing vegetated areas. Wishes to retain existing grassed access to river for launching kayaks and dinghy. The pathway and grassed areas are currently maintained to a high standard by landholder and will continue to do so.

Land owner to retain existing grassed access to foreshore. Work with land owner to manage some of the weeds within the vegetation.

I/168002 Support planting on verge area if completed to a high standard. Acknowledges the need for weed control of the stormwater drain. Wishes to maintain their present low key access point.

Noted will work with land owner to undertake weed control.

I/168468 Oppose the proposal, currently maintain the area to a high standard at no cost to council and will continue to do so. The ongoing costs to upkeep of the area would be prohibitive. Noted that there have been no complaints and no surveys conducted on the issue and they don’t understand the need for change.

Noted.

I/168148 Landholder currently mows and maintains area and will continue to do so. Does not support the planting of vegetation, as the area is used for playing and will attract snakes and dampness. Request that bench seat out the front be removed as noise from the bench seat disturbs guests at holiday house.

Noted.

I/167721 Submitted a plan indicating a change of the location of the access path. Spoke to landholder on phone – although not opposed to the planting, they believe the area is attractive as it is. Would support some additional planting of peppermint trees for succession planting of the peppermint trees which are in decline.

Noted, will work with land owner.

0111011 Phone conversation; would accept that the planting Noted, will work with


58

could happen provided that the plants would not block his view.

land owner.

0111011 Phone conversation. Has always maintained the reeds on the verge and was aware that you were not permitted to clear this area. Require some assistance to maintain verge.

Noted will work with land owner.

I/168332 Currently maintain area as mown lawn and is happy to continue to do so. Does not support additional planting. Acknowledges the work of the volunteers.

Noted – no planting proposed.

I/168562 Prefer to keep area as lawn which is currently maintained by the landholder.

Noted no planting proposed.

I/168310 Currently mows area and is happy to continue to do so. Does not support the planting of paper barks as they would block views. Supports limited planting of reeds. Happy to assist volunteers when he can.

Noted.

I/167424 I/167290

Support the proposed plan, have been involved with revegetation of the foreshore fronting their property and managing public access way. Identified issue with dog dropping along the pathway.

Noted will continue to work with landholder

I/168233 Maintains grassed area between planted wetland and his property and will continue to do so. Volunteers have been active in pond in front of his property for many years, requests no further planting.

Considerable efforts have gone into removing some very invasive weeds from wetland in this area and replanting of the pond with natives. This area has been much improved thanks to the effort of volunteers and grant funds.

DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS The Hardy Inlet River Foreshore area has been identified in the Federal Government’s Natural Resource Management Plan as a high value public asset. It is standard practice for local governments to prepare environmental management plans to assist with the care of reserves where large numbers of residents and tourists enjoy recreational activities. The aim of the Foreshore Management Plan is to reinforce the ecological and environmental values of the river foreshore reserve by introducing more native plantings to the area. River foreshore reserves serve a variety of environmental functions including absorbing wave energy, providing some protection from flooding. Riparian vegetation provides habitat for native animals; a nutrient stripping function (addressing garden fertilisers and leaking septic tanks) and adds to the aesthetic values. The preparation of the Management Plan has facilitated extensive discussions with the neighbouring land owners about the ongoing management of the river foreshore and this has been beneficial as a majority are not permanent residents. It has also clarified land owner’s individual commitments to manage the foreshore area, even if it is just to continue to mow the area and maintain this to a high standard. It is planned to continue working with the land owners to reinforce the natural values of this area. Ideally the values of the river foreshore reserve should not be limited to a 5 metre wide strip on the east side of the pathway. It is possible for ecological values of the foreshore to coexist with urban development. The value of this area can easily be improved by adding additional native plantings to the west of the pathway. This does not require a blanket planting along the entire foreshore reserve, but simply adding some native plants (including some trees) into selected garden areas where adjacent land owners are supportive. However, it is important that the foreshore area is maintained to a high standard and any works proposed only be undertaken with ongoing maintenance requirements in mind.


59

The Foreshore Management Plan makes recommendations to guide volunteer and Shire management actions in the reserve for the next five years and will aid in seeking grant funding to implement priority actions. STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Nil STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS The draft Foreshore Management Plan aligns with the key goal of Valuing the Natural Environment. PLANNING FRAMEWORK Nil FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The aim of the Foreshore Management Plan is to ensure limited resources are used in the most effective way. The Shire currently commits some weed control resources to this area. The bulk of the work is done by volunteers, who meet at the foreshore each week to undertake weed control, planting and seed collection. Thousands of hours of volunteers time has been committed since 2009. Multiple grants have been sourced to undertake work in this area and the foreshore management plan will assist in the seeking of further external grant funding. It is proposed to implement some of the high priority actions in the 2014/15 financial year through existing reserve management allocations. Future actions will be considered in future budgets and grant funding will be sought where available. SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental The South West region of WA has a diversity of rivers, wetlands, estuaries and bays, many of which have high conservation values. Waterways are the natural drainage system for catchments. They are complex, interconnected systems that provide habitat for unique flora and fauna. They also provide social, economic, cultural and aesthetic values for the community. The values of these waterways are not just recognised at the local level. Forty-six are listed as internationally significant and over 210 are considered regionally significant. Many support migratory birds and rare freshwater fish, have high biodiversity and feature remnant pockets of vegetation found nowhere else in the world. Many wetlands and waterways have been modified due to urban development, drainage, and agricultural activities. Some have become degraded as a result, impacting on the ecological, economic, social and aesthetic values they can provide. The changing climate will exacerbate these issues, as reduced rainfall reduces the amount of water reaching our waterways and recharging our groundwater aquifers. Nutrients and other pollutants from urban and agricultural areas can have a significant impact on waterways. The majority of nutrients entering waterways in urban areas come from fertiliser. Fertilisers contain nutrients and trace elements that plants need to grow. If used inappropriately, excess nutrients from fertiliser can run off into stormwater drains or leach into groundwater systems, eventually ending up in our waterways. Once there, they help the tiniest of plants, algae, grow in plague proportions. Excessive application of fertilisers can lead to the eutrophication (nutrient enrichment) of waterways. This causes:

public health issues;

toxic algal blooms;

low oxygen levels in water due to algal decay that can threaten wildlife and fish communities/ unpleasant odours;

increases in soil acidity; and

significant discolouration of waterways.


60

Additional planting and management of fertiliser in the Augusta town site will reduce the impact of algal growth in the estuary. The Hardy Inlet Water Quality Improvement Plan suggests that the near-shore macroalgal growth that is common throughout summer in Augusta on the rocks and near-shore areas are likely due to excess nutrients from urban sources, particularly septic tanks and garden fertiliser. Lawn grasses are shallow rooted and do not have the same nutrient stripping capacity as deep rooted native species, particularly rushes and sedges which is the predominant vegetation type that is proposed to be planted. Social Some land owners have historically used the foreshore reserve as an extension of their property and have requested that this be retained. Significant consultation has been undertaken with the neighbouring land owners to gain an understanding of what they value. Economic The economic worth of the Hardy Inlet natural environment is difficult to calculate but is considered to be a key attraction for both residents and visitors to Augusta. The Federal Government has also identified the Hardy Inlet as a High Value public Asset in its Natural Resource Management Plan. This is one of the few natural assets that have been identified by the federal government within the Shire. Limited resources are available in the current budget to implement this project. However the plan allows the Shire to focus our available resources in keys areas and will ensure that the work can be implemented slowly over time. The Foreshore Management Plan will provide a useful tool to guide volunteer and Shire management actions in the Reserve and will aid in seeking grant funding to implement priority actions. VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council releases the Draft Hardy Inlet Foreshore Management Plan for public comment for a period of 21 days. ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT As per Council recommendation ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Hardy Inlet Foreshore Reserve Management Plan RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION

CR HASTIE, CR SERVENTY OM2014/205 That Council releases the Draft Hardy Inlet Foreshore Management Plan for public comment for a period of 21 days.

CARRIED 6/0


61

11.3.2 PROPOSED CLOSURE OF BOULTER ROAD, FOREST GROVE

LOCATION/ADDRESS Boulter Road, Forest Grove APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Shire of Augusta Margaret River FILE REFERENCE RDS/0872 RES/47049 REPORT AUTHOR Doug Sims, Technical Officer Asset Services

David Nicholson, Manager Asset Services AUTHORISING OFFICER Johan Louw, Director Infrastructure

IN BRIEF

Boulter Road is an unbuilt and largely uncleared road reserve that runs from Forest Grove Road south to Reserve 47049 and was formerly the Flinders Bay Railway reserve.

It is proposed to convert the road reserve back to into the a Shire Reserve 47049 to ensure continuity of the 109km railway corridor from Busselton to Flinders Bay on which construction of the Wadandi Track is proposed.

The proposal was advertised for a 35 day period, in accordance with the Land Administration Act, and four submissions were received, of which one supported the proposal and three objected.

Following negotiations with the objectors, two have formally withdrawn their objections.

A minor amendment to the advertised proposal is recommended in order to maintain existing vehicle access to Boulter Road for one of the abutting properties.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Closes portions of Boulter Road as demonstrated on revised sketch plan REV No. 2 DWN No.

130902-003, 130902-004 and 130902-005 and 2. Informs the Department of Lands of the closure under Section 58 of the Land Administration Act

1997 and indemnifies the Department of any costs and claims.

LOCATION PLAN


62

TABLED ITEMS Nil BACKGROUND A report was presented to the Ordinary Council Meeting held 13 August 2014 with the recommendation that Council closes portions of Boulter Road to ensure continuity of the Wadandi Track (Busselton to Flinders Bay rail trail). The following Council decision was adopted: PROCEDURAL MOTION/COUNCIL DECISION CR SERVENTY, CR EARL OM2014/173 That Council defers the consideration of the officer’s recommendation until a subsequent meeting in order to obtain more information regarding the consequences of dual use for the section of Boulter Rd giving access to the properties owned by Mr Huntley and others.

CARRIED 6/0 An on-site meeting was held with Ms Huntley and a solution was agreed that negates the need for dual use of the rail trail adjacent to their property. Boulter Road was originally part of the Busselton to Flinders Bay railway reserve. The rail reserve, in most instances, consisted of a 60m wide railway corridor with a 20m wide road reserve running along each side of the railway corridor (see below).

In May 1960 Council resolved to dedicate a portion of the railway reserve as road reserve. However, no documentation could be found as to why this road was created. In October 1961 a 6.7km section of the railway reserve was excised and dedicated as road reserve by the then Department of Lands & Surveys. This road was later named Boulter Road. The road reserve varies in width from 40m to 100m, whereas the standard width of a rural road reserve is 20m. The road reserve is heavily vegetated except along the clearing of the original railway formation, which is generally 3m to 4m in width. A formal road was never constructed. However, the old railway formation was used by vehicles for access to adjoining properties, movement of stock and as an informal walk/mountain bike trail. Over the 6.7km length of Boulter Road there are 11 rural properties that adjoin the road reserve. All but one of these lots (Lot 3749) has vehicle access available to one or more other gazetted and constructed roads - Bussell Highway, Sebbes Road and/or Robinson Road. Lot 3749 has access to Bussell Hwy via an easement through an adjoining property.


63

Old Railway Formation in Boulter Road Reserve Since 2010, the Shire of Augusta Margaret River, City of Busselton and the National Trust of Australia (WA) have been working in partnership to develop a masterplan for the Wadandi Track. The 109 km trail will highlight the significant natural, aboriginal and historic heritage values of the region. It is proposed to use the existing railway formation as the track wherever possible. Both local governments have adopted polices reinforcing this objective. Most of the length of the proposed Wadandi Track (from Busselton to Augusta) is within Shire reserves. A notable exception is the 6.7km long Boulter Road reserve. As it is gazetted as a road reserve, this allows unrestricted access by private vehicles and also allows utility providers to locate their infrastructure within the reserve. Wherever possible it is proposed that use of the Wadandi Track be restricted to walkers and cyclists, and possibly horse riding in some sections. This will ensure that the track is as safe as possible for use by non-motorised users, including children. Vehicle access will be available only for emergency services and maintenance vehicles via locked gates. As a consequence it is considered necessary to convert a large portion of the Boulter Road reserve to a Shire reserve in order to prevent ongoing use of the rail formation as a vehicle track. To protect the integrity of the Wadandi Track (Reserve 47049) it is proposed to convert all unrequired portions of Boulter Road back into Reserve 47049. This proposal is shown on Revised Sketch Plan REV No. 2 DWN No. 130902-003, 13092-004 & 130902-005 (refer to Attachment 2). The proposed portions of road reserve that will be retained as 20m road reserves are as follows:

South from the intersection of Boulter and Robinson Roads for approximately 230 metres to provide for continuity of the Robinson Road reserve;

South of Sebbes Road on the east side for approximately 2.56km to provide for gazetted road access to Lot 3749, which would otherwise be landlocked; and

South of Sebbes Road on the west side for approximately 365 metres to allow side access to Lot 2706 Sebbes Road.

An outcome of this proposal is that several properties that use the former rail formation as a secondary access to their properties would lose this second access. However it is considered necessary to ensure that all land matters with regards the Wadandi Track is resolved in order to minimise any delays should funding be secured to construct the trail.


64

CONSULTATION AND ADVICE External consultation Under Section 58 (3) of the Land Administration Act, a local government must not resolve to make a request to close a road until a period of 35 days has elapsed from the publication in a newspaper circulating in its district of notice of motion for that resolution. To adhere to this statutory requirement the proposal was advertised on 30 May 2014 in the Augusta Margaret River Times. Submissions were invited from interested persons with the closing date for the submissions being 4pm on Friday 4 July 2014. The outcome of the consultation process was:

The Department of Lands – sees the merit behind the proposal and will await the outcome of the Council report.

Wadandi Track Steering Committee – supports the proposed road closure.

Service Providers - no objections received.

Advertisement in the Public Notices section of the local paper - four submissions received.

Internal consultation Infrastructure Services DISCUSSION/OFFICER COMMENTS The four submissions received are summarised below together with officer comments on the issues raised in the submissions.

Submission No.

Location Issues/comments Response

1 Part owner of Lot 2076 Sebbes Rd

Objects to rail trail. Wants to retain access from Boulter Road to a side gate.

The property already has access via three separate crossovers on Sebbes Rd. Amend plan to provide 20m wide road reserve on west side of trail reserve to maintain access to gate on Boulter Rd. Existing fire break can be used for vehicle access.

2 Tenants of Lot 5 Sebbes Rd

Have been using this part of Boulter Rd for 20 years for farming purposes ie, the movement of sheep on foot, farm machinery and for general farming purposes as have farmers before us and likely in the future. Believe it will not compromise the Rails to Trails on this section as they can exist harmoniously together. It is also an important emergency access/exit point as has been demonstrated by a wildfire in the recent past.

The movement of stock and equipment will be possible from northern boundary along Robinson Road through to Forest Grove Road. It is intended to keep the trail free from vehicle movement wherever possible. As stated above, it is intended to keep the trail free from vehicle movement wherever possible. Existing vehicle access will be maintained along the trail, only where there is no other option. This will ensure that as much of the trail as possible is a safe non-motorised pathway for use by pedestrians, joggers and cyclists of all ages. All emergency services will be able to access the trail if required. The only limitations will be at bridges, which will be designed to cater only for pedestrians and cyclists. The nearest bridge to the south will be at McLeods Creek, where the existing ford will be maintained for emergency vehicle use. The nearest bridge to the


65

We also believe that tourism and farming are integral to the future of our region, but this is a farming area and those activities should not be compromised by unnecessary access closures

north will be at Boodjidup Brook. It is accepted that both farming and tourism are both integral to the future of this region. The proposed closure of these portions of Boulter Rd is considered to have minimal impact on farming activities as north/south access between the property and Forest Grove Road will be available via Robinson Rd. Fencing of the trail reserve and installation of gates (where required) will be funded by the project when it proceeds.

3 Owner of Lot 3137 Sebbes Road

Huge supporter for the development of the trail, particularly the Boulter Rd section opposite his property. Believes the trail will provide a world class tourism facility that will draw people to the district whilst providing a safe recreational option,

Noted

4 Owners of Lot 1 Robinson Road (LATE SUBMISSION)

Would like to have access from Boulter Rd as an alternative access to their family business and recently constructed “Granny Flat” located at the rear of their property.

A condition of the recent building approval for a Proposed Ancillary Accommodation (Granny Flat) states "There shall be no access to the property from Boulter Rd. Minor improvements to the southern end Robinson Road will be undertaken by the Shire to facilitate safe access to Lot 1.

The residents of Lot 5 Sebbes Road have since withdrawn their objection to the road closure on the basis that the Wadandi Track project will fund the provision of a gate from their property onto Robinson Road. This is considered a win-win outcome and will add minimal additional cost to the trail project. The residents of Lot 1 Robinson Road have also withdrawn their objection on the condition that the Shire undertakes minor repairs to the southern end of Robinson Road to facilitate safe access to their property, in lieu of the Boulter Road access. This will involve one truck load of gravel that is spread and compacted by a bobcat. This can be undertaken at minimal cost. Sketch Plan DWN No. 130902-003 has been amended to retain secondary vehicle access to Lot 2706 from Boulter Road (refer to Attachment 2). The revised road closure proposal meets the needs of the adjoining objectors and provides for future construction and operation of the Wadandi Track. STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS All dedicated roads reserves belong to the Crown and are governed by the Land Administration Act 1997. Section 58 of the Act provides for the permanent closure of road reserves. In this case, the surplus road reserve would be extinguished and the land amalgamated back into Reserve 47049 which is vested with the Shire for the purpose of “Heritage Trail” (Wadandi Track). The proposed road closure has been advertised in accordance with Section 58 of the Act. If approved by Council, the proposal will be assessed by the Department of Lands and a recommendation made to the Minister for Lands. If the proposed road closure is approved by the Minister, affected land owners and relevant state government agencies will be notified of the closure.


66

STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Council recognises the significance of the Busselton-Flinders Bay rail trail (Wadandi Track) land as a strategic transport corridor for recreation and for its heritage and environmental values (Shire Policy TE.20, adopted 13 July 2011). PLANNING FRAMEWORK N/A FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS A survey of the boundaries of the proposed new roads reserves may be required. The Department of Lands will normally meet survey cost in circumstances where the land tenure only involves Crown land. SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental

Boulter Road is an environmental asset containing significant remnant vegetation and habitat for native fauna. The inclusion of this land back into the Reserve 47049 will allow this asset a higher level of protection.

Social

The closure of this portion of Boulter Road will have minimal adverse effect on the adjoining properties.

The construction of the Wadandi Track will provide a major recreational opportunity for both local residents and visitors.

The heritage of the former railway line and the industries that is served will be recognised through interpretive signage.

Economic

Funding has yet to be secured for construction of the Wadandi Track.

Following construction, the Shire will be responsible for ongoing maintenance.

Construction of the entire track could be expected to being significant economic benefits to local businesses through increased tourism.

VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Closes portions of Boulter Road as demonstrated on revised sketch plan REV No. 2 DWN No.

130902-003, 130902-004 and 130902-005 and 2. Informs the Department of Lands of the closure under Section 58 of the Land Administration Act

1997 and indemnifies the Department of any costs and claims. ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT As per Council recommendation ATTACHMENTS 1. Sketch Plans REV No.1 DWN No. 130902-003, 130902-004 and 130902-005 2. Revised Sketch Plans REV No.2 DWN No. 130902-003, 13092-004 and 130902-005 RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION

CR SERVENTY, CR EARL OM2014/206 That Council: 1. Closes portions of Boulter Road as demonstrated on revised sketch plan REV No. 2 DWN

No. 130902-003, 130902-004 and 130902-005 and 2. Informs the Department of Lands of the closure under Section 58 of the Land

Administration Act 1997 and indemnifies the Department of any costs and claims. CARRIED 6/0


67

11.4 Corporate & Community

Services


68

11.4. CORPORATE AND COMMUNITY SERVICES 11.4.1 MINUTES OF BUSH FIRE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING HELD 20 AUGUST 2014

LOCATION/ADDRESS Shire of Augusta Margaret River APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Shire of Augusta Margaret River FILE REFERENCE EMS/4 REPORT AUTHOR Brendan Jordan, Community Emergency Services Manager AUTHORISING OFFICER Paul Gravett, Acting Director Corporate & Community Services

IN BRIEF

On 20 August 2014 the Bush Fire Advisory Committee (BFAC) held its quarterly meeting.

At this meeting recommendations were passed proposing: - That the minutes of the Augusta Margaret River Bushfire Advisory Committee Meeting held

on 21 May 2014 be confirmed as a correct record of the meeting with the following amendment to Section 8, Clause 8.7, of the DPaW report, heading ‘Additional, bullet point 5 to read ‘There will be no broad scale coastal heath burning this spring in the Shire however, mechanical measures are being undertaken to put buffers in place’.

- That Council notes the updated 2014-15 Fuel Hazard Reduction & Firebreak Notice. RECOMMENDATION That Council; 1. Receives the minutes of the Augusta Margaret River Bushfire Advisory Committee Meeting held

on 21 May 2014. 2. Notes the Shire’s 2014-15 Fuel Hazard Reduction & Firebreak Notice.

LOCATION PLAN N/A TABLED ITEMS N/A BACKGROUND N/A CONSULTATION AND ADVICE External Consultation Bushfire Brigade BFAC Delegates Internal Consultation N/A DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS The Chief Bushfire Control Officer, David Holland, and BFAC delegates welcomed Mr Martin Dekkers, Fire Control Officer elect for the newly formed Kudardup Bushfire Brigade to the meeting, attending in an observer capacity. Once the DFES Commissioner endorses the formation of the Brigade it will then officially become active once again. John Carter, Bushfire Risk Planning Coordinator, spoke briefly on his presented report regarding the Bushfire Risk Management Plan - Pilot Project. Delegates were given the opportunity to speak on and to answer any questions regarding their respective reports.


69

Fuel Hazard Reduction and Firebreak Notice The Fuel Hazard Reduction & Firebreak Notice (the Notice) is a first and final Notice to all residents and ratepayers within the Shire regarding property compliance based on Section 33 of the Bush Fires Act 1954. The Notice is used by the Shire to communicate to landowners’ compliance requirements on an annual basis, clarify ambiguous terms and conditions, as well as provide relevant tips and information regarding fire preparedness. Requirements vary depending on the zoning and location of a property. The Notice includes clear requirements for each zone and provides diagrams and photographs to assist. The Notice includes application for alternate fire preparedness strategies when current measures fail to meet property requirements due to factors including erosion, natural obstructions and or ecological reasons. At the May 2014 BFAC meeting a sub-committee consisting of members of the BFAC, Shire Rangers plus Mr Nick Dornan from the Sustainability Advisory Committee was formed to review the Shire’s current Notice. The review took into consideration issues and confusions raised in the previous Notice either by those implementing the provisions or ratepayers. Feedback was also received from Contractors who often undertake remedial / mitigation works associated with the Notice on behalf of ratepayers. Some misunderstanding relating to the use of wood fired pizza ovens during the ‘prohibited’ fire period, without seeking an exemption from the authority (DFES), was one section that was clarified. All areas of the Notice where reviewed by the Committee to ensure the information continues to be clearly interpreted by readers and the information is consistent with requirements. Delegates were requested to discuss the ‘draft’ Notice with their respective brigades seeking their approval. As there were no issues raised by delegates it was recommended that the presented 2014-15 Fuel Hazard Reduction & Firebreak Notice be presented to Council for noting. Notice Timeline Below is a basic timeline for implementation of the Notice this coming fire season: Printing of Notice 12 September Mailed to all rate payers owners on or before 1 October Last day for Variation submissions 9 November Residential Firebreak Inspections Commence 22 November Rural Firebreak Inspections Commence 22 December Properties to be compliant up to an including 12 May STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Section 38(1) Bush Fire Act 1954 Section 41(3) Bush Fire Act 1954 STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Goal 2: Welcoming and inclusive communities 6. Safer Communities 6.2 Enhance the Shire’s emergency and disaster management capabilities 6.2.1 Provide community emergency services and programs PLANNING FRAMEWORK N/A FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS As Budget provision has been allocated for the production and mail-out of the Fuel Hazard Reduction and Firebreak Notice there are no additional financial implications. SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental A strong and effective Bushfire Brigade network has greater capacity to fight bushfires and reduce the potential impacts upon the environment.


70

Social A strong and effective Bushfire Brigade network has greater capacity to reduce the impact of fire to life and property and associated mental trauma to the community. Economic A strong and effective Bushfire Brigade network has greater capacity to reduce the impact from fire to property and local businesses / economy. VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council; 1. Receives the minutes of the Augusta Margaret River Bushfire Advisory Committee Meeting held

on 21 May 2014. 2. Notes the Shire’s 2014-15 Fuel Hazard Reduction & Firebreak Notice. ATTACHMENTS 1. Minutes of the Bush Fire Advisory Committee Meeting 20 August 2014 2. Fuel Hazard Reduction & Firebreak Notice 2014-2015


CR EARL, CR HASTIE OM2014/207 That Council; 1. Receives the minutes of the Augusta Margaret River Bushfire Advisory Committee Meeting

held on 21 May 2014. 2. Notes the Shire’s 2014-15 Fuel Hazard Reduction & Firebreak Notice.

CARRIED 6/0


71

11.4.2 LOCAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 12 AUGUST 2014

LOCATION/ADDRESS Shire of Augusta Margaret River APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Shire of Augusta Margaret River FILE REFERENCE EMS/3 REPORT AUTHOR Brendan Jordan, Community Emergency Services Manager AUTHORISING OFFICER Paul Gravett, A/Director Corporate and Community Services

IN BRIEF

The following report is a summary of the Shire’s Local Emergency Management Committee (LEMC) meeting held 12 August 2014 in Council Chambers, Margaret River.

RECOMMENDATION That Council receives the minutes of the Local Emergency Management Committee held 12 August 2014.

LOCATION PLAN N/A TABLED ITEMS N/A BACKGROUND N/A CONSULTATION AND ADVICE External Consultation LEMC Delegates Internal Consultation Nil DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS Attending delegates were given the opportunity to report on their respective organisations. Paul Gravett, Manager Community Development and Safety spoke briefly on the Office of Bushfire Risk Management (OBRM) Bushfire Risk Management Planning (BRMP) pilot project that the Shire is participating in. The meeting was advised that the Department of Fire & Emergency Services (DFES) had released for comment their Westplan – Storm. Delegates were advised to contact the Shire’s CESM to source a copy of the plan. Roma Boucher (DCPFS) advised the meeting that Anna Huxtable is still seconded to Perth and that she would be continuing in the role. Roma is currently reviewing the Shire’s Welfare Support Plan and requested agencies to ensure all contact details listed in the plan are correct. Vik Cheema (Community Emergency Management Officer, SEMC Secretariat) spoke briefly on the LEMC Annual Report & Business Plan and conducted a brief workshop with delegates in formulating the LEMC Business Plan for 2014/15.


72

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Compliance with the requirements of the Emergency Management Act 2005. STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Goal 2: Welcoming and inclusive communities Outcome: Strong community groups and networks

Safer communities

Strategies: Support and value community organisations and volunteers across the region. Support community celebrations, events and local festivals. Enhance the Shire’s emergency and disaster management capabilities

PLANNING FRAMEWORK N/A FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS N/A SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental Timing, response and support to local emergencies will reduce any impact on the environment. Social An effective LEMC will assist the community in the response and recovery phases of an emergency. Implementation of a subsequent community preparedness program will help to augment preparedness messaging currently in place and assist with any future recovery process. Economic A community able to respond and recovery quickly from an emergency is well placed to reduce the economic impact of such an event. VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council receives the minutes of the Local Emergency Management Committee held 12 August 2014. ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT N/A ATTACHMENTS 1. Minutes of the Local Emergency Management Committee meeting 12 August 2014. RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION

CR VEITCH, CR EARL OM2014/208 That Council receives the minutes of the Local Emergency Management Committee held 12 August 2014.

CARRIED 6/0


73

12. MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

Nil

13. MOTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION AT NEXT MEETING

Nil

14. NEW BUSINESS OF AN URGENT NATURE

14.1. Members

Cr Serventy requested that the following motion be considered as new business of an urgent nature as the funding announcement was made on the weekend and it would be timely to write as soon as possible.

MOTION / COUNCIL DECISION

CR EARL, CR VEITCH OM2014/209 That Council accept Item 14.1.1 Letter of thanks to Minister of Regional Development as new business of an urgent nature.

CARRIED 6/0

14.1.1 Letter of thanks to Minister of Regional Development – Cr Lyn Serventy

Cr Serventy requested that the Council write and official letter of thanks to the Hon Terry Redman, Minister for Regional Development, for securing $60 million for Stage 2 of the Margaret River Perimeter Road development. She said that Council should express its gratitude for the hard work the Minister has put in to acquiring the funding, noting that it will also make improvements to the main street and amenity of the Shire possible. MOTION / COUNCIL DECISION

CR SERVENTY, CR EARL OM2014/210 That Council writes to thank the local member, Leader of the National Party and Minister for Regional Development for his efforts in securing Royalties for Regions funding of $60 million for Stage 2 of the Margaret River Perimeter Bypass Road.

CARRIED 6/0

14.2. CEO

The CEO requested that the following report be considered as new business of an urgent nature as it pertains to Councillor nominations for the Augusta Maritime Advisory Committee, which close on 17 September 2014, prior to the next Ordinary Meeting of Council. MOTION / COUNCIL DECISION

CR SERVENTY, CR VEITCH OM2014/211 That Council accept Item 14.2.1 Councillor Representation on the Augusta Maritime Advisory Committee as new business of an urgent nature.

CARRIED 6/0


74

14.2.1 COUNCILLOR REPRESENTATION ON THE AUGUSTA MARITIME ADVISORY COMMITTEE

LOCATION/ADDRESS Shire of Augusta Margaret River APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Shire of Augusta Margaret River FILE REFERENCE GOV/44 TPT/3 REPORT AUTHOR Johan Louw, Director Infrastructure Services AUTHORISING OFFICER Gary Evershed, Chief Executive Officer

IN BRIEF

The Department of Transport is seeking Expressions of Interest for membership on the Augusta Maritime Advisory Committee.

Nominations are due by Wednesday 17 September 2014.

As the date for nominations closes before the next Ordinary Meeting, the CEO has requested that this report be considered as business of an urgent nature.

RECOMMENDATION That Council nominates Cr _________________as the Shire of Augusta Margaret River representative to the Augusta Maritime Advisory Group and Cr _____________ as deputy.

LOCATION PLAN N/A TABLED ITEMS Nil BACKGROUND The Department of Transport (DoT) wrote to the Shire on 3 September 2014 seeking Expressions of Interest for membership on the Maritime Advisory Group (MAG) to assist with communication and consultation with respect to the DoT’s management of the Augusta Boat Harbour. The DoT utilises the MAG process at boat harbours and maritime facilities throughout the State as a means of encouraging communication between harbour users, stakeholders and the Government. Representation on the MAG is invited from the following stakeholders and community groups: Augusta Volunteer Marine Rescue 1 Representative Commercial Fishing Operations 1 Representative Charter Vessel Operators 1 Representative Shire of Augusta Margaret River 1 Representative Department of Fisheries 1 Representative Recreational Pen Users 1 Representative Augusta Chamber of Commerce 1 Representative South West Development Commission 1 Representative Augusta Margaret River Tourism Association 1 Representative Department of Transport Several Representatives It is anticipated that the MAG will meet every 4 months initially, and the inaugural meeting is expected to be in October 2014, prior to the opening of the harbour. Nominations are to be received by Wednesday 17 September 2014. DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS The specific terms of reference for the MAGS are:


75

To improve the level of communication and interaction between DoT and its stakeholders. To provide and maintain strong local community/ stakeholder advice to assist with management decisions affecting maritime facilities and activities in the state.

To provide a forum where matters of common interest or concern can be discussed and resolved.

To review and comment on any planning and development strategies, standards and guidelines for the maritime facility, including the review of options for the development of new facilities and leases.

To assist in the review of submissions received for harbour development proposals.

To promote use of the harbour/maritime facility.

To address safety issues involving the harbour and adjacent waters, including the designation and management of special use areas.

The opportunity will also exist to raise and discuss any coastal management or other issues that may be of concern in the area, to enable these issues to be communicated to appropriate persons within DoT.

DoT, (Regional Services in conjunction with Coastal Facilities) appoints members to Regional MAGs based on a fair representation of user groups and beneficiaries. DoT is to provide the secretariat services to the MAG. The actual responsible officer will be subject to management arrangement and service agreements existing with respect to individual facilities. The MAG Chairperson will be the Regional Manager or delegate. As an alternative, MAG members may recommend appointment of a suitably experienced independent person to the committee to carry out the role of chairperson. Membership of the MAG is for a fixed term of two years. If a member resigns, a replacement may be appointed. Upon completion of the two year term, a MAG member may renominate for subsequent two year terms. If a MAG member misses three consecutive meetings, that person's membership will be subject to review by the other MAG members and DoT. MAG members are able to invite persons to individual meetings from time to time to address particular issues and to allow observers as long as required confidentiality is preserved on appropriate issues.

Meeting procedures are described in the attached letter from the DoT. STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS The decisions of the MAG are not binding upon Council. STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS In accordance with the Shire’s Governance and Business Excellence Policy 1.9, Council Delegates, appointments to committees should only be considered where the body/group/organisation:

Represents state or regional interests that are likely to impact upon the Shire of Augusta Margaret River;

Represents local interests and the Council has a direct financial interest in the affairs of that group; or

Represents local interests and the group occupies Council property.

The appointment to the MAG will allow the Shire to represent local interests of Augusta Boat harbour users. PLANNING FRAMEWORK N/A FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Councillors attending meetings and events as a Council appointed delegate are entitled to travel reimbursements and other costs in accordance with Council policy. The wages for staff time (often after hours) for staff attending committees to provide technical or administrative support should also be considered. SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental Nil Social Nil


76

Economic Nil VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council nominates Cr _________________as the Shire of Augusta Margaret River representative to the Augusta Maritime Advisory Group and Cr _____________ as deputy. ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT N/A ATTACHMENTS 1. Correspondence from the DoT dated 3 September 2014 RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION

CR EARL, CR VEITCH OM2014/212 That Council nominates Cr Smart as the Shire of Augusta Margaret River representative to the Augusta Maritime Advisory Group and Cr Hastie as deputy.

CARRIED 6/0


77

15. CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS

Nil 16. CLOSURE OF MEETING

The Chair thanked all in attendance and closed the meeting at 6.33pm.

Date post:	24-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Ordinary Council - Shire of Augusta-Margaret River · Manager Asset Management : Mr David Nicholson...

Documents