Ordinary Council...ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2016 2 ATTENTION/DISCLAIMER This agenda has yet...

Ordinary Council

AGENDA

FOR THE MEETING TO BE HELD WEDNESDAY, 8 JUNE 2016

IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, WALLCLIFFE ROAD, MARGARET RIVER

COMMENCING AT 5:30PM

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2016

1

Meeting Notice Dear Councillor I advise that an Ordinary Council Meeting of the Shire of Augusta Margaret River will be held in Council Chambers, Wallcliffe Road, Margaret River on Wednesday 8 June 2016, commencing at 5:30pm. Yours faithfully

JOHAN LOUW ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


2

ATTENTION/DISCLAIMER

This agenda has yet to be dealt with by the Council. The Recommendations shown at the foot of each item have yet to be considered by the Council and are not to be interpreted as being the position of the Council. The minutes of the meeting held to discuss this agenda 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 this agenda 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 .................................................................................................. 4

2. ATTENDANCE ........................................................................................................................... 4

3. DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST ................................................................................................. 4

4. PUBLIC QUESTIONS ................................................................................................................ 4 4.1. RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE ................................ 4 4.2. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME ......................................................................................................... 4

5. APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE ........................................................................... 4

6. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING ..................................................... 4 6.1 ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING HELD 11 MAY 2016 ............................................................. 4

7. DEPUTATIONS .......................................................................................................................... 4

8. PETITIONS ................................................................................................................................. 4

9. ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM THE PRESIDING MEMBER......................................................... 4

10. QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN .................................................... 4

11. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES AND EMPLOYEE REPORTS ................................................... 4

11.1. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ................................................................................................... 5

11.2. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT .............................................................................................. 7 11.2.1 WITCHCLIFFE ECO-VILLAGE STRUCTURE PLAN AND RELATED AMENDMENT

NO. 28 FOR CONSENT TO ADVERTISE ................................................................................. 8 11.2.2 AMENDMENT NO.42 AND STRUCTURE PLAN - LOT 51 TUNBRIDGE STREET,

MARGARET RIVER.................................................................................................................. 18 11.2.3 MARGARET RIVER SPEEDWAY LEASE ............................................................................... 26

11.3. INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES ............................................................................................. 41

11.4. CORPORATE AND COMMUNITY SERVICES ....................................................................... 43 11.4.1 FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENT REPORT - APRIL 2016 ................................................ 44 11.4.2 LIST OF PAYMENTS FOR APRIL 2016 .................................................................................. 52

12. MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN ........................................... 55

13. MOTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION AT NEXT MEETING ....................................................... 55

14. NEW BUSINESS OF AN URGENT NATURE ......................................................................... 55 14.1. Members ................................................................................................................................... 55 14.2. CEO .......................................................................................................................................... 55

15. CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS .................................................................................................... 55

16. CLOSURE OF MEETING ......................................................................................................... 55


4

Ordinary Council Meeting

1. DECLARATION OF OPENING

2. ATTENDANCE

3. DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

4. PUBLIC QUESTIONS

4.1. Response to Previous Public Questions Taken on Notice

4.2. Public Question Time

5. APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

6. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

6.1 Ordinary Council Meeting held 11 May 2016

7. DEPUTATIONS

8. PETITIONS

9. ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM THE PRESIDING MEMBER

10. QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

11. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES AND EMPLOYEE REPORTS


5

11.1.

Chief Executive Officer


6

11.1. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Nil


7

11.2. Sustainable Development


8

11.2.1 WITCHCLIFFE ECO-VILLAGE STRUCTURE PLAN AND RELATED AMENDMENT NO. 28 FOR CONSENT TO ADVERTISE LOCATION/ADDRESS Lots 2807 and 2812 Busssell Highway, Witchcliffe APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Sustainable Settlements Pty Ltd/ Hulme Developments Pty Ltd FILE REFERENCE LND/1/28 REPORT AUTHOR Matt Cuthbert, Acting Manager Planning and Development Services AUTHORISING OFFICER Nick Logan, Acting Director Sustainable Development IN BRIEF • On 26 November 2014, Council resolved to initiate a Scheme Amendment to rezone the subject

land to ‘Future Development’, in order to facilitate future subdivision and development of an ‘Eco-village’. The Amendment has since been subject to a process of community consultation.

• On 25 January 2016 the Shire received a draft Structure Plan relating to the subject land. • The Structure Plan has been subject to review and modifications such that it is now acceptable for

the purposes of advertising. • In order for the key features of the Eco-village to be embedded within the statutory planning

framework it is also necessary to modify and concurrently readvertise the related Scheme Amendment.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: a) Advertises draft Structure Plan for Lots 2807 and 2812 Bussell Highway, Witchcliffe subject to

modification; b) Determines that Amendment 28 is a ‘standard amendment’; c) Re-advertises modifications to Standard Amendment 28; and d) Seeks approval from the WAPC for an extension of the ‘consideration period’ for dealing with

Amendment 28. SITE AND SURROUNDS The Site consists of two lots with a combined area of approximately 120ha. The Site is located on the eastern side of Bussell Highway surrounding the existing Witchcliffe settlement. The Site has historically been used for grazing (Loc. 2812) and vineyards (Loc. 2807). It is predominantly cleared with scattered trees and small clumps of vegetation. A large dam is located centrally on the site with a second large dam having been approved by the Shire but not yet constructed (see Figure 1). BACKGROUND In March 2013 the WAPC approved a variation to the Witchcliffe Village Strategy to specifically identify the subject land and Loc. 2812 to the north, for future development. The variation was put forward at the Shire’s request after undertaking consultation with the community and government agencies. The resultant WVS identifies Loc. 2807 as being specifically designated for ‘Eco-village’ purposes. The same designation was not applied to Loc. 2812 where a more conventional urban development was anticipated. The proponent has since purchased Loc. 2812 and proposes to include this property within the ‘Eco-village’ amendment. On the 26 November 2014 Council initiated Amendment 28 for the purposes of rezoning the subject land to facilitate an Eco-village. Council noted staff concern that a Structure Plan was not lodged concurrently with the Amendment, in order to make clear the intended form of development for both Council and the community. Notwithstanding those concerns, Council agreed to initiate the amendment and further resolved to provide the proponent with the following advice:


9

….initiation of this Amendment is on the basis of the imminent preparation and submission of detailed technical information by way of a Structure Plan. Failure to provide this Structure Plan may influence Council’s final recommendation with respect to Amendment No. 28.

Figure 1 – Subject Land THE PROPOSAL The proposal is a Structure Plan which provides for the following outcomes: • A strata titled Eco-village to be located across three separate parent lots, and linked together via

an ‘Eco-village covenant’; • Approximately 330 residential dwellings; • Approximately 16 intensive agriculture lots; • Communal agricultural production areas;


10

• A low tech/low energy effluent disposal regime which allows for reuse of water for irrigation; • Storm water management based on water sensitive principles which provide for the capture,

passive treatment and reuse of water on site; • Power; • Three dams (including one existing dam and one small dam to be enlarged in size); • A boutique hotel and bar; • A fresh produce store; • Land for short stay tourism use; • Land for mixed use residential/commercial; • An extension to the Witchcliffe Retail strip with land to be zoned ‘Village Centre’ fronting Bussell

Highway; • A public reserve developed as a sporting field accessible by the wider community. WHAT IS AN ‘ECO VILLAGE’? The Eco-village is put forward as an alternative form of residential development with the main differences from conventional urban development being in the areas of servicing and land tenure. In order to be as sustainable and self-sustaining as possible, the Eco-village intends to minimise all inputs (e.g. power, water, food) and all outputs (e.g. waste CO2) by addressing these matters on site. The specific methods for achieving these aims are discussed in more detail in this report. Land tenure will be arranged by firstly amalgamating the existing two lots and re-subdividing to create three green titled lots. Within each lot, a survey strata scheme will be established to create the range of residential, commercial and other strata lots surrounded by areas of shared responsibility which will be located in ‘common property’. This form of land tenure is common in small ‘grouped dwelling’ developments throughout the Shire and the state, however the Eco-village will be one of the few strata titled residential developments of its size. The form of tenure chosen for the Eco-village is consistent with its objectives and principles as an intentional form of community, whereby there is a high degree of interrelationship between residents, as is necessary to effectively manage its proper functioning. For example all residents will share in upkeep of communal spaces, power, water and sewer networks, matters which are undertaken by the Shire, Water Corporation and Western Power in a conventional subdivision. The legislative framework guiding the way in which the Eco-village is ‘run’ will be by way of strata by-laws and an estate covenant which will link the three green title lots together such that development within each functions as one. Changes being proposed by the State Government to the Strata Titles Act, and which introduce a new form of title (community title) may or may not be in place at such time as strata subdivision of the Eco-village commences. PLANNING FRAMEWORK The draft Scheme Amendment previously supported by Council, proposes to introduce provisions into the scheme which set out the requirements against which the Structure Plan should be assessed. The following is summary of how the structure plan responds to the scheme requirements. Draft Scheme Requirement Response An Eco-village Outcomes and Implementation Plan that addresses and demonstrates how the following land use expectations will be met:

The proponent has prepared a number of issues based reports rather than one plan which is an acceptable response.

The production of food and agricultural products including the provision of infrastructure to enable community gardens for the growing of fresh food produce;

The design of the Eco-village is such that each cluster of strata titled dwellings has access to a common area which will be developed with infrastructure necessary to allow the growing of vegetables with 20m2 allocated per dwelling as a minimum. Each common area would also have space for fruit and nut trees.


11

Draft Scheme Requirement Response A high level of self -sufficiency in energy (including on-site power generation, solar passive housing design and lot orientation);

The structure plan orientates future lots so that they can be developed with solar passive housing. The design of future houses to achieve this objective will be secured through Local Development Plans as required. The proponent has put forward three potential power options discussed in further detail in this report.

100% self-sufficiency in on-site water capture and use (including rainwater harvesting from roof catchments, treatment and re-use of greywater and blackwater and use of other water supplies provided on-site);

• All dwellings will rely solely on rainwater stored in onsite tanks. The size of the tanks will be dependent on the size of the lot/dwelling and therefore occupancy.

• Grey water will be diverted for irrigation purpose but only on larger lots.

• Effluent will be treated on site via septic tanks or ‘digesters’ serving each strata cell and then by means of bio-filtration before being stored in lined dams for irrigation of community owned green spaces and of the agricultural lots where desired. This matter is discussed in more detail in this report.

Environmental Corridor/Stream Zone Management Plan;

A plan has been prepared and has been found by relevant Shire staff to be acceptable for the purposes of advertising.

Public Open Space and Landscaping Plan;

A plan has been prepared and has been found by relevant Shire staff to be acceptable for the purposes of advertising. All open space within the development will be owned by one of three strata companies with the exception of a junior sized oval which will be developed for its intended purpose before being ceded to the Shire free of cost for ongoing maintenance and community use.

Traffic Management Plan;

A plan has been prepared and reviewed by relevant Shire staff. It provides for two main entry/exit points onto Bussell Highway, and lower key access via Davis Road and Shervington Avenue. The views of Main Roads WA will be important given their responsibility of Bussell Highway and they will be consulted at such time as the Structure Plan is publicly advertised.

Fire Management Plan; A Bushfire Management Plan has been prepared and is generally supported by relevant Shire staff. It will be further considered by DFES, at such time as the Structure Plan is publicly advertised.

Proposed Land Tenure and Preliminary Strata Management Outline;

This information has been provided at a conceptual level only. Under the Strata Titles Act as currently constituted, three strata schemes would exist with each dwelling on its own survey strata lot. The three schemes would be tied together by an ‘Eco-village covenant’ setting out vision, values, management and structure. This matter is discussed in more detail in this report.

Community Infrastructure and Facilities Needs Plan;

The developer contributions payable for this development will be set by Amendment 35 once gazetted. The proponent seeks to have ‘affordable housing lots/dwellings’ exempted from the need to pay developer contributions. See further detailed comments in this report.

Affordable Housing Strategy.

The most significant contributions towards affordable accommodation put forward by the proponent are: • Living costs are reduced for residents given the expected

lower food, power, water and effluent disposal costs; and • Small lots will be created with a maximum size house

(100m2) mandated, expected to be available from $280,000 (house and land package). This issue is explored in further detail in this report.


12

LPS1 The subject land is currently zoned ‘Priority Agriculture’ in recognition of its agricultural use to the present time. Leeuwin Naturaliste Statement of Planning Policy 6.1 The LNRSPP identifies Witchcliffe as a ‘Village’ with a future population of around 2,000 persons. Witchcliffe Village Strategy The WVS identifies the subject land as forming residential development Cells 7 and 8. A range of issues are set out for future resolution at the Scheme Amendment / Structure Plan / Subdivision and Development stages. Most noteworthy are: Cell 7 • Potential lot yield: approximately 120 lots. • Lot range 333m2 to 4,000m2 (R30-R2.5). • Potential for Eco-village incorporating innovation and sustainability outcomes. • Address visual management in relation to adjoining land use/development. • Address fire hazard planning. • Development to respond to the provisions of the Shire's Rural Hamlet Design Handbook. • Investigation of the extent of stream/drainage/wetland protection areas.

Cell 8 • Potential lot yield: 180 lots. • Residential lots of 333m2 to 2,000m2 (R30-R5). • Potential for Eco-village development incorporating innovation and sustainability outcomes. • Provide a minimum 500 metre buffer between the boundary of the waste disposal site in Davis

Road and urban/residential development. • The development of additional dams or the enlargement of dams is not permitted and

environmental stream flows should be maintained following development. • Address visual management in relation to adjoining land use/development. • Subject to provision of co-ordinated water supply and sewerage services (connected to the

Witchcliffe Water Reclamation Scheme); grey-water re-use; capture and re-use of rainwater; environmentally sensitive housing development and sustainable energy use.

Figure 2 – Excerpt from Witchcliffe Village Strategy

SUBJECT LAND


13

DISCUSSION Power Supply The proponent has set out three options for providing renewable electricity to the development. They are: 1. Net Renewable – homes are connected to the grid but over time (e.g. per year) produce as much

power as they consume via rooftop solar PV, which feed excess power back into the grid. 2. Micro Grid – This option is subject to the proponent being successful in obtaining grant funding

provided by the Federal Government via the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA). Homes will produce power via rooftop solar PV with excess power stored in battery banks within the home, and central to each housing cluster. In this regard, clusters will ‘share’ power, and will be able to manage power use via real time information provided by the microgrid.

3. Self-sufficient Household – Homes would not be connected to the grid but would generate and store all of their own power in household battery banks.

In all of the possible power scenarios, home owners would provide rooftop solar photovoltaics (PV’s) and an inverter, which converts the power to a useable form. The proponent would provide either a connection point for each dwelling to access the existing power grid or microgrid, and provide related infrastructure. The draft scheme provisions do not express a preference for grid connected or non grid micro systems, however the proponent’s intention to achieve as a minimum an outcome whereby 100% of energy produced elsewhere is offset by that produced on site, meets the intent of the ‘Eco-village’ concept. Wastewater Recycling In November 2014 the proponent presented to Council potential options for wastewater treatment on the subject land. The proponent’s assessment at the time rated that the Eco-village could accept and treat wastewater from the existing Witchcliffe settlement and potentially also from surrounding (proposed) developments, if not, assisting in a solution by scale and thus resolving a long standing issue limiting Witchcliffe’s development. Since that time, the proponent has modified the Eco-village wastewater proposal such that it is now proposed to only accept wastewater from lots within the Eco-village. The system proposed is deliberately ‘low-tech’ which the proponent advises is in response to the high energy usage of more mechanised options. The system consists of seven separate treatment trains each serving a catchment of lots. As figure 3 depicts, wastewater will be piped from each catchment to an anaerobic digester akin to a large septic tank which will provide primary treatment. Secondary treatment will be achieved in constructed wetlands to which water will be released below the surface. Wetland vegetation will assist in cleaning the water through the uptake of nutrients, an approach widely used in storm water management. Treated water will then be stored in lined dams, sized to store water over the winter months for use for irrigation purposes. Irrigation will be in the form of drip line, with crops located upon ‘common property’ areas within which suitable crops will be grown. The Shire’s environmental health staff are satisfied with the concept, and the level of information provided, however have noted that the Shire is not authorised to approve a system of this kind and approval from the Department of Health is required. The proponent and Shire staff have spoken with the Department of Health who have advised that they are unable to provide informal feedback and that the proposal should be provided to them during the public consultation period. The proponent’s decision to pursue a stand-alone waste water option for the Eco-village will likely detract from the viability of a potential centralised facility to service the whole of Witchcliffe, and to resolve wastewater issues for existing commercial land in the Town Centre. This however, is a matter for evaluation by Witchcliffe landowners and developers to whom responsibility for developing such a facility falls. The Shire is not aware of any representations made by surrounding developers to the Eco-village proponents requesting access to the wastewater scheme. Furthermore, it is not inconceivable that other large landowners could take a similar approach to wastewater on their own sites. This solution may not be the broader issue of wastewater management and will be considered by the Shire in its review of the Witchcliffe Village Strategy, due to commence later this year.


14

Figure 3 – Eco-village wastewater schematic Water Balance A Water Balance is an assessment of all water entering, exiting and being used within a defined area. The proponent has prepared a Local Water Management Strategy which, as is required, contains an assessment of the water balance. One of the principles against which a Local Water Management Strategy is assessed as contained in the Better Urban Water Management document (WAPC/DoW 2008) is that “Post-development annual discharge volume and peak flow be maintained relative to predevelopment conditions, unless otherwise established through determination of ecological water requirements for sensitive environments”. The proponents water balance finds that post development flows will be 7% less than existing flows. The responsibility for approving a Local Water Management Strategy lies with the WAPC based on advice from the Department of Water (DoW). As such, feedback received from the DoW will be critical to ensuring that the proponent has used technically sound information and reasonable assumptions to compile their water balance information and to determining whether a 7% reduction is acceptable. Notwithstanding the DoW’s advice the Shire may elect to seek third party technical advice from a specialised engineer if there are outstanding concerns post advertising. Strata Management Of critical importance to the success of the Eco-village is a robust and workable strata management regime. This is due to the size of the strata and the extent of the common infrastructure which includes essential services such as effluent disposal. This places special emphasis on the cohesiveness of landowner interactions and the legal structure which guides them. The information provided to date confirms that a strata management regime either utilising the current Strata Titles Act 1985, or potential changes to the Act in the form of the Community Title Scheme currently being progressed through State Government. It does not however, discuss and provide responses to the multitude of different and complex scenarios which could arise and which would threaten the ability of the Eco-village to provide a desirable place to live. Such items include but are not limited to: • How each resident’s share of communal growing space is defined and managed; • How behaviours will be regulated to ensure effective functioning of such things as the effluent

disposal system (use of harmful chemicals etc.), and equitable access to power (those that use more vs those that use less);

• How will sufficient funds be collected over a reasonable time frame to cater for maintenance of the considerable common infrastructure assets such as roads and essential services.

Notwithstanding that oversight of the future strata company is not a responsibility of the Shire, there is a risk that the Shire would be regarded as being responsible if a less than optimal management


15

regime is implemented. It is therefore essential that the Shire has a role of oversight in the particulars of the Strata rules that will be implemented collectively by later owners. Affordable Housing Whilst the draft Scheme Amendment requires the proponent to address this issue, a lack of a supportive state planning policy framework does little to assist its application. It therefore relies on negotiated outcomes to achieve positive results. The proponent’s response to this issue is to seek to create 55 small lots of around 300m2 clustered into 11 groups of 5, upon which homes would have a maximum size of 100m2. The proponent commits to then selling the lots or house and land packages at a discount to market rates in order to make these available to households in B and C of the Department of Housing rating matrix ($57,000-$86,000 p.a. as at August 2010). A demographic which has a documented need for affordable home ownerhship options. This option is contingent on the proponent being exempt from the payment of developer contributions for these lots. This issue is discussed in more detail in this report. The proponent has also highlighted the reduced living costs available in the Eco-village due to a lack of water and sewer service charges, reduced energy costs and the opportunity to grow ones own food. The proponent also offers to support the construction of low cost housing by connecting future residents with supportive schemes and resources such as a building advisory service and Keystart loan opportunities. In reality, without statutory control in zoning or some other legal mechanism, the final purchase price of lots will be set by the market. Community Facilities / Developer Contributions Amendment 35 to LPS1 is currently with the WAPC and once signed by the Minister and gazetted, will take effect. In its current form it would require the developer to pay $2408.64 per lot at the time of strata lot creation ($1159.90 local contributions / $1248.74 district contributions). It is envisaged that the Amendment will be gazetted prior to subdivision approvals being sought for the Eco-village however the Shire should not support subdivision without first requiring the proponent to enter into a legal agreement to guarantee payment of contributions in the even the Amendment is delayed. In respect to the exemption from developer contributions sought for ‘affordable dwellings’, the Affordable Housing Strategy at Recommendation 3 states: Preference will be given to affordable housing commitments which result in suitable land parcels being transferred to the Shire or other suitable affordable housing provider. Developer contributions will not be charged by the Shire for lots/dwellings provided for affordable housing. As previously noted, the proponent has taken some positive steps towards improving housing affordability but not to the extent that would warrant an exemption from developer contribution requirements at this time. It could be argued that this in itself reduces housing affordability, however without any means of ensuring that current intentions result in actual outcomes, relaxation of this requirement would only achieve a reduction in the Shire’s capacity to provide agreed community facilities for the future resident population. New Dams As previously described the WVS attempts to prohibit new dams in the southern portion of the site. The matter is complicated by the fact that an approval has previously been issued by the Shire for a new dam associated with the current use of the site as a vineyard. The key issue for any dam, whether it be associated with the current vineyard or future residential development is its impact on the flow of water necessary to sustain the natural environment. In this regard, it would be useful to maintain the dam as part of the draft Structure Plan and seek comments from relevant experts including the Department of Water and surrounding land owners during the consultation period, in order that Council can make a fully informed decision when the plan returns for final consideration.


16

Lot Yield The intended residential lot yield envisaged by the Witchcliffe Village Strategy is 300. The subject plan as proposed identifies approximately 334 dwellings. The proponent advises that an increase to the dwelling numbers is required to offset the cost of providing affordable housing opportunities. It would not be consistent with conventional planning practice to stipulate a specific lot yield on a greenfields development of this size, given the multitude of factors which will influence detailed design as the subdivision progresses. It is recommended however, that the size and nature of the site is capable of supporting the general lot yield intended, subject to servicing elements being considered and approved by the relevant agencies as will be facilitated by the consultation process. Scheme Amendment At the ordinary meeting of 14 October 2015 Council noted a report outlining the changes made to the state planning framework by way of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015. Changes of particular importance in the context of the Eco-village proposal are: • Structure Plans can no longer ‘zone’ land. • Structure plans now hold less statutory weight (not part of scheme but must be given ‘due regard’). • ‘Conditions’ which would have been previously applied to Structure Plans now must be included in

the scheme if they are to achieve the same level of force and effect. For the reasons outlined above, it has become necessary for key outcomes of the Structure Plan to be included in the Scheme. As Amendment 28 is still in draft form, it is possible to further modify the Amendment to achieve this aim. Consultation with the Department of Planning has confirmed that in doing so, the amendment will need to be readvertised, to allow the public to consider and comment on the changes. The Shire will need to seek an extension to the period of time otherwise allowed for Council to deal with the amendment from the WAPC. The additional text added to the Scheme amendment can be found at Attachment 3, however in summary deals with the following issues: • The need for Local Development Plans to provide detailed guidance in relation to built form; • Clarification of the Shire position with respect to developer contributions; • Requirements imposed on the subdivided in relation to the staging of development and

development and ceding of the oval free of cost to the Shire; • Confirmation of the developers commitments in relation to energy and water provision; • A prohibition on dwellings applicable to the agricultural lots; and • A maximum size for dwellings upon the R30 lots of 100m2. Further Changes Staff have recommended that the Structure Plan be modified to show a road connection between the northern and southern sections of the site. The proponent has advised that pedestrian and cycle paths have been provided however do not agree to include a road. It is recommended that the plan be modified to include a road link prior to advertising. This is consistent with contemporary planning practice, reinforced by WAPC Policy ‘Liveable Neighbourhoods’ which calls for “highly interconnected” streets. Whilst walking and cycling are encouraged as modes of transport, the absence of a road will require persons electing to use a car to use Bussell Highway in order to access the opposite end of the site. This would be a less safe and more inconvenient outcome. CONSULTATION Amendment 28 was advertised in January of 2015. Of the 25 public submissions received, 4 were in support and three were ‘indifferent’ but raised some concerns. The primary concerns raised in the 18 submissions of objection was a lack of detail particularly in relation to issues associated with water use and catchment. The eight submissions received from government agencies and service providers were generally supportive (see Attachment 4). If Council resolves to support advertising of the draft Structure Plan it will be advertised together with changes to Amendment 28 in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning


17

Scheme) Regulations 2015. This will provide the community, including those that made initial submissions, to consider the proposal in light of the greater degree of information now available. STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Community Strategic Plan 2033 (CSP) Corporate Business Plan 2016-2020 Goal 3: Managing Growth Sustainably Community Outcome: Clearly defined areas for growth and renewal Strategic Response: Implement Local Planning Scheme No. 1 (LPS1) Service Level Strategy/Plan: Provide Planning Services FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Nil SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental The Eco-village concept is based upon a desire to co-locate residential development and the natural environment in a way that creates only positive outcomes for both. A range of requirements are imposed via the proposal which will lead to positive environmental outcomes. Social Future management of the strata, both physically and administratively will require a great deal of interaction and cooperation between future strata owners. The concept has been deliberately formed in such a way as to necessitate and facilitate social engagement. Economic The implementation of the proposal will not require Council expenditure, with all necessary infrastructure to be provided by the landowners. The future success of the proposal will be enhanced if it achieves its objectives of providing local employment opportunities for residents. VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT Nil

RECOMMENDATION That Council: a) Advertises draft Structure Plan for Lots 2807 and 2812 Bussell Highway, Witchcliffe in

accordance with clause 18(1) of the Deemed Provisions of Local Planning Scheme No.1, for a period of 28 days subject to the plan being modified to show a road connection between the northern and southern residential components;

b) Determines that Amendment 28 is a ‘standard amendment’ in accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 as it is “an amendment that is consistent with a local planning strategy for the scheme that has been endorsed by the Commission”;

c) Re-advertises modifications to Standard Amendment 28 in accordance with clause 51(1) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, for a period of 21 days; and

d) Seeks approval from the WAPC for an extension of the ‘consideration period’ for dealing with Amendment 28, in accordance with clause 50(1)(d) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, until 26 August 2016.

ATTACHMENTS 1. Structure Plan 2. Concept Plan 3. Modified Scheme Provisions 4. Schedule of Submissions


18

11.2.2 AMENDMENT NO.42 AND STRUCTURE PLAN - LOT 51 TUNBRIDGE STREET, MARGARET RIVER LOCATION/ADDRESS Lot 51 Tunbridge Street, Margeret River APPLICANT/LANDOWNER LB Planning for CVJ Pty Ltd FILE REFERENCE PTY/1688;LND/1/24 REPORT AUTHOR Johan Pienaar, Statutory Planning Coordinator AUTHORISING OFFICER Nick Logan, Acting Director Sustainable Development IN BRIEF • The proposed Scheme Amendment and associated Structure Plan seek to provide the

opportunity for Lot 51 Tunbridge Street Margaret River (the Site) to be subdivided at a higher density.

• The Site is to be rezoned to ‘Future Development’ with subdivision at a Residential density of R30/40 (average 180m2 - 450m² lots) proposed by a related structure plan. The site is currently zoned ‘Residential R15’ (allowing a minimum 666m² lot size).

• The Site is located in Development Investigation Area (DIA) M13 by the Local Planning Strategy (LPS) and is identified for mixed use and residential development at an R30/40 density.

• Council adopted the proposed Scheme Amendment and Structure Plan on 9 December 2015 for the purpose of advertising.

• Nine public submissions were received during the advertising period. • The proposed Amendment and Structure Plan is supported as it is an appropriate response to

objectives of the LPS and issues raised during advertising. RECOMMENDATION That Council pursuant to the Planning and Development Act 2005 (as amended) and Part 50 (3) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 resolves to adopt Amendment 42 to Local Planning Scheme No.1 and recommend the related Structure Plan for final approval. SITE AND SURROUNDS The Site is a narrow 1.4 ha lot which accommodates an existing dwelling, shed and water tank. The Site is accessed from Tunbridge Street to the south and is bounded by residential zoned lots along its western and eastern boundaries as is evident in Figure 1 below. The Site falls to the north with a drainage line traversing the site in the north-eastern corner. The adjoining residential lots are currently coded ‘R15’ but are similarly identified for future ‘R30/40’ development by the LPS. Council recently endorsed a Structure Plan over adjacent Lots 481, 482 and 483 Stewart Street, to facilitate residential development at the R20, R30 and R40 densities. TABLED ITEMS 1. Scheme Amendment Report 2. Structure Plan Report


19

Figure 1: Location Plan BACKGROUND Council gave in principle support for the rezoning of the Site in September 2014 subject to the final application addressing a number of aspects including the preparation of a Structure Plan, Traffic Impact Assessment and a requirement that the proponent consult with owners of adjoining lots. The purpose of this consultation was to canvas the views of property owners on Valley Road, inviting inclusion within the Structure Plan and Scheme amendment proposal. At the Ordinary Meeting of 9 December 2015, Council concluded that the proponent has satisfactorily addressed the conditions under which the in-principle support was given and resolved to endorse proposed Scheme Amendment 42 and the associated Structure Plan for advertising purposes. THE PROPOSAL The proposal consists of: • A Scheme Amendment to rezone Lot 51 from ‘Residential R15’ to ‘Future Development Zone’,

which requires subdivision and development to give ‘due regard’ to any applicable Structure Plan prepared for the site; and

• A Structure Plan which identifies how the site could be developed at an R30/40 density code which would yield approximately 30 lots. The proposed Structure Plan is appended as Attachment 1.

CONSULTATION AND ADVICE The proposed Scheme Amendment is a ‘standard amendment’ as per clause 34 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015. As such, the proposed Scheme Amendment and related Structure Plan were advertised accordingly. Public Submissions Nine public submissions were received during advertising. One submission objects to the proposed rezoning on the grounds of environmental impacts while the other submissions, irrespective of supporting or objecting to the application, raise concerns on certain aspects of the proposal. A summary of each submission is available in the schedule of submissions, which is appended as Attachment 2. Below is a summary of the issues that were raised.

Subject Land


20

• The proposed future pedestrian link over adjoining Lot 20, Valley Road would achieve nothing and could be a security issue for Lot 20.The link will encourage more people to walk in Valley Road, where there are no footpaths. Increase numbers of pedestrians will result in an increase in risk of traffic accidents.

• Seek assurance that the pedestrian link will not be forced upon the owners of Lot 7 Stewart Street in future rezoning.

• Lot 13 Tunbridge Street will be left with three street frontages. Lot 13 should be included in

the application and rezoned to R30/40 with a mixed use potential.

• Developer should pay for any new retaining, fencing.

• Appropriate dust and noise control measures must be implemented during construction to avoid impacts on adjoining dwellings and tourism business.

• R30/40 density is too dense. The semi-rural aspect of this location was the main attraction of

buying in this area. Higher density will result in more overlooking potential and increase noise/disturbance impacts.

• Will be a shame to lose all the mature trees on the site.

• Concerned about additional traffic impacts on already very busy Tunbridge Street.

• All parking bays on north side of Tunbridge Street should be decommissioned to improve

sight lines.

• Increased density will cause increased noise, loss of habitat and impacts on the drainage line. Government Agencies No major issues were raised by government agencies. Comments from the Water Corporation, Department of Fire and Emergency Services and the Department of Parks and Wildlife are highlighted below:

• The Water Corporation has highlighted that the existing sewer mains are located within the site near the rear boundary and recommended an easement or relocation of the sewer mains. The appropriate way of dealing with the matter will be determined at subdivision stage.

• The Department of Fire and Emergency Services (DFES) indicated that the proposed bushfire mitigation strategies are acceptable. The proposed Bushfire Management Plan (BMP) will be finalised and endorsed at subdivision stage.

• The Department of Parks and Wildlife (DPaW) recommends the preparation and

implementation of a Wildlife Protection Management Plan, to the satisfaction of DPaW, in light of the evidence that western ringtail possums utilise the site.

PLANNING FRAMEWORK Local Planning Strategy (LPS) The Site is located within DIA M13 for the purpose of infill development (see figure 2). DIA M13 is a substantial area north and south of Tunbridge Street and includes the area east of Bussell Highway as far as Le Souef Street. The LPS envisages this area to provide for infill development surrounding the town centre through the consolidation of lots to provide for higher density development in proximity to the town centre. Stewart Street and Valley Road are specifically highlighted to provide potential for increased densities subject to an overall Structure Plan, or as a minimum, a structure plan for each street to examine servicing and urban design/streetscape outcomes.


21

Figure 2: Excerpt from LPS (Land Use Strategy Map 2) DISCUSSION Issues that were raised during the recent advertising of the application relate to potential impacts as a result of subdivision works and the subsequent development stage. Subdivision works are subject to the submission and approval of appropriate engineering design and management plans. The management plans deal with aspects such as dust control, noise, hours of operation etc. It is unnecessary to include specific provisions in the Scheme in relation to these concerns as it is dealt with through the subdivision process. Other issues that were raised relate to the appropriateness of the proposed R30/40 density, the depicting on the proposed Structure Plan of “potential” pedestrian links through adjoining lots on Stewart Street and Valley Road and potential environmental impacts. These issues are addressed below. Density The proposed R30/40 density is consistent with the density provisions of the LPS. DIA M13 is identified for infill development through the consolidation of lots to provide for higher density development in proximity to the town centre. The transition of DIA M13 into a medium density area will take place over an extended period of time due to the complexities associated with multiple ownerships on Valley Road and Stewart Street, where a coordinated approach is required. The residential component is identified on the Structure Plan as a dual code being R30/40. The dual coding provides flexibility particularly in relation to the general site requirements prescribed by the Codes; however, a maximum lots size of 450m² is proposed to ensure the density objective of the LPS is achieved. As such, Schedule 11 of LPS1 will include a condition which requires a ‘Local Development Plan’ (LDP), which will deal with future development matters in detail, as a condition of subdivision. The amendment also includes a condition setting a maximum lot size of 450m². The 30/40 density will therefore provide for lots between 180m² and a maximum lot size of 450m². Given the sloping nature of the site, either retaining walls at subdivision or alternative building approaches (split level or pier construction) will be required particularly for the rear portion of the site. To avoid an uncoordinated approach to this issue by future landowners, if retaining is required, it will be installed by the subdivider. If reasonable site levels can be achieved without retaining, a prohibition on boundary retaining will apply, with future owners being required to utilise appropriate construction methods. This outcome is secured via a provision to be inserted at Schedule 11 of LPS1.

Subject Land


22

The cul-de-sac nature of the proposed subdivisional road means that adjoining properties will not experience any increase in vehicle traffic as a result of the proposal. Concern was raised that the location of the intersection at the north/eastern boundary of the site would result in adjoining Lot 13 having three road frontages. In initiating the subject amendment, Council noted this issue. It was agreed that this matter would best be tested during the advertising process to determine neighbour feedback. An objection was received from the owner of Lot 13 which resulted in further discussions occurring between the owner and Shire staff. The owner offered to withdraw any objection if Lot 13 was similarly rezoned to allow for mixed use development. The Local Planning Strategy identifies Lot 13 as being for future infill and mixed use development, consistent with the direction given for the subject land and the broader Stewart/Valley Road precinct generally. The Shire is therefore supportive of rezoning Lot 13 to facilitate this outcome. To include Lot 13 as part of the subject proposal would require readvertising of the amendment. The rezoning of Lot 13 would most appropriately be pursued together with other lots in the Valley Road locality. Consultation undertaken to date suggests that there is not a majority of landowners in this area supportive of such a proposal; however this would be a matter for owners themselves to canvas. Given that the objection received regarding the location of the proposal road relates primarily to the zoning of Lot 13, it is recommended that the road be retained in its proposed location. It is also possible that the owner of Lot 13 can bring an independent proposal to the Council for consideration. Pedestrian links In relation to pedestrian connections, opportunities have been put in place to allow connection with the Wadandi track to the west and Shire reserves to the east if adjoining lots are subdivided in the future. Consultation by the proponent with owners of lots on Valley Road, prior to the submission of the application, did not provide majority support for joining with the proposal, which might otherwise have allowed consideration of a zoning change for a wider area. Critically, the proponent engaged with the owners of Lot 20 Valley Road and Lot 7 Stewart Street, which if included in the proposal may provide options to create a more interconnected and permeable road network. It is reported that the owners of these lots indicated no fundamental objection to the proposal but declined to be involved directly. From the submissions received it is clear that both the owners of Lot 7 Stewart Street and Lot 20 Valley Road have reservations on the proposed pedestrian link due to potential amenity impacts and due to concerns that it will impact on the development potential of their land. The establishment of this link through the adjoining lots will be explored further when the Shire receive scheme amendment and structure plan applications for the Stewart Street and Valley Road precincts. It is considered appropriate that the proposed Structure Plan provide for this link to allow for the future exploration into establishing a pedestrian link. It is not considered that the establishment of this pedestrian link will result in increased traffic accidents, as mentioned in a submission, as any Structure Plan facilitating an increase in density on Valley Road will incorporate a requirement for a footpath, similarly to the subject Structure Plan. Environmental Impacts A “Flora and Fauna Values Assessment” was undertaken, which concludes that the site is in a completely degraded condition. Vegetation on the site is limited to 5 peppermint trees and some mixed regrowth near the drainage line. It is considered unlikely that the site would support any threatened flora or ecological communities. It is confirmed that evidence of Western Ringtail Possums were observed; however, it is concluded that the loss of 5 peppermint trees and regrowth near the drainage line (0.12ha of habitat) is not likely to be significant. The “Flora and Fauna Values Assessment” recommends that a suitably qualified specialist inspect the site prior to clearing to ensure that any Western Ringtail Possums are relocated outside the impact area if necessary, noting that significant habitat occurs in close proximity to the site. This recommendation is an appropriate response to the advice received from DPaW. The recommendations of the “Flora and Fauna Values Assessment” will be recommended to be applied as conditions of any subdivision application and is reflected as a Scheme amendment provision. Decommissioning of parking on northern side of Tunbridge Street A traffic impact statement has been prepared by a suitably qualified consultant and found to be acceptable by the Shire’s Asset Services staff. It finds that permanent occupation of the development


23

once complete will create 240 new vehicle movements per day, 24 being at peak times. The existing surrounding road network together with the proposed ‘new’ road, have been found to be adequate to deal with the levels of traffic generated by the proposal.

On street parking bays, which will be required to be removed from Tunbridge Street in order to provide for the new road intersection, will be replaced within the ‘new’ subdivisional road reserve. STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Community Strategic Plan 2033 (CSP) Corporate Business Plan 2015-2019 Goal 3: Managing Growth Sustainably Community Outcome: Liveable and well-designed places Strategic Response: Implement Local Planning Scheme No. 1 Service level strategy/plan: Provide planning services FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Nil SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental The site has been found to be in an environmentally degraded condition and thus its development does not threaten any significant environmental features, however provides an opportunity to improve the habitat value of the existing dam. Social The proposal provides the opportunity to increase the resident population and provide greater housing choice in the form of small lot housing. Economic The redevelopment of the site supports local businesses by introducing a greater residential population within close proximity. VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Pursuant to the Planning and Development Act 2005 (as amended) and Regulation 50 (3) of the

Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 resolves to support Amendment 42 to Local Planning Scheme 1 for the purposes of:

a) Rezoning Lot 51 Tunbridge Street, Margaret River from ‘Residential R15’ to ‘Future

Development’ zone and amending the Scheme Maps accordingly. b) Modifying Schedule 11 – Structure Plan areas by inserting the following text to include the

subject land within a ‘Structure Plan Area’:

Area No. (SPA)

Description of Land Area

Land Use Expectation

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

Associated Provisions

29 Lot 51 Tunbridge Street, Margaret River

Residential and Mixed Use

Subdivision shall be generally in accordance with a Structure Plan endorsed by the Western Australian Planning Commission in accordance with the process set out in Part 6.2 of the Scheme.

1. 10% Public Open Space is to be provided as a cash in-lieu contribution in accordance with Section 153 of the Planning and Development Act, 2005.

2. The maximum lot size shall be

450m2 except as may be absolutely necessary to address topographical constraints and/or retention of existing


24

infrastructure. 3. As a condition of subdivision the

subdivider shall prepare a Local Development Plan (LDP) to address the following Sustainable building design; Position of garage/carports; Primary street setbacks; Open Space; and Fencing.

4. While it is intended to minimise

disturbance of the natural ground levels, should retaining on the boundaries of new lots be required, such retaining shall be implemented by the subdivider at the time of subdivision. Further retaining on the boundaries of new lots by land owners is not permissible (See LDP for detailed design response).

5. As a condition of subdivision, the

subdivider will be required to prepare and implement the following: • Acid Sulphate Soils (ASS)

investigations including mitigation measures through the preparation of an ASS Management Plan to the satisfaction of the Department of Environment and Regulation (DER) and the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River;

• An Environmental Management Plan to address the interface between future development and Peppermint Brook drainage line to the satisfaction of the Department of Water (DoW) and the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River;

• A comprehensive Urban Water Management Plan to the satisfaction of the DoW and the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River;

• A detailed Landscape Plan for the POS areas, existing drainage lines, road reserves, interface with the road and pedestrian network to the satisfaction of the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River; and

• Bushfire Management Plan.

6. Land identified as having mixed use potential may be used exclusively for residential purposes or a mixture of residential and commercial uses limited to those which will


25

have minimal impact on residential amenity (e.g. office, medical centre, consulting rooms, child care, industry – cottage and art and craft centre).

Subject to inserting an additional dot point under provision 5 reading as follows: “A suitably qualified fauna specialist must inspect the site prior to clearing to ensure that any Western Ringtail Possums located within the areas to be cleared are relocated”

c) Denote the subject land as ‘SPA 29’ on the Scheme Map. 2. Pursuant to clause 20 (2) (e) of the deemed provisions of Local Planning Scheme No.1 endorse

the proposed Structure Plan without any modifications.

3. Pursuant to clause 20 (1) of the deemed provisions of Local Planning Scheme No.1 advise the WAPC of its endorsement of the proposed Structure Plan.

4. Authorises affixing the common seal to Amendment 42. ATTACHMENTS 1. Proposed Structure Plan 2. Schedule of Submissions


26

11.2.3 MARGARET RIVER SPEEDWAY LEASE LOCATION/ADDRESS Reserve 18838 Wallcliffe Road, Margaret River APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Augusta - Margaret River Hot Rod Club FILE REFERENCE RES/18838 REPORT AUTHOR Amelia Englert, Senior Legal Officer AUTHORISING OFFICER Nick Logan, Acting Director Sustainable Development IN BRIEF • The Augusta-Margaret River Hot Rod Club (Hot Rod Club) has formally occupied a portion of

Reserve 18838, Wallcliffe Road (Site) since 1978 and has operated the speedway during this time.

• The current 21 year lease granted in favour of the Hot Rod Club expires on 31 December 2017. • The Hot Rod Club has requested that a new lease be granted on the same terms as the current

lease. • During the operation of the speedway the Shire has received noise complaints from surrounding

property owners and occupants. • In December 2000 the Minister for the Environment made an exemption order which allows

speedway noise emissions to exceed the noise levels set under the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 (Regulations) and protects the Hot Rod Club and the Shire from potential prosecution under the Environmental Protection Act 1986.

• Since gazettal of the exemption order the Regulations have been amended and provide for provisions specifically applicable to motor sport venues with the Department of Environment Regulation (DER) indicating that the development of noise management plans for motor sport venues is preferable to exemption orders.

• It is considered that the exemption order should be replaced by a noise management plan developed in accordance with the amended Regulations so as to allow for community consultation, flexibility, certainty and consistency.

• The noise management plan should be finalised prior to the granting of a long term lease so as to gauge noise impacts and proposed management.

• The granting of a new short term lease is considered to be appropriate to allow time for the development of a noise management plan and to allow the Hot Rod Club to fulfil its future planned events.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: Supports the preparation and execution of a new lease agreement under the Chief Executive Officer’s delegated authority pursuant to section 5.42 of the Local Government Act 1995 in favour of the Augusta-Margaret River Hot Rod Club (Hot Rod Club) over a portion of Reserve 18838 subject to the following requirements:

a) The Hot Rod Club commencing the process of developing a noise management plan

pursuant to the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 within 2 months of the date of this resolution and completes the process within 12 months of the date of this resolution;

b) The new lease commencing on 1 January 2018 and expiring on 16 May 2019; c) On approval of a noise management plan Council consider granting a further lease from 17

May 2019; and d) On approval of a noise management plan, the Shire of Augusta Margaret River’s Chief

Executive Officer requesting the Department of Environment Regulation revoke Environmental Protection (Margaret River Speedway) Exemption Order 2000.


27

LOCATION PLANS Figure 1

Figure 2

TABLED ITEMS Nil BACKGROUND Lease History The Hot Rod Club has occupied the Site and operated the Margaret River Speedway (Speedway) over a long period of time with the first lease agreement being made on 3 January 1978 for a term of


28

21 years. During the occupation of the Site noise from the Speedway has become a matter of contention as a result of encroaching residential development. The following list sets out the relevant background information regarding the noise issue at the Site: • In October 1992 the Shire informed the Hot Rod Club that the lease granted in 1978 would not be

renewed until relocation of the speedway was resolved.

• Subsequently, in November 1992, the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) advised the Shire that prior to the Shire approving further residential development it should ensure that it considers the impacts of residential development and forced relocation on the Speedway.

• In April 1993 the Shire received advice from the Minister for the Environment (Minister) stating

that it supported the EPA advice and that it would be very disappointed if the Shire used the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) to manage a noise pollution situation it had, through its own decisions, created.

• In August 1993 the Hot Rod Club wrote to the Shire requesting it consider alternate sites for the

Speedway as the members realised that future development of the surrounding area would result in increased complaints and pressure on the Hot Rod Club and the Shire. After a large amount of investigation and effort on behalf of the Shire and the Hot Rod Club a number of sites were identified. A State Forest site vested in the Department of Conservation and Land Management was identified as the preferred option however it was determined that the Site was not suitable.

• In September 1995 the Hot Rod Club advised the Shire that it would be applying for a noise

exemption order for the current site and that it would also be investigating another site in Witchcliffe. This Witchcliffe site was later found to be unsuitable. In January 1996 the Minister advised the Shire it would be granting the exemption order so as to give the Hot Rod Club more time to relocate because the Speedway had operated at the Site prior to the encroachment of residential development.

• A new lease agreement was entered into between the Shire and the Hot Rod Club and was made

on 24 December 1997. The term of the lease was for a period of 10 years from 1 January 1998 with a further 10 year option. The lease also contained clauses addressing noise and compliance with future exemption orders. This lease is still current and applicable to the Site.

• On 22 December 2000 the Environmental Protection (Margaret River Speedway) Exemption

Order 2000 (Exemption Order) was published in the Government Gazette (WA). • In April 2007 the Hot Rod Club requested that the further 10 year option be renewed and, in

August 2007, the Shire informed the Hot Rod Club that it consents to the renewal of the further term and that the expiry date of the lease will be 30 December 2017 with no further option to renew. There does not appear to be any records of exploration of noise or relocation as part of the Shire’s consideration of the request to renew.

• In March 2011 Council adopted the Land Asset Management Plan (LAMP) which resulted in a

resolution to prepare a scheme amendment to rezone the Site to rural residential subject to appropriate studies being undertaken.

• In March 2012, as part of its review of LAMP, Council resolved to change the rezoning priority of

the Site from medium term to long term and to receive a report on the potential relocation options for the Speedway by the end of the 2012-2013 financial year.

• The last review of LAMP was undertaken in June 2014 with Council resolving to remove the Site

from LAMP because, although the Shire’s Local Planning Strategy (LPS) contemplates the rezoning and development of the Site, the strategic timeframe exceeds the timeframe in LAMP and would not be viable for at least another 10 years. The officer’s report also commented that a report on the relocation option for the Speedway remains a priority once the tenure arrangement for NBN infrastructure on the Site is resolved.


29

The Site The Site is a portion of approximately 22.5 hectares of Crown land under Shire management and is separated from the remaining portions of the reserve by Reserve 38103 as shown in Figures 1 and 2 above. The Site was vested in the Shire on 10 July 1970 and the management order applicable to the Site provides that it is to be used for the designated purpose of “Recreation” only. The Site is located south of Wallcliffe Road and approximately 2.3 kilometres west of the Margaret River town centre. Development on the Site consists of the Speedway racetrack and associated buildings while the majority of the Site is vegetated. In March 2014 the Shire granted development approval for the construction of a telecommunications tower on the Reserve and, by way of a deed of partial surrender of lease, the Hot Rod Club agreed to excise this area from the current lease. The Site is relatively level and a watercourse traverses across the far north-east corner. Larger freehold properties adjoin the Site to the west and to the east while Reserve 38103 and remaining areas of Reserve 18838 are located to the south of the Site. Smaller rural residential freehold lots are located across Wallcliffe Road to the north while the Basildene Manor tourist accommodation is located approximately 400 metres from the Speedway racetrack. There is no residential development on the rural property to the east of the Site. Dwellings, with a distance of 200m to 300m from the Speedway racetrack, are located on the rural residential properties to the north of Wallcliffe Road. Two freehold properties owned by Cape Mentelle Vineyards Ltd are located to the west of the Site and development on these properties consists of vineyards, dams and associated vineyard buildings. The distance from the Cape Mentelle cellar door to the Speedway is approximately 1.3 km. Figure 3 shows the number of properties and residences within 1km of the Speedway. The Margaret River Pony Club lease applies to a separate portion of Reserve 18838 to the south-east and is separated by Reserve 38103. Figure 3


30

The Augusta-Margaret River Hot Rod Club and Current Lease The Hot Rod Club has been an incorporated association since 1 December 1970 and has occupied the Site under a lease agreement since 1978. The Hot Rod Club was responsible for developing the racetrack and associated buildings at the Site and use of the Site as a Speedway track commenced in 1964. The Hot Rod Club hosts a maximum of 10 race meetings at the Site annually with the race meetings attended by the Hot Rod Club drivers and drivers from other clubs around Western Australia. The current lease agreement between the Hot Rod Club and the Shire, shown at Attachment 1, commenced on 1 January 1998 and will expire on 31 December 2017. The purpose of the lease is stated as ‘A race course for vehicles of the type known as “Speedway”’. Specific terms of the lease address noise and provide that the lessee is to comply with all legislation relating to noise including any exemption orders. CONSULTATION AND ADVICE External Consultation Department of Environment Regulation (DER) In 2009 the Hot Rod Club requested that the Exemption Order be amended so as to allow all meetings to be staged at the 95dB sound level for all vehicles which is an increase from the required level of 90dB under the Exemption Order. MLC Barry House wrote to the Minister in support of the Hot Rod Club’s request. In response to the request the Minister advised that amendments to the Regulations will include a specific regulation addressing motor sport venues and the development of noise management plans to be approved by the Chief Executive Officers of local governments. The Minister expected the amended regulations to be completed by 2010 and that a noise management plan was the preferred option to amending the Exemption Order. The amended Regulations were gazetted in 2013. The Hot Rod Club wrote to DER in 2016 again seeking an amendment to the Exemption Order to allow an increase from 90dB to 95dB. In response to this second request DER advised that it is not possible to amend an existing exemption order however the Minister or the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may revoke an existing exemption order and replace it with another. DER further advised, however, that the preferred option is to engage with the specific management provision within the amended Regulations by developing a noise management plan that will potentially allow the exceedance of the prescribed noise levels within the Regulations. DER also advised that the development of a noise management plan under the Regulations is intended to provide certainty for both motor sport venue operators and the affected community. The Hot Rod Club Shire officers have met with members of the Hot Rod Club to discuss the lease and have advised it of the possible recommendation to Council as detailed and discussed in this report. The WA Speedway Commission The WA Speedway Commission has advised that it will provide assistance to the Hot Rod Club in the development of a noise management plan. Adjoining and Surrounding Property Owners The process of assessing the noise management plan includes consultation with the community which has not been undertaken since the advertising of the Exemption Order. In 2000 when the Exemption Order was released for public comment 10 supporting comments and 6 objections were received. Internal Consultation Environmental Health Services In terms of complying with the Exemption Order the Hot Rod Club must send reports to the DER and provide copies to the Shire. The reports specifically detail noise levels of vehicles and noise levels at


31

adjoining properties. Environmental Health Service’s role is a secondary one with it assisting DER with the monitoring of compliance. Final enforcement of the Exemption Order lies with the DER. The Exemption Order does not set noise limits that are received at nearby noise sensitive premises (residential premises/accommodation businesses). They can however, be calculated should the race vehicle be generating noise at 90dB or 95dB. It should be noted however that sound levels received can be affected by wind direction, cloud cover and other environmental conditions. The noise level measurement taken at 2 residential premises in accordance with the Exemption Order is performed by a contractor engaged by the Hot Rod Club. A graph record of sound level readings from 2001 to 2016 and is representative of 2 race meetings per race season is shown at Figure 4. Figure 4

The readings were undertaken in accordance with the Exemption Order at Lot 501 Devon Road (190 metres from the speedway) and Lot 100 Wallcliffe Road (360 metres from the speedway). The red line on the graph represents 55dB which is the prescribed maximum sound level under the Regulations that should not be breached after 7pm. A useful indicative measure of loudness is that an increase of 3dB is just perceivable and an increase of 10dB equates to double the loudness. Shire records yield that there have been a total of 32 complaints about the Speedway since 1984 with the last complaint received in 2014 in which the complainant sought a review of the Exemption Order. The other complaints range from loud noise; race meetings conducted beyond authorised times; scheduling of race meetings; advertising of the race season program; and the need to relocate the Speedway and not renew the lease. It is difficult to assess the noise impact based on the number of complaints over the years because this statistic may be influenced by the gazettal of the Exemption Order with impacted residents feeling that complaints are futile. On Saturday 23 April 2016 Environmental Health Officers undertook monitoring of sound levels during a race meeting at the Speedway. The purpose of the monitoring was to determine sound levels at different residences and to determine to what extent, in terms of distance from the Speedway, they impacted on those locations. Recordings were performed at residences with distances ranging from 190 metres to 3.5 kilometres from the Speedway. Figure 5 shows the different locations and Figure 6 shows the noise levels at these locations.


32

Figure 5

Figure 6

Noise levels at 23 April 2016 meeting recorded by AMRS EHOs

Map ref Address

Distance from

speedway (m)

Maximum noise level

(dB) 1 Devon Drive (south) 190 68.3

2 Basildene Manor 360 65.0

3 Guernsey Gully 400 45.7

4 Karri Loop 600 59.8

5 Devon Drive (north) 750 45.5

6 Cnr Illawarra and Hereford

860 40.2

7 Ridgeview Close 1460 63.5


33

8 Tennis Club 1700 46.1

9 Tingle Ave (south) 3470 51.6

The prescribed maximum sound level under the Regulations that should not be breached is 55dB and results of the sound monitoring ranged from 40.2dB to 68.3dB. Different noise emissions with corresponding sound levels are shown at Figure 7. Figure 7

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Legal Advice Refer to Confidential Attachment 2. Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) Section 49(2) of the EP Act provides that where a person or local government intentionally causes noise pollution or allows noise pollution to be caused it commits an offence. The penalty for committing such an offence for local governments is a penalty not exceeding $1,000,000 and a daily penalty not exceeding $200,000. The Exemption Order currently acts to exempt the Shire and the Hot Rod Club from this offence and is discussed in more detail below. Environmental Protection (Margaret River Speedway) Exemption Order 2000 (Exemption Order) The Exemption Order was gazetted in 2000 and is shown at Attachment 3. The Speedway is the only speedway in Western Australia operating under an Exemption Order. The Exemption Order was made under the EP Act and causes Part V of the EP Act (except for sections 71, 74, 76, 77 and 78) to not be applicable. It enables race meetings to be conducted even though the resultant noise levels contravene the Regulations and the Hot Rod Club cannot be prosecuted for these contraventions. The Exemption Order does not have an expiry date and its duration is dependent on the Hot Rod Club being the leaseholder at the Site. Clause 4(1) of the Exemption Order provides that the Exemption Order will apply while the operator is the leaseholder of the Speedway. Once the current


34

lease expires the Exemption Order will cease to apply and the Hot Rod Club and the Shire may be liable under section 49(2) of the EP Act if the Speedway is still operating. The Exemption Order contains provisions in terms of allowable sound levels, number of race meetings, types of racing vehicles and recording of sound levels of actual race vehicles. Requirements also extend to the publishing of race meeting times and reporting requirements. Specifically, the Exemption Order provides the following requirements: Meetings • 10 meetings per race season from 15 October to 15 May with a maximum of 4 meetings featuring

sprint car, super sedan & late model sedans as these are deemed to produce the loudest noise at 95dB.

• Race meetings containing sprint cars, super sedans and/or late model sedans are limited to 5 races.

• A meeting can only be held on consecutive days once per season. • The racing program must be published in the Augusta-Margaret River Times and the Augusta-

Margaret River Mail in the last 2 weeks of September prior to the season. • Race meetings must be completed within 5 hours (between midday-10pm). Race car sound levels • All race vehicles racing at a meeting must be scrutinised in terms of noise levels by an authorised

person. This is undertaken prior to the season with a certificate issued. Should modifications be undertaken later during that season, the vehicle must be reassessed and a new certificate issued.

• 95dBLa slow for sprint car, super sedan and late model sedan. • 90dBLa slow for all other vehicles. • Race car sound levels are determined prior to the season and taken from within 30m of inside of

the track. Three consecutive laps must be undertake within a period not greater than 4 x times the average race winning lap time of previous season of the same vehicle class (then take average sound level).

• Should a race vehicle be noted to be producing a noise level beyond 90dB or 95dB at a race meeting the Hot Rod Club may prevent that vehicle from continuing at that meeting.

Residential levels • Sound levels must be taken of at least two meetings – one of which must be of a meeting where

sprint cars, super sedans & late model sedans are featured (95dB). • Sound level recordings are to be taken adjacent to 2 approved residential premises (the

Exemption Order is silent on length of recording other than the standard requirement within the Regulations which is 15 minutes).

• The 2 approved residential premises are: 1. Basildene Manor at Lot 100 Wallcliffe Rd (A1029) - 10m north of NW corner of

building; and 2. Lot 501 Devon Rd (A9519) - 15m south of SW corner of dwelling.

Reporting • A report must be submitted of recordings to DER and the Shire within 30 days of the meeting. The Exemption Order may be revoked by the Minister. Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 (Regulations) The Regulations assign levels of noise for various premises and where a motor sport venue cannot practicably comply with these levels Division 3 of the Regulations allows the venue occupier to apply for the approval of a noise management plan. If the noise management plan is approved it will mean that the noise emissions from the venue are permitted to exceed the assigned levels in the Regulations provided the venue operates in accordance with the approved noise management plan. As stated above the DER have provided advice that the Regulations were amended in 2013 to include noise management plans and that DER prefer noise management plans over exemption orders.


35

Under the Regulations ‘motor sport venue’ is defined as:

[P]remises approved or recognised by a motor sport organisation as premises at which racing activities may be conducted…

The WA Speedway Commission is included as one of the organisations under the definition of ‘motor sport organisation’. Under existing delegation, the Shire’s CEO has the authority to approve or refuse a noise management plan. Principles of an approved noise management plan are to include:

• Protection – the noise amenity of the community should be protected to a reasonable degree; • Fairness – the process and the outcome should be as fair as possible to all parties; • Certainty – the outcome should provide certainty to service providers as to their operations,

and certainty to the community as to what they can expect in the management of noise from their operations.

Process of developing a noise management plan The occupier of a motor sport venue may apply to the CEO of the local government and it is not compulsory to generate a noise management plan. The WA Speedway Commission supports motor sport venues and will assist clubs with the development of noise management plans. An application fee of $500 is required under the Regulations but can be waived or reduced by the local government CEO. An additional fee reflecting the actual cost of assessing/ processing the submitted application is to be estimated by the CEO (to be no greater than $15,000) and be paid by the applicant prior to assessment. The applicant may be required to undertake a survey that is directly related to the noise impact on the community. The CEO must not approve a noise management plan for a motor sport venue unless the plan:

1. Contains a detailed map of the venue; 2. Contains a description of types of racing activities and classes of vehicles that can be

reasonably expected to race at the venue; 3. Sets out limitations on racing activities to be conducted and times during which racing occurs; 4. Contains details of reasonable & practicable measures to be implemented to control noise

emissions; 5. Contains details of when and the manner in which notice of racing activities is to be published

or distributed to the public; 6. Specifies the persons who will be responsible for implementing the approved noise

management plan and sets out each person’s responsibilities; and 7. Contains a complaint response procedure.

Before making a decision to approve or refuse a noise management plan, the CEO must: • Provide an opportunity from the occupier of any noise sensitive premises within 1km of the

motor sport venue to make a submission on whether or not the plan should be approved; and • May give any other person the CEO considers appropriate an opportunity to make a

submission on whether or not the plan should be approved.

Approval of a noise management plan may be granted by the CEO with conditions and for a specified period. Conditions of a noise management plan may include periods of review however any decision to remove the noise management plan as a result of review would be a decision made by Council given the community impacts. A person aggrieved by the approval, refusal or any conditions within the plan may appeal to the Minister within 21 days of publication of notice of the decision. Contaminated Sites Act 2003 (CS Act) In Western Australia, contaminated sites are regulated by DER through the administration of the CS Act which provides the framework for the identification, recording, management and remediation of contaminated sites.


36

The CS Act includes the requirement for mandatory reporting of known and suspected contaminated sites to DER by land owners, occupiers and polluters with all reported sites recorded on the contaminated sites register. Reported sites are classified by DER, in consultation with the Department of Health, as one of seven classifications based upon the available information and risk they pose to human health and the environment. The CS Act includes provisions for investigation, monitoring and/or remediation of contaminated sites. Investigating and cleaning up contaminated sites is, in most cases, the responsibility of the polluter or current site owner. The DER guidance documents on contaminated sites reporting provides a list of potentially contaminating activities and land uses, and associated potential contaminants. Motor racing venues are included on the list due to the potential contamination of the land by petroleum hydrocarbons, monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (e.g. benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xylenes), solvents, resins, heavy metals and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. It is however noted that a site is not necessarily contaminated nor requires any notification to the DER solely because a potentially contaminating activity or land use has occurred on the site. If however it is known that a potentially contaminating activity has occurred on the site and there are indicators of possible contamination, then it is a mandatory requirement on the landowner to report the site to the DER. Local Government Act 1995 (LGA) The process required for the disposition of property under the LGA does not apply because the Hot Rod Club is a non-profit organisation and such a disposition is exempt under section 30(2)(b) of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996. Land Administration Act 1997 (LAA) Any lease over a reserve managed by a local government is to be approved by the Minister for Lands pursuant to section 18 of the Land Administration Act 1997. STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Community Strategic Plan 2033 (CSP) The granting of the new lease to the Hot Rod Club is consistent with Goal 2 of the Shire’s CSP which is to provide a welcoming and inclusive community. However this is also to be balanced against managing growth sustainably at Goal 3. Corporate Business Plan 2015-2019 (CBP) Goal 2: Welcoming and inclusive communities Community Outcome 2.1: Sense of identity and belonging Strategic Response: Support community celebrations, events and local festivals Service level strategy/plan: Provide professional advice and support to community groups. PLANNING FRAMEWORK Local Planning Scheme No. 1 (LPS1) Under LPS1, the Site is zoned as a Reserve for Parks and Recreation. There are no relevant provisions relating to the current lease under LPS1. Surrounding zones include Rural Residential to the north, General Agriculture to the east, Tourism to the east, Priority Agriculture to the west and Reserve for Parks and Recreation to the south. Local Planning Strategy (LPS) The LPS was endorsed in April 2011. The strategic timeframe of the LPS is 15 years which means that it will be reviewed in 10 years. Under the LPS the Site is designated as ‘Parks & Recreation’ within ‘Development Investigation Area M11’ as shown at Figure 8. The Parks and Recreation land use category supports a range of active and passive recreation and community facilities including parks, sporting grounds and walk trails and may contain areas of local environmental value that are worthy of protection. The LPS also states that these community facilities should be developed to accommodate a range of uses and be adaptable to future changes in use and users.


37

Figure 8

The LPS has identified Development Investigation Areas (DIAs) to provide strategic guidance as to the possible future major ‘greenfield’ development areas within the Shire and further states that it cannot be construed that just because land has been included in a DIA that it will be supported for subsequent rezoning. This means that DIAs will be subject to detailed investigation to ensure suitability for the envisaged land use; the need for that land use; and the appropriate staged release of land. The DIA Summary Table under the LPS states that the Site has a Staging Priority of 5 and that development is to be clustered rural residential/special residential with the protection of remnant vegetation and the indicative western perimeter road alignment being primary planning considerations. The staging priority given to the Site is the lowest priority as compared to the other DIAs under LPS. The eastern Perimeter Road alignment is shown running along the western boundary of the Site under the Land Use Strategy Map which is an ‘in principle’ alignment requiring further detailed studies. The property to the east of the Site is designated as DIA M10 which means that it is potentially suitable for clustered special rural/special residential development. This property has a staging priority of 2 which is a higher staging priority than the subject Site however development of this Site would be subject to the operation of the Speedway although not specifically mentioned in the LPS. The other sites adjoining the Subject site includes classifications of Tourism, Priority Agriculture and Reserve under the LPS.


38

State Planning Policy 6.1 Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge (SPP6.1) Under SPP6.1 the Site is identified as a Development Investigation Area which is explained as a guide to potential development requiring detailed investigation prior to subdivision and development. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS It is reasonable to lease the Site to the Hot Rod Club for the nominal ‘pepper corn’ rent given that it is a not-for-profit community organisation. However, as a lessee of the Site, the Hot Rod Club will be responsible for the payment of all services such as electricity, gas and water to the Site. The Hot Rod Club will also be responsible for public liability and building insurance. The Hot Rod Club will also be responsible for the costs associated with the preparation of a noise management plan. SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental Contamination Motor sport venues can pose environmental risks through:

(a) noise emissions; (b) leaks or spills of chemicals or petroleum hydrocarbons from storage areas, accidents and

crashes, mechanical servicing areas and on the race tracks; (c) turbid or contaminated stormwater runoff; (d) inappropriate containment or disposal of solid waste and wastewater from mechanical

servicing and wash-down areas; and (e) amenities for the congregation of large numbers of people.

Furthermore motor racing activities may cause environmental contamination of the site and as such the provisions of CS Act are relevant and should be considered by the Shire in leasing a parcel of land under its responsibility for a use which if not controlled, has the potential to contaminate the land on which it occupies. Currently there are no indications that the Shire is aware of that would suggest contamination of the Site that would require the Shire to report it as contaminated to the DER. To safeguard against this potential eventuality, it is recommended that should renewal of the lease be considered that a requirement for compliance with an Environmental Management Plan be included as a provision of the lease. This plan will include good environmental practices included managing impacts of vehicle maintenance, storage fuels and chemicals, dust management, stormwater, waste management and disposal, stormwater management, emergency response, spill containment, fire prevention and management, environmental monitoring and reporting. If the renewal of the lease is not supported and the land use of the Site is proposed to be changed to a more sensitive use it will trigger a further site contamination assessment through the planning process to ensure that the Site is suitable for the proposed land use. Should preliminary site investigation prove the Site as contaminated it will require remediation prior to rezoning, subdivision or development. There is currently no clause in the current lease to cover the remediation and clean-up of the Site by the Hot Rod Club should it be proven as contaminated due to the existing activities on the leased portion of the Site. The Shire will be responsible for these costs should it wish to rezone the site for a more sensitive land use. Any new lease should address the potential contamination of the Site. Drainage A Shire officer recently inspected the drainage from the racetrack to determine any environmental impacts from this drainage. The officer noted that the drain is close to the boundary but that it appeared to discharge relatively small amounts of water. The main concern that the officer had was the amount of litter (plastic, carpet, tiles, tyres, bricks and bottles) in the fill that supports this pipe. The pipe discharge area itself shows signs of minor erosion, but there is also some gully erosion in the area along the length of the pipe, presumably form overland flows also collecting in this area. Neither of these issues are significant but should be addressed by the Hot Rod Club as part of an overall management plan required as a provision of any new lease which also addresses the storage and use of fuels and oil.


39

Social The Hot Rod Club provides social benefit to the Shire through the provision of alternative recreational activity and community interaction. However, if the noise emissions are excessive and largely impact on nearby occupiers it may cause social issues associated with land use conflict. Economic The Hot Rod Club events provide an alternative form of entertainment for visitors to the area which supports the economy of the area. However, a long term lease will restrict the Shire from developing the Site as envisioned by the LPS. DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS Noise Since the subdivision of surrounding land the issue of noise has become more topical and in the past has led to the exploration of other sites for the relocation of the Speedway. The issue of noise has also limited subdivision potential of adjoining properties. The adjoining property to the east has development potential given its designation under the LPS however it is unlikely that the Shire would support the rezoning of this site if the Speedway is still operating in its current location. Race meetings held at the Speedway are regarded as ‘events’ and accordingly should be subject to normal Shire processes in terms of their staging. The normal process for multiple noise emitting events, such as music events, is to require consultation with the occupiers of nearby properties likely to be affected. Granting a long term lease for the future operation of the Speedway without undertaking community consultation does not follow this standard Shire process. It is considered that the development of a noise management plan satisfies the consultation process, will allow further exploration of noise impacts and will provide greater flexibility and certainty for the Hot Rod Club and the Shire in managing the noise. New Lease The noise issue requires further exploration to determine impacts on adjoining residents and the community. A new short term lease would allow this process to occur and allow time for the Hot Rod Club to fulfil its events calendar. The new lease can be granted so as to commence at the expiry of the current lease, 1 January 2018, and expire at the end of the racing season in 2019 thereby encompassing 2 racing seasons. The new lease will need to refer to the current exemption order and future noise management plan and will provide that the Site be left in an uncontaminated condition at the end of the lease. If the noise management plan is approved the Shire may consider the granting of another lease for a longer term. However, if it is not approved the Hot Rod Club will be able to occupy the Site under the current Exemption Order until the end of the racing season in 2019. Alternative options include:

• Not renewing the lease and the Speedway being relocated; or • Renewing the lease (with the Exemption Order or a noise management plan) for a longer

period of up to 21 years however there are known amenity impacts and it may compromise the DIA implementation.

CONCLUSION Considering the noise issue and future planning for the Site it is reasonable to conclude that a new 10 year lease with a 10 year option is not a suitable option. Further community consultation is required to gauge noise impacts and the development of a noise management plan is the appropriate method for undertaking this consultation. A minor lease extension prior to undertaking the noise management plan process enables consultation on the noise issue which will, in turn, inform the decision on whether to extend the lease for a further period and will provide sufficient certainty for all parties.


40

VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council: Supports the preparation and execution of a new lease agreement under the Chief Executive Officer’s delegated authority pursuant to section 5.42 of the Local Government Act 1995 in favour of the Augusta-Margaret River Hot Rod Club (Hot Rod Club) over a portion of Reserve 18838 subject to the following requirements:

a) The Hot Rod Club commencing the process of developing a noise management plan

pursuant to the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 within 2 months of the date of this resolution and completes the process within 12 months of the date of this resolution;

b) The new lease commencing on 1 January 2018 and expiring on 16 May 2019; c) On approval of a noise management plan Council consider granting a further lease from

17 May 2019; and d) On approval of a noise management plan, the Shire of Augusta Margaret River’s Chief

Executive Officer requesting the Department of Environment Regulation revoke Environmental Protection (Margaret River Speedway) Exemption Order 2000.

ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT Nil ATTACHMENTS 1. Lease 2. Confidential attachment 3. Exemption Order


41

11.3. Infrastructure Services


42

11.3. INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES

Nil


43

11.4. Corporate and Community

Services


44

11.4.1 FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENT REPORT - APRIL 2016 LOCATION/ADDRESS Shire of Augusta Margaret River APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Shire of Augusta Margaret River FILE REFERENCE FIN/14 REPORT AUTHOR Andrew Ross, Manager Corporate Services AUTHORISING OFFICER Annie Riordan, Director Corporate and Community Services IN BRIEF • The monthly financial activity statement report is a standard financial reporting item prepared in

accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996.

• Council is to consider the financial results for the period ending 30 April 2016. RECOMMENDATION That Council receives the Monthly Financial Report – April 2016 in accordance with Section 6.4 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996. LOCATION PLAN Nil TABLED ITEMS Nil BACKGROUND In accordance with Financial Management Regulation 34 the Shire is to prepare each month a Statement of Financial Activity reporting on the sources and applications of funds, as set out in the annual budget under Financial Management Regulation (1) (d), for that month with the following details:

(a) annual budget estimates; (b) budget estimates to the end of the month to which the statement relates; (c) actual amounts of expenditure, revenue and income to the end of the month to which the

statement relates; (d) material variances between the comparable amounts referred to in (b) and (c); and (e) net current assets at the end of the month to which the statement relates.

Also under Financial Management Regulation 34(5) Council are to adopt each year a material variance threshold. At the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 22 July 2015 (OM2015/162) Council adopted a monthly variance for reporting of material variances, where financial activity is greater than 10% and $10,000. CONSULTATION AND ADVICE External Consultation Nil Internal Consultation Business unit managers were provided the draft monthly financial reports for their business units and have provided their comments on variances greater than 10% and $10,000.


45

DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS The commentary contained in the body of this report is in line with Financial Management Regulation (2) (b) that requires commentary on material variances to the Statement of Financial Activity at the nature/type, program or business unit level. The Statement of Financial Activity shows a year to date actual closing position at 30 April of $8.432 million which was higher than the expected year to date budgeted position of $5.706 million. The closing budget position reduced by $3.447 million compared to the result at the end of March. The main reasons for the variation to Budget are:

• Operating expenditure on a year to date basis is $2.190 million or 7.6% below budget (last month was $2.248 million or 8.6%). Contributing factors are employee expenses being $0.368 million or 3.1% under budget due primarily to staff leave taken and staff vacancies (last month $0.402 million and 3.8%) and materials being $1.958 million or 25.6% under budget (last month $1.994 million and 28.1%). For the month operating expenditure of $2.530 million was $0.059 million over the budget of $2.471 million.

• 26 business units are recording under budget labour expenditure and 11 are showing over budget labour (last month was 28 and 9).

• 37 business units are recording under budget materials expenditure and 4 are showing over budget materials expenditure (last month was 36 and 5).

• Operating revenue is $0.271 million or 0.9% above budget (last month $0.172 million or 0.6%) with the main over budget categories being fees and charges, other income and interest earned.

• Year to date capital expenditure of $6.382 million (last month $5.708 million) was lower than the $9.670 million anticipated in the budget. Capital expenditure is $3.289 million or 34% under budget (last month was $3.574 million or 39%). Major contributing factors include: - waste management works being $0.514 million under budget as some works requiring

external approval have been delayed and will be carried over to next year; - a number of building projects for caravan parks totalling over $0.900 million have been

delayed and will be carried over to 2016-17; - path works are $0.455 million under budget due primarily to a lack of quotes being

received for the Le Souef Street and Elva Street path projects; - delays obtaining permits has resulted in the $0.083 million Ellis Street boat ramp finger

jetty project being put on hold; - the later than anticipated start for the Stevens Road bridge has resulted in this project

being $0.433 million under budget at this stage; - unsuitable conditions and permit holdups have resulted in drainage renewal projects

being $0.223 million under budget; - the $0.166 million dehumidifier project for the Aquatic Centre has been deferred to 2016-

17; and - the plant replacement program is $0.649 million under budget, however orders have been

placed for a number of items for delivery prior to the end of the financial year. • Grants for capital works are $0.211 million under budget (last month $0.111 million) as a

result of grants for the Augusta hydrotherapy pool and Ellis Street boat ramp finger jetty project still being considered by the grant bodies and grants for paths, bridges, trails and airstrips still to be received.

Capital expenditure of $0.674 million was incurred during the month compared to the budget for the month of $0.389 million. Expenditure was incurred on the following items:

• $22,591 for various waste services works; • $32,465 on Community Buildings’ projects including $30,124 on the Augusta Recreation

Centre squash court to gym conversion; • $40,154 on the loading dock project for the Cultural Centre; • $7,872 for a cricket pitch cover at the Nippers Oval; • $59,633 on Parks and Garden projects including $42,158 for POS infrastructure renewal,

$4,888 for the rock base for the illuminated sign in the civic precinct and $6,848 for safety handrails and panels for an access way at Rivermouth beach;

• $389,288 on road related projects of which $157,134 was spent on various infrastructure upgrade projects including the extension of the Wadandi track, the John Archibald Drive


46

connection path and the removal of the depot fuel tanks. $232,155 was spent on infrastructure renewal projects including $94,692 on the reconstruction of Leeuwin Road, Rosa Brook Road and Wallcliffe Road, $97,469 on the Stevens Road bridge, $21,421 on drainage works and $11,700 on kerbs;

• $101,500 to purchase a mini street sweeper; and • $28,249 on various caravan park works including $24,592 to upgrade the water pipeline for

Turner Caravan Park and $3,657 for assessments and permits for the Turner Caravan Park chalets.

Financial performance against budget is shown in the following charts.


47

Following is the Statement of Financial Activity for the year ending 30 April 2016.


48

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA - MARGARET RIVERSTATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITYFOR THE PERIOD ENDING 30 April 2016

BUSINESS UNITS 2015-16 2015-16 2015-16 2015-16 2015-16 YTDApproved Amended Month of YTD YTD Variance

Budget Budget April Budget Actual >10% & Comments$ $ $ $ $ >$10,000

OPERATING REVENUESRates 18,593,760 18,963,760 21,749 18,957,260 18,996,785 0General Financing 1,238,111 1,273,556 64,636 1,037,392 1,084,174 0Members of Council 0 0 0 0 80 0Chief Executive Officer 10,000 0 3,279 0 3,599 0Director Corporate & Community 8,500 8,500 777 7,500 6,920 0Director Sustainable Development 0 12,832 0 12,832 12,832 0Director Infrastructure 0 0 0 0 1 0Finance 3,000 3,000 378 3,000 4,974 0Records 0 0 661 0 871 0Customer and Information Services 5,000 5,000 372 4,100 5,235 0Customer Relations 199,000 219,000 17,423 190,000 182,904 0Information Comm. Technology 0 0 200 0 2,100 0Human Resources 10,000 55,000 0 55,000 108,282 53,282 Perm: LGIS Scheme member dividendCommunity Planning & Development 28,536 28,536 28 28,036 13,044 (14,992) Timing: Grant acquittal reportsEmergency and Fire Services 243,663 464,041 99,442 440,909 453,473 0Rangers 191,250 201,250 13,131 170,550 148,823 (21,727) Timing/Perm: Infringements and RecoveriesLibraries 32,400 32,400 2,953 27,000 30,951 0Health 100,552 100,552 5,983 91,865 102,419 10,554 Timing: Fees and chargesChild Care 272,900 277,900 33,271 245,400 255,762 0Waste Services 4,118,693 4,277,693 85,332 4,176,375 4,245,747 0Town Planning 373,000 410,000 36,796 349,500 358,002 0Community Buildings 0 0 0 0 7,419 0MR Recreation Centre 902,000 922,000 71,531 782,000 750,422 0Cultural Centre 8,400 8,400 0 7,000 3,611 0Augusta Recreation Centre 40,000 40,000 790 33,000 17,391 (15,609) Timing/Perm: Fees & charges (gym redevelopment)Gloucester Park 66,000 66,000 3,509 60,500 57,284 0Parks and Gardens 4,700 4,700 28,636 4,700 37,845 33,145 Perm: Contribution to Brookfield POSAsset Services 157,800 196,600 815 149,200 143,983 0Landcare 0 0 4,500 0 4,631 0Maintenance 0 0 3,760 0 12,499 12,499 Perm: Private Works & Sundry incomePlant Program 16,645 16,645 0 16,645 12,513 0Caravan Parks 1,941,500 1,941,500 180,976 1,843,490 1,922,930 0Building Control 213,360 273,360 21,677 212,800 206,027 0Works Overheads 0 32,400 1,868 32,400 34,471 0Plant Operation Costs 0 0 0 0 625 0Other Property and Services 40,000 40,000 0 30,000 11,041 (18,959) Timing: Workers Compensation claimsTOTAL REVENUES 28,818,770 29,874,625 704,473 28,968,454 29,239,670 271,216

OPERATING EXPENSESRevenue (310,483) (305,483) (27,891) (246,403) (294,912) (48,509) Perm: Interim schedules and debt recovery costsGeneral Financing (643,968) (643,968) (14,738) (490,891) (482,476) 0Members of Council (338,101) (338,101) (25,114) (293,430) (266,655) 26,774 Timing: Projects including Haining exchangeChief Executive Officer (1,056,597) (1,014,477) (97,112) (900,645) (768,771) 131,874 Timing: Projects and CAPEROCDirector Corporate & Community (561,939) (549,739) (40,890) (482,519) (469,159) 0Director Sustainable Development (630,848) (645,848) (49,748) (544,266) (499,075) 0Director Infrastructure (300,269) (294,269) (22,760) (246,850) (241,161) 0Finance (911,928) (911,928) (47,361) (823,211) (823,882) 0Records (165,663) (175,663) (14,648) (148,321) (139,494) 0Customer and Information Services (388,512) (352,512) (29,207) (295,967) (285,703) 0Customer Relations (463,566) (503,566) (38,303) (427,396) (401,914) 0Information Comm. Technology (1,061,959) (1,066,959) (67,356) (976,122) (894,288) 0Human Resources (668,901) (653,901) (43,890) (557,776) (509,372) 0Community Development (572,975) (562,346) (46,212) (450,188) (338,793) 111,395 Timing: Projects and labour costsEmergency and Fire Services (734,574) (981,729) (78,725) (825,023) (914,236) 0Rangers (608,652) (623,652) (43,254) (537,637) (459,573) 78,064 Timing: Contract services, equipment, printingLibraries (846,667) (876,667) (76,964) (756,403) (727,333) 0Health (564,056) (558,056) (39,328) (468,974) (430,498) 0Child Care (289,892) (294,892) (30,769) (247,497) (279,612) (32,115) Perm: Increased labour costsWaste Services (2,543,794) (2,430,814) (183,002) (2,054,846) (1,704,459) 350,387 Timing: Projects and operationsTown Planning (1,080,292) (1,084,145) (70,865) (911,094) (764,961) 146,133 Timing: Training and projectsCommunity Buildings (1,931,187) (1,901,187) (130,650) (1,599,277) (1,457,785) 0MR Recreation Centre (2,220,767) (2,235,767) (158,891) (1,836,927) (1,683,170) 0Cultural Centre (345,270) (345,270) (8,119) (329,370) (325,443) 0Augusta Recreation Centre (121,646) (121,646) (7,614) (106,348) (63,787) 42,561 Timing: Maintenance costsGloucester Park (240,100) (185,100) (14,580) (160,700) (147,937) 0Beach Lifeguards (122,568) (122,568) (16,525) (121,868) (96,337) 25,531 Timing/Perm: Labour, maintenance, consultantParks and Gardens (2,122,174) (2,541,174) (172,897) (2,163,412) (2,109,634) 0Asset Services (1,089,514) (1,047,830) (73,677) (916,761) (800,620) 116,141 Timing Projects and utilitiesLandcare (305,581) (305,581) (14,099) (277,744) (229,281) 48,463 Timing: ProjectsMaintenance (7,172,186) (7,984,708) (672,935) (6,664,741) (6,446,702) 0Plant Program (55,139) (55,139) (7,994) (53,139) (65,171) (12,032) Perm: Loss on sale of assetCaravan Parks (1,301,829) (1,318,829) (134,975) (1,091,617) (1,051,823) 0Building Control (218,246) (198,246) (15,231) (166,059) (132,647) 33,412 Perm: Labour costsWorks Overheads (74,023) (99,022) (18,316) (112,368) (42,566) 69,802 Timing: Overhead recovery rate over recoveringPlant Operation Costs 27,676 (147,324) 4,434 (128,829) 93,118 221,947 Timing: Plant recovery rate over recoveringOther Property and Services (60,000) (295,000) 1,003 (282,500) (250,912) 31,588 Timing: Workers Compensation claimsTOTAL EXPENSES (32,096,190) (33,773,106) (2,529,204) (28,697,117) (26,507,021) 2,190,096

NET OPERATING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) (3,277,420) (3,898,481) (1,824,730) 271,337 2,732,649 2,461,312


49

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA - MARGARET RIVERSTATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITYFOR THE PERIOD ENDING 30 April 2016

BUSINESS UNITS 2015-16 2015-16 2015-16 2015-16 2015-16 YTDApproved Amended Month of YTD YTD Variance

Budget Budget April Budget Actual >10% & Comments$ $ $ $ $ >$10,000

NON OPERATING GRANTS & CONTRIBUTIONSEmergency and Fire Services 320,000 320,000 0 0 0 0Town Planning 200,000 500,000 0 480,000 467,888 0Community Buildings 1,650,000 45,455 0 45,455 54,208 0Augusta Recreation Centre 30,000 30,000 30,000 0 (30,000) Timing: Pool Revitalisation Grant not yet receivedAsset Services 37,125 37,125 0 37,125 0 (37,125) Timing: RBFS grant for Ellis St jetty projectConstruction 3,156,561 3,548,077 140,000 3,411,577 3,271,198 0TOTAL NON OPERATING REVENUES 5,393,686 4,512,657 140,000 4,036,157 3,825,294 (210,863)

NET RESULT 2,116,266 614,176 (1,684,730) 4,307,494 6,557,943 2,250,449

ADJUSTMENTS FOR NON-CASHREVENUE AND EXPENDITURE

Add back Depreciation 7,076,400 8,155,802 661,892 6,782,752 6,743,234 0Add back (Profit)/Loss Asset Disposal 18,494 243,494 6,314 243,494 412,730 169,236 Loss on sale of MR Pre-school CentreAdd back Movement in Provisions,etc 0 0 0 0 0 0

7,094,894 8,399,296 668,206 7,026,246 7,155,964 129,718

CAPITAL EXPENDITUREPurchase Land and Buildings (5,003,651) (1,759,901) (72,619) (914,401) (469,483) 444,918 Timing: Community building & Caravan Park projectsPurchase Infrastructure Assets - Other (1,569,651) (1,684,651) (106,818) (1,490,161) (691,995) 798,166 Timing: Waste management, Asset ServicesPurchase Infrastructure Assets - Roads (5,677,616) (6,205,135) (389,288) (6,048,619) (4,752,856) 1,295,763 Timing: Path, bridge and other projectsPurchase Plant and Equipment (1,280,191) (1,579,557) (105,157) (1,124,957) (388,397) 736,560 Timing: Plant Program, Aquatic Centre DehumidifierPurchase Furniture and Equipment (258,593) (125,093) 0 (91,993) (78,818) 13,175 Perm: Waste Services weighbridge software

Repayment of Debentures (641,676) (641,676) (18,287) (503,056) (506,374) 0Advances to Community Groups (50,000) (50,000) 0 (50,000) (50,000) 0Transfers to Cash Reserves (2,280,753) (3,058,994) (1,843,558) 0 (3,024,651) (3,024,651) Property sale proceeds, LBA dividend, interest

(16,762,131) (15,105,007) (2,535,727) (10,223,187) (9,962,574) 260,613

CAPITAL REVENUEProceeds from Disposal of Assets 1,160,228 1,204,738 8,341 1,149,738 1,060,734 0Proceeds from Self-Supporting & IF Loans 13,034 15,590 0 14,429 15,663 0Proceeds from New Loan 1,081,600 0 0 0 0 0Transfers from Cash Reserves 1,885,400 1,440,394 97,794 0 173,394 173,394

4,140,262 2,660,722 106,135 1,164,167 1,249,791 85,624

SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) JULY 1 B/FWD 3,410,710 3,430,813 3,430,813 3,430,813 0

SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) C/FWD (0) (0) (3,446,116) 5,705,533 8,431,937 2,726,404 Investments At 30 April 2016 the Shire’s cash on hand, deposits and investments totalled $21,820,349 (a decrease of $1,358,186 to last month) and total investment interest earned for the month was $50,466. Actual interest earned for the year to date of $475,717 exceeded the amended budget of $444,605.

Term Deposits – Cash Management At the end of April the Shire had the following short-term facilities (term deposits).

Term Days Maturity Institution (ADI) Principal

$ Interest Rate Interest

$ 90 7/6/16 National Australia Bank 1,500,000 3.10% 11,466 268 10/6/16 Bank of Queensland 1,500,000 2.75% 30,288 91 20/6/16 Bankwest 1,500,000 3.00% 11,219 90 4/7/16 National Australia Bank 2,000,000 3.06% 15,090 90 18/7/16 National Australia Bank 1,500,000 3.05% 11,281 365 28/7/16 National Australia Bank 1,000,000 2.89% 28,900 365 16/8/16 Bankwest 4,000,000 2.80% 112,000 365 6/9/16 Bankwest 2,000,000 2.70% 54,000 367 12/9/16 National Australia Bank 3,000,000 2.80% 84,460 366 14/9/16 National Australia Bank 2,000,000 2.80% 56,153

20,000,000 414,857


50

Two term deposits matured during the month. An investment of $2 million with NAB matured on 5/4/16 and was rolled over for 90 days at 3.06%. An investment of $1.5 million with NAB matured on 19/4/16 and was rolled over for 91 days at 3.05%. The average rate of interest to be paid on all of the term deposits is 2.90%.

Held for Trading CDOs The Shire no longer has any CDOs in its investment portfolio. No further advice has been received about the possible distribution of funds from the liquidation of Lehman Brothers Australia.

In-Kind Support In-Kind support and fee waivers at 30 April 2016 totalled $7,785. $1,385 of fees were waived under delegation and a further $6,400 was provided in sponsorships for sports representatives. Reserves Movement to reserves represent interest earned on reserve funds for the year to date and some specific transfers to and from reserves. In addition to interest earned, a number of reserve


51

transactions were processed during the month to ensure the end of month budget surplus was not overstated. These included approved and amended budget transfers for the Caravan Park Upgrade, Community Loan, Waste Management, Community Facility and Emergency Services reserves. Developer contributions received were transferred to that reserve, the profit on sale of registration plates was transferred to the Community Grants reserve, road works contributions to the road asset reserve and a contribution received from Local Government Insurance Services was transferred to the Self Insurance reserve. STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Financial Management Regulation 34 requires a local government to prepare each month a Statement of Financial Activity reporting on the sources and applications of funds, as set out in the annual budget under Financial Management Regulation 22(1) (d). STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Community Strategic Plan 2033 (CSP) Corporate Business Plan 2015-2019 Goal 5: Effective leadership and governance Community Outcome 2: Effective strategy, planning and asset management Strategic Response: Ensure the Shire’s financial performance is well managed and leads to a strong financial position. PLANNING FRAMEWORK Nil FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The overall financial performance of the Shire is as summarised in this report. SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental Nil Social Nil Economic As stated in the report. VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council receives the Monthly Financial Report – April 2016 in accordance with Section 6.4 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996. ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT Nil ATTACHMENTS 1. Monthly Financial Report consisting of:

a. Notes to and forming part of the Statement of Financial Activity b. Financial Reports by Business Units


52

11.4.2 LIST OF PAYMENTS FOR APRIL 2016 LOCATION/ADDRESS Shire of Augusta Margaret River APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Shire of Augusta Margaret River FILE REFERENCE FIN/42 REPORT AUTHOR Jaye Lanzini, Finance Officer Accounts Payable AUTHORISING OFFICER Andrew Ross, Manager Corporate Services Director Corporate and Community Services discloses interest in the credit card expenses which is certified by the Acting Chief Executive Officer. IN BRIEF It is a requirement of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 that payments made under delegated authority by the CEO are reported to Council on a monthly basis showing details of each account paid since the last such list was prepared. RECOMMENDATION That Council notes the April 2016 List of Payments for $2,497,089.18 as certified correct by the Director Corporate and Community Services. LOCATION PLAN Nil TABLED ITEMS Nil BACKGROUND Where Council has delegated authority to the CEO to make payments from the Shire’s bank accounts then under Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996, Regulation 13 (1) a list of such payments is to be prepared each month for noting by Council. CONSULTATION AND ADVICE External Consultation Nil Internal Consultation Nil DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS Table 1 below provides a summary of the payments made and Table 2 makes comparison between payments for the 2014-15 and 2015-16 financial years. The List of Payments attachment provides further details as required under Regulation 13 (1). These details are as follows.

(a) The payee’s name; (b) The amount of the payment; (c) The date of the payment; and (d) Sufficient information to identify the transaction.

In order to improve operational efficiency and reduce costs the Shire’s Finance team continually liaise with creditors paid by cheque to encourage them to switch to EFT.


53

TABLE 1 – SUMMARY OF PAYMENTS MADE IN THE MONTH

MODE OF PAYMENT CHEQUE / EFT NUMBERS SUB-TOTAL AMOUNT

Cheques (includes reimbursement of credit cards) 42021-42033 $15,738.88 $15,738.88

EFT 53121-53559 $1,604,883.83 Direct Debits $876,466.47 $2,481,350.30

TOTAL $2,497,089.18

TABLE 2 – COMPARISON WITH PRIOR YEAR OF PAYMENTS MONTH CHEQUES EFT TOTAL PMTS CUMULATIVE CHEQUES EFT TOTAL PMTS CUMULATIVE

2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 PAYMENTS 2015-16 2015-16 2015-16 PAYMENTS

JULY $27,627.52 $3,382,878.99 $3,410,506.51 $3,410,506.51 18,574.29 3,108,059.98 3,126,634.27 3,126,634.27 AUGUST $24,371.61 $1,881,379.90 $1,905,751.51 $5,316,258.02 18,321.82 1,980,022.38 1,998,344.20 5,124,978.47

SEPTEMBER $29,105.88 $10,523,000.04 $10,552,105.92 $15,868,363.94 16,151.74 9,861,625.31 9,877,777.05 15,002,755.52 OCTOBER $16,883.83 $3,009,076.16 $3,025,959.99 $18,894,323.93 19,349.63 5,058,215.63 5,077,565.26 20,080,320.78

NOVEMBER $37,159.65 $2,423,568.91 $2,460,728.56 $21,355,052.49 22,306.58 2,617,585.05 2,639,891.63 22,720,212.41 DECEMBER $28,403.96 $3,158,418.92 $3,186,822.88 $24,541,875.37 38,300.43 3,340,304.12 3,378,604.55 26,098,816.96 JANUARY $27,233.40 $2,058,456.34 $2,085,689.74 $26,627,565.11 24,247.57 4,404,603.21 4,425,850.78 30,524,667.74

FEBRUARY $22,820.69 $2,080,353.62 $2,103,174.31 $28,730,739.42 17,988.50 2,292,007.08 2,309,995.58 32,834,663.32 MARCH $19,847.73 $5,571,238.52 $5,591,086.25 $34,321,825.67 31,991.91 6,362,556.19 6,394,548.10 39,229,211.42 APRIL $27,247.06 $2,340,113.91 $2,367,360.97 $36,689,186.64 15,738.88 2,481,350.30 2,497,089.18 41,726,300.60 MAY $43.137.58 $2,631,154.74 $2,674,292.32 $39,363,478.96 JUNE $59,529.13 $3,001,795.20 $3,061,324.33 $42,424,803.29

$363,368.04 $42,061,435.25 $42,424,803.29 222,971.35 41,506,329.25 41,726,300.60


54

STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Local Government Act 1995, s 6.10, and Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996, r 13 STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Community Strategic Plan 2033 (CSP) Corporate Business Plan 2015-2019 Goal 5: Effective leadership and governance Community Outcome 2: Effective strategy, planning and asset management Strategic Response: Ensure the Shire’s financial performance is well managed and leads to a strong financial position Service level strategy/plan: Continue to monitor and analyse monthly, year to date and annual financial performance. PLANNING FRAMEWORK Nil FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Nil SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental Nil Social Nil Economic Nil VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council notes the April 2016 List of Payments for $2,497,089.18 as certified correct by the Director Corporate and Community Services. ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT Nil ATTACHMENTS 1. List of Payments for April 2016


55

12. MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN 13. MOTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION AT NEXT MEETING 14. NEW BUSINESS OF AN URGENT NATURE

14.1. Members

14.2. CEO

15. CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS

16. CLOSURE OF MEETING

Date post:	11-Aug-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Ordinary Council...ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 8 JUNE 2016 2 ATTENTION/DISCLAIMER This agenda has yet...

Documents