Ordinary Council - Shire of Augusta–Margaret River...ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015...

Ordinary Council

MINUTES

FOR THE MEETING HELD WEDNESDAY, 22 APRIL 2015

IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, WALLCLIFFE ROAD, MARGARET RIVER

COMMENCING AT 5:30PM

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015

Meeting Notice Dear Councillor I advise that an Ordinary Council Meeting of the Shire of Augusta Margaret River will be held in Council Chambers, 41 Wallcliffe Road, Margaret River, on Wednesday 22 April 2015, commencing at 5:30pm. Yours faithfully

GARY EVERSHED CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

1


ATTENTION/DISCLAIMER

These minutes will be confirmed at the next Ordinary Council Meeting. The minutes should be read to ascertain the decision of the Council. In certain circumstances members of the public are not entitled to inspect material, which in the opinion of the Chief Executive Officer is confidential, and relates to a meeting or a part of a meeting that is likely to be closed to members of the public. No responsibility whatsoever is implied or accepted by the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River for any act, omission, statement or intimation occurring during Council or Committee meetings. The Shire of Augusta-Margaret River disclaims any liability for any loss whatsoever and howsoever caused arising out of reliance by any person or legal entity on any such act, omission or statement of intimation occurring during Council or Committee meetings. Any person or legal entity who acts or fails to act in reliance upon any statement, act or omission made in a Council or Committee meeting does so at that person’s or legal entity’s own risk. In particular and without derogating in any way from the broad disclaimer above, in any discussion regarding any planning application or application for a licence, any statement or intimation of approval made by any member or Officer of the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River during the course of any meeting is not intended to be and is not taken as notice of approval from the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River. The Shire of Augusta-Margaret River advises that anyone who has any application lodged with the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River must obtain and should only rely on WRITTEN CONFIRMATION of the outcome of the application and any conditions attaching to the decision made by the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River in respect of the application. The Shire of Augusta-Margaret River advises that any plans or documents contained within these minutes may be subject to copyright law provisions (Copyright Act 1968, as amended) and that the express permission of the copyright owner(s) should be sought prior to their reproduction. It should be noted that Copyright owners are entitled to take legal action against any persons who infringe their copyright. A reproduction of material that is protected by copyright may represent a copyright infringement.

2


TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM NO. SUBJECT PAGE NO.

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

2. ATTENDANCE ........................................................................................................... 5

2.1. APOLOGIES.............................................................................................................. 5

2.2. APPROVED LEAVE OF ABSENCE .......................................................................... 5

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

3.1 11.1.1 WA LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION HONOURS 2015 MERIT AWARD (PREVIOUSLY DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD) ................................ 6

4. PUBLIC QUESTIONS ................................................................................................ 6

4.1. RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE ................. 6

4.2. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME ......................................................................................... 6

5. APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE ............................................................ 6

5.1 CR IAN EARL – 13 MAY 2015 ................................................................................... 6

6. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING ...................................... 6

6.1 ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING HELD 8 APRIL 2015 ............................................ 6

7. DEPUTATIONS ......................................................................................................... 6

7.1 ITEM 11.2.1 AMENDMENT 32 FOR INITIATION - LOTS 56 AND 57 KEVILL ROAD EAST MARGARET RIVER – MARC HALSALL FROM HALSALL AND ASSOCIATES ON BEHALF OF MARK GOODLICH AND JENNY ROSS .................. 6

7.2 ITEM 11.2.3 TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE (NBN FIXED WIRELESS TOWER) - 72 (LOT 2) EXMOOR DRIVE, MARGARET RIVER - MARC HALSALL FROM HALSALL AND ASSOCIATES ON BEHALF OF KEN AND MADELAINE MILES .................................................................................. 8

7.3 11.2.2 TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE (MOBILE PHONE TOWER) - LOT 1033 REDGATE ROAD, WITCHCLIFFE - KYLIE FERGUSON, ERICSSON AUSTRALIA, 28 FLINDERS AVENUE, HILLARYS ......... 10

7.4 ITEM 12.1 REFUGEE WELCOME ZONE BILL BUNBURY, 18 TIMOR CLOSE MARGARET RIVER .................................................................................... 10

7.5 ITEM 12.1 REFUGEE WELCOME ZONE - MARIA BAXTER, 14 CALADENIA RISE MARGARET RIVER ................................................................... 10

7.6 ITEM 12.1 REFUGEE WELCOME ZONE - PAULINE MCLEOD - ON BEHALF OF AMNESTY MARGARET RIVER IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE UNITING CHURCH & TIG LE HOUSE. .................................................................................... 13

8. PETITIONS .............................................................................................................. 13

9. ANNOUCEMENTS FROM THE PRESIDING MEMBER .......................................... 14

10. QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN ................................... 14

12.1 REFUGEE WELCOME ZONE – CR LYN SERVENTY ............................................. 14

11. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES AND EMPLOYEE REPORTS .................................. 16

11.2. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................ 21

3

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 11.2.1 AMENDMENT 32 FOR INITIATION - LOTS 56 AND 57 KEVILL ROAD

EAST MARGARET RIVER ....................................................................................... 21

11.2.2 TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE (MOBILE PHONE TOWER) - LOT 1033 REDGATE ROAD, WITCHCLIFFE ........................................................ 28

11.2.3 TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE (NBN FIXED WIRELESS TOWER) - 72 (LOT 2) EXMOOR DRIVE, MARGARET RIVER ................................ 38

11.2.4 DRAFT MASTER PLAN - TALLINUP AUGUSTA AIRPORT .................................... 49

11.2.5 APPOINTMENT TO DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANELS .............................. 56

11.3. INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES ............................................................................. 59

11.4. CORPORATE AND COMMUNITY SERVICES ........................................................ 61

11.4.1 UNBUDGETED EXPENDITURE AND GRANT FOR YOUTH COLLABORATION PROJECT ($25,000) ................................................................. 61

11.4.2 NON-RATEABLE PROPERTIES ............................................................................. 64

11.4.3 LIST OF PAYMENTS FOR MARCH 2015 ................................................................ 76

11.4.4 FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENT REPORT - MARCH 2015 .............................. 79

12. MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN ............................. 88

12.1 REFUGEE WELCOME ZONE – CR LYN SERVENTY ............................................. 88

13. MOTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION AT NEXT MEETING ........................................ 88

14. NEW BUSINESS OF AN URGENT NATURE .......................................................... 88

14.1. MEMBERS………… ................................................................................................ 88

14.2. CEO………………… ................................................................................................ 88

14.2.1 MATTER RELATING TO A CONTRACT THAT MAY BE ENTERED INTO FOR THE SALE OF COUNCIL LAND ...................................................................... 88

15. CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS .................................................................................... 88

16. CLOSURE OF MEETING ......................................................................................... 88

4


Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on Wednesday 22 April 2015, in Council Chambers, 41

Wallcliffe Road, Margaret River, commencing at 5.30pm.

1. DECLARATION OF OPENING

The Deputy Shire President welcomed all in attendance and declared the meeting open at 5.30pm. 2. ATTENDANCE

Deputy Shire President : Cr Lyn Serventy North Ward Councillors : Cr Kylie Kennaugh North Ward

Cr Ian Earl North Ward Cr Felicity Haynes Town Ward Cr Neville Veitch Town Ward Cr Kim Hastie Leeuwin Ward

Chief Executive Officer : Mr Gary Evershed Director Infrastructure Services : Mr Johan Louw Director Sustainable Development : Mr Iliya Hastings Manager Planning and Development : Mr Nick Logan Manager Finance : Mr Andrew Ross Minute Secretary : Ms Megan Smith

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC 25 Members of public MEMBERS OF THE PRESS Augusta Margaret River Mail : Mr Matt Shand Augusta Margaret River Times : Mr Declan Bush

2.1. Apologies

Shire President, Cr Michael Smart, Leeuwin Ward Director Corporate and Community Services, Ms Annie Riordan

2.2. Approved Leave of Absence

Nil

5

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 3. DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

3.1 Item 11.1.1 WA LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION HONOURS 2015 MERIT AWARD (PREVIOUSLY DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD)

Cr Serventy verbally declared a disclosure of interest in item 11.1.1 WA Local Government Association Honours 2015 Merit Award as she is the councillor to whom the proposed nomination relates.. 4. PUBLIC QUESTIONS

4.1. Response to Previous Public Questions Taken on Notice

Nil

4.2. Public Question Time

Nil

5. APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

5.1 Cr Ian Earl – 13 May 2015

Cr Ian Earl requested that Council grant him leave of absence from the 13 May 2015 Ordinary Meeting of Council. MOTION / COUNCIL DECISION CR SERVENTY, CR KENNAUGH OM2015/71 That Council grants Cr Earl leave of absence from the 13 May 2015 Ordinary Meeting of Council.

CARRIED 6/0

6. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

6.1 Ordinary Council Meeting held 8 April 2015

MOTION / COUNCIL DECISION CR KENNAUGH, CR HAYNES OM2015/72 That Council confirms the minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held 8 April 2015 to be a true and correct record of the meeting.

CARRIED 6/0

7. DEPUTATIONS

7.1 ITEM 11.2.1 AMENDMENT 32 FOR INITIATION - LOTS 56 AND 57 KEVILL ROAD EAST MARGARET RIVER – MARC HALSALL FROM HALSALL AND ASSOCIATES ON BEHALF OF MARK GOODLICH AND JENNY ROSS

“I refer to the above proposal which is the subject of a report to Council. The proposal has been supported by the Shire’s Planning Department with a change that the proponent is very concerned about. The recommendation to Council indicates a reduction from potentially 3 lots to 2 lots on lot 57 and the purpose of this presentation is to seek your support for the 3 lot proposal as originally presented. In support of this request I provide the following background. As Councillors may be aware, the subject land is situated within the Kevill Road East area where much of the area has been already identified with an adopted Detailed Area Plan for subdivision to a minimum lot size of 1ha. Lots 56, 57 and 58 are 3 predominantly cleared lots which remain unzoned and not identified on plan for subdivision. 6

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 Refer to current adopted guide plan (provided). I represent the owners of Lot 57 (Mark Goodlich and Jenny Ross). They approached us and requested whether they would be able to pursue subdivision of their land in a similar fashion to that immediately to the south and just to the west of their land. In keeping with Council’s Policy Framework, we advised that it would be advantageous to work in with the other neighbours to present a proposal to Council. Our clients land (lot 57) is located between lots 56 and 58 and careful thought would need to be put into any proposal having regard for neighbours. We consulted both neighbours and the owner of lot 58 indicated that they had no objection to us pursuing a proposal but wished to have no involvement. The owners of lot 56 indicated that they similarly had no objection to the proposal and were happy to be involved to the extent that this would assist their neighbours but did not wish to show any subdivision opportunities. Given lots 56 and 57 share a battleaxe access arrangement (approximately 10m wide in total) we met specifically onsite with the owners of lot 56 along with our clients to work out access arrangements and discuss subdivision layout and building envelopes. The proposed access to the lots within lot 57 is along the eastern boundary and due attention has been given to setbacks from that boundary along with vegetative screening. This has been with the input of the adjoining neighbour (lot 56). We also indicated specifically where the building envelopes were proposed to be located for the 3 lots concerned and the adjoining neighbours (lot 56) acknowledged this. As necessary, we also undertook a geotechnical assessment, effluent disposal capability investigations, fire management planning and environmental study. Given lot 57 is the only site that is currently being designed for subdivision the studies related to this land only. Favourable results have suggested that 3 lots are capable of establishment. The investigations are consistent with others we have been involved in within the general area. The Shire planners report notes that studies do not show negative results. The Shire Planners report suggests all 3 lots (lots 56, 57 and 58) should be zoned and our clients accept this is Council’s prerogative. The report also indicates that future lot boundaries and building envelopes are to be indicated for lots 56 and 58 and a notation should require that further investigations on geotech, fire management and environment assessment may be necessary to refine those boundaries. Again this is Council’s prerogative to require a plan of this nature when it is considering amending its Town Planning Scheme. The Shire Planners have also however recommended that the lot yield for lot 57 be reduced from 3 to 2. The specific comment made by the Shire Planners in relation to justification for this is: “lots in this location being on the outer extremity of the area identified for further subdivision were generally expected to be larger (not smaller) than the otherwise accepted minimum to create a transition to larger 3ha lots to the east. The location of the land on the banks of the Margaret River further reinforces the need for a more sensitive approach to development intensity. To address this point it is recommended that the maximum yield which can be achieved from each of the included lots should be 2.” In response to this, the detailed investigations of land capability including effluent disposal and environmental factors has illustrated that there is no impediment to the establishment of 3 lots on lot 57. The ground water table is not evidenced in any of the test pits and a 100m setback for effluent disposal is indicated on the plan therefore protecting the integrity of the Margaret River. Further, it is noted that there are other 1ha lots created in a similar context along the Margaret River and further afield from the town site of Margaret River. There is also generally no specific theme of transition to larger lots within the wider area. 1ha lots abut larger lots in many cases. This is illustrated in the plan also provided to Councillors and therefore indicates that a decreasing of lot size on the areas extremities has not been a consistent objective for the Shire. In fact some 1ha lots have been created in vegetation and adjacent to the Margaret River recently at Connelly Drive. The Shire’s objective to make better use of land already committed for rural residential is important. This is because no further areas for this type of lot have been identified. Further,

7

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 Councillors recently made a firm statement that vegetated lots should be considered carefully putting more emphasis on cleared lots like the subject site. This has further reduced possibilities for creation of such lots which are highly desirable particularly in such locations. As such, given there are no impediments for the subject site, the officers broad overview comment that a reduction in lot yield is not necessarily a view that Council needs to take on board in this case. This is demonstrated by previous decisions of Council and plan provided shows this. Our clients have seen neighbours across the road and also adjacent to the river receive support for 1 ha lots and they would greatly appreciate the same outcome. At least the proposal could be advertised with 3 lots to gauge opinions of the community and government agencies. We therefore respectfully request that the officer recommendation be modified by: - removing the following statement from part 2 of the recommendation “Reduce the lot yield shown on the plan for lot 57 from 3 to 2” We accept the other aspects of the Officers recommendation and would appreciate Councils support for this request as a decision to reduce lots from 3 to 2 has a major impact on the overall proposal and the objectives of the landowners who have seen approvals for 1ha lots occur throughout the Kevill Road area. Thank you for your consideration.” Cr Serventy thanked Mr Halsall for his presentation

7.2 ITEM 11.2.3 TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE (NBN FIXED WIRELESS TOWER) - 72 (LOT 2) EXMOOR DRIVE, MARGARET RIVER - MARC HALSALL FROM HALSALL AND ASSOCIATES ON BEHALF OF KEN AND MADELAINE MILES

“I am presenting on behalf of Ken and Madeleine Miles who own the rural residential lot 44 immediately adjacent (to the west) of the proposed NBN Tower at Lot 2 Exmoor Drive, Margaret River. The Miles family objected to the proposal for the tower at lot 2 Exmoor Drive Margaret River due to its proposed proximity to their property (118 metres) and at 45 metres high the tower will be very obvious from their house. At the previous Council Meeting that the Council deferred a decision “to enable further negotiation between the Shire and the proponent with a view to achieving greater separation from existing and future dwellings and to ascertain overall plans for the Shire.” From the review of the officers report it is noted the proponents of the NBN tower were asked to indicate whether they would be willing to amend the proposal to relocate the tower further to the east away from rural residential land and this was obviously in keeping with the Shire’s resolution to negotiate with a view to achieving greater separation. I understand that the result of the liaison was that the proponents of the NBN were not willing to relocate the tower or support further landscaping to protect the amenity of adjoining rural residential. This is disappointing to the rural residential neighbours (Ken and Madeleine Miles). The Shire Planners in their report have indicated that the proponent was reluctant to provide exact numbers on the loss of coverage if the tower was relocated however loss of coverage would be experienced. We suggest this must be very minor. Negotiation requested by Council was therefore unsuccessful and the officers recommendation is therefore to approve the tower with a requirement for additional vegetation screening between the proposed tower and Lot 44 (Ken and Madeleine Miles) in keeping with an approved landscape plan. The plan should be submitted by a suitable consultant and show the location and name of mature heights of existing and proposed trees. The proposed trees should be no less than 12m and planted no further than 60m from the eastern elevation of the dwelling on Lot 44. Furthermore, that existing trees should not be impacted upon.

8

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 Obviously Ken and Madeleine Miles are disappointed with the approach from NBN and lack of willingness to relocate the tower further to the east and lack of willingness to support further landscape planting. They are also concerned in relation to the recommendation for approval with landscaping as the only method of trying to resolve the issue. The following comments on their behalf in this regard:

• The Shire Planners are obviously recognising that there is an amenity issue by recommending that landscaping be implemented.

• The NBN have not provided any specific information to demonstrate the potential impact on loss of coverage. This makes it very difficult for the Shire Officers, Council and the Miles family to make a judgement on the impact of relocating the tower balanced against the impact on amenity of adjoining rural residential dwellings. Why can’t the NBN proponents provide this?

• Establishment of landscaping between the tower and adjoining rural residential will take many years to reach a maturity that will have any noticeable effect.

• If the tower was located further away from rural residential the effect of landscaping would be improved due to the view/sight lines being lowered from adjoining lots.

• Ken and Madeleine Miles have suggested they would be amenable to relocation of the tower a further 120 to 150m to the east and surely this would have limited impact on coverage. Whilst we are not experts in radio communications, it seems difficult to understand that relocating a tower only 120m to 150m on consistent contour would have a debilitating impact on coverage.

We have provided three plans to the Councillors which show the proposal site and the suggested alternate location. This indicates to Council how subtle the change would be in the context of the area and should assist Councillors. Ken and Madeleine Miles are aggrieved by the current proposal which is before Council. They feel that no real change has been put to try and address their concerns in the short term. Landscaping will go part the way but only in many years to come. The Miles are also very concerned about the health issues associated with this proposal. Whilst it is noted that some findings of health related reports indicate that health issues are not a concern, it is understandable that people will still feel concerned about this issue and further separation from dwellings would go a long way to making neighbours feel better about the proposal and be a good precautionary approach. Whilst the Miles family would prefer the tower be located much further away, we respectfully request that the Council in the absence of the NBN’s cooperation, require that the tower be located further to the east (between 120m and 150m) and retain the current landscaping conditions and improve on them. We therefore request that the Council include the following additions to the officer recommendation: Condition 7 Implementation of landscaping shall include fast growing mature trees so that landscape screening of the tower will have an earlier effect. Condition 8 The tower shall be located 120m to 150m to the east (avoiding vegetation) from the location within lot 2 as indicated on the application plans. Detailed location plans indicating this are to be submitted for approval prior to commencement of works. The Council’s previous decision was to defer the item and enable “negotiation between the Shire and the proponent with a view to achieving greater separation from existing and future dwelling”. The Council has therefore already indicated a will to support relocation of the tower and the Miles family respectfully request that this be embodied in Council’s final decision. Ken and Madeleine Miles support the NBN rollout, it is a very important service, but the proposed tower is very imposing on their amenity and this need not be the case. A tower at 45 metres high and only 118 metres away will be very obvious and hard to screen with landscaping.

9

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 We appreciate the Council’s deferral of the proposal to consider this as it is certainly a worm to the family. Thank you.”

7.3 11.2.2 TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE (MOBILE PHONE TOWER) - LOT 1033 REDGATE ROAD, WITCHCLIFFE - KYLIE FERGUSON, ERICSSON AUSTRALIA, 28 FLINDERS AVENUE, HILLARYS

“Ms Ferguson advised the meeting that the repositioning of the fixed wireless tower to the position suggested would result in a notable lack of signal throughout the network – the approximate loss would be 10% of the signal which would be achieved by placing the tower in the location proposed by the NBN Co. The placement of this tower is critical for the efficacy of the entire network.” Cr Serventy thanked the presenters for their input

7.4 ITEM 12.1 REFUGEE WELCOME ZONE BILL BUNBURY, 18 TIMOR CLOSE MARGARET RIVER

“Well before the present refugee situation, Australians have always shown humanity and empathy for strangers in our midst. In World War Two, when Italian prisoners of war were sent to work on our farms, some farmers saw them as the enemy, to be employed but kept apart from the family , to sleep and eat meals on their own – often in an outbuilding or shed. Some wives however suggested that Guiseppe or Joe should come into the home and share meals with the family. They pointed out that these young men, often like their own sons, away fighting in Europe for the Allies, were also away from home and far from family. Where that happened it led to lasting friendships, often at war’s end, with a farmer offering to sponsor Joe or Guiseppe, as a migrant, if after his necessary repatriation, he wished to return. That also happened and those friendships survive to this day. Well after that the Shire of Katanning in the 1970s offered employment and home to Cocos Islanders, working in the Katanning abbatoir, to perform Halal slaughter. Wisely they brought in families, not single men and these newcomers were made welcome. Katanning has continued to do that for refugees in more recent times. Another recent experience for me was interviewing an Afghan refugee family. The father, an Hasara, had to flee because of the deaths of close relatives and threats to his own family. He spoke English quite fluently. His wife had no English but I asked the daughter, a very calm and capable 16 year old if she would translate for me for an interview with her mother. She herself had picked up very good English after less than a year at Churchlands High School. I thanked her for that task and asked her what she hoped to be now that they were all safe in Australia. “I hope to be a doctor and work in this community. It would be a small reward for all that Australia has done for us.” That was in 1997. I hope that tradition of welcoming ‘the stranger in our midst’ will persist.”

7.5 ITEM 12.1 REFUGEE WELCOME ZONE - MARIA BAXTER, 14 CALADENIA RISE MARGARET RIVER

10

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 Boa tarde- diak ka lai amigos? (Good afternoon- how are you all dear friends?) So how did a refugee from East-Timor end up in Margaret River? Before I share my refugee journey with each one of you, please take the time to reflect the first Article of the UN Declaration of Human Rights; “All humans are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.” A little bit of history of East-Timor. The island of Timor was first colonized by the Portuguese in 1520. The Portuguese had come to Timor to trade sandalwood and eventually established settlements and ports. The Dutch were in control of several of the surrounding islands. By 1613 the Dutch had taken control over the island until 1860. At this time a treaty was made dividing Timor into the eastern and western portions. The treaty gave the western portion to the Netherlands and the eastern portion to Portugal. Eventually the Netherlands gave up it’s colonies in the Dutch west Indies including West Timor, giving birth to Indonesia. The Dutch recognized the Western part of Timor as Indonesia in 1949. The Portuguese remained in control of East-Timor for 455 years, until 1975. A military coup in Portugal in 1974 increased political both in Portugal and Portuguese Timor. A civil war broke out between opposing national groups U.D.T Democratic Union of East-Timor and FRETELIN, invasion by Indonesia which fought against the Timorese resistance until 1999. My father Domingos de Oliveira was the secretary general of UDT. We lived in Dili the capital and as it became unsafe to remain in our house we were forced to seek refuge at the Portuguese military base at Dili port. The Fretelin fighters outnumbered the Portuguese military, an SOS was sent out and luckily a Norwegian merchant ship anchored a few km’s of Dili port. My mother Leopaldina, 5yr old older sister Nidia and I, plus hundreds of young expectant mums, babies, young children were forced to flee with the bare clothing on our backs in individual wooden boats towards the ship. Husbands were separated from their families, young men were detained. My father was ill at the time and he made the sacrifice to stay behind to fight his cause and made his brother –in-law my uncle John who managed to flee with us to look after mum, my sister and myself. I was four, I can’t remember boarding the ship but I know I was so scared not knowing what was going on. Mum recalls people shouting, screaming, vomiting, whining, howling in despair. People trying to comfort their children, children trying to comfort their expectant mums, young mums and some grand-parents. Some people managed to sleep, others just stood in silence facing their homeland as the ship slowly departed. After 11 hours we finally arrived in Darwin and we were united with my mums sister Madalena, Uncle John and my cousins John jnr and Maria Zinha, my mums cousin in law-Maria Ceu who was expecting her second child and daughter Lumena aged 3, her grand-ma Maria. We stayed in an undercover area under the verandas of the high school grounds where we had stretch beds to sleep, 1 blanket and food provided on a daily basis. After a month in Darwin we were given the choice which state we wanted to settle in. We didn’t want to be separated and Uncle John was asthmatic so we relocated to Perth where we arrived at the Graylands Hostel. We were welcomed and supported by the Portuguese community from Fremantle, Brazilian interpreters, St. Vincent De Paul and Red Cross volunteers, Catholic Presentation sisters from St.Thomas the Apostle school in Claremont and the parishioners. We were given basic essentials, some books and toys. The department of Immigration wasted no time to make sure the East-Timorese enter the workforce. Most were young mums still grieving for their husbands and other relatives back home. Majority didn’t speak or couldn’t write English. Uncle John spoke and could write in English as in previous years he studied to become a pilot in Sydney. So he was one of our interpreters who spoke Portuguese, English, Tetum- our main dialect. English classes were available daily. The children were picked up by the Portuguese community volunteers where were driven to Mount Claremont community Kindy. Uncle John found a job of all places in Perenjori as a garden hand for the shire of Mullewa. Other families relocated to Carnarvon to work at plantations owned by some Portuguese. Uncle John and aunt Madalena didn’t want to separate the three families and so we relocated to Perenjori and stayed in the caravan park from the end of 1975 until April 1976.

11

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 Perenjori had 1 primary school, 1 church 1 pool, I bakery, 1petrol station, 1 hotel and of course 1 pub. We were the only foreigners but were welcomed and supported by the school-an Italian principal, his Australian wife who volunteered to teach English to everyone. The farming community employed some of the young women and men. I loved Perenjori the children form the town were so friendly , we felt safe and always welcome. Out stint in Perenjori didn’t last long, uncle John tried his best to fulfil his responsibilities, he was a bit of a larrikin and preferred more leisure to work. So he got the sack and he headed back to Perth with my aunt and found a rental property through his contacts at Mullewa shire. The three families consisted of 5 adults, one grandma and 6 children rented a house in Subiaco on Salvado Road. English classes were provided by the St.Josephs convent near St. John of God where every Monday evening all the mums used to drag the children to the classes and play in the background as the women learned English. Mum finally got her first job 7 months after we relocated back to Perth, as a laundry worker at the Graylands Hospital Laundry. We were supported by the Presentation sisters again and caught the train from Subiaco , departing at Loch street and it took 45 minutes to walk to St.Thomas Apostle Catholic Primary School. By then a lot of the East-Timorese families had settled in units and homes through Department of Housing and Commission in the suburbs of Fremantle, East-Fremantle, Beaconsfield, Koondoola, Balga, Mirrabooka, Osborne Park, Wembley. Though we were scattered around Perth we still kept in contact and supported each other with the families who still had loved ones back home. My mother was brave, she worked hard at the laundry, came home every night where the women cooked and the children helped to cook the traditional meals of our homeland. I suppose mum had to occupy herself constantly to reduce the emotional stress of being separated from dad. In 1980 after being separated from dad we were finally united as a family through the support of Red Cross, Amnesty International, Geoff Logan a social justice lawyer. But after a month dad had to go to Portugal to sort out his documentation as a former Portuguese employee as a customs officer. Whilst in Portugal he worked as an interpreter for the Australian Ambassador in Lisbon. After 11 months dad returned home worked in the Subiaco print for a few weeks and then made the change to work in the laundry at St John of God hospital in Subiaco. We finally had a unit next to the hospital . My parents made a lot of sacrifices, working long hours for my sister Nidia and I to receive a good education, to become good citizens and have the rights to be treated like a human. My sister Nidia a graduate from the U.W.A , she is a doctor of microbiology and virology. She worked for Queen Elizabeth 11 Medical centre based near Sir Charles Gardener hospital, she wrote her PHD thesis on Ross River Virus for the south west in the mid 90’s, she has worked for Bill Gates and is currently based in Bedfordshire, England where she works under the professor for the faculty of life sciences for the cell and development of biology for the University College of London. I studied through the VET –vocational educational training sector and during my studies I did volunteer work in various earlychildhood and education care services at Princess Margaret Hospital and Sir Charles Gairdner hospital. I have worked in this early childhood sector for 24 years and currently I work partime as a child care lecturer and part time as an early learning consultant for goodstart early learning – Australia’s largest non for profit child care centres working in partnership with Brothers of St Laurence, The Benevolent Society, Social Ventures Australia and Mission Australia. I am married to a top aussie bloke Garth and we have two beautiful teenage daughters Caitlin and Gabrielle. My parents Domingos and Leopoldina are both retired, dad still does a lot of volunteer work back home. I am an East-Timorese but a proud Australian citizen since 1975. I am co-chair of the Augusta- Margaret River Parishes,MR Lions member, past W.A and Bunbury Catholic womens league member, present CWL MR member, past FMR junior and senior committee member, past MR tennis committee member. I have shared my refugee journey with you all today because back in 1975 I was part of a process where hundreds of thousands of refugees in camps were resettled across the world in an orderly way. I am here because if my parents didn’t take that risk to flee to that Norwegian ship – I would be dead or either suffering from post traumatic stress from the civil war ,suffering mental health from the invasion of Indonesian military where I could have been raped.

12

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 I am here because Australia is a very lucky country and all the Australians who volunteered since my arrival in 1975 through various social services, church organisations and people from various communities gave me and many East-Timorese refugees the right to seek and to enjoy asylum from persecution” Obrigado barak –Thank you in Tetum-main East-Timorese dialect.

7.6 ITEM 12.1 REFUGEE WELCOME ZONE - PAULINE MCLEOD - ON BEHALF OF AMNESTY MARGARET RIVER IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE UNITING CHURCH & TIG LE HOUSE.

“Our Augusta Margaret River community is a welcoming one. We welcome more than 500,000 visitors into our community each year. Our visitor centre, one of the best in Australia and No.1 on Trip Advisor, welcomes 250,000 people each year into our region. Welcoming people to share our lives & experience our culture is what we love to do. It underpins our economy. We are a visitor destination. We welcome people from all over the world from all walks of life regardless of their colour, race or creed. We know we live in one of the best places in the world and that we are very lucky to live here and we like to make others who visit feel welcome. When you live here awhile you come to understand that the people of Augusta Margaret River, like people in other Australian communities, are fair, compassionate and tolerant. They have a great respect and love for the environment and a great love and respect for their fellow man. They are humanitarian. History demonstrates this. The European families that came as migrants to settle in Margaret River after the 2nd world war were welcomed because our small farming community back then realised these families had been through enormous suffering & dislocation. They also knew those same families would bring diverse skills & expertise that would help our community prosper. And they did. They made an enormous contribution to our community – socially, culturally and economically. Like other towns in Australia our community reaped the benefits of becoming a multicultural one. We are in fact a nation of migrants. There are now over 50 million displaced persons in the world... more than the number after the 2nd world war. This is a time of significant global turmoil, upheaval, conflict and war. Many people are suffering as a consequence . Many innocent people have lost their lives, lost family members, brothers, sisters and loved ones. Families, men, women and children have to flee their homes for fear of persecution, torture or death. It is a global crisis. Unfortunately, however, it has also given rise to fears and racial tension across the globe and in our country. When the gunman from the Middle East held people hostage in the cafe in Sydney last year you might remember there was fear there would be a backlash against the Muslim community in Australia. A young girl, travelling on a train into Sydney at the time of the siege, was sitting next to a Muslim woman. The woman appeared agitated and fearful of being seen in public while the crisis unfolded. She removed her head scarf. The young girl followed the woman and told her to put her head scarf back on and to reassure her said that she would ride with her. The lady cried, hugged her and walked away. The young girl posted her story on FACEBOOK. Within 2 hours there were 40,000 tweets and in 4 hours 200,000 tweets in overwhelming support. It was a massive positive response from the Australian community. That one small kind act by that young girl provided the leadership and balance that was needed right then in our country. Declaring our community a welcome refugee zone is a community statement. It is not a political one. It requires no financial commitment. It is a statement that reaffirms the tradition of our community. It is a statement about the way our community feels and acts. It confirms to the world that our Augusta Margaret River community is an inclusive, fair, compassionate and a welcoming one. By declaring our community a Welcome Refugee Zone we also are doing our bit during these troubled times to show leadership - Leadership that reflects a voice of balance, understanding, and compassion. We urge you to support this motion.” 8. PETITIONS 13

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 Nil

9. ANNOUCEMENTS FROM THE PRESIDING MEMBER

Nil

10. QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

Nil

MOTION That Council bring forward item 12.1 to be considered as the next item of business at the meeting. RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION CR EARL, CR KENNAUGH OM2015/73 That Council bring forward the item 12.1 to be considered as the next item of business at the meeting.

CARRIED 6/0

12.1 REFUGEE WELCOME ZONE – CR LYN SERVENTY

MOTION

That the Augusta Margaret River Shire Council declares the Shire of Augusta Margaret River a Refugee Welcome Zone, as endorsed by the Refugee Council of Australia, the Declaration being a commitment in spirit to welcoming refugees into our community, upholding the human rights of refugees, demonstrating compassion for refugees, and enhancing cultural and religious diversity in our community. ATTACHMENTS Publication – Refugee Council of Australia (RCOA) Refugee Welcome Zones: Local Councils building a culture of welcome for refugees RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION CR SERVENTY CR EARL OM2015/74 That the Augusta Margaret River Shire Council declares the Shire of Augusta Margaret River a Refugee Welcome Zone, as endorsed by the Refugee Council of Australia, the Declaration being a commitment in spirit to welcoming refugees into our community, upholding the human rights of refugees, demonstrating compassion for refugees, and enhancing cultural and religious diversity in our community.

CARRIED 6/0

14


11.1 Chief Executive Officer

15


11. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES AND EMPLOYEE REPORTS Cr Serventy called for nominations for the position of Presiding Member whilst she vacated the Chamber due to her declaration of an interest affecting impartiality in relation to the WALGA Awards as she in the person nominated in the CEO’s report. MOTION That Council appoint Cr Earl as presiding member while item 11.1.1 is debated. RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION CR HAYNES, CR VEITCH OM2015/75 That Council appoint Cr Earl as presiding member while item 11.1.1 is debated.

CARRIED 5/0

Cr Serventy left the Chambers at 6.13pm as she had declared an interest in item 11.1.1 Cr Earl moved into the Presiding Member’s chair and requested that a motion be considered to allow Cr Serventy to hear the discussion on her nomination from the public gallery.

MOTION That Cr Serventy be invited to sit in the public gallery while 11.1.1 is debated. RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION CR KENNAUGH, CR HASTIE OM2015/76 That Cr Serventy be invited to sit in the public gallery while 11.1.1 is debated.

CARRIED 5/0

Cr Serventy returned to the meeting and was seated in the public gallery at 6.14

16


11.1.1 WA LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION HONOURS 2015 MERIT AWARD (PREVIOUSLY DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD)

LOCATION/ADDRESS Shire of Augusta Margaret River APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Shire of Augusta Margaret River FILE REFERENCE CSV/34 REPORT AUTHOR Gary Evershed, Chief Executive Officer AUTHORISING OFFICER Gary Evershed, Chief Executive Officer IN BRIEF • The WA Local Government Association (WALGA) has called for nominations for the 2015 WA

Local Government Association Honours program with nominations closing on the 15 May, 2015. • The Honours program is significant public recognition and celebration of the outstanding

achievements and lasting contributions made by elected members and Officers to their respective Councils, to Local Government as a sector and to the wider community.

• The Merit Award (previously the Distinguished Service Award) recognises elected members who have provided distinguished service to the community through their local community

• Cr Lyn Serventy has been a member of the Council of the Shire of Augusta Margaret River on two occasions, from 1990-1993 and again from 2007 to this date.

RECOMMENDATION That Council nominates Cr Lyn Serventy for a WA Local Government Association Merit Award for distinguished service to the community through the Shire based on her eleven years of service as a Shire Councillor and her significant endeavours, achievements and contributions to the Shire over those periods of service. LOCATION PLAN Nil TABLED ITEMS Nil BACKGROUND CONSULTATION AND ADVICE • Chief Executive Officer, Shire of Augusta Margaret River • WA Local Government Association

DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS The WA Local Government Association (WALGA) has called for nominations for the 2015 WA Local Government Association Honours program with nominations closing on the 15 May, 2015. (See attachments). The Honours program is significant public recognition and celebration of the outstanding achievements and lasting contributions made by elected members and Officers to their respective Councils, to Local Government as a sector and to the wider community. The Merit Award (previously the Distinguished Service Award) recognises elected members who have provided distinguished service to the community through their local community. The Long and Loyal Service Award is for more than 12 years of service. Cr Lyn Serventy has been a member of the Council of the Shire of Augusta Margaret River on two occasions, from 1990-1993 and again from 2007 to this date. Cr Lyn Serventy has indicated that she will not be renominating for Council at the end of her current term of service. 17

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 The following is a summary of Lyn’s work for the community over the past 41 years: Lyn came to Margaret River in 1975 after working as the NT Arts and Education officer in a small theatre and community arts building In Darwin. She and her husband decided to find some land in the country, preferably near a coast and live a life of self-sufficiency. Lyne and her husband decided on Margaret River as they had both had visited as children and remembered it as being wild and unpopulated. Her first involvement in the community was to attend workshops on the National Park and Leeuwin Naturalist Management Plan, and to join the CWA and the Leeuwin Conservation Group. In 1987 she made her first unsuccessful attempt to run for Council but was elected at the second attempt in 1990 and served from 1990 to 1993. Her key achievements were • Leading the introduction of recycling and as Chairperson of Waste Management Committee which

oversaw the reduction of waste sites from 22 to one central site. This recycling service was discontinued some years later.

• Advocating to preserve the old Hospital buildings for use for arts and community resource centre. • Encouraging the development of a Rural Strategy, the precursor to a district Scheme, which

would protect the environmental values of the shire. • Involved in the rejection of an inappropriate coastal golf course development (Eaglescliffe) and

encouraged detailed strategic planning for the area involved which eventuated in the formation of a protective Town Planning Scheme for the coastal zone.

In a recent presentation to the University of the Third Age, Cr Serventy highlighted her involvement in the community during the period between her terms of service on Council, as shown in the following extract. • Youth march, Hotel overlooking Gnarabup beach, Beenup Consultative Group, chaired a

Committee which reintroduced recycling. • Continued to attend workshops on planning – Leeuwin Naturaliste Region Statement Planning

Policy • Beenup and the problem of mining acidity continued. The upgrade of public education into acid

sulfate soils instigated on the east coast enabled me to contact leading scientists in New South Wales.

• She appealed successfully on behalf of Leeuwin Environment, the EPA recommendation to allow discharge of mine water directly into the Blackwood River. Water samples from the mine were obtained and these together with aerial photos enabled Professor Mike Melville of University of NSW to predict that the mine had a severe acid sulfate problem. She arranged a meeting between Professor Melville and the Chairman of the EPA and the DEP to alert DEP of the problem. This ensured that when the mine finally closed, the EPA instigated a Peer Review of the management plan to permanently stabilise thousands of tonnes of acidic clay slurry which is held in the 90ha tailings dam at the defunct mine located between the Blackwood and Scott rivers.

Her second stint on Council commenced with her election in 2007 and her third term of office commenced with her re-election in 2011. She was elected as Deputy Shire President in 2013. Her committee involvement has included the Local Emergency Management Committee, the Sustainability Advisory Committee, the South West Joint Development Assessment Panel, the Beenup Consultative Group, the Busselton-Augusta Rail Trail Steering Committee, the Bridle Trails Feasibility Study Community Reference Group, the Whicher Water Resource Management Committee, among other services. POLICY IMPLICATIONS Community Strategic Plan 2033 (CSP) Goal 5: Effective Leadership and Governance Community Outcome 1. Effective Governance and corporate leadership Strategic Response 1.1. Attract and develop high quality councillors that are able to lead and articulate the community’s aspirations PLANNING FRAMEWORK 18

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 Community Strategic Plan FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Nil. SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Nil VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council nominates Cr Lyn Serventy for a WA Local Government Association Merit Award for distinguished service to the community through the Shire based on her eleven years of service as a Shire Councillor and her significant endeavours, achievements and contributions to the Shire over those periods of service.

ATTACHMENTS 1. WALGA invitation to submit nominations, Honours Policy and Honours Panel Terms of Reference RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION CR Veitch, CR Kennaugh OM2015/77 That Council nominates Cr Lyn Serventy for a WA Local Government Association Merit Award for distinguished service to the community through the Shire based on her eleven years of service as a Shire Councillor and her significant endeavours, achievements and contributions to the Shire over those periods of service.

CARRIED 5/0 Cr Serventy returned to the chair

19


11.2 Sustainable Development

20

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 11.2. Sustainable Development 11.2.1 AMENDMENT 32 FOR INITIATION - LOTS 56 AND 57 KEVILL ROAD EAST MARGARET RIVER LOCATION/ADDRESS KEVILL ROAD EAST MARGARET RIVER APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Halsall & Associates Town Planning Consultants / M Goodlich, J

Ross FILE REFERENCE LND/1/32SASP REPORT AUTHOR Matt Cuthbert, Strategic Project Officer AUTHORISING OFFICER Iliya Hastings, Director Sustainable Development IN BRIEF • The proposal seeks to amend the zoning of two existing and adjoining ‘rural residential’ lots, in

order to facilitate their future subdivision into smaller (1ha) lots. • The proposal can be amended to be consistent with Council’s established policy position with

respect to the re-subdivision of rural residential lots, and will bring the zoning of the land into line with that which is in place for surrounding land.

• Some modifications are required prior to advertising, most notably the need to include adjoining Lot 58, in order to complete the implementation of a consistent planning framework for the entire Kevill Road precinct.

RECOMMENDATION That Council pursuant to section 75 of the Planning and Development Act (2005) initiates Amendment No. 32 to Local Planning Scheme No. 1 for the purposes of including reference to Lots 56, 57 and 58 Kevill Road East Margaret River within Schedule 11, amending the Scheme map accordingly, and advertising a related amendment to the existing Detailed Area Plan applicable to Kevill Road East. SITE AND SURROUNDS The subject land consists of two lots (Lots 56 and 57) which are 3.0026ha and 3.0018ha in size respectively. The land is located to the west of the Margaret River town centre and has frontage to Kevill Road East via co-joining battleaxe legs. Surrounding land is zoned ‘Rural Residential’ and consists of lots which are generally 3ha in size. Within the surrounding area designated as ‘RR15’ a Detailed Area Plan (DAP) is in place which allows further subdivision down to a minimum lot size of 1ha. Re-subdivision of 3ha lots in the area is being progressively undertaken consistent with the DAP.

Figure 1 – Location Plan TABLED ITEMS Amendment documentation – Halsall and Associates December 2014.

Subject Land

21

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 BACKGROUND Council endorsed a Detailed Area Plan to provide for future re-subdivision of the rural residential area surrounding (but not including) the subject land, in 2011 (see Figure 2).

Figure 2 – Excerpt from existing Detailed Area Plan THE PROPOSAL The proposal consists of two elements being: • Identification of the land in Schedule 11 – ‘Special Provisions Relating To Development on Land

Zoned Rural-Residential Zone’ of LPS1. This provides the statutory basis for subdivision of the lots to a minimum lot size of 1ha, subject to the preparation of a suitable modification to the DAP which applies to adjacent land; and

• A modification to the existing Kevill Road DAP which demonstrates how one of the subject lots (57) could be subdivided into a total of 3 lots, each of approximately 1ha.

The modified DAP can be found at Attachment 1. It proposes that Lot 57 be strata - subdivided in ‘battle axe’ formation with ‘rights’ to the access leg being shared with adjoining Lot 56 so that the one point of access will serve 4 lots. It should be noted that whilst supportive of the rezoning of their land, the owners of Lot 56 to the east have not put forward a structure for the future subdivision of their land given that they have no intention of subdividing at this time. The proponent advises that the owner of adjoining Lot 58 supports the proposed rezoning, but has declined to be joined with the Amendment as they have no intention of subdividing in the foreseeable future. This inconsistent approach to the planning for three similar lots is not consistent with orderly planning. Means of addressing this issues are discussed in the ‘officer comments’ section of this report.

Subject Land

22

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 PLANNING FRAMEWORK LPS1 The subject land is zoned ‘Rural Residential. Clause 4.22.1(b) requires a minimum lot size of 3ha. However clause 4.22 states: In the event of any conflict between the provisions of clause 4.21 and the site-specific provisions of Schedule 11, the provisions of Schedule 11 shall prevail. As such, reference to an alternative lot size in Schedule 11, provides for the creation of lots smaller than 3ha. Land surrounding the subject land is zoned Rural Residential and designated ‘RR15’. The provisions included at Schedule 11 relevant to the ‘RR15’ designation state that: 1. The local government will not support any proposal to re-subdivide the land until such time as

a Detailed Area Plan has been prepared and adopted for the land in accordance with the Scheme having regard the relevant considerations for the preparation of such a plan at clause 6.2.8.

2. Subject to the overriding consideration that as much existing vegetation as possible shall be preserved, vegetation on the land may only be removed where it is dead or dangerous or required to be removed to give effect to an approved subdivision or development or to satisfy a bushfire requirement.

3. Notwithstanding the provisions of Clause 4.21 of the Scheme, the minimum lot size for any re-subdivision of the land shall not be less than 1hectare.

Local Planning Strategy Councils adopted position with respect to proposals to re-subdivide rural residential land takes the form of a proposed amendment to the Shire’s Local Planning Strategy. Locational and subdivisional criteria are to be added to the LPS as follows: Locational Criteria The re-subdivision of areas which display any of the following attributes are unlikely to be supported: • Significantly vegetated – subdivision of densely vegetated land would result in an undesirable

environmental outcome, would likely put future residents at higher risk of bushfire, and have greater potential to be inconsistent with the environment and landscape provisions of the LNRSPP.

• Located in areas which have an extreme fire risk and/or have poor fire management characteristics.

• Located along Caves Road – Caves Road is identified as a travel route corridor by the LNRSPP wherein development should be sited so as to be inevident from the road. Subdivision would result in additional development and thus a greater potential for adverse visual impact.

• Located in an identified Environmental Corridor (LPS) or National Park Influence Area. • Located in areas which have been developed around the maximisation of views, where additional

development would impact upon such views and landscape character • Isolated from all other lots having potential for subdivision (i.e. - would commence rather than

complete a pattern of subdivision inconsistent with the character of the locality). • Not easily accessible, for example – no direct road frontage, located at end of long cul de sac,

etc.

Subdivision Criteria Once an area has been determined to be suitable for re-subdivision (refer to locational criteria for guidance) proposals should be required to meet the following criteria: • Subdivision at a ratio of less than 1ha (average) will not be supported. • Lots of not less than 4000m2 may be considered where a clustered subdivision approach is

appropriate notwithstanding that the 1ha average lot size will still need to be met. • Rezoning and structure planning necessary to support subdivision should be undertaken on a

precinct (rather than lot by lot) basis unless completing a pattern of subdivision. 23

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 • Subdividers will be required to contribute to the proportional upgrade of infrastructure necessary

to adequately service the intended additional population. • Opportunities for re-subdivision should seek to provide enhanced environmental outcomes. • A bushfire hazard assessment and Bushfire Management Plan is to be prepared and

implemented at the time of subdivision.

DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS The subject land meets the locational criteria necessary to qualify for consideration of further subdivision. The land is not heavily vegetated, has reasonable road access and is adjacent to other land already identified for re-subdivision. The same could also be said for adjoining Lot 58, which is not included in the subject proposal. This would leave this lot (58) as the only lot within the immediate ‘Kevill Road’ locality not designated ‘RR-15’ and hence not able to subdivide to create smaller lots. The proponent advises that the owner of Lot 58 has specifically declined from being included in the process, although not objecting to the rezoning of adjoining land. This however would result in an inconsistent planning framework for the area, and considering that Lot 58 has similar characteristics to Lot 56, 57 and indeed the rest of the RR-15 precinct, it should be included. This does not mean that the land owner will be required to subdivide, or to undertake the various studies which form the necessary precursors to subdivision. It does however provide a simple planning pathway to future subdivision as is applicable to the surrounding locality. In response to the subdivision criteria, the land’s inclusion in the Kevill Road DAP will necessitate contributions towards road upgrading, as is applicable to all other subdivision which occurs in this area. In respect to fire management, the proponent has prepared a Bushfire Management Plan (BMP) which confirms that future development upon undeveloped strata lots (572 and 573) can be undertaken to a maximum Bushfire Attack Level (BAL) rating of 29 which is an acceptable rating, subject to a moderate amount of vegetation clearing within proximity to the proposed building envelopes. The proponent has also provided an environmental study which confirms that there are no declared rare or priority species located within the areas which require modification by the BMP. A large Marri tree is identified as being a likely ‘habitat tree’, however its proximity to the existing dwelling on the site means that it will not need to be removed to facilitate development. The environmental assessment and the BMP will be reviewed by relevant government agencies during the consultation period. A structure for the subdivision of Lot 56 has not been provided as the owners of the land do not intend to subdivide in the foreseeable future. As such, the modified DAP contains a notation which requires that a further modification to the DAP will be required prior to subdivision. This will necessitate that detailed site investigations such as geotechnical, environmental and fire management will occur. Whilst it is certainly the case that these investigations are warranted and necessary, it is desirable that a structure for future subdivision of this lot (56) and Lot 58 be devised at this point. If undertaken on a wider basis encompassing all three lots, the structure plan can arrive at an outcome which achieves a greater degree of cohesiveness across the site. Whilst the proposal achieves an average lot size of 1ha, each of the strata lots proposed to be created from existing Lot 57 is less than the 1ha required by LPS1. The reduced lot sizes arise from the need for a common property driveway of approximately 500m2. Whilst not the only consideration to be made as regards to lot size, the extent of the deficiency brings attention to the broader issue of whether the overall lot yield is suitable for the area. In this regard, lots at this location, being on the outer extremity of the area identified for further subdivision would generally be expected to be larger (not smaller) than the otherwise accepted minimum to create a transition to larger 3ha lots to the east. The location of the land on the banks of the Margaret River further reinforces the need for a more sensitive approach to development intensity. To address this point it is recommended that the maximum yield which can be achieved from each of the three included lots should be two. CONSULTATION AND ADVICE Should this proposal be initiated by Council, detailed consultation would be required in accordance with the requirements of the Town Planning Regulations (1967).

24

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Nil STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Community Strategic Plan 2033 (CSP) Corporate Business Plan 2014-2018 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 SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental The site is predominantly cleared and building envelopes are located to avoid removing existing vegetation where possible. Social The proposal provides the opportunity to increase the resident population without compromising the amenity of the area. Economic The subdivider will be responsible for the provision of the necessary infrastructure to the newly created lots, and has paid a fee for the processing of the amendment. VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Pursuant to the Planning and Development Act, 2005 (as amended), and Part 17 (2) of the Town

Planning Regulations (1967), initiates Amendment No. 32 to Local Planning Scheme No. 1 for the purpose of: a) Including reference to Lots 56, 57 and 58 Kevill Road East Margaret River within Schedule 11

– Special provisions relating to development on land zoned “Rural-Residential Zone”, (relevant to clause 4.21) at RR-15 under the ‘Site Description’ column.

b) Modifying the ‘Priority and Timing’ section of DCP2c at Schedule 14 of the Scheme to include the subject lots.

c) Amending the Scheme map to include lots 56, 57 and 58 Kevill Road East Margaret River

within the area referenced as ‘RR-15’. d) Amending the Scheme map to include lots 56, 57 and 58 Kevill Road East Margaret River

within Developer Contribution Area 2C (‘DCA2c’) 2. Determines that the amended Kevill Road East Detailed Area Plan dated December 2014, be

advertised subject to the following: Retitle the plan ‘Local Development Plan’; Reduce the lot yield shown on the plan for Lot 57 from 3 to 2; Provide a structure for the future subdivision of Lots 56 and 58; and Apply a notation to Lot 56 and 58, which states “The exact location of future lot boundaries and building envelopes is to be refined at the subdivision stage and is to be informed through the preparation of geotechnical investigations, a fire management plan and an environmental assessment as may be necessary.”

ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT Nil ATTACHMENTS Detailed Area Plan, Kevill Road East, December 2014

25

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION CR VEITCH, CR EARL OM2015/ That Council:

1. Pursuant to the Planning and Development Act, 2005 (as amended), and Part 17 (2) of the Town Planning Regulations (1967), initiates Amendment No. 32 to Local Planning Scheme No. 1 for the purpose of:

a) Including reference to Lots 56, 57 and 58 Kevill Road East Margaret River within Schedule 11 – Special provisions relating to development on land zoned “Rural-Residential Zone”, (relevant to clause 4.21) at RR-15 under the ‘Site Description’ column.


c) Amending the Scheme map to include lots 56, 57 and 58 Kevill Road East Margaret

River within the area referenced as ‘RR-15’. d) Amending the Scheme map to include lots 56, 57 and 58 Kevill Road East Margaret

River within Developer Contribution Area 2C (‘DCA2c’) 2. Determines that the amended Kevill Road East Detailed Area Plan dated December 2014,

be advertised subject to the following: Retitle the plan ‘Local Development Plan’; Provide a structure for the future subdivision of Lots 56 and 58; and Apply a notation to Lot 56 and 58, which states “The exact location of future lot boundaries and building envelopes is to be refined at the subdivision stage and is to be informed through the preparation of geotechnical investigations, a fire management plan and an environmental assessment as may be necessary.”

LOST 4/3 CR SERVENTY USED THE PRESIDING MEMBERS SECOND VOTE

CRS SERVENTY, HAINES, AND KENNAUGH VOTED AGAINST THE MOTION REASON: Cr Veitch spoke to his motion stating that he felt it would achieve consistency within the subdivision, that the owners had made every attempt to work with their neighbours, had done significant research at their own cost, and that the alternative motion was in line with previous Council decisions. As the motion was lost, the officer’s recommendation was then put. RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION CR EARL, CR HAYNES OM2015/78 That Council:

1. Pursuant to the Planning and Development Act, 2005 (as amended), and Part 17 (2) of the Town Planning Regulations (1967), initiates Amendment No. 32 to Local Planning Scheme No. 1 for the purpose of:

a) Including reference to Lots 56, 57 and 58 Kevill Road East Margaret River within Schedule 11 – Special provisions relating to development on land zoned “Rural-Residential Zone”, (relevant to clause 4.21) at RR-15 under the ‘Site Description’ column.


c) Amending the Scheme map to include lots 56, 57 and 58 Kevill Road East Margaret

River within the area referenced as ‘RR-15’.

26


d) Amending the Scheme map to include lots 56, 57 and 58 Kevill Road East Margaret River within Developer Contribution Area 2C (‘DCA2c’)

2. Determines that the amended Kevill Road East Detailed Area Plan dated December 2014,

be advertised subject to the following: • Retitle the plan ‘Local Development Plan’; • Reduce the lot yield shown on the plan for Lot 57 from 3 to 2; • Provide a structure for the future subdivision of Lots 56 and 58; and • Apply a notation to Lot 56 and 58, which states “The exact location of future lot

boundaries and building envelopes is to be refined at the subdivision stage and is to be informed through the preparation of geotechnical investigations, a fire management plan and an environmental assessment as may be necessary.”

CARRIED 4 /2 CRS VEITCH AND HASTIE VOTED AGAINST THE MOTION

27

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 11.2.2 TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE (MOBILE PHONE TOWER) - LOT 1033 REDGATE ROAD, WITCHCLIFFE LOCATION/ADDRESS Lot 1033 Redgate Road, Witccliffe APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Daly International Pty Ltd /Peter and Thelma Burnett FILE REFERENCE PTY/645/P214472 REPORT AUTHOR Johan Pienaar, Statutory Planning Coordinator AUTHORISING OFFICER Iliya Hastings, Director Sustainable Development IN BRIEF • The Shire is in receipt of an application for the development of telecommunications infrastructure

(82m high mobile phone guyed mast) at Lot 1033 Redgate Road, Witchcliffe. • The proposal is to relocate the existing mast from its location on Lot 9000 Redgate Road

(previously known as Lot 1035) to adjoining Lot 1033. • The application was advertised and 7 submissions objecting to the proposed development were

received. • The application has been assessed against the requirements of relevant state and local planning

policies and the provisions of Local Planning Scheme No. 1. • Council resolved to defer a decision to enable further negotiations achieve a greater separation

distance from adjoining residential development. The proponent argues that a greater separation distance will impact on the viability of the facility and has provided additional justification in support of the development as proposed.

RECOMMENDATION That Council approves the application for Telecommunications Infrastructure (mobile phone tower) at 173 / 175 (Lot 1033) Redgate Road, Witchcliffe subject to conditions. TABLED ITEMS 1. Application Report BACKGROUND Council resolved, at its ordinary meeting of 8 April 2015, to defer a decision “…to enable further negotiation between the Shire and the proponent with a view to achieving greater separation from existing and future dwellings and to ascertain overall plans for the Shire”. The Shire met with the proponent, whom indicated that an alternative location will impact on the viability of the facility and that the proposed locations meet planning and other objectives. The proponent provided additional written justification in support of the proposed development. The additional written justification is appended as Attachment 3. This application is for the relocation of the existing guyed mast that exists at 81 (Lot 9000) Redgate Road, Witchcliffe. The requirement to relocate is due to the expiring lease of the existing Crown Castle Australia (CCA) site located at Lot 9000. In addition, Lot 9000 is zoned ‘Future Development’ and structure planned for future urban development. The Structure Plan requires removal of the existing tower prior to any subdivision in the south-eastern corner of Lot 9000. The network provides fundamental telecommunications services in the Shire of Augusta Margaret River and surrounding areas and will provide carriers with the capacity for future technology upgrades. The current tower supports 4G antennas belonging to several mobile carriers including Telstra, Optus, and Vodafone. The mast has also been identified as a co-location site for the NBN broadband fixed wireless rollout program. 28

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 Site Parameters Numerous sites (“candidate sites”) have been investigated for the location. Figure 1 is an extract from the proponent’s report showing the number of candidate sites that were examined for the proposed tower. The white circle identifies the location of the “prime candidate” site, which is the subject of this application. The other candidate sites could not be considered due to unwilling land owners. A summary of the assessment of each candidate site is available in the application report submitted as Tabled Item 1 to this report.

Figure 1 – Candidate Sites LOCATION The site is 88.7ha in size and is located approximately 1.4km south-west of Witchcliffe Village. The site is at its closest approximately 1.4km from Bussell Highway The site is accessed from Redgate Road and is developed with a dwelling, outbuildings/farm buildings and orchard. The site adjoins agricultural zoned land to the south and west and land identified and or developed for low density residential development to the north and east. The location of the site in the context of surrounding areas is evident in Figure 2 of this report.

The Site

29


Figure 2 – Location Plan TENURE The site is privately owned and Crown Castle Australia (CCA) has secured a lease with the owner. PROPOSAL The mast requires relocation due to the expiration of the current lease. Approval is sought for:

− the development of a 82m high guyed mast (the overall height is 87m); − 3 equipment shelters and 2 outdoor cabinets; − A headframe, dishes and antennas; and − 2.4m high chain-link security fence around the licenced area of the mast.

The mast is proposed in the south-east corner of the site and setback 24m from the southern boundary and 48m from the eastern boundary. The area of the proposed location is largely cleared of any vegetation and a limited number of trees will be removed or require some pruning to secure unobstructed access to the development area. Figure 3 below shows the area of the site on which the tower is proposed. The proposed facility is to continue to be part of the telecommunications infrastructure network owned by Crown Castle Australia (CCA). The mast has been identified as suitable for colocation for the NBN rollout programme. Noise and vibration emissions associated with the proposed facility will be limited to the construction phase. Noise generated during the construction will be of short duration and will be in accordance with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997. Construction is to occur between the hours of 7am and 7pm. The total construction period will be approximately 10 weeks. Once operational, the facility will function on a continuously unstaffed basis and will typically only require maintenance works once a year, for approximately one day per year. Plans and elevations of the proposed development are provided as Attachment 1.

Existing Location Proposed Tower Location

30


Figure 3 – Development area CONSULTATION AND ADVICE External Consultation The application was advertised by way of a notice in the local newspaper and written referral to surrounding land owners (within a 1km radius). At the close of advertising the Shire had received 7 submissions objecting to the proposed development. A detailed description of the submissions, and related officer comments and recommendations, is attached to this report as Attachment 2. The main issues of concern raised by the objectors comprise: Potential impacts on human health Crown Castle Australia’s (CCA’s) infrastructure is for operators who co-locate on their structure. These operators must comply with Australian Safety Standards. To illustrate this Daly International has submitted a compliance report for the proposed facility demonstrating its maximum possible signal strength. The predicted maximum EME level from the proposed facility (0m – 500m) is 0.11% of allowable levels deemed as safe by the Australian Government. There are no established health effects from these very low levels of RF EMR from living or working near telecommunications towers. Visual impact concerns and alternative location The applicant has provided photomontages (Figure 4a and 4b below) to demonstrate that at a distance the mast will not be dominant in the landscape, especially when viewed form identified travel route corridors. The impact will not be greater compared to the existing facility at a locality level. The main issue being potential impacts on future residential development.

31


Figure 4a - Visual impact from Redgate Road of existing mast

Figure 4b - Visual impact from Redgate Road of proposed mast It is noted that a similar structure already exists approximately 700m east of the proposed site and that the proposal is for the relocation of the existing tower rather than installation of an entirely new facility. The existing tower received approval from Council in March 2000. The applicant responded as follows to the Shire’s request to reconsider a number of alternative locations as identified in the application: Relocating the facility even further from the town would mean a reduction in services for the town of Witchcliffe and surrounding area. Further, given there are not any feasible alternative sites, we are concerned about impacts to the Witchcliffe community in the event this proposal was to be refused. This facility is for use by multiple carriers, including Telstra, Optus, Vodafone and NBN Co – as there are no alternative locations available in the area, losing the site would mean the loss of not just one carrier or service but all of them, with significant amenity impacts for the Witchcliffe community. Losing the site would result in loss of mobile telecommunications coverage and wireless broadband, impacting on community amenity, local business and public safety.

32

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 The current tower supports 4G antennas belonging to several mobile carriers. The original scoping for this project occurred in 2008 when technological requirements were very different – 4G technology requires much smaller distances between both users and other facilities in the network than older 3G technology. A representative from Crown Castle has confirmed that when scoping for new sites, its facilities generally need to be within 500m of the intended coverage area, and no further than 1km in the worst case. The existing tower sits approximately 600m from the Bussell Highway and covers both the highway and Witchcliffe. The new site’s setback from the highway is 1.4km, not an ideal outcome from a service perspective. Increasing the setback even further would be likely to result in significant black spots along the highway and potentially in the town itself – the radiofrequency engineer has reviewed the site, and found a further shift would negatively impact all carriers using the site. The applicant has indicated that the location of the tower in the southwest corner of the site is not supported by the owner of Lot 1033. According to the proponent a landowner’s preference is not the only, but an important consideration in the planning and design of the facility. Property values The potential impacts on land values cannot be determined nor is a relevant planning issue in determining the application. The relevant consideration is whether there is an unreasonable impact on the amenity and the purpose of the surrounding zones. The amenity impacts are comprised of impacts on character, such as visual impact and vegetation removal. In this case no vegetation will be removed and a similar tower has been a long standing feature of the local amenity. STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Shire of Augusta Margaret River Local Planning Scheme No. 1 (LPS1) Clause 5.13.1 and 5.13.2 of Local Planning Scheme No.1 (LPS1) specifies the height standards for buildings and structures in the Scheme Area. Clause 5.13.4 specifies, for the purposes of clause 5.13.1, that a building and structure does not include a mast or signal receiving or transmitting tower provided “….the structure or facility is designed, sited and/or treated so as not to detract from the visual amenity of the locality.” The proposed tower would therefore not be subject to the height standards specified in the Scheme. It is concluded under the policy section of this report that that the proposed development will not have a detrimental visual impact. Clause 5.17 deals with telecommunication infrastructure and confirms that planning approval is required except for those type of developments listed in the Telecommunications Low Impact Facilities Determination 1997. This site is not considered to be a low impact facility. Telecommunications Act 1997 The Telecommunications Act 1997 (the Act) was enacted to provide a regulatory framework for telecommunications infrastructure. Licensing under the Act is required for all providers and their facilities and the principal regulation body is the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA). ACMA regulates compliance with legislation, broadcast licence conditions, reports of communications industry matters including its performance, and issues telecommunications licences and allocates and licences the radiofrequency spectrum. The industry has also developed Codes of Practice via the Communications Alliance industry group. ACMA registers such Codes and is empowered to respond to braches of these Codes and drive more formal regulation. The structural integrity of the facility is covered by the Building Code of Australia and the requirement for a certified building permit. STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS State Planning Policy 6.1 - Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge (LNRSPP) The site is within the “General Character” landscape class as shown on figure 3 of the LNRSPP. Under the policies for this landscape class it is stated that “…development or change in use should protect the rural character and conform with policies and guidelines for Travel Route Corridors.”

33

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 The subject site is identified to fall within the “principle agriculture (viticulture and grazing)” area in the LNRSPP. In this area agriculture is to remain the predominant economic land use within the constraints to protect remnant vegetation and landscape values. State Planning Policy 5.2 – Telecommunications Infrastructure (SPP 5.2) The matters to be considered under SPP 5.2 when determining planning applications comprise: • The extent to which the proposal contributes to the social and economic benefits of affordable and

convenient access to modern telecommunications services for people and businesses throughout the State.

• The need to ensure continuity of supply of telecommunications services to people and businesses in the local area or region.

• The extent to which the proposal enhances or maintains visual amenity including streetscape and minimises adverse visual impacts.

• The degree to which the proposal is co-ordinated with other services. • The extent to which the proposal adheres to the Guiding Principles for the Location, Siting and

Design of Telecommunications Infrastructure set out in Section 5.1 of the Policy. With regard to siting and design section 5.1 states that facilities need to meet the communication needs of the community; visual impacts should be minimised; co-location of facilities should be sought as well as integration with other services where possible; and measures such as colour co-ordination and landscaping to screen at least the base of towers and ancillary structures should be used, where appropriate, to minimise the visual impact of telecommunications facilities. Planning Bulletin 46 – applications for Telecommunications Infrastructure (PB 46) Planning bulletins canvass proposed policy changes or highlight information about Western Australian Planning Commission and Department of Planning practices on a variety of planning matters. PB 46 states that “the overall aim should be to find the appropriate balance between sometimes conflicting objectives by the application of sound planning principles. Applications for telecommunication facilities should be determined taking account of the considerations. In respect of public safety concerns reference should be made to credible scientific evidence. It should be noted that the Health Department of Western Australia considers there is currently no health basis for restricting either the siting of mobile telephone towers or ground level access to them.” Local Planning Strategy (LPS) The site is identified to fall within the Priority Agriculture land use classification under the LPS. Intensive agriculture is to remain the predominant economic land use. PLANNING ASSESSMENT The planning framework requires a weighing up between the need for a facility against potential landscape and other impacts. The key question in this instance is does the visual impact of the mast outweigh the community benefit? The applicant has provided photomontages to demonstrate that at a distance the mast will not be dominant in the landscape, especially when viewed from identified travel route corridors. The proposed facility will have a similar impact as the existing facility. The Visual Landscape Planning Manual (WA) states in part 3 ‘regardless of the prominence of utility towers, the community’s perception of the importance of their function may impact on their perceived visual impact and therefore the extent of visibility that is acceptable’. The visual impact is considered limited in relation to the benefits NBN will bring. In assessing the relevant matters mentioned it is concluded that the proposed facility will provide an essential, contemporary and affordable service to benefit the wider community. The relocation will also ensure the continuity of supply of telecommunication services. Visual impacts will occur due to the nature of the development. The mast already exists in the location and the impact due to the relocation will not be greater from a locality point of view. The following is relevant in this regard:

34

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 • Redgate Road and Bussell Highway are identified as travel route corridors in the LNRSPP. The

site is approximately 800m (0.8km) from Redgate Road and 1400m (1.4km) from Bussell Highway. The site is also approximately 1.1km from the Rails to Trails tract. At this distance any visual impacts from the travel route corridors is minimal as demonstrated in figures 4a and 4b above. The new location of the mast will not cause any additional amenity impacts on the landscape;

• The proposed development will not impact on existing remnant vegetation and would not render the site incapable of agricultural uses;

• This is an identified co-location opportunity for the NBN fixed wireless rollout programme; • The proposed siting of the telecommunications facility is required to be proximate to the existing

tower in order to maintain current levels of service; • It is the Federal Government’s aim to provide affordable and fast internet access to every person

in Australia, which is a relevant matter to be considered under SPP 5.2; • The nearest facility is 7.8km to the north, 9.9km to the north-west and 14.4 km to the south. If this

facility is not relocated, the mobile network performance in the area will suffer significant losses. This facility provides the infrastructure for three telecommunications carriers and NBN. If it is decommissioned and not replaced as near as possible to its current location, coverage to the area will likely be severely affected. This has further implications beyond household customers as emergency service operators such as ambulance, police and the fire service utilise commercial telecommunications networks in providing emergency services to the public.

The existing facility is required to be relocated, under the provisions of the approved Structure Plan, due to its proximate location to future residential development. If the existing facility is to remain it will result in residential development that is situated virtually under the tower. The proposed new location is separated from future residential development by approximately 170m. This is a much improved outcome and the base of the facility can be screened with appropriately located landscaping. Australia has adopted the safety regulations recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO). The applicant has provided supporting information to demonstrate that the communications facilities operate at radio signal strengths that are thousands of times below the safety limit set by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA). The mast in this general location is important to maintain the current level of service and to be suitable as a colocation site for the NBN rollout programme. The information provided by the applicant is considered sufficient to conclude that the refusal of the application or an alternative location will have a significant impact on the level of service and the continuity of supply of telecommunication services. These are relevant considerations under the relevant state planning policy and PB. The application is supported as the tower will not cause any increased visual impacts for this locality. SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental Impact on the landscape values of the locations has been assessed in the body of the report and ‘on balance’ the potential impact is considered acceptable. Social The proposed tower will ensure the continuance and enhancement of communication services for the community. Economic Improved and reliable internet access will benefit the local economy including the tourist industry and local businesses.

35

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 RECOMMENDATION That Council approves the application for Telecommunications Infrastructure (mobile phone tower) at 173 / 175 (Lot 1033) Redgate Road, Witchcliffe subject to the following conditions: 1. The development is to be carried out in compliance with the plans and documentation listed

below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent.

Plans and Specifications

Plans entitled P1 – P4 received at the Shire on 17 September 2014

2. If the development, the subject of this approval, is not substantially commenced within two (2)

years from the date of this letter, the approval shall lapse and be of no further effect. Where an approval has lapsed, development is prohibited without further approval being obtained. (P)

3. Additional landscaping shall be planted on the site, in accordance with an approved Landscape Plan, to screen the compound and base of the tower from future residential development on adjoining Lot 9000.

4. A Landscape Plan shall be prepared by a suitably qualified and or experienced landscape

consultant and submitted to the Shire for approval and thereafter implemented to the satisfaction of the Shire.

ADVICE NOTES a) This is not a Building Permit. A Certified Building Permit application to commence work must be

lodged to the Permit Authority in accordance with the Building Act 2011. ATTACHMENTS 1. Proposed Development Plans 2. Schedule of submissions 3. Proponent’s additional written justification RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION CR EARL, CR KENNAUGH OM2015/79 1. That Council approves the application for Telecommunications Infrastructure (mobile phone tower) at 173 / 175 (Lot 1033) Redgate Road, Witchcliffe subject to the following conditions: 2. The development is to be carried out in compliance with the plans and documentation listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent.

Plans and Specifications

Plans entitled P1 – P4 received at the Shire on 17 September 2014

3. If the development, the subject of this approval, is not substantially commenced within two (2) years from the date of this letter, the approval shall lapse and be of no further effect. Where an approval has lapsed, development is prohibited without further approval being obtained. (P) 4. Additional landscaping shall be planted on the site, in accordance with an approved Landscape Plan, to screen the compound and base of the tower from future residential development on adjoining Lot 9000. 5. A Landscape Plan shall be prepared by a suitably qualified and or experienced landscape consultant and submitted to the Shire for approval and thereafter implemented to the satisfaction of the Shire.

CARRIED 4 /2 CRS SERVENTY AND VEITCH VOTED AGAINST THE MOTION

36


37

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 11.2.3 TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE (NBN FIXED WIRELESS TOWER) - 72 (LOT 2) EXMOOR DRIVE, MARGARET RIVER LOCATION/ADDRESS Lot 2 Exmoor Drive, Margaret River APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Daly International Pty Ltd/Joan Monkhouse FILE REFERENCE PTY/1645/P214531 REPORT AUTHOR Johan Pienaar, Statutory Planning Coordinator AUTHORISING OFFICER Iliya Hastings, Director Sustainable Development IN BRIEF • The Shire is in receipt of an application for the development of telecommunications infrastructure

(45m high NBN fixed wireless tower) at Lot 2 Exmoor Drive, Margaret River. • The application was advertised and 8 submissions were received (3 in support and 5 in

objection). • The application has been assessed against the requirements of relevant state and local planning

policies and the provisions of Local Planning Scheme No. 1. • Council resolved to defer a decision to enable further negotiations achieve a greater separation

distance from adjoining residential development. The proponent argues that a greater separation distance will impact on the viability of the facility and has provided additional justification in support of the development as proposed.

RECOMMENDATION That Council approves the application for Telecommunications Infrastructure (NBN Fixed Wireless Tower) at Lot 2 Exmoor Drive, Margaret River subject to conditions. TABLED ITEMS 2. Application Report BACKGROUND Council resolved, at its ordinary meeting of 8 April 2015, to defer a decision “…to enable further negotiation between the Shire and the proponent with a view to achieving greater separation from existing and future dwellings and to ascertain overall plans for the Shire”. The Shire met with the proponent, whom indicated that an alternative location will impact on the viability of the facility and that the proposed locations meet planning and other objectives. The proponent provided additional written justification in support of the proposed development. The additional written justification is appended as Attachment 3. Background information provided by the applicant in relation to NBN broadband facilities comprise: The NBN is a high-speed broadband network that is intended to utilise a combination of optical fibre, fixed wireless and satellite technology to offer advanced broadband services to premises across Australia. NBN Co is proposing to build a national wireless broadband network to service those areas that are not proposed to be serviced by the fibre optic network. 93% of homes, schools and workplaces will be serviced by optical fibre (fibre to the premises or “FTTP"), providing superfast broadband services to Australians in both urban and regional towns. For the remaining 7%, NBN Co will utilise a combination of next generation fixed wireless and satellite technologies. The network will comprise a series of fixed radio sites that will be connected to the fibre optic network via a series of radio transmission dishes terminating at radio hub sites. Fixed wireless is like a fixed broadband service but delivered over the air instead of through a fibre optic cable. It provides broadband services over the air from a radio

38

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 network base station to an antenna and network equipment installed at the end user premises. Premises outside the fixed line and fixed wireless footprints will be serviced by satellite. In response to the fixed wireless component of this network, NBN Co requires a fixed wireless transmission site to provide high-speed wireless broadband coverage to Molloy Island, Augusta and Margaret River. The greater South-West area is among the first release areas nationally. Fixed wireless networks are engineered to meet the speed and service requirements for a known number of users in the coverage area, which means that the bandwidth per end-user has the potential to be more consistent and stable than mobile wireless, even in peak times of use. This is unlike a mobile wireless service where speeds can be affected by the number of people moving into and out of the service area. This proposed development is the fourth of a number of facilities planned for the NBN roll out in the Shire. Council has already approved 3 NBN fixed wireless towers at its Ordinary Meeting of 26 March 2014. The approved towers will be located on Molloy Island, Allnut Terrace in Augusta and next to the speedway in Margaret River. Representatives of NBN Co have confirmed that at this point in time a total of 6-7 towers are planned for the Shire. Site Parameters NBN Co identifies an area where the requirement for a fixed wireless broadband facility would be highest (a ‘search area’) and undertakes a preliminary investigation in conjunction with its planning and property consultants, radiofrequency engineers and designers in order to identify possible locations and options to locate a facility. Generally speaking, new sites must be located within, or immediately adjacent to the identified search area in order to be feasible. However, while the operational and geographical aspects of deploying new facilities are primary factors, there are also many other critical issues that influence network design, and these have to be resolved in parallel. Some of the issues which need to be considered are visual amenity, potential co-location opportunities, the availability and suitability of land and a willing site provider, occupational health and safety, construction issues (including structural and loading feasibility and access for maintenance purposes), topographical constraints, legislative policy constraints, environmental impacts and cost implications. The number, type and height of facilities required to complete the fixed wireless network are largely determined by the operational, geographical and other factors mentioned above. The applicant has advised that as a first option it endeavours to co-locate with existing telecommunications facilities, if it is feasible to do so. Co-location in this instance could not be achieved, as there were no suitable options available. Numerous sites (“candidate sites”) have been investigated for each location. Figure 1a is an extract from the proponent’s reports showing the number of candidate sites that were examined for the proposed tower. The yellow star on the figure shows the location of the “prime candidate” site, which is the subject of this application. Reasons why the other candidate sites were not considered suitable include insufficient coverage, planning issues, unwilling land owners and proximity to identified travel route corridor (Caves Road). A summary of the assessment of each candidate site is available in the application report submitted as Tabled Item 1 to this report. LOCATION The site is 37ha in size and is located approximately 2.5km south-east of the Wallcliffe Road intersection with Caves Road. The site is at its closest, approximately 1.2km from Boodjidup Road to the east and 950m from Caves Road to the west. The site is accessed from Exmoor Drive and is developed with two dwellings and ancillary outbuildings. The site adjoins rural residential lots to the south, west and north-west and priority agriculture zoned land to the north, east and south-east. The location of the site in the context of surrounding areas is evident in Figure 1 below, which is an extract from the applicants report.

39


Figure 1a – Location Plan and candidate sites

Figure 1b – Zoomed in Location Plan Tenure The site is privately owned and NBN Co has entered into a lease with the owner. PROPOSAL The proposed Telecommunications Infrastructure (fixed wireless broadband tower) will be enclosed within a secure compound, which measures approximately 96m² in area. This is a smaller compound

Proposed Tower Location

Proposed location of tower

40

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 to what is normally used in order to minimise the impacts. The proposed development for the site comprises: • 45m high monopole; • One parabolic dish antenna, • Three panel antennas on a circular headframe; • Two outdoor units at ground level; • Compound area of 96m²; and • Ancillary equipment associated with the operation of the facility. The proposed development is setback 118m from the western boundary and 35m from the northern boundary of the site. Plans and elevations of the proposed development are provided as Attachment 1. Figure 2 below show the area of the site on which the tower is proposed. It is evident that no vegetation will be affected.

Figure 2 – Development area A total construction period of approximately ten weeks (including civil works and network integration and equipment commissioning) is anticipated. Construction activities will involve four basic stages: • Stage 1 (week 1) - Site preparation works, including field testing, excavation and construction of

foundations. • Stage 2 (weeks 2, 3 and 4) - Construction of the mast. • Stage 3 (weeks 5 and 6) - Construction of the equipment shelter and fences. • Stage 4 (weeks 7 - 10) - Installation of antennas and radio equipment, as well as equipment

testing. Once operational, the facility will function on a continuously unstaffed basis and will typically only require maintenance works once a year, for approximately one day per year.

41

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 The site will be connected to existing Western Power electricity supply via underground power cables. CONSULTATION AND ADVICE External Consultation The application was advertised by way of a notice in the local newspaper, a sign installed on the site and written referral to surrounding land owners (within a 1km radius). At the close of advertising the Shire had received 8 submissions of which 3 supports the proposal and 5 are objecting. A detailed description of the submissions, and related officer comments and recommendations is included in the Schedule of Submissions attached to this report as Attachment 2. The main issues of concern raised by the objectors comprise: Potential impacts on human health In relation to health concerns the following information was provided by NBN Co: “The Fixed Wireless Network is a licensed radio network subject to national safety standards for the transmission of radiofrequency signals. The standards relating to electromagnetic energy (EME) exposure levels are set by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) and administered by the government agency Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) and are based on the standards sanctioned by the World Health Organisation. A compliance report was submitted with the application to illustrate compliance with Australian Safety Standards. The predicted maximum EME level from the proposed fixed wireless facility (0m – 500m) is 0.016% (much less than 1%) of allowable levels, which is more than 6,000 times below the standard level deemed as safe by the Australian Government. This level (0.016%) would only be reached when the facility is running at full capacity. There are no established health effects from these very low levels of RF EMR from living or working near Fixed Wireless base stations.” Visual impact concerns and alternative location The applicant has provided a photomontage (Figure 3 below) to demonstrate that at a distance the mast will not be dominant in the landscape, especially when viewed form identified travel route corridors.

Figure 3 – Expected view from Caves Road post development Line of sight to the desired coverage area is required, which can be achieved by sufficient elevation and clearance of antennas above physical obstruction, such as built form, topographical features and

Proposed tower

42

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 vegetation. For the fixed wireless network to be effective the facility is required to be as near to the target area as practical (facilities are located either in the centre or in close proximity to the target coverage area). The characteristics of the local area also need to be considered. The main consideration is visual impacts on adjoining Lot 44. To explore the possibility of achieving a greater separation distance between the proposed tower and the dwelling on adjoining Lot 44, officers requested the applicant to investigate what impact a location further east of the proposed site will have on coverage. The applicant undertook analysis on moving the site at various intervals from the proposed location from 50m to 300m. The applicant was reluctant to provide exact numbers, but indicated that in all cases varying loss of coverage will be experienced. As NBN Co is not comfortable accepting any loss of coverage (particularly given the constraints on satellite in this area) the Shire was requested to proceed with the assessment of the application as it stands. The applicant has also indicated that from the land owner’s point of view the current location is the preference. The proponent has provided the following information in response to the visual impact concerns that were raised and suggestions that the facility should be located further away from the adjoining rural residential development:

− To move to the north-east corner of the site is not feasible from a technical and planning perspective. A move to the north-east corner will result in significant loss in radio coverage and will compromise the ability to meet performance objectives. There is even less vegetation in the north-east corner which will make the facility even more visible.

− The height of the proposed facility has been kept to a minimum. A 45m high facility will enable it to be constructed as a monopole, which is the least visually obstructive tower type.

− The facility needs to be proximate to the residents it wil serve. − Although the facility will be visible by virtue of size it is noted that existing vegetation will

provide an effective backdrop and screen the lower mid portion of the tower. − NBN will consider colour matching if required, to further minimise the site’s visibility. − The proposed facility has been sited to comply with the LNRSPP and the guiding principles

of State Planning Policy 5.2 – Telecommunications Infrastructure. The applicant is also not in favour of a suggestion by staff for more vegetation screening (close to the western boundary) between the buildings on Lot 44 and the tower. Landscaping in the immediate periphery of the compound, as suggested by the proponent will not achieve any substantial mitigation as there is already sufficient vegetation close to the tower to screen the compound and the lower portion of the tower. The introduction of vegetation with a mature height of no less than 12m within 60m of the adjoining dwelling will largely screen the facility and will reduce the visual impact of the tower when viewed from the dwelling on adjoining Lot 44. A condition is therefore recommended to require additional vegetation screening to be planted no further than 60m from the dwelling on adjoining Lot 44 in appropriate locations to address the visual impact concerns raised by this specific neighbour. This condition is recommended despite NBN Co not agreeing to it. Property values The potential impacts on land values cannot be determined nor is a relevant planning issue in determining the application. The relevant consideration is whether there is an unreasonable impact on the amenity and the purpose of the surrounding zones. The amenity impacts are comprised of impacts on character, such as visual impact and vegetation removal. In this case no vegetation will be removed and additional vegetation screening is proposed to address visual impacts on adjoining Lot 44. STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Shire of Augusta Margaret River Local Planning Scheme No. 1 (LPS1) Clause 5.13.1 and 5.13.2 of Local Planning Scheme No.1 (LPS1) specifies the height standards for buildings and structures in the Scheme Area. Clause 5.13.4 specifies, for the purposes of clause 5.13.1, that a building and structure does not include a mast or signal receiving or transmitting tower provided “….the structure or facility is designed, sited and/or treated so as not to detract from the visual amenity of the locality.” The proposed tower would therefore not be subject to the height standards specified in the Scheme. It has already been concluded under the policy section of this report that that the proposed development will not have a detrimental visual impact.

43

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 Clause 5.17 deals with telecommunication infrastructure and confirms that planning approval is required except for those type of developments listed in the Telecommunications Low Impact Facilities Determination 1997. This site is not considered to be a low impact facility. Telecommunications Act 1997 The Telecommunications Act 1997 (the Act) was enacted to provide a regulatory framework for telecommunications infrastructure. Licensing under the Act is required for all providers and their facilities and the principal regulation body is the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA). ACMA regulates compliance with legislation, broadcast licence conditions, reports of communications industry matters including its performance, and issues telecommunications licences and allocates and licences the radiofrequency spectrum. The industry has also developed Codes of Practice via the Communications Alliance industry group. ACMA registers such Codes and is empowered to respond to braches of these Codes and drive more formal regulation. The structural integrity of the facility is covered by the Building Code of Australia and the requirement for a certified building permit. STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS State Planning Policy 6.1 - Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge (LNRSPP) The site is within the “General Character” landscape class (figure 3 of the LNRSPP). Under the policies for this landscape class it is stated that “…development or change in use should protect the rural character and conform with policies and guidelines for Travel Route Corridors.” The purpose of Travel Route Corridors is described in the LNRSPP as to “…allow people opportunities to access and experience adjoining areas and consist of a 600 metre wide corridor (300m on either side) along the Primary Transport Network. The subject site is not situated within the identified travel rout corridors as identified in the LNRSPP. The subject site is identified to fall within the “principle agriculture (viticulture and grazing)” area on the land use strategy plan of the LNRSPP (figure 5). In this area agriculture is to remain the predominant economic land use within the constraints to protect remnant vegetation and landscape values. State Planning Policy 5.2 – Telecommunications Infrastructure (SPP 5.2) SPP 5.2 provides a range of matters to be considered when determining planning applications for telecommunications infrastructure such as: • The extent to which the proposal contributes to the social and economic benefits of affordable and

convenient access to modern telecommunications services for people and businesses throughout the State.

• The need to ensure continuity of supply of telecommunications services to people and businesses in the local area or region.

• The extent to which the proposal enhances or maintains visual amenity including streetscape and minimises adverse visual impacts.

• The degree to which the proposal is co-ordinated with other services. • The extent to which the proposal adheres to the Guiding Principles for the Location, Siting and

Design of Telecommunications Infrastructure set out in Section 5.1 of the Policy. With regard to siting and design section 5.1 states that facilities need to meet the communication needs of the community; visual impacts should be minimised; co-location of facilities should be sought as well as integration with other services where possible; and measures such as colour co-ordination and landscaping to screen at least the base of towers and ancillary structures should be used, where appropriate, to minimise the visual impact of telecommunications facilities. Planning Bulletin 46 – applications for Telecommunications Infrastructure (PB 46) Planning bulletins canvass proposed policy changes or highlight information about Western Australian Planning Commission and Department of Planning practices on a variety of planning matters.

44

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 PB 46 states that “the overall aim should be to find the appropriate balance between sometimes conflicting objectives by the application of sound planning principles. Applications for telecommunication facilities should be determined taking account of the considerations listed in the PB. In respect of public safety concerns reference should be made to credible scientific evidence. It should be noted that the Health Department of Western Australia considers there is currently no health basis for restricting either the siting of mobile telephone towers or ground level access to them. Local Planning Strategy (LPS) The site is identified to fall within the Priority Agriculture land use classification under the LPS. Intensive agriculture is to remain the predominant economic land use. PLANNING ASSESSMENT The planning framework requires a weighing up between the need for a facility against potential landscape and other impacts. The key question in this instance is whether the visual impact of the tower outweighs the community benefit? The applicant has provided photomontages to demonstrate that at a distance the mast will not be dominant in the landscape, especially when viewed from identified travel route corridors. The proposed mast and compound will be screened by existing vegetation on the site, though will protrude above the trees and have some visual impact to dwellings in close proximity to the Site. This is however considered to be minimal and can be mitigated in time through the establishment of appropriately located vegetation screening as discussed. The proponent has confirmed that satellite connection is not an option in-lieu of a fixed wireless facility. The aim and benefit of the NBN programme is to provide to every household, school, business, hospital etc. in Australia the opportunity to connect to an affordable and reliable high-speed broadband network. The Visual Landscape Planning Manual (WA) states in part 3 ‘regardless of the prominence of utility towers, the community’s perception of the importance of their function may impact on their perceived visual impact and therefore the extent of visibility that is acceptable’. The visual impact in relation to the proposed tower is considered limited in relation to the benefits NBN will bring. In assessing the application against the relevant matters mentioned in the applicable policies and LPS1 it is concluded that the proposed facility will provide an essential, contemporary and affordable service to benefit the wider community. Due to the nature of the development some visual impacts will occur. The visual impacts are considered manageable and not excessive in the context of the character of the area. The visual impact is considered to be low and will not be detrimental to the rural amenity of the location or the wider rural landscape amenity. The following is relevant in this regard:

− The site is almost halfway between Caves Road and Boodjidup Road. Both these roads are identified as travel route corridors in the LNRSPP. The site is approximately 950m from Caves Road and 1.2km from Boodjidup Road. At this distance any visual impacts from the travel route corridors is minimal as demonstrated in Figure 3 of this report. The tower will not adversely compromise the landscape values of the Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge as it will not be dominant in the landscape when viewed from travel route corridors;

− There are no co-location opportunities in this location; − This tower may offer future co-location opportunities for other service providers; − According to the proponent the current site is about as far east as possible whilst still

providing a feasible level of coverage; − The tower is sited to use existing vegetation to screen the base of the tower from nearby

properties; − Potential visual impacts on nearby rural residential development are mitigated through

existing vegetation on and off the site and can be further reduced through the planting of additional vegetation screening, specifically in relation to adjoining Lot 44 to the west;

− The proposed development will not impact on existing remnant vegetation and would not render the site incapable of agricultural uses;

− It is the Federal Government’s aim to provide affordable and fast internet access to every person in Australia, which is a relevant matter to be considered under SPP 5.2;

45


− Local rate payers and business owners have expressed a general need for access to reliable internet access;

− The proposed tower is an integral part of the NBN rollout network/program for the Shire. This site will work in tandem with the golf course site – the golf course site is providing coverage north and west while the subject site is intended to provide coverage to residences south of the golf course, on both sides of Caves Road.

Australia has adopted the safety regulations recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO). The applicant has provided supporting information to demonstrate that the NBN fixed wireless communications facilities operate at radio signal strengths that are thousands of times below the safety limit set by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA). SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental Impact on the landscape values of the locations has been assessed in the body of the report and on balance the potential impact is considered acceptable. Social The proposed tower will provide a service that enhances communication for the community. Economic Improved and reliable internet access will benefit the local economy including the tourist industry and local businesses. VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council approves the application for Telecommunications Infrastructure (NBN Fixed Wireless Tower) at Lot 2 Exmoor Drive, Margaret River subject to the following conditions:

1. The development is to be carried out in compliance with the plans and documentation listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent.

Plans and Specifications Plans entitled P1 – P4 received at the Shire on 9 October 2014 2. If the development, the subject of this approval, is not substantially commenced within two

(2) years from the date of this letter, the approval shall lapse and be of no further effect. Where an approval has lapsed, development is prohibited without further approval being obtained. (P)

3. The approved telecommunications tower is permitted at a maximum height of 45m measured from ground level. (P)

4. Additional vegetation screening shall be planted between the proposed tower and the dwelling on adjoining Lot 44 in accordance with an approved Landscape Plan. The Approved Landscaping Plan shall be implemented at the commencement of works and shall be maintained at all times to the satisfaction of the Shire.

5. A Landscape Plan shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Shire by a suitably qualified and/or experienced landscape consultant and be submitted to the Shire for approval prior to the commencement of works. The Landscape Plan shall be drawn to scale and show the location, name and mature heights of existing and proposed trees. The mature height of proposed trees shall be no less than 12m and shall be planted no further than 60m from the eastern elevation of the dwelling on adjoining Lot 44.

6. The existing trees on the lot and adjoining properties shall not be impacted by the excavation or construction phases of the development.

ADVICE NOTES

a) This is not a Building Permit. A Certified Building Permit application to commence work must be lodged to the Permit Authority in accordance with the Building Act 2011.

46

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 ATTACHMENTS 1. Proposed Development Plans 2. Schedule of Submissions 3. Proponent’s additional written justification RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION CR, CR OM2015/ That Council approves the application for Telecommunications Infrastructure (NBN Fixed Wireless Tower) at Lot 2 Exmoor Drive, Margaret River subject to the following conditions:


Plans and Specifications Plans entitled P1 – P4 received at the Shire on 9 October 2014

2. If the development, the subject of this approval, is not substantially commenced within two (2) years from the date of this letter, the approval shall lapse and be of no further effect. Where an approval has lapsed, development is prohibited without further approval being obtained. (P)





As there was no mover for the officer’s recommendation at this time, Cr Earl moved an alternative motion and Council voted on the alternative motion in light of additional information provided by the NBNCO in the afternoon briefing and in the deputation to Council. ALTERNATVE RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION CR EARL, CR KENNAUGH OM2015/80 That Council approves the application for Telecommunications Infrastructure (NBN Fixed Wireless Tower) at Lot 2 Exmoor Drive, Margaret River subject to the following conditions:


Plans and Specifications Plans entitled P1 – P4 received at the Shire on 9 October 2014

2. If the development, the subject of this approval, is not substantially commenced within two (2) years from the date of this letter, the approval shall lapse and be of no further effect. Where an approval has lapsed, development is prohibited without further approval being obtained. (P)



47




7. The proposed tower being located between 120m and 150m further to the east of the currently proposed location on Lot 2 and shall avoid loss of vegetation. Revised plans showing the new location shall be submitted for approval.

CARRIED 5 / 1

CR HASTIE VOTED AGAINST THE MOTION

Cr Hastie wished it to be noted that he agreed with the amended motion but voted against only because of the inclusion of the condition at point 7.

48

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 11.2.4 DRAFT MASTER PLAN - TALLINUP AUGUSTA AIRPORT LOCATION/ADDRESS Lots 315 & 380 (Reserve 29668) Hillview Road, Augusta APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Shire of Augusta Margaret River FILE REFERENCE TPT/12 RES/29668 REPORT AUTHOR Angela Satre, Senior Planning Officer AUTHORISING OFFICER Iliya Hastings, Director Sustainable Development IN BRIEF • At the Ordinary Meeting of Council (OMC) on 26 February 2014 the Interim Development Plan

(IDP) for the Tallinup Augusta Airport (TAA) was adopted. The IDP was prepared by an aviation consultant as a short to medium term guide for development at the TAA and to provide a framework to determine two development applications for private aircraft hangars.

• Following the adoption of the IDP the two development applications were determined and site preparation works for the hangars have commenced.

• At the 26 February 2014 OMC a Leasing Plan for the TAA, which indicated potential lease areas, was also adopted. Negotiations toward finalising lease arrangements in accordance with the Leasing Plan are progressing.

• As an outcome of the IDP and Leasing Plan, the need for a long term master plan for the TAA was identified.

• In October 2014, based on a successful funding application, the Shire entered into a agreement for shared funding with the Department of Transport, as part of its Regional Airports Development Scheme (RADS). The funding agreement is based on preparation of a master plan for the TAA within the 2014/15 financial year.

• Aviation Projects was appointed to undertake preparation of the Draft Master Plan which commenced in April 2015.

• Preparation of the Draft Master Plan has involved an inspection of the TAA and meetings with stakeholders including State Government agencies, lessees and interested members of the public.

• A Draft Master Plan has now been prepared and is presented to Council with a recommendation for adoption for the purposes of advertising.

RECOMMENDATION That Council adopts the Draft Master Plan, shown as Attachments 1 and 2, for the Tallinup Augusta Airport at Lot 315 and Lot 380 Reserve 39668 Hillview Road, Augusta for the purposes of advertising for public comment for a period of 21 days. TABLED ITEMS Tallinup Augusta Airport Draft Master Plan Executive Summary BACKGROUND In December 2012 an aviation consultancy was commissioned to prepare a plan to guide short term development at the TAA. As an outcome, the Draft IDP was prepared and adopted for the purposes of advertising at the OMC on 24 April 2013 (OM1304/12). Following a process of engagement with stakeholders, the IDP was finally adopted at the OMC on 24 February 2014 (OM2014/31). The IDP was prepared to provide for the development of the TAA for approximately a five year period. The IDP included the development of two ‘Future Hangars’ on the eastern side of the existing sealed aircraft parking area; a number of development requirements for ‘Future Hangars’; and modifications to airport facilities. The IDP also identified the area to the north of existing hangars as potential future hangar sites to be investigated as part of future master planning.

49

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 During preparation of the IDP, the need for a long term master plan for the TAA was identified. Interest in development of private aircraft hangars, beyond the scope of the IDP, has also been expressed. Some additional works to the emergency service facilities has also been identified as an intention of DPaW. The Draft Master Plan has been prepared in response to these factors. Consideration has been given to development of a long term master plan for the Margaret River Airport. Given unresolved issues with the pine plantation over the existing airport reserve and the associated drainage and future access issues, development of a master plan to, in part, provide aircraft hangars is considered premature. Long term master plan preparation for the Margaret River Airport is therefore pending further investigation, including costings, and resolution of these issues which will be critical to its further development. An aviation consultant was appointed in July 2014, as the first stage in the preparation of a Draft Master Plan for the TAA. This first stage required:

a visit to the site and investigation and data gathering for a future master plan; and assessment and report on the suitability or otherwise of the proposed office precinct in the

context of an optimum master plan. A preliminary concept for a future master plan was produced. As a further outcome of the assessment of the proposed office precinct, the application lodged for the redevelopment of the office was granted planning approval. The aviation consultant however was not able to complete the final stage of the master plan process due to other time commitments. In March 2015, Aviation Projects was commissioned to prepare and complete the Draft Master Plan. The Draft Master Plan includes a short term development plan (annexed as Attachment 1) and a long term development plan (annexed as Attachment 2). An executive summary of the complete Draft Master Plan specifications has also been provided (refer to the Tabled Item). The Draft Master Plan is now presented with a recommendation to be adopted for the purposes of advertising.

SITE AND SURROUNDS The TAA or Reserve 29668 is a C class reserve. TAA comprises two lots including Lot 380 to the north east, zoned Parks and Recreation, and Lot 315 to the south west, zoned Public Purpose Aerodrome pursuant to Local Planning Scheme No. 1 (LPS1). Reserve 29668 is approximately 1399ha in size, is predominantly vegetated, is in the ownership of the Department of Regional Development and Lands and is vested in the Shire. The two lots comprising Reserve 29668 are displayed in Figure 1.

50


Figure 1: Reserve Location Plan The TAA is developed with • a 15m wide and 1100m long runway which currently caters for aircraft of Code 1B1 capacity, with

a wing span up to 24m, such as the RFDS patient transfer aircraft; • taxiway and aprons; • runway lighting for night landings by the RFDS; • RFDS patient transfer station; • refuelling and water loading facilities for emergency services; • a freestanding toilet block; • perimeter fence; • aircraft tie down facilities; • privately leased office building; and • three existing private aircraft hangars including one hangar used by the Aero Club. CONSULTATION AND ADVICE External Consultation – Emergency Services The Draft Master Plan preparation has been commissioned with the following objectives: • To ensure the highest standards of public safety. • To ensure primacy for emergency services that utilise the TAA noting that the primary purpose of

the TAA is to provide airport facilities for the Royal Flying Doctor (RFDS) in patient transfers and a base for emergency service operations by the Department for Parks and Wildlife (DPaW) and the Department of Fire and Emergency Services (DFES). Firefighting operations largely include

1 Aircraft ‘Code’ references relate to the size (wingspan and wheel span measurements) of the aircraft. The higher the numerical or alphabetical Code reference the larger the aircraft.

LLLooottt 333888000

LLLooottt 333111555

51


refuelling and water loading for fixed wing aircraft and on occasion rotary wing aircraft (helicopters).

• To avoid potential conflict between emergency services and recreational aircraft facilities particularly with growing demand from recreational users for facilities at the TAA.

The Draft Master Plan has been prepared with regard to the recommendations of emergency service operators. RFDS has indicated their preference, in an optimum master plan design, for registration of the TAA which is a prerequisite for instrument approaches based on GPS technology. Instrument approaches would provide for landings in conditions of reduced visibility and it would increase the potential number of landings and patient transfers from TAA (statistics show that an average of 10 patient transfers per annum were conducted by the RFDS in the four years up to 2013). The standards for a registered aerodrome are reflected in the design assumptions for the Draft Master Plan. DPaW aviation operations have indicated their preference, in an optimum master plan design, for continued separation of facilities between recreational airport users, improved taxiway design, direct vehicle access from the eastern access road, and semitrailer access and manoeuvring area for fuel and water refilling operations. These preferences are included in the design of the Draft Master Plan. The comments of DFES are reflected in DPaW advice for the preparation of the Draft Master Plan. DFES involvement in emergency service operations at the TAA is limited to the rotary wing (helicopter) firefighting response, which is serviced from suitable alternative public open space, and the emergency rescue helicopter service (RAC rescue helicopter) which would have use of the TAA only during extreme weather events. Both services have limited involvement in the TAA therefore the comments of DFES are included by way of DPaW advice in the Draft Master Plan. The recommendations of emergency services are preliminary and the comments of DFES and other relevant emergency service operators will be sought during any formal advertising process. Notwithstanding the Draft Master Plan has been prepared with regard to the recommendations of emergency service operators. External Consultation – Native Title Claimants The reserve on which TAA operates is owned by the State Government and is vested in the Shire for the purposes of an aerodrome. The terms of the vesting order require liaison with any determined native title holder or registered native title party (or their representative). In accordance with the terms of the vesting order, the Draft Master Plan is scheduled to be presented to the South West Boojarah Working Party Group meeting on 29 April 2015. The outcomes of the meeting will be reported to Council. Following any Council resolution to adopt the Draft Master Plan for advertising, the Draft Master Plan will be advertised in accordance with clause 9.4 of LPS1 for 21 days and stakeholders will be directly notified and provided with an opportunity to comment. Comments received will be considered and the outcomes reported back to Council. DRAFT MASTER PLAN Preparation of the Draft Master Plan has been conducted with the following key assumptions: • The Shire does not have a financial plan for major development of the airport. Facilities for private

recreational users therefore must be self-funded. Minor capital works (for example relocation of the windsock) identified in the Draft Master Plan may be funded through the existing Shire works program and budget. Works to emergency service facilities are to be funded by the State Government directly or through funding grants sought by the Shire.

• Specifications for registering the TAA are a key assumption underlying the design and layout for future development as it is depicted on the Draft Master Plan. Whilst the Shire reserves its decision about the need for actually registering the TAA, it is considered that these specifications should be used as a basis for future airport planning and this should be reflected in the Draft Master Plan. Applying specifications for registration:

o Enables instrument procedures, should the Shire choose at a later date, noting this is not a requirement;

o Provides a robust system for operational information to be communicated to pilots (for example, communicating closure of the airport during an emergency); and

52


o Assures an acceptable level of safety when airport operations become more complex.

• Code 2B aircraft design specifications is an assumption for the Draft Master Plan preparation. Some relaxation of these standards is however recommended in the Draft Master Plan for development of apron areas immediately abutting some hangar sites consistent with the aircraft that will predominantly use these areas. For example the apron areas abutting northern hangar sites are designed for Code A aircraft.

These are considered to be valuable assumptions upon which the Draft Master Plan has been prepared for the following reasons: • Applying the standards for a registered aerodrome means that the ability to register the aerodrome

in the future, should the Shire wish, would not be fettered by additional development. In this regard development of any future hangar sites to the north would be subject to design specifications to address any potential non-compliance in the event of registering.

• Reflecting standards for a registered aerodrome and Code 2B aircraft is recommended given the standard of emergency service facilities that currently utilise the TAA ($6 million RFDS aircraft and fixed wing DFES firefighting response aircraft up to 8 tonne capacity).

• The Draft Master Plan would demonstrate a recommended precautionary approach to future development which would be important to the sustainable expansion of the facility.

The Draft Master Plan is presented with regard to two major timeframes or stages: • Stage one (indicative time frame of three to five years) which demonstrates:

o four hangar sites to the north of existing hangars with access designed for the smaller Code A aircraft;

o one additional lease site to the east of the office building;

o straightening and widening of the existing main taxiway from 7.5m to 10.5m for Code B aircraft and increase its bearing strength to accommodate the heavier aircraft now operating at the TAA;

o a new Code B stub taxiway link for emergency services to the south (widened to 10.5m and pavement strengthened);

o aircraft parking areas (shown in yellow) constructed to a stabilised standard;

o emergency services vehicle access from the eastern access road;

o relocation of the wind sock;

o a new helicopter landing site;

o implementation of a building line for the two eastern hangars to enable taxi through to the hardstand area; and

o identifying relocation of the Aero Club hangar at some point in the future.

The stage one design responds to short term demand for private aircraft hangars and to the recommendations of emergency services. The stage one design also demonstrates that the existing aircraft turning area, currently used for a Code 1B (RFDS aircraft) aircraft and the corresponding wing tip clearances do not meet Civil Aviation Safety Authority recommended standards for aircraft of this capacity. As demonstrated by the yellow aircraft turning circle shown over the existing apron, wing tip clearances for the current Code 1B aircraft are encroached by the Aero Club hangar which is an impediment to the current capacity of the apron and any future taxiway link. The preliminary plans also showed that wing tip clearances are slightly encroached by the two hangars granted planning approval in 2014 and the southern lease area identified in 2014. Negotiations are now underway with lessees toward modifying lease areas and building footprints where practical to achieve the standards provided in the Draft Master Plan. Negotiations are also required for ultimate relocation of the Aero Club hangar which houses the emergency generator and landing light controls that are maintained by the Shire.

• Stage two (indicative time frame of five to 20 years) demonstrates potential development in the long term and involves:

o relocating the eastern access road to the north;

53


o relocating the DPaW fuel store and water tank to the east;

o relocating the toilet block;

o an additional two hangars to the north of existing hangars;

o an additional seven hangars to the south; and

o taxiway links developed for Code 2B aircraft.

Stage two of the Draft Master Plan represents a significant change to the existing development layout however it is a long term plan for development that will be realised depending on demand. STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Lot 380 is zoned Parks and Recreation Reserve and Lot 315 is zoned Public Purpose Aerodrome under LPS1. The vesting order for the reserve specifies the designated reserve purpose is “Aerial Landing Ground”. For consistency between the land use zone and the vesting order it is recommended that the land use zone for Lot 380 is changed in LPS1 to more accurately refer to Public Purpose Aerodrome. This change to the land use zone is recommended to be addressed separately after adoption of the Draft Master Plan for advertising. Use or development of a Local Reserve, including hangar development, must first be granted planning approval with due regard to the Matters to be Considered under clause 10.2 of Local Planning Scheme No. 1 and the ultimate purpose intended for the Local Reserve. Upon adoption of the Draft Master Plan and, subject to the granting of planning approval, any developer will be required to enter into a lease agreement with the Shire in accordance with section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995. All costs associated with entering into a lease agreement are to be borne by the developer. STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS The Draft Plan is consistent with the Visual Management Area ‘C’ classification in the Local Planning Strategy. The outcomes presented in the Draft Master Plan are also consistent with the Augusta Town Site Strategy which seeks to encourage the provision of a range of recreation facilities to accommodate structured and unstructured activities in the town. Community Strategic Plan 2033 Preparation of a master plan to guide development of the TAA is consistent with Goal 4 of the Corporate Strategic Plan 2033. Goal 4 is to promote a vibrant and diverse economy and the master plan process responds to the specific strategy to develop major infrastructure to cater for increased residents and visitors. In this case the Draft Master Plan has, in part, been prepared in response to growing demand for recreational aircraft facilities. Preparation of the master plan is also consistent with Goal 3 which is to manage growth sustainably. Strategies for Goal 3 are to develop and implement master plans for Shire facilities and projects so they are well designed and have aesthetic appeal and are accessible by all. The Draft Master Plan has been prepared to ensure sound future design of the TAA, to ensure the continued capability of emergency services, and to provide the opportunity for aircraft hangar sites for interested members of the public. PLANNING FRAMEWORK The Draft Master Plan demonstrates consistency with the Reserve purpose and is acceptable with regard to the matters to be considered under clause 10.2 of LPS1. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The cost of preparing the finally adopted Master Plan has been sourced with shared funding from the Department of Transport’s Regional Airports Development Scheme (RADS) and from the Shire’s 2014/15 budget. In order to qualify for funding from RADS in the 2014/15 financial year budget, the Draft Master Plan is required to be adopted no later than the Ordinary Council Meeting of 10 June 2015. In accordance with this timeframe, the Draft Master Plan is now presented for adoption for the purposes of advertising. 54

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 CONCLUSION The Draft Master Plan has been prepared with regard to the recommendations of key emergency service operators and with regard to the initial comments of airport stakeholders. The Draft Master Plan is recommended to be adopted for the purposes of advertising to provide a further opportunity to comment and consider amendments to the design process. The Draft Master Plan demonstrates current areas of concern about the limited capacity of the existing facility to cater for current emergency service providers. The Draft Master Plan also indicates a number of new points for lease negotiations. Sound justification has however been provided for the assumptions upon which the design is based and toward ensuring that with future development the safety standards for airport users will be improved. For these reasons the Draft Master Plan is recommended to be adopted for the purposes of advertising with the outcomes reported back to Council. SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental The Draft Master Plan provides for development in two stages. Stage one shows development over largely already cleared areas, notwithstanding, some clearing of fringing vegetation adjoining the eastern access road is proposed. Appropriate heritage surveys and relevant approvals would be sought for clearing in this case although it is noted that this area of clearing is minimal and important to ensure stage one area is fully utilised before developing stage two. Stage two of the Draft Master Plan indicates development over a significant stand of vegetation to the south of existing facilities. Stage two is considered a long term response to demand for hangar space and clearing approvals will only be sought as demand arises. Development of stage two will also require flora and fauna surveys, aboriginal heritage survey and clearing permits. It would also require realignment of the proposed Wardandi / Rails to Trails track. Social Adopting the Draft Master Plan would provide a framework for development that may result in employment opportunities during construction works and a point of interest to the public. This has the potential to be an advantage to the community subject to the development costs being borne by the user which in this case would be the lessee(s). Economic Adopting the Draft Master Plan has the potential to foster economic growth by providing a framework for the development of private recreational aircraft facilities at the cost of the lessee(s). VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple majority. RECOMMENDATION That Council adopts the Draft Master Plan, shown as Attachments 1 and 2, for the Tallinup Augusta Airport at Lot 315 and Lot 380 Reserve 39668 Hillview Road for the purposes of advertising for public comment for a period of 21 days. ATTACHMENTS

1. Tallinup Augusta Airport Master Plan Proposed Short Term Development Plan 2. Tallinup Augusta Airport Master Plan Proposed Long Term Development Plan

RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION CR HASTIE, CR HAYNES OM2015/81 That Council adopts the Draft Master Plan, shown as Attachments 1 and 2, for the Tallinup Augusta Airport at Lot 315 and Lot 380 Reserve 39668 Hillview Road for the purposes of advertising for public comment for a period of 21 days.

CARRIED 6/0

55

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 11.2.5 APPOINTMENT TO DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANELS LOCATION/ADDRESS Shire Wide APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Department Of Planning FILE REFERENCE LND/126 REPORT AUTHOR Nick Logan – Manager Planning and Development AUTHORISING OFFICER Iliya Hastings – Director Sustainable Development IN BRIEF • Development Assessment Panels have been introduced across Western Australia as a series of

regional based groups that meet to determine applications for planning approval over a certain value.

• In 2013 the Council confirmed Cr Smart and Cr Earl as the Shire’s members, and Cr Serventy as alternate member, for the South West Joint Development Assessment Panel.

• The term for current panel members expires on 26 April 2015 and requires nomination of two Councillors as members of the South West Joint Development Assessment Panel and two ‘alternate’ members.

RECOMMENDATION The Council nominates two Councillors as members of the South West Joint Development Assessment Panel and two ‘alternate’ members BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Under the Development Assessment Panel (DAP) Regulations, each DAP will determine development applications that meet set type and value thresholds as if it were the responsible authority under the relevant planning instrument, such as the local planning scheme or region planning scheme. The DAP regulations state that DAP applications cannot be determined by local government or the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC). The role of DAP members is to determine development applications within a certain type and value threshold through consistent, accountable, and professional decision-making. There are two different types of DAPs: 1. Local Development Assessment Panels (LDAPs) An LDAP only has one local government within its boundary area. An LDAP is established to service a single local government, where it is deemed to be a high-growth local government with enough development to support its own DAP. There is currently only one LDAP for the City of Perth. 2. Joint Development Assessment Panels (JDAPs) JDAPs are established to service two or more local governments. There will be 14 JDAPs in Western Australia. The South West Joint Development Assessment Panel has jurisdiction in the Shire of Augusta Margaret River. There are two thresholds for planning applications to be presented to a DAP: the mandatory threshold of an application with a value over $7M, and an optional threshold for an application of between $3M and $7M in value. Since DAPs came into effect in 2011 no applications in the Shire have been presented to the SW JDAP and the application thresholds have been subject to review. All appointed DAP members that have not previously attended DAP training will be required to attend a DAP training session prior to sitting and determining a DAP application.

56

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 Local Government elections may result in a change to local DAP membership if current Councillors are not re-elected. In this instance alternate members would take the place of former members. If both current and alternate members aren’t re-elected further nominations would need to be made.

CONSULTATION AND ADVICE N/A STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS The Planning and Development (Development Assessment Panels) Regulations 2011 set out the form and constitution of DAPs. STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Community Strategic Plan 2033 (CSP) Corporate Business Plan 2014-2018 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 All members sitting fees are funded by the application fees.

All DAP members, except those not entitled to receive sitting fees, will be paid sitting fees on a sessional basis (see Premier’s Circular No. 2010/02). The presiding member will be paid $500 per session, and all other members will be paid $400 per session ‘as set out in Schedule 2 of the regulations’. The regulations provide that travelling costs that DAP members incur when attending DAP meetings are to be paid to all DAP members, including accommodation and airfares. These costs are to be paid as set out in the current Public Sector Commissioner’s Circular on this matter (2009/20 Reimbursement of Travel Expenses for Members of Government Boards and Committees). For the avoidance of doubt, all DAP members, including those not entitled to be paid sitting fees, will be entitled for reimbursement for these out-of-pocket expenses.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental N/A Social N/A

Economic N/A

VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple majority. RECOMMENDATION That Council confirms Cr Ian Earl, and Cr Kylie Kennaugh as the Shire of Augusta Margaret River nominees, and Cr Kim Hastie, and Cr Michael Smart as alternate nominees for the South West Joint Development Assessment Panel. RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION CR VEITCH, CR EARL OM2015/82 That Council confirms Cr Ian Earl, and Cr Kylie Kennaugh as the Shire of Augusta Margaret River nominees, and Cr Kim Hastie, and Cr Michael Smart as alternate nominees for the South West Joint Development Assessment Panel.

CARRIED 6/0

57


11.3 Infrastructure Services

58

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 11.3. Infrastructure Services Nil

59


11.4 Corporate and Community

Services

60

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 11.4. Corporate and Community Services 11.4.1 UNBUDGETED EXPENDITURE AND GRANT FOR YOUTH COLLABORATION PROJECT ($25,000) LOCATION/ADDRESS Shire of Augusta Margaret River APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Shire of Augusta Margaret River FILE REFERENCE FIN/15 REPORT AUTHOR Gemma Mincherton, Senior Community Development Officer AUTHORISING OFFICER Annie Riordan, Director Corporate and Community IN BRIEF • In March 2015 the Shire was approached by the Department of Local Government and

Communities (DLGC) to participate in a youth collaboration project. • The Shire was selected as one of four regional local governments previously successful in

attracting funds from the DLGC due to its effective youth engagement programs. • A total of $25,000 plus GST has been offered to the Shire for the collaboration program. • Due to the opportunistic nature of this funding, grant income and expenditure items have not been

included in the 2014-15 budget. • The purpose of this report is to seek authorisation to amend the Community Development budget

to reflect this additional funding and associated expenditure. RECOMMENDATION That Council approves unbudgeted expenditure of $25,000 (ex GST) in job COM95 (Regional Youth Collaboration Project) funded by the Department for Local Government and Communities LOCATION PLAN Nil TABLED ITEMS Nil BACKGROUND The Shire’s Community Development team regularly liaise with and submit funding applications to bodies such as the Department for Local Government and Communities (DLGC) to support project ideas. This relationship history, along with proven delivery of youth engagement initiatives involving collaboration, has strongly positioned the Shire for invitation to participate in the DLGC Youth Collaboration project. As part of this project the Shire have been asked to develop a project plan for approval, prior to funding being released. CONSULTATION AND ADVICE External Consultation The Margaret River Youth Advisory Council are consulted regularly about project, events and issues that impact them, with their ideas incorporated into the plan to utilise the $25,000 contribution from DLGC. Internal Consultation The Community Development team has provided input into the plan to utilise the funds, ensuring it is aligned with the recently adopted Strengthening Youth Plan. 61

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS Although unexpected, the funding is welcomed and will be utilised to activate the Zone Room youth space as well as strengthen the existing youth engagement program.

The project will focus on delivering the following outcomes: • improving wellbeing and resilience; • changing community perceptions of young people; and • enhancing the youth development capacity within local governments, community service and

other organisations.

More specifically just over half of the $25,000 (ex GST) will be used to engage an external contractor to run youth events in the Zone Room on Wallcliffe Road as well as participate in the end of year MR SAM youth event. This will further activate the youth space and will provide healthy and fun activities for young people on a Friday night once a month. The remainder of the funding will be used to value add to the existing youth engagement program managed by the Community Development team. Activities will include:

• Partnering with Buzz Marketing in promoting and participating in South West Mud Fest; • A battle of the bands youth music event; • A sailing adventure providing young people and opportunity to learn this skill; and • A forgotten skills project where seniors teach youth age old skills such as skateboard making

and knitting. STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Section 6.8 (1) of the Local Government Act 1965 states that “A local government is not to incur expenditure from its municipal fund for an additional purpose except where the expenditure –

(a) Is incurred in a financial year before the adoption of the annual budget by the local government; or

(b) Is authorised in advance by resolution*; or (c) Is authorised in advance by the mayor or president in an emergency.” Point (b) requires the resolution be adopted by an absolute majority of Council.

STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Community Strategic Plan 2033 (CSP) Corporate Business Plan 2014-2018 Goal 2: Welcoming and Inclusive Communities Community Outcome: A sense of identity and belonging Strategic Response: Foster participation in cultural events and activities that encourage a sense of identity and belonging. Service level strategy/plan: 2.1.4 Implement actions from the Youth Plan PLANNING FRAMEWORK Nil FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The funding income will be the equivalent to program expenditure, resulting in a cost neutral outcome. Consequently there will be no additional expenses to the Shire other than in-kind officer time required to implement project objectives. By proposing a model to engage an external organisation/contractor to facilitate Youth Precinct collaboration/youth engagement activities, this will reduce the operational impact. SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental Nil Social There will be a social benefit to the project as it will engage young people in healthy activities as well as learning life skills. 62

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 Economic The will be an economic benefit to the young people who participate in the project as events and activities are often offered at very low or no cost. VOTING REQUIREMENTS Absolute Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council approves unbudgeted expenditure of $25,000 (ex GST) in job COM95 (Regional Youth Collaboration Project) funded by the Department for Local Government and Communities ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT Nil ATTACHMENTS Nil RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION CR HASTIE, CR HAYNES OM2015/83 That Council approves unbudgeted expenditure of $25,000 (ex GST) in job COM95 (Regional Youth Collaboration Project) funded by the Department for Local Government and Communities.

CARRIED 6/0 ABSOLUTE MAJORITY

63

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 11.4.2 NON-RATEABLE PROPERTIES LOCATION/ADDRESS Various APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Shire of Augusta Margaret River FILE REFERENCE FIN/28 REPORT AUTHOR Vicki Scott, Revenue Coordinator AUTHORISING OFFICER Annie Riordan, Director Corporate and Community Services IN BRIEF

• An owner of property may make an application to the Shire for a Rating Exemption under section 6.26 of the Local Government Act 1995 (LG Act).

• The Shire’s Rates Collection procedure was endorsed by the Executive Leadership Team on 22 July 2014 and outlines the timeline for review of properties with rating exemptions.

• The Revenue Business Unit is to review properties every two (2) years and every five (5) years with the list is to be submitted to Council on an informational basis.

RECOMMENDATION That Council notes the following properties as being exempt from rates in accordance with sections 6.26(2)(d), (e), (f), (g) and (j) of the Local Government Act 1995.

Property Address Land owner A7559 - Unit 3 No 34 Station Rd, Margaret River Christian Outreach Centre A3662 - 11 Station Rd, Margaret River A8415 - 40 Riverslea Dr, Margaret River A4411 - 47 Allnut Tce, Augusta A4688 - R19989 Bussell Hwy, Cowaramup

Bunbury Diocesan Trustees

A3649 - 20 Wallcliffe Rd, Margaret River A9479 - 103 Blackwood Ave, Augusta A6701 - 12424 Bussell Hwy, Karridale

Roman Catholic Bishop of Bunbury

A3462 - 3 Mitchell Dr, Prevelly Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia Consolidated Trust

A1811 - 60 Tingle Ave, Margaret River A3648 - 68 Blackwood Ave, Augusta

Uniting Church of Australia

A11268 - 177-179 Bussell Hwy, Margaret River Jehovah Witnesses Congregations A4832 - 28 Tunbridge St, Margaret River The Baptist Union of WA A213 - 30 Wallcliffe Rd, Margaret River Roman Catholic Bishop of Bunbury A9298 - 59 Clarke Rd, Margaret River Margaret River Montessori School A4675 - 36 Tunbridge St, Margaret River St John Ambulance A5968 - 2/126 Minchin Way, Margaret River G & P McDonald A5932 - 5/31 Station Rd, Margaret River Australasian Conference Assoc. A375 - Station Rd, Margaret River Trustees of Kilcarnup Estate Grand

Lodge No. 166 A9480 - 17 Green St, Augusta Bunbury Diocesan Trustees A3670 - 192 Blackwood Ave, Augusta South West Health Board A2084 - 41 Allnut Tce, Augusta A10731 - 42 Town View Tce, Margaret River A4437 - Lot 4085 Rosa Glen Rd, Rosa Glen

Country Women’s Association

A4174 - 15 Dahlberg St, Augusta Leeuwin Frail Aged Lodge Inc. A6563 - 26 Waverley Rd, Cowaramup Lions Club of Cowaramup 64

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 A644 - Lot 270 Fisher Rd, Augusta A2314 - 13 Dunkley Cr, Molloy Island A2354 - 18 Clements Cr, Molloy Island A2399 - 28 Clements Cr, Molloy Island A3369 - 20 Sabina Dr, Molloy Island A3439 - 10 Scott River Rd, Augusta

The Molloy Island Homeowner’s Assoc. Inc.

A3903 -21 Farrelly St, Margaret River A4140 -12 Farrelly St, Margaret River

WA Baptist Hospital and Homes Trust

A9288 - Lot 155 Harvest View, Cowaramup A9920 - Lot 550 Sunset Dr, Cowaramup A10379 - Lot 551 Sunset Dr, Cowaramup

The National Trust of Australia (WA)

LOCATION PLAN Nil TABLED ITEMS Nil BACKGROUND Shire procedure ‘Rates Collection’ endorsed by ELT on 22 July 2014, outlines the timeline for review of properties exempt from rates under s6.26 of the LG Act. Properties are owned by organisations, schools, centres and individuals used for a variety of purposes. Each property is reviewed on an individual basis against the criteria for rateable land under s6.26 LG Act. A property that is exempt from rates is referred to as a non-rateable property, and it is then excluded from being levied rates and the waste facility maintenance rate until the use of the property changes or the property is sold. Rates and associated charges levied against a property may include: • Rates • Waste facility maintenance rate • Emergency services levy • Rubbish service charge • Recycling service charge The emergency services levy, rubbish service charge and recycling service charge where applied are not exempt from being levied on a non-rateable assessment and are payable to the Shire. CONSULTATION AND ADVICE External Consultation Department of Local Government and Communities (DLGC), Principal Advisory Officer WA Local Government Association (WALGA) Rate Exemption Best Practice Guideline Department of Local Government and Communities Rating Policy for Rateable Land Internal Consultation Manager Finance CEO DISCUSSION / OFFICER COMMENTS Application The owner of a property is required to make written application to the Shire requesting an exemption of rates and provide details of the use and characteristics of the land in support of the application for exemption.

65

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 The WALGA ‘Charitable Land Use’ Rate Exemption Application Best Practice Guideline released in March 2015, includes an ‘Application for Rates Exemption Form’, attached to this report. The application form is to assist local governments when determining an application for an exemption. The Guideline also advised that Council may delegate authority for a rate exemption application to the CEO and such a delegation will be considered in the 2015 review of the Shire’s Delegation Register. The Guideline’s suggested timeframe for review of the non-rateable property registers will also be considered in the next review of the Rates Collection procedure. Non-Rateable Properties Each application is reviewed on an individual basis to ensure the property meets the criteria of s6.26 of the LG Act, where an application meets the criteria a report is presented to Council with a recommendation to approve the request. The Shire has a total of 37 non-rateable properties as tabled within this report. Properties that meet the criteria of non-rateable under s6.26 (2)(a) or (b) or (c) of the LG Act are not tabled within this report. (a) land which is the property of the Crown; (b) land which is owned and used by the local government; (c) land which is owned and used by the local government for commercial purposes. In these instances, the land is owned by the State of Western Australia (Crown) and vested by management order to the Organisation, School or Centre who occupy the land. Examples of non-rateable properties in this category are: • Nyindamurra Independent School on Reserve 19937, 10890 Bussell Hwy, Forest Grove; • St John Ambulance Centre on Reserve 37281, 12 Donovan St, Augusta; and • Australian Red Cross on Reserve 43241, Lot 54 Redgate Rd, Witchcliffe. Table 1 – section 6.26 (2)(d) The Shire has 13 non-rateable properties under s6.26 (2)(d) of the LG Act as tabled below:

(d) land used or held exclusively by a religious body as a place of public worship or in relation to

that worship, a place of residence of a minister of religion, a convent, nunnery or monastery, or occupied exclusively by a religious brotherhood or sisterhood;

Item No

Land owner Property Address Use

1.1 Christian Outreach Centre

A7559 - Unit 3 No 34 Station Rd, Margaret River

Surfside Christian Outreach Centre

1.2 Bunbury Diocesan Trustees

A3662 - 11 Station Rd, Margaret River A8415 - 40 Riverslea Dr, Margaret River

Anglican Parish Church Occupied by Minister of Religion, Anglican Church

A4411 - 47 Allnut Tce, Augusta A4688 – R19989 Bussell Hwy, Cowaramup

Church of England Church


A3649 - 20 Wallcliffe Rd, Margaret River

Saint Thomas More Catholic Church

A9479 – 103 Blackwood Ave, Augusta A6701 – 12424 Bussell Hwy, Karridale

Lumen Christi Catholic Church

1.3 Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia Consolidated Trust

A3462 - 3 Mitchell Dr, Prevelly Greek Orthodox Church

1.4 Uniting Church of Australia


Uniting Church

1.5 Jehovah Witnesses Congregations

A11268 - 177-179 Bussell Hwy, Margaret River

Jehovah’s Witness Kingdom Hall

1.6 The Baptist Union of A4832 – 28 Tunbridge St, Margaret River Baptist Church 66


WA 1.1 The Christian Outreach Centre ‘Surfside Church’ holds weekly services on Sundays. The

property is also used to facilitate Global Care Australia which is a public benevolent institution run with the assistance of volunteers to provide public services and personal support to members of the local community.

Global Care is a Christian Missions, Aid and Development Organisation that is committed to

providing emotional, spiritual and physical support - along with effective aid relief - in areas of need and provides a broad range of effective relief services. Working as part of the community and with governments at all levels, Global Care provides opportunities for communities in need and in times of extreme hardship empower them to move on with their lives.

1.2 The land owned by the Roman Catholic Bishop of Bunbury comes under the Diocese (district)

of Bunbury. The Bunbury Diocesan Trustees manage various parishes across the Shire, providing support for the many religious faiths as places of worship and religious instructions.

The property at 40 Riverslea Dr, Margaret River is occupied by a Minister of the Anglican

Church. 1.3 The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia Consolidated Trust is the owner of the property,

where the Greek Chapel of St. John the Theologian, (Prevelly Chapel) was built by a serviceman as a tribute to the Greek people who helped him and his fellow troops who fought the battle of Crete in World War II. It is an interdenominational place of worship.

1.4 The Uniting Church in Australia (UCA) is organised by groups of women and men, lay and

ordained, consulting together, usually making decisions by consensus, in each area of the church’s life. The Uniting Church is committed to being a series of interrelated councils – local churches, presbytery, synod, and the national assembly with the aim of embracing all people to unite them with other and with God in a place of public worship.

1.5 The Jehovah Witnesses Congregation is held in the ‘Kingdom Hall’. Jehovah Witnesses

preach the ‘good news of the Kingdom’. They see their mission as primarily evangelical (disseminating “good news”), to warn as many people as possible in the remaining time before Armageddon. All members of the religion are expected to take an active part in preaching. The property in Margaret River is used solely as a place of worship for religious instructions.

1.6 Australian Baptist Ministries are an evangelical movement of churches, State Baptist Unions

and national ministries are committed to proclaiming and demonstrating the Gospel of Jesus Christ as revealed in the Scriptures, the Church in Margaret River is used solely as a place of worship.

Table 2 – section 6.26 (2)(e) The Shire has 1 non-rateable property under s6.26 (2)(e) of the LG Act as tabled below:

(e) land used exclusively by a religious body as a school for the religious instruction of children;

Item No

Land owner Property Address Use – School

2.1 Roman Catholic Bishop of Bunbury

A213 - 30 Wallcliffe Rd, Margaret River

Saint Thomas More Primary

2.1 Saint Thomas More Catholic Primary School (STMCPS) Margaret River is a Catholic School under the Bunbury Diocese. They encourage community members to integrate faith, life and culture and to live the values of Christ, developing the spiritual, cognitive, physical, creative, social and emotional attributes of their students. Religious education is the first key learning area of the school and programmes are based on the Perth Archdiocese guidelines.

67

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 Table 3 – section 6.26 (2)(f) The Shire has 1 non-rateable property under s6.26 (2)(f) of the LG Act as tabled below:

(f) land used exclusively as a non-government school within the meaning of the School

Education Act 1999;

Item No

Land owner Property Address Use – School

3.1 Margaret River Montessori School

A9298 - 59 Clarke Rd, Margaret River

Margaret River Montessori

3.1 Margaret River Montessori School (MRMS) is an Independent School registered by the Department of Education, located in Margaret River and surrounded by natural bushland. The property also holds a natural wetland which is utilised by students for environmental and sustainability studies. MRMS provides individualised learning for individual children, fostering children’s love of learning and encourages independence by providing an environment of activities and materials which children use at their own pace. This builds self-confidence, inner discipline, a sense of self-worth and instils positive social behaviour. The approach forms the basis for lifelong learning. Table 4 – section 6.26 (2)(g) The Shire has 19 non-rateable properties under s6.26 (2)(g) of the LG Act as tabled below:

(g) land used exclusively for charitable purposes;

Item No

Land owner Property Address Use – Charitable Purposes

4.1 St John Ambulance A4675 - 36 Tunbridge St, Margaret River

Ambulance Depot and Training Centre

4.2 G & P McDonald A5968 - 2/126 Minchin Way, Margaret River

Society of St Vincent de Paul Opportunity Shop

4.3 Australasian Conference Assoc.

A5932 - 5/31 Station Rd, Margaret River

Seventh Day Adventist Opportunity Shop

4.4 Trustees of Kilcarnup Estate Grand Lodge No. 166

A375 - Station Rd, Margaret River Masonic Lodge

4.5 Bunbury Diocesan Trustees A9480 - 17 Green St, Augusta Lumen Christi Aged Persons Homes

4.6 South West Health Board

A3670 - 192 Blackwood Ave, Augusta

Frail Aged Facility

4.7 Country Women’s Association

A2084 - 41 Allnut Tce, Augusta A10731 - 42 Town View Tce, Margaret River A4437 - Lot 4085 Rosa Glen Rd, Rosa Glen

CWA Halls

4.8 Leeuwin Frail Aged Lodge Inc.

A4174 15 Dahlberg St, Augusta

Leeuwin Frail Aged Lodge

4.9 Lions Club of Cowaramup A6563 26 Waverley Rd, Cowaramup

Cowaramup Aged Persons Units

4.10 The Molloy Island Homeowner’s Assoc. Inc.

A644 - Lot 270 Fisher Rd, Augusta A2314 -13 Dunkley Cr, Molloy Island A2354 -18 Clements Cr, Molloy Island A2399 -28 Clements Cr, Molloy Island A3369 -20 Sabina Dr, Molloy Island A3439 -10 Scott River Rd, Augusta

Ferry Landing Molloy Island Bushfire Brigade Foreshore access

4.11 WA Baptist Hospital and Homes Trust


Baptist Aged Homes

68

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 4.1 The property is owned and occupied by the St John Ambulance Western Australia, a

charitable, not-for-profit, humanitarian organisation serving the community through first aid. Their motto is ‘for the service of humanity’, the Margaret River Sub Centre provides high quality ambulance and first aid services for the welfare of the community.

4.2 The property is owned by P and M McDonald but occupied and operated by the St Vincent De

Paul Society, a Catholic organisation that aspires to live the gospel message by serving Christ and the poor with love, respect, justice, hope and joy, and by working to shape a more just and compassionate society. The Society aspires to be recognised as a caring Catholic charity offering “a hand up” to people in need, by respecting their dignity, sharing hope, and encouraging them to take control of their own destiny.

The property is being used to sell donated clothing, household items, accessories, books and shoes to the community at a reasonable price assisting low-income families and individuals to buy items and clothing at affordable prices. The Society also facilitates the distribution of free clothing and household items for those families and individuals requiring welfare assistance.

4.3 The property is owned by the Australasian Conference Association but occupied and operated by the ‘Seventh Day Adventist Church’ Ad Care Shop. The Ad Care shop sells donated clothing, household items, accessories to the community at a reasonable price assisting low-income families and individuals to buy items and clothing at affordable prices.

4.4 The property owned and occupied by Trustees of Kilcarnup Estate Grand Lodge No. 166 is

governed by the Grand Lodge of Western Australia Freemasons, a multi-racial and multi-cultural organisation. Membership is open to men of all faiths who are law abiding, of good character and who acknowledge a belief in a supreme being. Grand Lodge No. 166 hold evening meetings at the Masonic Hall every fourth Wednesday of the month.

4.5 The property owned by the Bunbury Diocesan Trustees is managed by the Lumen Christi

Homes for the Aged Augusta Inc. adjacent to (Lumen Christi Catholic Church), a public benevolent institution providing aged care facilities to the elderly.

4.6 The property owned by the South West Health Board property is used for the purposes of a

Residential Aged Care facility, managed by the Augusta Hospital (located adjacent to the property) to provide assistance to frail aged high care patients.

4.7 Country Women’s Association Australia (CWAA) is a self-funded, non-party political and non-

sectarian organisation whose opinion is sought in many arenas. They maintain a strong working relationship with governments around Australia, which offers a ‘human face and grass roots perspective’ which the CWAA has projected for almost 70 years.

CWAA aims to improve the conditions for women and children and make life better for

families, especially those living in regional, rural and remote Australia and three CWA halls are located across the Shire,

4.8 The property owned and managed by the Leeuwin Frail Aged Lodge Inc. is a specialised

aged care facility catering to the ‘Frail Aged’ who require a substantial level of care and support.

4.9 The property owned and managed by the Lions Club of Cowaramup is provision of an aged

care facility catering to the elderly. 4.10 The Molloy Island Homeowner’s Association Inc (MIHA) is an incorporated charitable

institution. The properties owned by MIHA are used for various purposes including ferry landing, Molloy Island bushfire brigade shed and open public foreshore access.

4.11 The properties owned and managed by WA Baptist Hospital and Homes Trust (WABHHT)

provide quality aged care residential facilities to the elderly. WABHHT also provides Home Services, Disability Services and Mental Health Services to the community.

69

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 Table 5– section 6.26 (2)(j) The Shire has 3 non-rateable properties under s6.26 (2)(j) of the LG Act as tabled below:

(j) land which is exempt from rates under any other written law;

Item No

Land owner Property Address Use

5.1 The National Trust of Australia (WA)

A9288 – Lot 155 Harvest View, Cowaramup A9920 - Lot 550 Sunset Dr, Cowaramup A10379 - Lot 551 Sunset Dr, Cowaramup

Residential Estate Cowaramup ‘Parkwater’

The National Trust is exempt under the National Trust of Australia (WA) Act 1964 Section 17. The Trust is a committed, community-based body promoting and conserving Australia’s indigenous, natural and historic heritage through its advocacy work and its custodianship of heritage places and objects. It works to raise knowledge, awareness, understanding and commitment to Western Australia’s natural, Aboriginal and historic heritage. STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS National Trust of Australia Act (WA) Act 196 17. Exemption from rates and taxes (1) No rate or tax shall be made, charged or levied under any law of the State on or in respect

of any real property or chattel real belonging to The Trust. (2) No duty is payable under Part V of the Administration Act 1903, in respect of any property

received or derived by, or accruing to The Trust after the coming into operation of this Act. (3) An instrument executed after the coming into operation of this Act by which any real or

personal property is assured to or vested in The Trust for purposes of this Act or agreed to be so assured or vested is exempt from any duty chargeable under the Duties Act 2008.

Local Government Act 1995 6.26. Rateable land

(1) Except as provided in this section all land within a district is rateable land. (2) The following land is not rateable land — (a) land which is the property of the Crown and — (i) is being used or held for a public purpose; or (ii) is unoccupied, except — (I) where any person is, under paragraph (e) of the definition of

“owner” in section 1.4, the owner of the land other than by reason of that person being the holder of a prospecting licence held under the Mining Act 1978 in respect of land the area of which does not exceed 10 hectares or a miscellaneous licence held under that Act; or

(II) where and to the extent and manner in which a person mentioned in paragraph (f) of the definition of “owner” in section 1.4 occupies or makes use of the land;

(b) land in the district of a local government while it is owned by the local government and is used for the purposes of that local government other than for purposes of a trading undertaking (as that term is defined in and for the purpose of section 3.59) of the local government;

(c) land in a district while it is owned by a regional local government and is used for the purposes of that regional local government other than for the purposes of a trading undertaking (as that term is defined in and for the purpose of section 3.59) of the regional local government;

70

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 (d) land used or held exclusively by a religious body as a place of public worship or in

relation to that worship, a place of residence of a minister of religion, a convent, nunnery or monastery, or occupied exclusively by a religious brotherhood or sisterhood;

(e) land used exclusively by a religious body as a school for the religious instruction of children;

(f) land used exclusively as a non-government school within the meaning of the School Education Act 1999;

(g) land used exclusively for charitable purposes; (h) land vested in trustees for agricultural or horticultural show purposes; (i) land owned by Co-operative Bulk Handling Limited or leased from the Crown or a

statutory authority (within the meaning of that term in the Financial Management Act 2006) by that company and used solely for the storage of grain where that company has agreed in writing to make a contribution to the local government;

(j) land which is exempt from rates under any other written law; and (k) land which is declared by the Minister to be exempt from rates. (3) If Co-operative Bulk Handling Limited and the relevant local government cannot reach an

agreement under subsection (2)(i) either that company or the local government may refer the matter to the Minister for determination of the terms of the agreement and the decision of the Minister is final.

(4) The Minister may from time to time, under subsection (2)(k), declare that any land or part of any land is exempt from rates and by subsequent declaration cancel or vary the declaration.

(5) Notice of any declaration made under subsection (4) is to be published in the Gazette. (6) Land does not cease to be used exclusively for a purpose mentioned in subsection (2)

merely because it is used occasionally for another purpose which is of a charitable, benevolent, religious or public nature.

STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Community Strategic Plan 2033 (CSP) Corporate Business Plan 2014-2018 Goal 5 of Effective Leadership and Governance Community Outcome: 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: The Shire Procedure Rates Collection outlines the administrative processes implemented to review properties exempt from rates.

6. Rating Exemptions

Rating exemptions granted by the Council shall apply from 1 July of the financial year or from the relevant date in the case of a property settlement or grant of a lease. Exemptions will not be applied prior to the financial years in which approval is granted. Exemptions granted in accordance with s6.26 LG Act are to be reviewed by the Revenue Coordinator every year two (2) years and every five (5) years the list submitted to Council on an informational basis.

PLANNING FRAMEWORK Nil

71

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The amount of forgone rates revenue in 2014-15 for the 37 non-rateable properties as listed below is $234,897.

Item No

Land owner Rate Exemption

1.1 Christian Outreach Centre $2,790 1.2 Bunbury Diocesan Trustees - Roman Catholic Bishop of Bunbury $31,909 1.3 Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia Consolidated Trust $1,247 1.4 Uniting Church of Australia $6,629 1.5 Jehovah Witnesses Congregations $5,812 1.6 The Baptist Union of WA Inc $1,145 2.1 Roman Catholic Bishop of Bunbury $18,227 3.1 Margaret River Montessori School $15,057 4.1 St John Ambulance $4,544 4.2 G & P McDonald $2,593 4.3 Australasian Conference Assoc. $1,231 4.4 Trustees of Kilcarnup Estate Grand Lodge No. 166 $2,060 4.5 Bunbury Diocesan Trustees $13,107 4.6 South West Health Board $3,462 4.7 Country Women’s Association $3,607 4.8 Leeuwin Frail Aged Lodge Inc. $1,145 4.9 Lions Club of Cowaramup $12,555 4.10 The Molloy Island Homeowner’s Assoc. Inc. $7,521 4.11 WA Baptist Hospital and Homes Trust $96,539 5.1 The National Trust of Australia (WA) $3,717

Total $234,897 SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental The National Trust is committed to promoting and conserving Australia’s indigenous, natural and historic heritage. Social Organisations, Schools and Centres provide valuable services to the local community including places of public worship, educational institutions and other facilities for the benefit of the public and community. Economic Organisations and Centres assist low-income families and individuals to buy household items and clothing at affordable prices and in some instances provide welfare assistance. VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council notes the following properties as being exempt from rates in accordance with sections 6.26(2)(d), (e), (f), (g) and (j) of the Local Government Act 1995.

Property Address Land owner A7559 - Unit 3 No 34 Station Rd, Margaret River Christian Outreach Centre A3662 - 11 Station Rd, Margaret River A8415 - 40 Riverslea Dr, Margaret River A4411 - 47 Allnut Tce, Augusta A4688 - R19989 Bussell Hwy, Cowaramup

Bunbury Diocesan Trustees

A3649 - 20 Wallcliffe Rd, Margaret River A9479 - 103 Blackwood Ave, Augusta A6701 - 12424 Bussell Hwy, Karridale


72

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 A3462 - 3 Mitchell Dr, Prevelly Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of

Australia Consolidated Trust A1811 - 60 Tingle Ave, Margaret River A3648 - 68 Blackwood Ave, Augusta





A4174 - 15 Dahlberg St, Augusta Leeuwin Frail Aged Lodge Inc. A6563 - 26 Waverley Rd, Cowaramup Lions Club of Cowaramup A644 - Lot 270 Fisher Rd, Augusta A2314 - 13 Dunkley Cr, Molloy Island A2354 - 18 Clements Cr, Molloy Island A2399 - 28 Clements Cr, Molloy Island A3369 - 20 Sabina Dr, Molloy Island A3439 - 10 Scott River Rd, Augusta






ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT Nil ATTACHMENTS Nil Cr Hastie wished to amend the officer’s recommendation as he was opposed to the inclusion of A5968. The CEO advised that it would be better if the recommendation could be moved in two parts to enable Cr Hastie’s opposition to A5968 to be considered separately rather than Cr Hastie voting against the whole list or Councillors voting against the amended list. The Presiding member therefore decided to split the officer’s recommendation into two parts in accordance with the Standing Orders. OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION PART 1/ COUNCIL DECISION CR EARL, CR HASTIE OM2015/84 That Council notes the following properties as being exempt from rates in accordance with sections 6.26(2)(d), (e), (f), (g) and (j) of the Local Government Act 1995, but recommends the exclusion of A5968 - 2/126 Minchin Way Margaret River from the exemption.

Property Address Land owner A7559 - Unit 3 No 34 Station Rd, Margaret River Christian Outreach Centre A3662 - 11 Station Rd, Margaret River Bunbury Diocesan Trustees

73

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 A8415 - 40 Riverslea Dr, Margaret River A4411 - 47 Allnut Tce, Augusta A4688 - R19989 Bussell Hwy, Cowaramup A3649 - 20 Wallcliffe Rd, Margaret River A9479 - 103 Blackwood Ave, Augusta A6701 - 12424 Bussell Hwy, Karridale


A3462 - 3 Mitchell Dr, Prevelly Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia Consolidated Trust






A4174 - 15 Dahlberg St, Augusta Leeuwin Frail Aged Lodge Inc. A6563 - 26 Waverley Rd, Cowaramup Lions Club of Cowaramup A644 - Lot 270 Fisher Rd, Augusta A2314 - 13 Dunkley Cr, Molloy Island A2354 - 18 Clements Cr, Molloy Island A2399 - 28 Clements Cr, Molloy Island A3369 - 20 Sabina Dr, Molloy Island A3439 - 10 Scott River Rd, Augusta






CARRIED 6/0

74

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION PART 2 / COUNCIL DECISION CR EARL, CR KENNAUGH OM2015/85 That Council notes the following properties as being exempt from rates in accordance with sections 6.26(2)(d), (e), (f), (g) and (j) of the Local Government Act 1995,.

Property Address Land owner A5968 - 2/126 Minchin Way, Margaret River G & P McDonald

CARRIED 5/1

CR HASTIE VOTED AGAINST THE MOTION

REASON: Cr Hastie spoke to his amendment, stating that as the property was privately owned he felt it was a case of commercial gain from rate exemption. 75

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 11.4.3 LIST OF PAYMENTS FOR MARCH 2015 LOCATION/ADDRESS N/A APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Shire of Augusta Margaret River FILE REFERENCE FIN/42 REPORT AUTHOR Jaye Lanzini, Finance Officer Accounts Payable AUTHORISING OFFICER Annie Riordan, Director Corporate and Community Services Director Corporate and Community Services discloses interest in the credit card expenses which is certified by the 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 March 2015 List of Payments of $5,591,086.25 as certified as correct by the Director Corporate and Community Services. LOCATION PLAN N/A TABLED ITEMS N/A 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 2013/14 and 2014/15 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.

76


TABLE 1 – SUMMARY OF PAYMENTS MADE IN THE MONTH

Mode of Payment Cheque / EFT Numbers Sub-Total Amount

Cheques (includes reimbursement of credit cards) 41804-41818 $19,847.73 $19,847.73

EFT 47404- 47876 $4,606,343.42 Direct Debits $964,895.10 $5,571,238.52

TOTAL $5,591,086.25

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

2013/14 2013/14 2013/14 2014/15 2014/15 2014/15 JULY $33,585.55 $3,403,267.39 $3,436,852.94 $27,627.52 $3,382,878.99 $3,410,506.51 AUGUST $13,478.79 $8,251,231.55 $8,264,710.34 $24,371.61 $1,881,379.90 $1,905,751.51 SEPTEMBER $24,116.63 $8,549,073.97 $8,573,190.60 $29,105.88 $10,523,000.04 $10,552,105.92 OCTOBER $22,159.85 $3,536,806.15 $3,558,966.00 $16,883.83 $3,009,076.16 $3,025,959.99 NOVEMBER $21,331.92 $3,420,684.44 $3,442,016.36 $37,159.65 $2,423,568.91 $2,460,728.56 DECEMBER $21,495.36 $4,327,763.54 $4,349,258.90 $28,403.96 $3,158,418.92 $3,186,822.88 JANUARY $19,932.71 $2,466,975.07 $2,486,907.78 $27,233.40 $2,058,456.34 $2,085,689.74 FEBRUARY $30,263.36 $8,776,712.18 $8,806,975.54 $22,820.69 $2,080,353.62 $2,103,174.31 MARCH $23,803.70 $2,679,343.95 $2,703,147.65 $19,847.73 $5,571,238.52 $5,591,086.25 APRIL $23,495.00 $3,181,582.86 $3,205,077.86 MAY $29,084.59 $3,386,392.80 $3,415,477.39 JUNE $44,011.46 $2,830,518.20 $2,874,529.66

$306,758.92 $54,810,352.10 $55,177,111.02 $233,454.27 $34,088,371.40 $34,321,825.667

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 2014-2018 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 N/A FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS N/A SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS Environmental N/A 77

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 Social N/A Economic N/A VOTING REQUIREMENTS Simple Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council notes the March 2015 List of Payments of $5,591,086.25 as certified as correct by the Director Corporate and Community Services. ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT N/A ATTACHMENTS

1. List of Payments for March 2015 RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION CR KENNAUGH , CR EARL OM2015/86 That Council notes the March 2015 List of Payments of $5,591,086.25 as certified as correct by the Director Corporate and Community Services.

CARRIED 6 /0

78

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 11.4.4 FINANCIAL ACTIVITY STATEMENT REPORT - MARCH 2015 LOCATION/ADDRESS N/A APPLICANT/LANDOWNER Shire of Augusta Margaret River FILE REFERENCE FIN/14 REPORT AUTHOR Andrew Ross, Manager Finance 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 31 March 2015. RECOMMENDATION That Council:

1. Receives the Monthly Financial Report – March 2015 in accordance with Section 6.4 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 ; and

2. Approves over budget expenditure of $50,000 for job PXN002 Rails to Trails (Wadandi Track) and notes this over budget expenditure will be funded from expected expenditure savings and revenue increases compared to the amended budget.

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 23 July 2014 (OM2014/163) 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. 79

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 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. Budget variances have been calculated against the amended budget for 2014-15 which was approved by Council at their meeting on 25 February 2015. The Statement of Financial Activity shows a year to date actual closing position at 31 March of $9.960 million which was higher than the expected year to date budgeted position of $5.787 million. High capital expenditure commitments during the month resulted in the budget position reducing by $3.499 million compared to the result at the end of February. The main reasons for the variation to Budget are:

• operating expenditure on a year to date basis is $2.610 million or 10.6% below budget (last month 12%) and is primarily a result of materials expenditure being $1.970 million under budget (last month $1.813 million) and employee expenses being $0.569 million under budget (last month $0.632 million);

• operating revenue is $0.443 million or 1.5% above budget (last month 0.6%) and is primarily due to planning and building activity continuing to generate more fees and charges than were budgeted, interest on investments and increased income for services and facility usage;

• year to date capital expenditure of $6.265 million (after adjusting for the initial recognition of gravel, limesand and grit stocks) was lower than the $9.386 million anticipated in the budget. This variance is narrowing as more capital works are completed, however capital works are still expected to be under budget at the end of the year due to a number of major projects not proceeding as anticipated (Cultural Centre redevelopment works of $1 million and Turner Caravan Park works of $0.8 million); and

• grants for capital works are $1.086 million under budget as payment of the grant approved by Lotterywest for Cultural Centre equipment will not be received until project completion and a grant of $1,000,000 was budgeted for the Cultural Centre redevelopment project but is unlikely to occur in this financial year.

Materials expenditure and budgets were compared to determine the main contributors to the year to date under budget result. Expenditure on projects, services and maintenance are not achieving budget profiling expectations for a number of business units. As a contrast, only 4 business units are recording over budget materials expenditure and in total they are $37,416 over budget. Expectations at mid-year budget review were that budget forecasts would be achieved, therefore the cause of the majority of the under budget variances are timing matters. The following table shows the largest under budget materials variances that were recorded for business units. Business Unit YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Variance Aquatics Centre 100,990 36,408 64,582 Asset Services 286,600 97,617 188,983 Community Buildings 942,256 704,478 237,778 Community Development 166,125 65,852 100,273 Fire Prevention 183,798 86,103 97,695 Information Technology 589,982 534,407 55,575 Maintenance 1,818,817 1,485,446 333,371 Town Planning 223,520 118,596 104,924 Waste Services 1,099,809 936,619 163,190 5,411,897 4,065,526 1,346,371 Employee expenses expenditure and budgets were also compared and it was determined that all business units are under budget apart from 7. Staff vacancies and leave have contributed to lower actual employee costs being recorded compared to the budget assumption of a full staffing complement. Capital expenditure of $2.177 million during the month was the largest monthly capital spend for the year and included:

80

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 • $10,000 for the first progress payment for the East Augusta Fire Station works; • $43,519 for various waste service works; • $310,091 on the predominantly grant funded works at the Cultural Centre to replace the flytower

and make other improvements; • $22,935 to replace the fence at the Gloucester Park football oval; • $29,017 on various parks and gardens infrastructure projects; • $1,537,289 on various road projects including $1,000,000 paid to Main Roads WA for the

commencement of works on the Perimeter Road which was funded from a Supertowns grant, $161,463 on infrastructure upgrades and was primarily works for widening of Treeton Road and Fisher Road, $18,104 on various path projects, $58,810 on Cowaramup CBD improvements and $375,825 on various infrastructure renewal projects including $158,970 on rural reseals, $5,934 on asphalt overlays, $165,922 on Leeuwin Road reconstruction and $43,700 to replace the Wallcliffe Road cycle path; and

• $221,750 on various mobile plant purchases including a tractor, mower/slasher and reach arm slasher.

During the review of the financial results for the month it was identified a budget for a capital works project was not amended at the time of the mid-year Budget review and should have been increased by $50,000. Job PXN002 has been allocated for the Rails to Trails (Wadandi) path with the current stage being developed being the extension from Gnarawary Road to Redgate Road. The original budget was $175,000 and should have been increased to $225,000 to allow the works required to be completed with the bulk of the works expected to be undertaken in April. As the variation is greater than $10,000 Council approval is required in accordance with the Finance General Policy. It is anticipated expenditure savings and increased revenues will offset this additional expenditure. Financial performance against budget is shown in the following charts. It should be noted the budget used for comparison from February to June is the revised budget based on the results of the mid-year budget review.

- 10,000,000 20,000,000 30,000,000

Liquidity Comparison

2014/15 14/15 Budget 2012/13 2013/14

- 10,000,000 20,000,000 30,000,000 40,000,000

Operating Revenue - YTD Budget vs Actual

2013-14 Actual 2014-15 Budget 2014-15 Actual

81


Following is the Statement of Financial Activity for the year ending 31 March 2015.

-

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

Non Operating Revenue - YTD Budget vs Actual


- 5,000,000

10,000,000 15,000,000 20,000,000 25,000,000 30,000,000 35,000,000

Operating Expenditure - YTD Budget vs Actual


- 2,000,000 4,000,000 6,000,000 8,000,000

10,000,000 12,000,000 14,000,000

Capital Expenditure - YTD Budget vs Actual


82


SHIRE OF AUGUSTA - MARGARET RIVERSTATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITYFOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 March 2015

BUSINESS UNITS 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 YTDAmended Month of YTD YTD Variance

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

OPERATING REVENUESRates 17,679,025 61,917 17,661,025 17,755,840 0General Financing 1,827,764 67,455 1,381,419 1,495,373 0Members of Council 0 0 0 3,770 0Chief Executive Officer 13,000 8,679 13,000 27,188 14,188 ContributionsDirector Corporate & Community 18,340 673 16,340 15,093 0Director Sustainable Development 0 0 0 4,750 0Director Infrastructure 0 0 0 0 0Finance 6,000 0 6,000 6,288 0Records 0 0 0 34 0Customer and Information Services 5,000 230 5,000 5,108 0Customer Relations 203,000 15,253 131,000 123,330 0Information Comm. Technology 0 500 0 1,062 0Human Resources 32,446 630 32,446 33,076 0Community Development 61,800 10,184 59,700 50,584 0Emergency and Fire Services 380,484 0 292,389 297,807 0Rangers 178,432 9,469 145,829 148,331 0Libraries 32,200 3,581 25,700 26,417 0Health 83,441 6,389 77,974 82,452 0Child Care 264,180 16,434 203,130 232,741 29,611 Perm: Grant and usage feesWaste Services 4,017,286 79,189 3,887,203 3,952,622 0Town Planning 376,000 23,854 300,000 305,362 0Community Buildings 150,000 379 140,000 135,116 0MR Recreation Centre 937,395 82,156 723,395 684,186 0Cultural Centre 9,400 767 4,900 4,330 0Augusta Recreation Centre 34,000 1,849 26,200 21,717 0Gloucester Park 57,200 3,391 43,900 55,604 11,704 Timing: Fees invoiced earlier than expectedBeach Lifeguards 0 0 0 0 0Parks and Gardens 5,000 0 5,000 4,631 0Asset Services 110,070 10,937 77,345 71,469 0Construction 0 0 0 0 0Maintenance 1,225,384 117,949 1,225,384 1,376,535 151,151 Works for Department of TransportPlant Program 133,744 1,091 133,744 44,563 (89,181) Timing: Vehicle disposalsCaravan Parks 1,829,340 270,814 1,580,540 1,673,674 0Building Control 235,000 23,349 183,500 195,389 0Works Overheads 0 0 0 240 0Plant Operation Costs 0 0 0 0 0Other Property and Services 701,300 0 691,300 681,984 0TOTAL REVENUES 30,606,231 817,116 29,073,363 29,516,666 443,303

OPERATING EXPENSESRevenue (461,022) (30,313) (232,458) (211,917) 0General Financing (620,727) (130,893) (475,958) (465,458) 0Members of Council (291,795) (18,981) (226,074) (201,092) 24,982 Timing: Training, Functions & ReceptionsChief Executive Officer (959,937) (96,687) (782,185) (704,185) 78,000 Timing: Projects delayedDirector Corporate & Community (568,421) (47,830) (464,074) (392,163) 71,911 Timing: Projects delayedDirector Sustainable Development (603,418) (70,180) (465,448) (422,836) 42,612 Timing: Labour costs and projectsDirector Infrastructure (293,217) (34,163) (223,320) (213,890) 0Finance (879,740) (50,130) (778,069) (773,287) 0Records (161,160) (15,484) (121,564) (108,603) 12,961 Timing: Labour costsCustomer and Information Services (380,767) (35,367) (290,038) (264,867) 0Customer Relations (452,992) (48,391) (347,990) (318,504) 0Information Comm. Technology (932,937) (70,304) (775,027) (718,316) 0Human Resources (650,209) (87,173) (493,330) (474,589) 0Community Development (526,112) (38,913) (429,166) (327,519) 101,647 Timing: ProjectsEmergency and Fire Services (783,780) (102,572) (646,178) (592,904) 0Rangers (615,870) (52,923) (474,172) (406,195) 67,977 Timing: Labour costs (allowances), consumablesLibraries (811,201) (83,977) (632,174) (569,479) 62,695 Timing: Labour costs and stock purchasesHealth (549,004) (46,504) (421,450) (363,089) 58,361 Timing: Labour costs (leave) & projectsChild Care (305,617) (23,892) (237,586) (201,437) 36,149 Timing: Building maintenance, contract servicesWaste Services (2,224,580) (185,400) (1,715,306) (1,465,820) 249,486 Timing: Commencement of projectsTown Planning (1,074,158) (88,688) (852,325) (698,703) 153,622 Timing: Labour costs & projectsCommunity Buildings (2,131,843) (167,727) (1,632,934) (1,401,170) 231,764 Timing: ProjectsMR Recreation Centre (2,173,633) (191,236) (1,657,827) (1,431,303) 226,523 Timing: Labour costs & building maintenanceCultural Centre (366,200) (6,987) (343,550) (339,932) 0Augusta Recreation Centre (106,582) (3,970) (85,871) (40,351) 45,520 Timing: Labour, building maintenance, depreciationGloucester Park (221,550) (27,043) (153,800) (173,254) (19,454) Timing: Unscheduled repairs to Oval lightsBeach Lifeguards (138,527) (22,440) (111,114) (78,389) 32,725 Timing: Labour budget profile should be seasonalParks and Gardens (2,013,509) (241,679) (1,499,841) (1,489,445) 0Asset Services (1,235,652) (96,769) (920,292) (702,160) 218,132 Timing: Labour costs and projectsConstruction 0 0 0 0 0Maintenance (7,496,154) (579,229) (5,719,152) (5,350,383) 0Plant Program (49,368) (5,307) (49,368) (26,518) 22,850 Timing: Vehicle disposalsCaravan Parks (1,201,632) (121,436) (888,615) (842,903) 0Building Control (226,074) (28,162) (172,417) (152,663) 19,754 Timing: Labour costsWorks Overheads (75,626) 19,904 (72,064) (147,035) (74,971) Timing: Under recoveryPlant Operation Costs 139,653 31,798 119,561 368,347 248,787 Timing: Over recoveryOther Property and Services (433,066) 1,164 (420,566) (379,671) 40,895 Timing: Workers Compensation paidTOTAL EXPENSES (31,876,426) (2,797,884) (24,691,741) (22,081,681) 2,610,060

NET OPERATING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) (1,270,195) (1,980,768) 4,381,622 7,434,985 3,053,363

83


Investments At 31 March 2015 the Shire’s cash on hand, deposits and investments totalled $17,784,339 and total Shire investment interest earned for the month was $47,405. Actual interest earned for the year to date of $418,355 exceeds the year to date budget of $331,000. Term Deposits – Cash Management At the end of March the Shire had the following short-term facilities (term deposits).

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA - MARGARET RIVERSTATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITYFOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31 March 2015

BUSINESS UNITS 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 YTDAmended Month of YTD YTD Variance

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

NON OPERATING GRANTS & CONTRIBUTIONSEmergency and Fire Services 305,152 0 305,152 283,403 0Town Planning 0 0 0 0Community Buildings 1,000,000 0 1,000,000 0 (1,000,000) Perm: Possible grant for Cultural Centre projectCultural Centre 185,500 0 185,500 0 (185,500) Timing: Grant approved, not yet receivedParks and Gardens 124,400 0 124,400 124,400 0Asset Services 37,125 0 0 0 0Construction 1,540,342 133,446 1,371,942 1,493,017 0Caravan Parks 0 0 0 0 0TOTAL NON OPERATING REVENUES 3,192,519 133,446 2,986,994 1,900,820 (1,086,174)

NET RESULT 1,922,324 (1,847,322) 7,368,616 9,335,804 1,967,189

ADJUSTMENTS FOR NON-CASHREVENUE AND EXPENDITURE

Add back Depreciation 7,021,455 (586,271) 5,253,789 5,194,462 0Add back (Profit)/Loss Asset Disposal (104,376) (636) (104,376) 6,320 110,696 Timing: Asset disposalsAdd back Movement in Provisions,etc 0 0 0 0 0

6,917,079 (586,907) 5,149,413 5,200,782 51,369

CAPITAL EXPENDITUREPurchase Land Held for Resale 0 0 0 0 0Purchase Land and Buildings (2,746,749) (209,054) (1,711,249) (409,339) 1,301,910 Timing: project delaysPurchase Infrastructure Assets - Other (1,652,520) (72,535) (1,586,520) (929,756) 656,764 Timing: Waste Services projectsPurchase Infrastructure Assets - Roads (5,435,229) (1,537,288) (4,868,133) (3,487,128) 1,381,005 Timing: Works programme recently commencedPurchase Plant and Equipment (1,399,966) (358,302) (1,149,717) (1,129,901) 0Purchase Furniture and Equipment (27,500) 0 (37,000) (16,110) 20,890 Timing: budget profile of purchases

Repayment of Debentures (581,452) (126,171) (433,483) (433,482) 0Advances to Community Groups (12,768) 0 (12,768) (12,768) 0Transfers to Cash Reserves (2,863,691) (17,444) (2,863,691) (2,611,752) 0

(14,719,875) (2,320,794) (12,662,561) (9,030,236) 3,632,325

CAPITAL REVENUEProceeds from Disposal of Assets 315,319 34,500 315,319 165,158 (150,161) Timing: Sale of vehiclesProceeds from Disposal of Investments 0 0 0 0 0Proceeds from Self-Supporting Loan 13,599 2,271 12,030 12,031 0Proceeds from New Loan 0 0 0 0 0Transfers from Cash Reserves 3,171,287 0 3,171,287 1,843,603 (1,327,684) Timing: Transfers to be processed when required

3,500,205 36,771 3,498,636 2,020,791 (1,477,845)

SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) JULY 1 B/FWD 2,433,267 2,433,267 2,433,267 0

SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) C/FWD 53,000 (4,718,252) 5,787,371 9,960,408 4,173,038

Term Days Maturity Institution (ADI) Principal $

Interest Rate Interest $

91 15/6/15 National Australia Bank 1,000,000 3.10% 7,729 273 16/6/15 AMP Bank 1,000,000 3.50% 26,178 178 29/7/15 National Australia Bank 2,000,000 3.45% 33,649 182 17/8/15 Bankwest 4,000,000 3.05% 60,833 180 7/9/15 Bankwest 2,000,000 3.00% 29,589 363 11/9/15 National Australia Bank 2,000,000 3.66% 72,799

84


Four Term Deposits matured in March. A $1 million investment with Bankwest was increased to $2 million and invested for 6 months at 3%, a $3 million investment with National Australia Bank was split into an investment of $2 million for 6 months at 3.11% and $1 million for 90 days at 3.10%. The $1 million investment with Members Equity Bank matured and was rolled over into the Bankwest investment and the $1 million investment with Bendigo Bank was not rolled over. The Reserve Bank’s decision to lower the cash rate to 2.25% on 3 February 2015 resulted in lower interest rate yields being obtained for cash based investments. The average rate of interest to be paid on all of the term deposits has reduced to 3.27% from 3.43%.

Overnight cash facility As a result of Supertowns the Shire had an overnight cash deposit facility with WATC. On 26 March 2015 the final drawdown of $210,000 for the Surfers Point project was received along with interest earned of $235,400. The balance of this facility is now nil apart from the interest accrued in March of $671.

182 14/9/15 National Australia Bank 2,000,000 3.11% 31,015 14,000,000 261,792

85

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 Held for Trading CDOs The Shire no longer has any CDOs in its investment portfolio. The class action for these CDOs is still in progress and if successful is anticipated to recover a portion of the total loss on this portfolio of $404,547.

In-Kind Support In-Kind support and fee waivers as at 31 March 2015 totalled $12,162 and included $10,400 of fees waived by Council for the Augusta Adventure Race and the Drug Aware Surf Pro and $1,762 of other fees waived under delegation. In addition $2,900 was provided in sponsorships for sports representatives. Reserves Movement to reserves at this stage represent transfers agreed to as part of the mid-year budget review and interest earned on reserve funds for the year to date. Budgeted transfers to and from reserves will occur progressively through the year. STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT / LEGAL IMPLICATIONS As per 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 22(1) (d). STRATEGIC PLAN / POLICY IMPLICATIONS Community Strategic Plan 2033 (CSP) Corporate Business Plan 2014-2018 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 Absolute Majority RECOMMENDATION That Council:


2. Approves over budget expenditure of $50,000 for job PXN002 Rails to Trails (Wadandi Track) and notes this over budget expenditure will be funded from expected expenditure savings and revenue increases compared to the amended budget.

ADVICE TO APPLICANT / PROPONENT Nil

86

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 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

RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION CR HAYNES, CR HASTIE OM2015/87 That Council:


2. Approves over budget expenditure of $50,000 for job PXN002 Rails to Trails (Wadandi Track) and notes this over budget expenditure will be funded from expected expenditure savings and revenue increases compared to the amended budget

CARRIED 6/0

87

SHIRE OF AUGUSTA MARGARET RIVER ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015 12. MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

12.1 REFUGEE WELCOME ZONE – CR LYN SERVENTY

This item was moved forward in the agenda and dealt with before item 11.1.1 in the agenda. 13. MOTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION AT NEXT MEETING 14. NEW BUSINESS OF AN URGENT NATURE

14.1. Members 14.2. CEO

14.2.1 MATTER RELATING TO A CONTRACT THAT MAY BE ENTERED INTO FOR THE SALE OF COUNCIL LAND RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION CR EARL CRHASTIE OM2015/88 That the matter be considered as an item of new business of an urgent business to be discussed with members of the public excluded.

CARRIED 6/0

Members of the public, press and officers left Chambers and the Public Gallery at 7.17

MOTION That council notes that an expression of interest has been received for the purchase of two lots owned by the Shire and that Council procedes to the next step in the disposition of the property by private treaty.

COUNCIL DECISION CR HASTIE CR VEITCH OM2015/89 That council notes that an expression of interest has been received for the purchase of two lots owned by the Shire and that Council procedes to the next step in the disposition of the property by private treaty.

CARRIED 6/0

MOTION That the meeting be reopened to the public. COUNCIL DECISION CR EARL CR KENNAUGH OM2015/90 That the meeting be reopened

CARRIED 6/0

The meeting was reopened at 7.26

15. CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS

16. CLOSURE OF MEETING

The Chair thanked all in attendance and closed the meeting at 7.27pm

88

Ordinary Council - Shire of Augusta–Margaret River...ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015...

Documents

Transcript of Ordinary Council - Shire of Augusta–Margaret River...ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 2015...