Agenda of Ordinary Council

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 5

Disclosure of Interests

Notes for Your Guidance

Impact of a Financial Interest (s. 5.65. & s. 67. Local Government Act 1995)

A member who has a Financial Interest in any matter to be discussed at a Council or Committee Meeting, which will be attended by the member, must disclose the nature of the interest:

a. In a written notice given to the Chief Executive Officer before the Meeting or;

b. At the Meeting immediately before the matter is discussed.

A member, who makes a disclosure in respect to an interest, must not:

a. Preside at the part of the Meeting relating to the matter or;

b. Participate in, or be present during, any discussion or decision making procedure relative to the matter, unless and to the extent that, the disclosing member is allowed to do so under Section 5.68 or Section 5.69 of the Local Government Act 1995.

Interests Affecting Financial Interest

The following notes are a basic guide for Councillors when they are considering whether they have a Financial Interest in a matter.

1. A Financial Interest, pursuant to s. 5.60A or 5.61 of the Local Government Act 1995, requiring disclosure occurs when a Council decision might advantageously or detrimentally affect the Councillor or a person closely associated with the Councillor and is capable of being measured in money terms. There are expectations in the Local Government Act 1995 but they should not be relied on without advice, unless the situation is very clear.

2. If a Councillor is a member of an Association (which is a Body Corporate) with not less than 10 members i.e sporting, social, religious etc, and the Councillor is not a holder of office of profit or a guarantor, and has not leased land to or from the club, i.e, if the Councillor is an ordinary member of the Association, the Councillor has a common and not a financial interest in any matter to that Association.

3. If an interest is shared in common with a significant number of electors and ratepayers, then the obligation to disclose that interest does not arise. Each case needs to be considered.

4. If in doubt declare.

5. As stated if written notice disclosing the interest has not been given to the Chief Executive Officer before the meeting, then it must be given when the matter arises in the Agenda, and immediately before the matter is discussed. Under s. 5.65 of the Local Government Act 1995 failure to notify carries a penalty of $10 000 or imprisonment for 2 years.

6. Ordinarily the disclosing Councillor must leave the meeting room before discussion commences. The only exceptions are:

6.1 Where the Councillor discloses the extent of the interest, and Council carries a motion under s.5.68(1)(b)(ii) of the Local Government Act 1995; or

6.2 Where the Minister allows the Councillor to participate under s.5.69(3) of the Local Government Act 1955, with or without conditions.

Interests Affecting Proximity (s. 5.60b Local Government Act 1995)

1. For the purposes of this subdivision, a person has a proximity interest, pursuant to s.5.60B of the Local Government Act 1995, in a matter if the matter concerns;

a proposed change to a planning scheme affecting land that adjoins the person’s land; or
a proposed change to the zoning or use of land that adjoins the person’s land; or
a proposed development (as defined in section 5.63(5)) of land that adjoins the person’s land.

2. In this section, land (the proposal land) adjoins a person’s land if;

The proposal land, not being a thoroughfare, has a common boundary with the person’s land; or
The proposal land, or any part of it, is directly across a thoroughfare from, the person’s land; or
The proposal land is that part of a thoroughfare that has a common boundary with the person’s land.

3. In this section a reference to a person’s land is a reference to any land owned by the person or in which the person has any estate or interest.

Interests Affecting Impartiality

Definition: An interest, pursuant to Regulation 11 of the Local Government (Rules of Conduct) Regulations 2007, that would give rise to a reasonable belief that the impartiality of the person having the interest would be adversely affected, but does not include an interest as referred to in Section 5.60 of the ‘Act’.

A member who has an Interest Affecting Impartiality in any matter to be discussed at a Council or Committee Meeting, which will be attended by the member, must disclose the nature of the interest;

a. In a written notice given to the Chief Executive Officers before the Meeting or;

b. At the Meeting, immediately before the matter is discussed

Impact of an Impartiality disClosure

There are very different outcomes resulting from disclosing an interest affecting impartiality compared to that of a financial interest. With the declaration of a financial interest, an elected member leaves the room and does not vote.

With the declaration of this type of interest, the elected member stays in the room, participates in the debate and votes. In effect then, following disclosure of an interest affecting impartiality, the member’s involvement in the Meeting continues as if no interest existed.

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 13

SHIRE OF ESPERANCE

AGENDA

Ordinary Council Meeting
TO BE HELD IN Council Chambers ON 27 October 2020

COMMENCING AT 4pm

1. OFFICIAL OPENING

2. ATTENDANCE

Members

Cr I Mickel, AM JP President Rural Ward

Cr B Parker Deputy President Rural Ward

Cr J O’Donnell Town Ward

Cr S McMullen Town Ward

Cr S Payne, JP Town Ward

Cr J Obourne Town Ward

Cr R Chambers Town Ward

Cr D Piercey, JP Town Ward

Cr W Graham Rural Ward

Shire Officers

Mr S Burge Chief Executive Officer

Mr M Walker Director Asset Management

Mr S McKenzie Acting Director External Services

Ms B O’Callaghan Acting Director Corporate Resources

Mr R Hindley Manager Strategic Planning & Land Projects

Miss A McArthur Executive Assistant

Members of the Public & Press

3. APOLOGIES & NOTIFICATION OF GRANTED LEAVE OF ABSENCE

4. APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

5. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE PERSON PRESIDING WITHOUT DISCUSSION

6. DECLARATION OF MEMBERS INTERESTS

6.1 Declarations of Financial Interests – Local Government Act Section 5.60a

6.2 Declarations of Proximity Interests – Local Government Act Section 5.60b

6.3 Declarations of Impartiality Interests – Admin Regulations Section 34c

7. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

8. PUBLIC ADDRESSES / DEPUTATIONS

9. Petitions

Nil

10. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

That the Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting of the 22 September 2020, the Special Council Meeting of the 22 September 2020, and the Special Council Meeting of the 1 October 2020 be confirmed as true and correct records.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

11. DELEGATES’ REPORTS WITHOUT DISCUSSION

Councillor Attendance

	Agenda Briefing Sessions (12)	Ordinary Council Meetings (12)	Special Council Meetings (7)	Annual Electors Meeting (1)
Shire President Cr Ian Mickel	12	12	7	1
Deputy President Cr Basil Parker	12	12	5	1
Cr Jo-Anne O’Donnell	12	12	6	1
Cr Steve McMullen	11	12	6	1
Cr Shelley Payne	12	12	6	1
Cr Jennifer Obourne	11	12	6	1
Cr Ron Chambers	11	12	5	1
Cr Dale Piercey	9	11	6	1
Cr Wes Graham	12	11	5	1

12. MATTERS REQUIRING A DETERMINATION OF COUNCI

12.1 External Services

Item: 12.1.1

Change in Operating Hours at Esperance Museum

Author/s	Mel Ammon	Manager Community Support
Authorisor/s	Scott McKenzie	Acting Director External Services

File Ref: D20/26219

Applicant

Esperance Museum

Location/Address

Esperance Museum

Executive Summary

To consider a reduction in operating hours of the Esperance Museum.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council endorse a reduction in operating hours of the Esperance Museum to four days per week, being Thursday to Sunday, 1.30pm – 4.30pm.

Background

Pre COVID-19, the Esperance Museum was open 7 days per week from 1.30pm – 4.30pm.

To keep the doors open, the Shire of Esperance, rely entirely on a volunteer workforce. The Museum does have a 0.7 FTE Cultural Officer allocated to it, however the role of Cultural Officer is to organise the operational needs of the Museum and support the volunteers.

The Esperance Museum Volunteer Group (Museum Volunteers) has consisted of up to 24 people, who covered 7 shifts per week with two people per shift. The average age of a Museum volunteer is 72 years old.

The Esperance Museum closed due to the COVID-19 Pandemic on Saturday 21 March 2020.

The Museum reopened to the public on Thursday, 17 September 2020. Due to volunteer availability the Museum can open 4 days per week, being Thursday through to Sunday at the current time.

Officer’s Comment

Staff have worked with the Museum volunteers throughout the Pandemic closure to keep volunteers interested in their role and informed of the situation. The vulnerability of the demographic of our volunteers was always front of mind for both our staff and the volunteers themselves, and there has been a significant decrease in the capacity of our volunteers over this time and as we return to a “new, post COVID normal”. Generally we have approx. 24 volunteers available to assist on the front counter, currently there are 14.

For the first three weeks of operation, the Museum has welcomed 644 visitors, including a school group outside normal opening hours, and has received $4,486 in takings. For the same three week period last year, takings were $4,560, at 7 days per week of operation. The similarity in takings with the reduced hours is attributed to the busier than usual tourism numbers in Esperance for the school holidays post COVID.

It is the desire of the wider Museum stakeholder group for the Museum operating hours to return to 7 day per week operation as soon as practicable, however they understand the challenges of working within a volunteer workforce.

Consideration has been given to conducting a recruitment drive to rally more volunteers to the Museum, however the Cultural Officer, who undertakes volunteer management, inductions, training etc will be taking long service leave from mid December 2020 through to April 2021, with only minimal relief being provided during this time. Volunteer management is very important and there is a reluctance to recruit new volunteers if they cannot be trained and managed appropriately from the outset. For this reason, a volunteer recruitment drive has been earmarked leading into the 2021/22 tourist season, with a view to enabling the Museum to operate 7 days again.

It has been well publicised that Esperance is expecting a busier Christmas period than ever before. Council may wish to consider the possibility of employing a casual officer to open the Museum the three days per week the volunteers cannot during this time. Hiring a Level 2 Officer to open the Museum and operate the front desk for 3.5 hours per day for three days per week (Mon-Wed) over this peak period, say six weeks, would cost approx. $300 per week.

Consultation

Museum Volunteers

Financial Implications

The financial implications arising from this report is the possible reduction in takings, operating a 4 day week operation rather than 7 days. This is not reflective of takings to date, however we may see an impact from March 2021 once the tourism season is over.

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

Nil

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 - 2027

Leadership

A financially sustainable and supportive organisation achieving operational excellence

Provide responsible resource and planning management for now and the future.

Corporate Business Plan 2020/21 – 2023/24

C3.8 Manage the Esperance Museum

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

Nil

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council note the reduction in operating hours of the Esperance Museum to four days per week, being Thursday to Sunday, 1.30pm – 4.30pm

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 14

Item: 12.1.2

Amendment of Local Planning Policy - Holiday Houses

Author/s	Richard Hindley	Manager Strategic Planning & Land Projects
Authorisor/s	Scott McKenzie	Acting Director External Services

File Ref: D20/25634

Applicant

Internal

Location/Address

Shire of Esperance

Executive Summary

For Council to consider proceeding with an amendment to a Local Planning Policy namely the Holiday Homes – Development Requirements Local Planning Policy.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council in accordance with Clause 4 of the Deemed Provisions (set out in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 Schedule 2) amend the Holiday House – Development Requirements Policy as contained in Attachment A.

Background

This item aims to amend the existing Holiday Homes – Development Requirements Local Planning Policy by referencing the specific land use of ‘Holiday House’ and to allow all applications in a fire prone area to be lodged with restrictions applying in the BAL-40 and BAL-FZ rating areas.

This is consistent with the WAPC Position Statement – Tourism land uses in bushfire prone areas (Attachment B).

Officer’s Comment

A number of changes are proposed to the Policy which are outlined below:

Change

Minor modification to title to reference land use

Correction to land use definition from ‘Holiday Home’ to ‘Holiday House’

Amending the provision stating that where a Bushfire Attack Level Assessment of BAL-40 and BAL-Flame Zone applies it is considered inappropriate for a Holiday Home land use and an application for development approval will be refused.

Consultation

As this policy is being amended under Clause 4.(1) of the Deemed Provisions (set out in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 Schedule 2 it will need to be advertised not less than 21 days.

Financial Implications

Nil

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

Division 2 of Part 2 of the Deemed Provisions (set out in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 Schedule 2)

78D. Proposed development in a bushfire prone area

(1) Unless subclause (2) applies, before commencing any development on a development site a person (the developer) must cause to be prepared a bushfire attack level assessment for the development site if the development site —

(a) is in a bushfire prone area; and

(b) has been in a bushfire prone area for a period of at least 4 months.

(2) A developer is not required under subclause (1) to cause to be prepared a bushfire attack level assessment for a development site if —

(a) a BAL contour map has been prepared in relation to the development site; or

(b) because of the terrain of the development site it is not possible to calculate the bushfire attack level of the development site.

Planning and Development Act 2005

Policy Implications

This item relates to policy development.

Local Planning Policies are guidelines used to assist the local government in making decisions under the Local Planning Scheme and may address land use as well as development requirements. Although Local Planning Policies are not part of the Local Planning Scheme they must be consistent with, and cannot vary, the intent of the Local Planning Scheme provisions. In considering an application for Planning Approval, the local government must have regard to a Local Planning Policy as required under Clauses 3(5) and 67 of the Deemed Provisions (set out in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 Schedule 2.

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 - 2027

Built Environment

New developments that enhance the existing built environment

Encourage innovation and support new development

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

a ⇩.	Draft Amended Holiday House Local Planning Policy
b ⇩.	WAPC Position Statement – Tourism land uses in bushfire prone areas

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council in accordance with Clause 4.(1) of the Deemed Provisions (set out in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 Schedule 2) amend the Holiday House – Development Requirements Local Planning Policy as contained in Attachment A.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 34

Item: 12.1.3

Placement of Fill – Local Planning Policy

Author/s	Richard Hindley	Manager Strategic Planning & Land Projects
Authorisor/s	Scott McKenzie	Acting Director External Services

File Ref: D20/26506

Applicant

Internal

Location/Address

Shire of Esperance

Executive Summary

For Council to consider proceeding with a Local Planning Policy namely the Placement of Fill – Local Planning Policy.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council in accordance with Clause 4 of the Deemed Provisions (set out in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 Schedule 2) prepare the Placement of Fill – Local Planning Policy as contained in Attachment A.

Background

Council at its August 2020 Ordinary Meeting of Council resolved (O0820-280):

That Council instruct the CEO to prepare a Local Planning Policy dealing with Fill.

This item and the attached Local Planning Policy have been prepared in response to this resolution.

Officer’s Comment

The objectives of the proposed Placement of Fill – Local Planning Policy are:

· To ensure that the filling of land does not adversely impact on the amenity or environment of the locality in which it is being undertaken;

· To ensure that drainage is appropriately managed;

· To minimise environmental impacts on surface and groundwater hydrology and vegetation; and

· To ensure visual impact is minimised on neighbouring properties and the streetscape

· Minimise the potential for the proposal to create nuisance via dust, sand drift and/or erosion.

The policy will apply to the filling of land in all zones except ‘rural’ under Local Planning Scheme No. 24 where the lot size is 4000m² or greater or located with Special Control Area No. 4 (Public Drinking Water source Protection Areas) or 5 (Wetlands of Significance and Lake Warden Recovery Catchment).

Consultation

Financial Implications

Nil

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

Division 2 of Part 2 of the Deemed Provisions (set out in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 Schedule 2).

Policy Implications

This item relates to policy development.

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 - 2027

Built Environment

New developments that enhance the existing built environment

Encourage innovation and support new development

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

a ⇩.

Placement of Fill – Local Planning Policy

Officer’s Recommendation

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 41

Item: 12.1.4

Development Application - Oversized Outbuilding (Shed) - Lot 723 (23) Twilight Beach Road, West Beach

Author/s	Peter Wilks	Senior Planning Officer
Authorisor/s	Richard Hindley	Manager Strategic Planning & Land Projects

File Ref: D20/27065

Applicant

Drake-Brockman Building & Construction Pty on behalf of T Spencer

Location/Address

Lot 723 (23) Twilight Beach Road, West Beach

Executive Summary

For Council to consider Development Application 10.2020.4419.1 for an Oversized Outbuilding (Shed) at Lot 723 (23) Twilight Beach Road, West Beach.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council approve Development Application 10.2020.4419.1 for an Oversized Outbuilding (Shed) at Lot 723 (23) Twilight Beach Road, West Beach subject to conditions.

Background

Discussions between Planning and Health Services and the Applicant for a proposed Oversized Outbuilding (Shed) at Lot 723 (23) Twilight Beach Road, West Beach occurred on the 16 July 2020 due to concerns regarding whether there was sufficient space on-site for the operation of an effluent disposal system. A Development Application for an Oversized Outbuilding (Shed) at Lot 723 (23) Twilight Beach Road, West Beach subsequently received by Planning Services on 17 August 2020.

The application was subsequently advertised to the adjoining landowners between 27 August 2020 and 10 September 2020 with no objections being received.

In accordance with the provisions of Council’s Local Planning Policy: Outbuildings, the proposed outbuilding requires referral to Council for determination, with the policy stating:

Outbuildings in Residential and Future Residential Zones

*Objective*	The objective of these development requirements is to achieve a balance between: • Providing for the legitimate garaging, storage and other domestic needs of people living in residential areas; and • Minimising the adverse impacts outbuildings may have on the amenity (e.g. peace and quiet), appearance and character of residential neighbourhoods, and on neighbours.
*Permitted Uses of Outbuildings*	• Must be for legitimate residential purposes. • Use of outbuildings for commercial/business uses is not permitted except where planning approval has been granted for a home based business. • Use of outbuildings for human habitation is not permitted. • An Outbuilding will not be approved until such time as a Dwelling is substantially commenced on the lot.
*Setbacks*	As per provisions of Local Planning Scheme No. 24 and the Residential Design Codes;
*Size*	• Maximum area of outbuilding(s) per lot: o 10% of site area where lot 1000m2 or less; o 100m2 where lot is greater than 1000m2. • Maximum wall height – 3.6 metres • Maximum ridge height – 4.2 metres
*Maximum Variation*	• 25% for Site Area • 10% for Wall or Ridge Height
*Consultation*	Where an application for an outbuilding does not comply with the site and setback provisions referenced above, the application is to be referred to the affected adjoining landowners for comment in accordance with the consultation provisions of the Residential Design Codes.

Shire staff are only authorised to approve applications that meet the requirements of legislation and Local Planning Policy. Applications for outbuildings that do not comply with the above development requirements will be assessed on a case by case basis and may be permitted subject to the following matters being taken into account in the assessment process:

· Demonstration that the larger size is required to satisfy specific domestic needs;

· The outbuilding will not reduce the amount of open space required by Table 1 of the Residential Design Codes;

· The outbuilding being sited behind the front setback line for the dwelling;

· Use of non-reflective materials on the outbuilding and/or adequate screening from the road and neighbouring properties being provided; and

· Comments from the affected adjoining landowners.

If the Maximum Variation is exceeded the matter will be referred to Council.

This proposal calls for 121.8 square metres of new Outbuilding to be constructed on the property, with a proposed wall height of 4.2 metres and a ridge height of 4.981 metres, all of which exceed the requirements of Local Planning Policy: Outbuildings.

Officer’s Comment

It is noted that the building does not comply with the acceptable development provisions of the Local Planning Policy – Outbuildings as the proposal:

1) Exceeds the maximum 10% of the site area (80.5 square metres) of Outbuildings permitted in the Residential zone as well as the 25% maximum variation criteria which would permit up to 100.6 square metres of Outbuildings on the property subject to neighbour referral.

2) Exceeds the maximum wall height of 3.6 metres as well as the 10% maximum variation criteria which would permit a wall height up to 3.96 metres subject to neighbour referral.

3) Exceeds the maximum ridge height of 4.2 metres, as well as the 10% maximum variation criteria which would permit a ridge height up to 4.62 metres subject to neighbour referral.

That said, there are several mitigating factor in this instance.

1) The Outbuilding is located behind the main line of the dwelling and in an area where landscaping in the road reserve reduces the visual impact from Twilight Beach Road. The existing Dwelling dominates the frontage of the property which will further reduce the visual impact on Twilight Beach Road from the Outbuilding.

2) The adjoining landowners have not objected and the development to the rear is the Star of the Seas School which is unlikely to be impacted by visual amenity issues from the proposed Outbuilding (Shed).

3) Lot 723 (23) Twilight Beach Road slopes down from the street boundary to the rear of the property, with an elevation of approximately 53 metres above sea level at the front of the property and an elevation of approximately 51 metres at the rear. This means that the visible height from the street will be lower than if the property was a level development site.

One thing to note is that no retaining walls or earthworks have been noted on the plans. Any need for retaining walls or earthworks may require a separate development application or an amendment to the planning consent.

As a consequence, it is the position of Planning Officers that the proposal can be supported subject to conditions.

Reasons for recommendation

· The development is an ‘I’ use which means it is not permitted unless it is incidental to a dwelling;

· The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the Residential Zone; and

· Although exceeding the maximum heights in Local Planning Policy: Outbuildings non-objections have been received from all adjoining landowners.

· The development is well screened from Twilight Beach Road due to a vegetated median between Twilight Beach Road and the slip road.

Consultation

The application was subsequently advertised to the adjoining landowners between 27 August 2020 and 10 September 2020 with no objections being received.

Financial Implications

Application fees totalling $147.00 were received as part of this application.

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

The statutory implications arising from this report are:

· Planning and Development Act 2005

· Local Planning Scheme No. 24

· Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015

Policy Implications

Local Planning Policies are guidelines used to assist the local government in making decisions under the Local Planning Scheme and may address land use as well as development requirements. Although Local Planning Policies are not part of the Local Planning Scheme they must be consistent with, and cannot vary, the intent of the Local Planning Scheme provisions. In considering an application for Planning Approval, the local government must have regard to a Local Planning Policy as required under Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 - 2027

Built Environment

New developments that enhance the existing built environment

Encourage innovation and support new development

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

a ⇩.	Site Plan
b ⇩.	Outbuilding Plans

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council approve 10.2020.4419.1 for an Oversized Outbuilding (Shed) at Lot 723 (23) Twilight Beach Road, West Beach subject to the following conditions:

1. Development shall be carried out and fully implemented in accordance with the details indicated on the stamped approved plans unless otherwise required or agreed in writing by the Shire of Esperance (Planning Services).

2. The approved outbuilding(s) shall be used for purposes incidental and ancillary to the enjoyment of the dwelling on the land only, and shall not be used for human habitation, commercial or industrial uses.

3. All stormwater and drainage run off from all roofed and impervious areas is to be retained on-site to the satisfaction of the Shire of Esperance (Building Services).

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

5. The works involved in the implementation of the development must not cause sand drift and/or dust nuisance. In the event that the Shire of Esperance is aware of, or is made aware of, the existence of a dust problem, measures such as installation of sprinklers, use of water tanks, mulching, or other land management systems as appropriate may be required to be installed or implemented to prevent or control dust nuisance, and such measures shall be installed or implemented within the time and manner directed by the Shire of Esperance (Environmental Health Services).

6. During construction stage, adjoining lots are not to be disturbed without the prior written consent of the affected owner(s).

7. The development hereby approved must not create community safety concerns, or otherwise adversely affect the amenity of the subject locality by reason of (or the appearance or emission of) smoke, fumes, noise, vibration, odour, vapour, dust, waste water, waste products or other pollutants.

And the following advice notes:

1. THIS IS NOT A BUILDING PERMIT. An application for a building permit or building approval certificate is required to be submitted and approved by the Shire of Esperance (Building Services) prior to any works commencing on-site.

2. The development is to comply with the Building Code of Australia, Building Regulations and the Local Government Act.

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

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

5. Horizon Power has requested the Shire to advise Applicants that Horizon Power has certain restrictions regarding the installation of conductive materials near its network assets. Applicants are advised to contact Horizon Power’s Esperance office to ascertain whether any of Horizon Power’s restrictions affect their proposed development.

6. The applicant is to liaise with Shire of Esperance (Planning Services) in regards to any deviation to the approved plans to establish if an amendment to the development approval is required.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 51

Item: 12.1.5

Development Application - Two (2) Group Dwellings - Lot 1 (46) Dempster Street, Esperance

Author/s	Peter Wilks	Senior Planning Officer
Authorisor/s	Richard Hindley	Manager Strategic Planning & Land Projects

File Ref: D20/27113

Applicant

Wells Building Designers and Consultants on behalf of M Hart and Meringo Holdings Pty Ltd.

Location/Address

Lot 1 (46) Dempster Street, Esperance

Executive Summary

For Council to consider Development Application 10.2020.4428.1 for two (2) group dwellings at Lot 1 (46) Dempster Street, Esperance.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council approve Development Application 10.2020.4428.1 for two (2) group dwellings at Lot 1 (46) Dempster Street, Esperance subject to conditions.

Background

Lot 1 (46) Dempster Street, Esperance is zoned Residential R40/60 and is affected by Special Control Area 9 – Coastal Inundation and Erosion Zone and Additional Use 6.

It should be noted the Additional Use 6 applies to the area that was formerly zoned ‘Tourist Residential’ under Local Planning Scheme No. 23.

A development application for two (2) group dwellings, retaining walls and associated earthworks was received by Shire of Esperance (Planning Services) on 25 August 2020.

The application was subsequently referred to adjoining landowners for a number of variations to the Deemed-to-Comply provisions of the Residential Design Codes with one non-objection from the owner of Lot 2 (44) Dempster Street and one objection from the owner of Lot 3 (5) Kemp Street being received.

The application was also referred to Shire of Esperance (Asset Management Division) due to concerns regarding car parking and sight lines around the Dempster Street/Kemp Street Intersection.

The text of the objection was subsequently referred back to the applicant, who provided additional details regarding the proposed garrison style fencing. As the arrangement of one (1) car parking bay per dwelling remains, the objection to the lack of on-site car parking remains valid. As such the application is referred to Council for determination.

For reference, a separate approval has been issued for earthworks and retaining walls on-site as no objection were received regarding either earthworks or retaining walls.

Officer’s Comment

The proposal calls for two (2) group dwellings, one two-storey two bedroom two bathroom, and a single storey two bedroom two bathroom.

The table below outlines the Officer’s assessment for those points to the Deemed-to-Comply criteria of the Residential Design Codes, where an objection was lodged, which are not covered by neighbour non-objections or which do not impact on adjoining landowners but which still impact on Shire interests (such as road safety).

Proposed

Deemed-to-comply

Design Principles

Officers Comment

0.806 metre setback to a corner truncation

1 metre requirement for buildings in R40 density code

P2.1 Buildings setback from Street Boundaries an appropriate distance to ensure they:

- Contribute to, and are consistent with, an established streetscape;

- Provide adequate privacy and open space for dwellings;

- Accommodate site planning requirement such as parking, landscaping and utilities; and

- Allow safety clearances for easements for essential service corridors.

P2.2 Buildings mass and form that:

- Uses design features to affect the size and scale of the building;

- Uses appropriate minor projections that do not detract from the character of the streetscape;

- Minimises the proportion of the façade at ground level taken up by building services, vehicle entries and parking supply, blank walls, servicing infrastructure access and meters and the like; and

- Positive contributes to the prevailing or future development context and streetscape as outlined in the local planning framework.

The streetscape in proximity to the intersection of Dempster and Kemp Streets is eclectic. Within one block there are commercial buildings at nil setbacks to the street, a bevy of vacant commercial and residential lots, the Museum and Museum village, Group Dwellings with reduced front setbacks and old weatherboard dwellings setback further than required. As a result of such an un-unified character, it is not possible to say that the proposal is consistent or inconsistent with the character of the area.

The setback reduction to the corner truncation doesn’t impact on privacy or open space provision.

Both dwellings are proposed with only one (1) car parking bay. This is not consistent with the requirement for two (2) car parking bays per Group Dwelling.

The proposed development has an adequate clearance to the sewer easement running through the south-east of the property.

The design of both dwellings minimises the proportion of the façade used for vehicle entries and parking.

Being new development in an area with a number of older or poorly maintained buildings, the proposal will make a positive contribution to the development context and the streetscape.

A two (2) metre setback for Garages to the Primary Street.

A 4.5 metre setback from the primary street

The setting back of carports and garages to maintain clear sight lines along the street and not to detract from the streetscape or appearance of dwellings; or obstruct view of dwellings from the street and vice versa.

In this instance it is the position of planning officers that the reduced setback for Garages from the primary street is justified due to the following:

- Direct access from Dempster Street was not permitted to the landowner by Shire of Esperance due to car parking and sight lines around the Dempster Street/Kemp Street Intersection;

- Kemp Street is a much lower traffic environment compared to Dempster Street;

- The Kemp Street Road Reserve is 30 metres wide, with the road verge fronting the property being 10 metres wide, results in the proposal not impacting on sight lines or views to and from the dwelling.

One (1) car parking bay per dwelling

Two (2) car parking bays per dwelling

P3.1 Adequate car parking to be provided on-site in accordance with projected need related to:

- The type, number and size of dwellings;

- The availability of on-street and other off-street parking; and the proximity of the proposed development to public transport and other facilities.

P3.2 Consideration may be given to a reduction in the minimum number of on-site car parking spaces for grouped and multiple dwellings provided:

- Available street parking in the vicinity is controlled by the local government; and

- The decision marker is of the opinion that a sufficient equivalent number of on-street space are available near the development.

The objection lodged included an objection to the variation to the car parking requirement, stating:

It is rare that there is only one car per family especially since these are two (2) bedroom dwellings. This means that cars will be parked on the verge and cause traffic problems especially on such a busy corner.

It is difficult to say if the proposal provides for adequate car parking. A single car parking bay would be adequate if there was to only be one resident in each dwelling, however with two bedrooms in each dwellings there is the potential for additional vehicle parking demand.

This is further complicated by the presence of a pedestrian footpath in the Kemp Street Road Reserve in front of the property, which restricts the ability to use the road verge for additional car parking.

There is a lot of on-street car parking in the area, particularly along The Esplanade, however it is acknowledged that residents in the Shire of Esperance favour parking directly in front of the property/business they are visiting and are not inclined to walk great distances. Planning Services further believes that the proposal may impact on the existing car parking at the Museum Village and Visitors Centre which has car parking in proximity to the proposal.

One thing to note is there is sufficient space on the half of the property not proposed for development for car parking, however as the property is in the process of being subdivided, the expectation is that the two undeveloped ‘lots’ will be built upon in the future. As such any use of these properties for additional car parking would be temporary in nature.

1.8 metre high front fencing.

1.2 metre high fencing within the primary street setback

C4 Front Fences within the primary street setback area are visually permeable above 1.2 metres of natural ground level, measured from the primary street side of the front fence

P4 Front fences are low or restricted in height to permit surveillance (as per Clause 5.2.3) and enhance streetscape (as per Clause 5.1.2), with appropriate consideration to the need:

- For attenuation of traffic impacts where the street is designated as a primary or district distributor or integrator arterial; and

- For necessary privacy or noise screening for outdoor living areas where the street is designated as a primary or district distributor or integrator arterial.

The objection lodged also included an objection to the proposed fencing, stating:

I am opposed to the increase in height of the front fencing because this may encourage break-ins since once people get into the properties they will not be able to be seen as per the normal 1.2 metres fencing height.

The front fencing proposed is 1.8 metre wrought iron garrison style fencing which is highly visually permeable as such the proposal may be in accordance with the Deemed-to-Comply criteria (C4) so long as the fencing chosen is compliant with the definition of visually permeable in the Residential Design Codes.

If the type of fencing selected does not comply with the definition of visually permeable, the use of over height and non-visually permeable fencing can still be considered in this location as it would be required to mitigate traffic impacts from vehicles on Dempster Street.

Planning Officers also wish to note that the property is currently approved for subdivision and is currently in the process of clearing the conditions for creation of property titles.

From the position of the Planning Officers, the major issue is the lack of car parking. There is sufficient space on the half of the property not proposed for development for car parking, however as the property is in the process of being subdivided, the expectation is that the two undeveloped ‘lots’ will be built upon in the future. As such any use of these properties for additional car parking would be a temporary solution at best. That said the fact that both dwellings only have two bedrooms does mean that the car parking demand will be less than a conventional three or four bedroom house, as the low number of bedrooms means the dwellings are unlikely to be used by large families. Visitors going to see relatives are more likely to cause traffic difficulties, though issues relating to visitors will be shorter term in nature.

With the only significant variation being to the car parking provision, and the low number of bedrooms meaning that any car parking issue is likely to be for visitors to the properties, it is the position of Planning Services that the proposal can be supported.

Reasons for recommendation

· The development is a ‘P’ use that means it is a permitted use,

· The development is compliant with the applicable Design Principles of the R-Codes; and

· The requirements of SCA 9 can be satisfied by a condition.

Consultation

The application was advertised to adjoining landowners between 26 August 2020 and 9 September 2020 for a number of variations to the Deemed-to-Comply provisions of the Residential Design Codes with one non-objection from the owner of Lot 2 (44) Dempster Street and one objection from the owner of Lot 3 (5) Kemp Street being received.

Financial Implications

Application fees totalling $1600.00 were received as part of this application.

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

The statutory implications arising from this report are:

· Planning and Development Act 2005

· Local Planning Scheme No. 24

· Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 - 2027

Built Environment

New developments that enhance the existing built environment

Encourage innovation and support new development

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

a ⇩.	Objection
b ⇩.	Plans

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council resolve to approve Development Application 10.2020.4428.1 for two (2) group dwellings at Lot 1 (46) Dempster Street, Esperance subject to the following conditions:

1. Development shall be carried out and fully implemented in accordance with the details indicated on the stamped approved plan(s) unless otherwise required or agreed in writing by the Shire of Esperance (Planning Services).

2. The land and buildings the subject of this approval shall be used for the purposes of Dwelling only and for no other purpose unless otherwise approved in accordance with the provisions of Local Planning Scheme No. 24 (refer below definition as extracted from the Residential Design Codes).

- Dwelling – A building or portion of a building being used, adapted, or designed or intended to be used for the purpose of human habitation on a permanent basis by a single person, a single family, or no more than six persons who do not comprise a single family.

3. During construction stage, adjoining lots are not to be disturbed without the prior written consent of the affected owner(s).

4. Earthworks are to be in accordance with Australian Standard 3798 Guidelines on Earthworks for Commercial and Residential Developments.

5. The vehicle crossover is to be constructed, drained and sealed to the satisfaction and specifications of the Shire of Esperance (Asset Management Division) – refer enclosed vehicle crossover application form.

6. One (1) car parking bay is to be provided on-site for the exclusive use of each dwelling in accordance with the requirements of Australian Standard AS2890.1:2004 Parking Facilities – Off-street Car Parking.

7. Vehicle parking, manoeuvring and circulation areas shall be suitably constructed, sealed (asphalt, concrete or brickpavers), drained and thereafter maintained.

8. All stormwater and drainage run off from all roofed and impervious areas is to be retained on-site to the satisfaction of the Shire of Esperance (Building Services).

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

10. The approved development must be connected to a reticulated water supply provided by a licensed water provider.

11. Before the approved development is occupied, the property must be connected to the Water Corporation reticulated sewerage system.

12. The development hereby approved must not create community safety concerns, or otherwise adversely affect the amenity of the subject locality by reason of (or the appearance or emission of) smoke, fumes, noise, vibration, odour, vapour, dust, waste water, waste products or other pollutants.

13. The works involved in the implementation of the development must not cause sand drift and/or dust nuisance. In the event that the Shire of Esperance is aware of, or is made aware of, the existence of a dust problem, measures such as installation of sprinklers, use of water tanks, mulching, or other land management systems as appropriate may be required to be installed or implemented to prevent or control dust nuisance, and such measures shall be installed or implemented within the time and manner directed by the Shire of Esperance (Environmental Health Services).

14. All fencing shall be in accordance with the Shire of Esperance Local Law Relating to Fencing.

15. The proposed operations, during and after construction, are required to comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.

16. A Section 70A Notification under the Transfer of Land Act 1893 (as amended) must be registered against the Certificate of Title to the land the subject of the proposed development advising the owners and successors in title that:

VULNERABLE COASTAL AREA - This lot is located in an area likely to be subject to coastal erosion and/or inundation over the next 100 years.

The Section 70A Notification is to be registered on the Certificate of Title prior to the issuance of a building permit, with all costs associated with preparing and lodging the Section 70A Notification on the Certificate of Title at the applicant's/owner's expense.

AND the following advice notes:

1. THIS IS NOT A BUILDING PERMIT. An application for a building permit is required to be submitted and approved by the Shire of Esperance (Building Services) prior to any works commencing on-site.

2. The development is to comply with the Building Code of Australia, Building Act 2011, Building Regulations 2012 and the Local Government Act 1995.

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

6. The Department of Water and Environmental Regulation and Environment Regulation has prepared dust control guidelines for development sites, which outline the procedures for the preparation of dust management plans. Further information on the guidelines can be obtained from the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation and Environmental Regulation’s website www.dwer.wa.gov.au under air quality publications.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 68

Item: 12.1.6

Development Application - Alterations and/or Additions to Dwelling and Fencing - Lot 133 (134) Johns Street, West Beach

Author/s	Peter Wilks	Senior Planning Officer
Authorisor/s	Richard Hindley	Manager Strategic Planning & Land Projects

File Ref: D20/27645

Applicant

Wells Building Designers and Consultants on behalf of V & G Oversby

Location/Address

Lot 133 (134) Johns Street, West Beach

Executive Summary

That Council considers Development Application 10.2020.4421.1 for Alterations and/or Additions to Dwelling and Fencing at Lot 133 (134) Johns Street, West Beach.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council resolve to approve Development Application 10.2020.4421.1 for Alterations and/or Additions to Dwelling and Fencing at Lot 133 (134) Johns Street, West Beach subject to conditions.

Background

Lot 133 (134) Johns Street is zoned Residential R12.5.

An application for Development Approval was received by Shire of Esperance (Planning Services) for Alterations and/or Additions to Dwelling and Fencing on 21 August 2020.

The application was subsequently referred to the adjoining landowners along Johns Street for a number of variations to the Deemed-to-Comply provisions of the Residential Design Codes with one objection being received from the owners of Lot 134 (132) Johns Street, West Beach.

Upon receipt of the objection, the applicant was advised of the objection on 7 September 2020 and a copy of the objection with the objectors contact details removed was provided to the applicant.

Subsequently amended plans were received by Planning Services on 18 September 2020 with the amended plans being forwarded to the objector, with the objector being queried if they wished to amend, withdraw or maintain their objection.

The objector verbally advised Planning Services on 22 September 2020 that they wished to maintain their objection to the proposal, and the application was subsequently forwarded to Council for determination.

The landowner for Lot 133 (134) Johns Street subsequently dropped in a letter of justification for the proposed fence on 6 October 2020 which is included with this item.

Officer’s Comment

The proposal calls for exterior modifications to the dwelling, extension of the front deck/verandah and the replacement of the existing front fence with a new 1.8 metre high fence.

The table below outlines the Officer’s assessment for those points to the Deemed-to-Comply criteria of the Residential Design Codes and the Fencing Local Law, where an objection has been lodged:

Proposed

Deemed-to-comply

Objection

Design Principles

Officers Comment

3.75 metre primary street setback.

Originally proposed at 3.58 metres.

7.5 metre primary street setback as a standard requirement with alternative options for a setback equal to the average setback of dwellings on both sides, or for a 50% intrusion subject to an appropriate compensating area being provided.

We do not support the requests of setback variations of R-Codes in accordance with the Design Principles provisions as we believe it will have negative impacts on amenities and streetscape.

P2.1 Buildings setback from Street Boundaries an appropriate distance to ensure they:

- Contribute to, and are consistent with, an established streetscape;

- Provide adequate privacy and open space for dwellings;

- Accommodate site planning requirement such as parking, landscaping and utilities; and

- Allow safety clearances for easements for essential service corridors.

P2.2 Buildings mass and form that:

- Uses design features to affect the size and scale of the building;

- Uses appropriate minor projections that do not detract from the character of the streetscape;

- Minimises the proportion of the façade at ground level taken up by building services, vehicle entries and parking supply, blank walls, servicing infrastructure access and meters and the like; and

- Positive contributes to the prevailing or future development context and streetscape as outlined in the local planning framework.

While the original proposal for a 3.58 metre setback did not comply with any front setback criteria, the revised 3.75 metre setback complies with the intruding/compensating criteria of the Residential Design Codes. As such it is seen that the objection is not valid.

There is also several precedents in the area for this type of front setback reduction, as Lot 255 (126) Johns Street and Lot 102 (141) Johns Street both utilise intruding/compensating criteria to allow for the buildings to sit further forward.

1.8 metre high fencing

Local Law:

A fence within the primary street setback area shall not exceed 1200mm in height without the written approval of the Local Government

R-Codes: Front fences within the primary street setback that are visually permeable above 1.2 metres of natural ground level.

R-Codes: Front fences within the primary street setback that are visually permeable above 1.2 metres of natural ground level

We believe that the proposed front street fencing is out of character with the area and will also have a negative impact on the streetscape and amenity.

P4 Front Fences are low or restricted in height to permit surveillance (as per Clause 5.2.3) and enhance streetscape (as per Clause 5.1.2), with appropriate considered to the need:

- For attenuation of traffic impacts where the street is designated as a primary or district distributor or integrator arterial; and

- For necessary privacy or noise screening for outdoor living areas where the street is designated as a primary or district distributor or integrator arterial

There is a conflict between the provisions of the Residential Design Codes and Fencing Local Law in this instance.

The fencing local law states that A fence within the primary street setback area shall not exceed 1200mm in height without the written approval of the Local Government while the R-Codes allows for Front fences within the primary street setback that are visually permeable above 1.2 metres of natural ground level.

As such it is considered that the proposed Fence can be considered, however it requires the consent of local government. The proposed fence type is deemed visually permeable as defined by the Residential Design Codes.

It is noted that the proposed type of fencing complies with the definition of visual permeability under the Residential Design Codes.

The Deemed-to-comply provisions of the R-Codes state that Front fences within the primary street setback that are visually permeable above 1.2 metres of natural ground level. As the proposed fence is compliant with this criteria it is exempt from development approval under Cl 61.(d) of the Deemed Provisions.

The fence still requires approval under the local law and this can be done by the issuance of the development approval with it being shown on the approved plans.

Given the provisions of the R-Codes it may be warranted to review the Fencing Local Law to reflect the exemption granted by the R-Codes.

The objector also provided comments relating to the impact of the proposal on the infrastructure servicing the property, notably the effluent disposal system. The Shire of Esperance has assessed the proposal and determined that the proposal can be considered but should the system on the site incur damage or fail in the future it is to be repaired or upgraded at the applicant’s cost.

It is noted that the objector did suggest an option to mitigate the visual impact of the fence, namely reducing the height of the fence to 1.2 metres (starting at the same height as the top of the existing wall at Lot 133 (134) Johns Street. This option was forwarded to the applicant who has decided to pursue the 1.8 metre fence height as marked on the plans.

Reasons for recommendation

· The proposed development is consistent with the requirements of the R-Codes; and

· The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the Residential Zone.

Consultation

The application was advertised to adjoining landowners between 25 August 2020 and 8 September 2020 with one objection received.

Financial Implications

Application fees totalling $147.00 were received as part of this application.

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

The statutory implications arising from this report are:

· Planning and Development Act 2005

· Local Planning Scheme No. 24

· Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015

Policy Implications

· Residential Design Codes Volume 1

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 - 2027

Built Environment

New developments that enhance the existing built environment

Encourage innovation and support new development

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

a ⇩.	Plans
b ⇩.	Objection
c ⇩.	Landowners Letter of Justification
d ⇩.	Applicants Report of Justification

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council resolve to approve Development Application 10.2020.4421.1 for Alterations and/or Additions to Dwelling and Fencing at Lot 133 (134) Johns Street, West Beach subject to the following conditions:

2. During construction stage, adjoining lots are not to be disturbed without the prior written consent of the affected owner(s).

3. All stormwater and drainage run off from all roofed and impervious areas is to be retained on-site to the satisfaction of the Shire of Esperance (Building Services).

5. The development hereby approved must not create community safety concerns, or otherwise adversely affect the amenity of the subject locality by reason of (or the appearance or emission of) smoke, fumes, noise, vibration, odour, vapour, dust, waste water, waste products or other pollutants.

6. The works involved in the implementation of the development must not cause sand drift and/or dust nuisance. In the event that the Shire of Esperance is aware of, or is made aware of, the existence of a dust problem, measures such as installation of sprinklers, use of water tanks, mulching, or other land management systems as appropriate may be required to be installed or implemented to prevent or control dust nuisance, and such measures shall be installed or implemented within the time and manner directed by the Shire of Esperance (Environmental Health Services).

7. All fencing shall be in accordance with the Shire of Esperance Local Law Relating to Fencing unless otherwise approved.

8. The proposed operations, during and after construction, are required to comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.

AND the following advice notes:

1. THIS IS NOT A BUILDING PERMIT. An application for a building permit is required to be submitted and approved by the Shire of Esperance (Building Services) prior to any works commencing on-site.

2. The development is to comply with the Building Code of Australia, Building Act 2011, Building Regulations 2012 and the Local Government Act 1995.

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

7. The approved development is to comply with the requirements of the Health (Treatment of Sewage and Disposal of Effluent and Liquid Waste) Regulations 1974, including the following criteria:

- Septic tank to be located a minimum of 1.2 metres from all buildings, footings and boundaries. Leach drains to be 1.8 metres from all buildings, any septic tanks, any other leach drains or soak wells and boundaries.

- The footings for the decking fall within the 1800 setback. Should the system incur damage or fail in the future it is to be repaired or upgraded at the applicant’s cost

8. Health Local Law:

Escape of Smoke etc.

5.1.3(1) An owner or occupier shall not cause or permit the escape of smoke, dust, sand, fumes, offensive or foul odours, liquid waste or liquid refuse from the premises in such quantity or of such nature as to cause or to be a nuisance.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 96

Item: 12.1.7

Development Application - Hangar - S/L 18 (65) Merivale Road, Myrup

Author/s	Peter Wilks	Senior Planning Officer
Authorisor/s	Richard Hindley	Manager Strategic Planning & Land Projects

File Ref: D20/28588

Applicant

Marc Payne, Director, Fairfield Pty Ltd on behalf of S N Payne

Location/Address

Strata Lot 18 (65) Merivale Road, Myrup

Executive Summary

That Council consider Development Application 10.2020.4472.1 for a Hangar at Strata Lot 18 (65) Merivale Road, Myrup.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council resolve to approve Development Application 10.2020.4472.1 for a Hangar at Strata Lot 18 (65) Merivale Road, Myrup.

Background

Shire of Esperance (Planning Services) received a development application on 1 October 2020 for a Hangar at Strata Lot 18 (65) Merivale Road, Myrup.

As the application relates to land owned by an Elected Member which is not their primary place of residence, the application must be determined by Council in accordance with EXT 004: Applications Lodged by Senior Employees or Elected Members.

Officer’s Comment

The application complies with all provisions of the Local Planning Scheme, and as such Planning Officers recommend approval of the development.

It is referred to Council for Determination in accordance with EXT 004: Applications Lodged by Senior Employees or Elected Members.

Reasons for recommendation

· The development is a component of a ‘D’ use which means it is a discretionary approval.

· The development complies with the provisions of SU4 - Myrup Fly-in Estate.

· The development would have been approved under delegated authority if EXT 004: Applications Lodged by Senior Employees or Elected Members did not apply.

Consultation

Nil

Financial Implications

Application fees totalling $147.00 were received as part of this application.

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

The statutory implications arising from this report are:

· Planning and Development Act 2005

· Local Planning Scheme No. 24

· Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015

Policy Implications

Local Planning Policies are guidelines used to assist the local government in making decisions under the Local Planning Scheme and may address land use as well as development requirements. Although Local Planning Policies are not part of the Local Planning Scheme they must be consistent with, and cannot vary, the intent of the Local Planning Scheme provisions. In considering an application for Planning Approval, the local government must have regard to a Local Planning Policy as required under Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 - 2027

Built Environment

New developments that enhance the existing built environment

Encourage innovation and support new development

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

a ⇩.	Plans
b ⇩.	Site Plan

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council approve Development Application 10.2020.4472.1 for a Hangar at Strata Lot 18 (65) Merivale Road, Myrup subject to the following conditions:

2. During construction stage, adjoining lots are not to be disturbed without the prior written consent of the affected owner(s).

3. The approved Hangar shall not be used for human habitation, commercial or industrial uses.

4. All stormwater and drainage run off from all roofed and impervious areas is to be retained on-site to the satisfaction of the Shire of Esperance (Building Services).

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

6. The development hereby approved must not create community safety concerns, or otherwise adversely affect the amenity of the subject locality by reason of (or the appearance or emission of) smoke, fumes, noise, vibration, odour, vapour, dust, waste water, waste products or other pollutants.

7. All fencing shall be in accordance with the Shire of Esperance Local Law Relating to Fencing.

8. The works involved in the implementation of the development must not cause sand drift and/or dust nuisance. In the event that the Shire of Esperance is aware of, or is made aware of, the existence of a dust problem, measures such as installation of sprinklers, use of water tanks, mulching, or other land management systems as appropriate may be required to be installed or implemented to prevent or control dust nuisance, and such measures shall be installed or implemented within the time and manner directed by the Shire of Esperance (Environmental Health Services).

9. The proposed operations, during and after construction, are required to comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.

AND the following advice notes:

1. THIS IS NOT A BUILDING PERMIT. An application for a building permit is required to be submitted and approved by the Shire of Esperance (Building Services) prior to any works commencing on-site.

2. The development is to comply with the Building Code of Australia, Building Act 2011, Building Regulations 2012 and the Local Government Act 1995.

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

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 111

Item: 12.1.8

Development Application - Single Dwelling, Retaining Walls and associated Earthworks - Lot 22 (135) Twilight Beach Road, West Beach

Author/s	Peter Wilks	Senior Planning Officer
Authorisor/s	Richard Hindley	Manager Strategic Planning & Land Projects

File Ref: D20/28760

Applicant

M & K Beasley

Location/Address

Lot 22 (135) Twilight Beach Road, West Beach

Executive Summary

For Council to consider Development Application 10.2020.4462.1 for a Single Dwelling, Retaining Walls and associated Earthworks at Lot 22 (135) Twilight Beach Road, West Beach.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council refuse Development Application 10.2020.4462.1 for a Single Dwelling, Retaining Walls and associated Earthworks at Lot 22 (135) Twilight Beach Road, West Beach as is inconsistent with Clause 26 (4) of Part 4 of Local Planning Scheme No. 24.

Background

A development application was received by Shire of Esperance (Planning Services) on 23 September 2020 for a Single Dwelling, Retaining Walls and associated Earthworks at Lot 22 (135) Twilight Beach Road, West Beach.

Assessment of the proposal determined that the only variation from the provisions of the Residential Design Codes and Local Planning Scheme No. 24 was to the front setback. As such the application was referred to the owners of Lot 23 (137) Twilight Beach Road for comment, as the owners of Lot 21 (4) Willowtree Avenue are also the applicants for this application. No objections were received.

Officer’s Comment

Lot 22 (135) Twilight Beach Road is zoned Residential R12.5 and is not affected by any Special Control Areas.

The property is in an area designated as Bushfire Prone by the Department of Fire and Emergency Services.

The property is affected by Clause 26 (4) of Part 4 of Local Planning Scheme No. 24 which requires a 7.5 metre primary street setback to Twilight Beach Road, with the application proposing a setback of 3.997 metres. This is in conflict with the majority of dwellings fronting Twilight Beach Road, where a check of aerial photography indicates that the majority of dwellings fronting Twilight Beach Road comply with the 7.5 metre setback. However the unusual arrangement of Twilight Beach Road in front of Lot 22 (135) actually results in the proposed dwelling being located at approximately the same distance from the actual road than a substantial number of houses along Twilight Beach Road due to the unusually large road reserve.

There are a number of houses along Twilight Beach Road that have been approved with reduced primary street setbacks, including the adjoining Lot 22 (137) Twilight Beach Road which was approved by Council on 23 August 2016 (Council Resolution: O0816-54) at a 3.641 metre setback. Note this approval was issued under Local Planning Scheme No. 23 which allowed a larger range of variations to Scheme provisions to occur.

The 7.5 metre front setback requirement under Clause 26 (4) of Part 4 of Local Planning Scheme No. 24 cannot be varied. Under Local Planning Scheme No. 24 only provisions in Schedule 1, 6, 7 8 and 9 can be varied under Clause 34. of the Scheme.

As such it is the recommendation of the Planning Officers that the proposal be refused due to non-compliance with the provisions of Local Planning Scheme No. 24. Council has no discretion to approval the development other than with a front setback of 7.5 metres from Twilight Beach Road. It is recommended that the Shire investigate options to allow a reduced setback to the west of Willowtree Avenue on Twilight Beach Road.

Reason for recommendation

· The proposed development is inconsistent with Clause 26 (4) of Part 4 of Local Planning Scheme No. 24

· Council has no discretion to approval the development other than with a front setback of 7.5 metres from Twilight Beach Road.

Consultation

The application was referred to the owners of Lot 23 (137) Twilight Beach Road for comment between 25 September 2020 and 12 October 2020. No objections were received.

No referral was undertaken to the owners of Lot 21 (4) Willowtree Avenue, as they are also the applicants for this application.

Financial Implications

Application fees totalling $1246.00 were received as part of this application.

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

The statutory implications arising from this report are:

· Planning and Development Act 2005

· Local Planning Scheme No. 24

26. Modification of R-Codes

(4) In the established ‘Residential’ zone along Castletown Quays and Twilight Beach Road the minimum front setback shall be 7.5 metres unless otherwise provided by Special Control Area provisions of this Scheme.

· Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015

Policy Implications

· Residential Design Codes Volume 1

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 - 2027

Built Environment

New developments that enhance the existing built environment

Encourage innovation and support new development

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

a ⇩.

Plans

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council

1. Refuse Development Application 10.2020.4462.1 for a Single Dwelling, Retaining Walls and associated Earthworks at Lot 22 (135) Twilight Beach Road, West Beach on the following grounds:

a). The proposed development is not inconsistent with Clause 26 (4) of Part 4 of Local Planning Scheme No. 24.

2. Investigate options to allow a reduced setback to the west of Willowtree Avenue on Twilight Beach Road.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 120

Item: 12.1.9

Development Application - Single Dwelling and Oversized Outbuilding (Shed) - Lot 237 (17) Bell Way, Bandy Creek

Author/s	Peter Wilks	Senior Planning Officer
Authorisor/s	Richard Hindley	Manager Strategic Planning & Land Projects

File Ref: D20/28796

Applicant

Wells Building Designers and Consultants on behalf of W and S Hurrell

Location/Address

Lot 237 (17) Bell Way, Bandy Creek

Executive Summary

That Council consider Development Application 10.2020.4471.1 for a Single Dwelling and oversized Outbuilding (Shed) at Lot 237 (17) Bell Way, Bandy Creek.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council approve Development Application 10.2020.4471.1 for a Single Dwelling and oversized Outbuilding (Shed) at Lot 237 (17) Bell Way, Bandy Creek subject to conditions.

Background

Shire of Esperance (Planning Services) received a development application on 30 September 2020 for a Single Dwelling and oversized Outbuilding (Shed) at Lot 237 (17) Bell Way, Bandy Creek.

The applicant subsequently obtained a non-objection from the one adjoining landowner.

The proposed Dwelling complies with all provisions of the Residential Design Codes barring a side setback variation, with 0.15 metres proposed and one (1) metre required.

This proposed Outbuilding calls for a wall height of 4.2 metres and a ridge height of 4.861 metres, which exceeds the maximum variations permitted in the policy for a wall height of up to 3.96 metres and a ridge height of up to 4.62 metres subject to advertising. Side and rear setback variations are also proposed, with 0.15 metre setbacks proposed where 1 metre is required.

In accordance with the provisions of Council’s Local Planning Policy: Outbuildings, the proposed outbuilding requires referral to Council for determination, with the policy stating:

Outbuildings in Residential and Future Residential Zones

*Objective*	The objective of these development requirements is to achieve a balance between: • Providing for the legitimate garaging, storage and other domestic needs of people living in residential areas; and • Minimising the adverse impacts outbuildings may have on the amenity (e.g. peace and quiet), appearance and character of residential neighbourhoods, and on neighbours.
*Permitted Uses of Outbuildings*	• Must be for legitimate residential purposes. • Use of outbuildings for commercial/business uses is not permitted except where planning approval has been granted for a home based business. • Use of outbuildings for human habitation is not permitted. • An Outbuilding will not be approved until such time as a Dwelling is substantially commenced on the lot.
*Setbacks*	As per provisions of Local Planning Scheme No. 24 and the Residential Design Codes;
*Size*	• Maximum area of outbuilding(s) per lot: o 10% of site area where lot 1000m2 or less; o 100m2 where lot is greater than 1000m2. • Maximum wall height – 3.6 metres • Maximum ridge height – 4.2 metres
*Maximum Variation*	• 25% for Site Area • 10% for Wall or Ridge Height
*Consultation*	Where an application for an outbuilding does not comply with the site and setback provisions referenced above, the application is to be referred to the affected adjoining landowners for comment in accordance with the consultation provisions of the Residential Design Codes.

· Demonstration that the larger size is required to satisfy specific domestic needs;

· The outbuilding will not reduce the amount of open space required by Table 1 of the Residential Design Codes;

· The outbuilding being sited behind the front setback line for the dwelling;

· Use of non-reflective materials on the outbuilding and/or adequate screening from the road and neighbouring properties being provided; and

· Comments from the affected adjoining landowner’s.

If the Maximum Variation is exceeded the matter will be referred to Council for determination.

Officer’s Comment

Lot 237 (17) Bell Way is zoned Residential R15 and is affected by Special Control Area 2B – Flinders Residential Development.

The proposed Single Dwelling complies with all provisions barring the side boundary setback, where 0.15 metres is proposed and a one (1) metre setback is required in accordance with the Residential Design Codes.

The Planning Officers note that was the Dwelling to be assessed separately from the Outbuilding, the Dwelling could be approved under delegated authority by officers.

As the adjoining non-shire landowner has raised no objection, and the proposed Outbuilding will not generate a significantly larger impact than an Outbuilding that complied with the variation criteria of Local Planning Policy: Outbuildings, the recommendation of the Planning Officers is for approval.

Reason for recommendation

· The development in an ‘I’ use which means it is not permitted unless it is incidental to a dwelling;

· The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the Residential Zone; and

· Although exceeding the maximum heights in Local Planning Policy: Outbuildings non-objections have been received from all adjoining landowners.

Consultation

The applicant sought and obtained a non-objection from the one adjoining non-shire landowner.

Financial Implications

Application fees totalling $1228.80 were received as part of this application.

Asset Management Implications

Nil. The proposed Outbuilding will not impact on future development of adjoining properties.

Statutory Implications

The statutory implications arising from this report are:

· Planning and Development Act 2005

· Local Planning Scheme No. 24

· Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015

Policy Implications

Local Planning Policies are guidelines used to assist the local government in making decisions under the Local Planning Scheme and may address land use as well as development requirements. Although Local Planning Policies are not part of the Local Planning Scheme they must be consistent with, and cannot vary, the intent of the Local Planning Scheme provisions. In considering an application for Planning Approval, the local government must have regard to a Local Planning Policy as required under Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 - 2027

Built Environment

New developments that enhance the existing built environment

Encourage innovation and support new development

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

a ⇩.

Plans

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council approve Development Application 10.2020.4471.1 for a Single Dwelling and oversized Outbuilding (Shed) at Lot 237 (17) Bell Way, Bandy Creek subject to the following conditions:

3. During construction stage, adjoining lots are not to be disturbed without the prior written consent of the affected owner(s).

4. Earthworks are to be in accordance with Australian Standard 3798 Guidelines on Earthworks for Commercial and Residential Developments.

6. A minimum of two (2) car parking bays are to be provided on-site in accordance with the requirements of Australian Standard AS2890.1:2004 Parking Facilities – Off-street Car Parking.

7. Vehicle parking, manoeuvring and circulation areas shall be suitably constructed, sealed (asphalt, concrete or brickpavers), drained and thereafter maintained.

8. All stormwater and drainage run off from all roofed and impervious areas is to be retained on-site to the satisfaction of the Shire of Esperance (Building Services).

10. The approved development must be connected to a reticulated water supply provided by a licensed water provider.

11. Before the approved development is occupied, the property must be connected to the Water Corporation reticulated sewerage system.

14. All fencing shall be in accordance with the Shire of Esperance Local Law Relating to Fencing.

15. The proposed operations, during and after construction, are required to comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.

AND the following advice notes:

1. THIS IS NOT A BUILDING PERMIT. An application for a building permit is required to be submitted and approved by the Shire of Esperance (Building Services) prior to any works commencing on-site.

2. The development is to comply with the Building Code of Australia, Building Act 2011, Building Regulations 2012 and the Local Government Act 1995.

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

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 180

Item: 12.3.2

New Fee for Bay of Isles Leisure Centre

Author/s	Beth O'Callaghan	Acting Director Corporate Resources
Authorisor/s	Shane Burge	Chief Executive Officer

File Ref: D20/27948

Applicant

Internal

Location/Address

Bay of Isles Leisure Centre

Executive Summary

For Council to consider a parental/supervision spectator fee for underage adolescent gym users at the Bay of Isles Leisure Centre to be included in the 2020/21 Schedule of Fees and Charges.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council adopt a parental/supervision spectator fee for underage adolescent gym users at the Bay of Isles Leisure Centre of $1 to be included in the 2020/21 Schedule of Fees and Charges.

Background

During May 2020 Council considered the fees and charges for 2020/21. At the May OCM the fees as presented were approved however with four changes requested by Council. One of the four changes was overlooked by officers and subsequently not included in the Fees and Charges when adopted with the 2020/21 Budget in August 2020.

The overlooked fee was the parental/supervision fee for underage adolescent gym users at the Bay of Isles Leisure Centre. The intention of this fee was so a parent/supervisor could supervise their adolescent whilst their adolescent was using gym equipment without requiring the parent/supervisor to pay full fee entry to the gym.

The fee was determined to be $1 per parent/supervisor which is the same for spectators that attend the aquatic area at the Bay of Isles Leisure Centre.

Officer’s Comment

Although it was the intention of Council to include this fee as per resolution O0520-150 (see below) it cannot be subsequently included without the formal adoption of Council as per Local Government Act (1995) Section 6.16 (3) (a) and will also require absolute majority.

Council Resolution

That Council endorse the Fees and Charges associated to the Bay of Isle Leisure Centre to be included within the 2020/2021 Budget as amended.

CARRIED

F7 - A0

Reason: Council wanted to include a parental/supervisor fee of $1 in the dry area of the Bay of Isle Leisure Centre.

Therefore this report is presented to Council to correct this oversight and include the fee into the Schedules of Fees and Charges as was the intention of Council in May 2020.

Consultation

Nil

Financial Implications

The financial implications arising from this report will be the income received for any parental/supervision spectator fees at the Bay of Isles Leisure Centre.

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

Local Government Act (1995) S.6.16 Imposition of Fees and Charges

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 - 2027

Leadership

A financially sustainable and supportive organisation achieving operational excellence

Corporate Business Plan 2020/21 – 2023/24

Provide responsible resource and planning management for now and the future.

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

Nil

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council adopt a parental/supervision spectator fee for underage adolescent gym users at the Bay of Isles Leisure Centre of $1 to be included in the 2020/21 Schedule of Fees and Charges.

Voting Requirement Absolute Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 182

Item: 12.3.3

Policy Review - EXE 019, EXT 015, EXT 030, ASS 025 and new Policies Electoral Caretaker Period and Attendance at Events

Author/s	Sarah Walsh	Coordinator Governance & Corporate Support
Authorisor/s	Beth O'Callaghan	Acting Director Corporate Resources

File Ref: D20/28590

Applicant

Internal

Location/Address

N/A

Executive Summary

For Council to consider

1. Endorsing the amended and/or new policies of;

· EXE 019: Risk Management

· ASS 025: Internal Drone (Remotely Piloted Aircraft System) Use

· Electoral Caretaker Period

· Attendance at Events.

2. Authorising the Chief Executive Officer to undertake a 30 day advertising and consultation period for the following proposed policies;

· EXT 015: Outdoor Personal Training in Public Places; and

· EXT 030: Trading in Public Places

Recommendation in Brief

That Council endorse EXE 019: Risk Management, EXT 015: Outdoor Personal Training in Public Places, EXT 030: Trading in Public Places, Electoral Caretaker Period and Attendance at Events inclusive of additions, deletions and amendments.

Background

A review of Council Policies is recommended to take place every two years, in line with Council elections to ensure that the policies are in keeping with community expectations, relevance and current requirements.

Officer’s Comment

The following is a summary of recommended changes. Please refer to attachments for full details.

Policy Name	Ref No.	Recommended Amendment
Risk Management	EXE 019	Australia/New Zealand Standard ISO 31000:2009 Risk Management has been updated to 31000:2018
Internal Drone (Remotely Piloted Aircraft System) Use	ASS 025	Change to name of policy for consistency with the Operation Manual. Update to include provisions around emergency service operations.
Outdoor Personal Training in Public Places	EXT 015	Recreational Activities on Council Foreshore deleted and replaced with Outdoor Personal Training in Public Places.
Trading in Public Places	EXT 030	Minor wording changes throughout, removal of Jetty Headland and Twilight permit areas. Inclusion of applications not complying with Policy being put to Council for consideration.
Electoral Caretaker Period		New Policy
Attendance at Events		New Policy

In regards to EXT 030 Trading in Public Places, the Jetty Headland and Twilight Beach Permit areas have been removed as trading zones for mobile food vans as there are current lease area(s) operating at these locations. Council will note that there is an exclusion zone of 300m within the Trading in Public Places policy where a mobile food van may not operate if it competes with an established bricks and mortar business that offers a similar service.

The trading zone adjacent to the RAC’s Esperance Holiday Park has also been included in the updated policy. It should be noted that this area may change with the re-development of Esperance Caravan Park. Discussions are underway with relevant stakeholders i.e. the RAC and the Traders Permit holder (BeanBreak) in regards to the short and long term impacts of the redevelopment.

Consultation

Manager Human Resources

OSH/Risk Management Officer

Chief Executive Officer

Manager Development and Statutory Services

Acting Director External Services

Director Asset Management

Technical Officer - Assets

Financial Implications

Nil

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

Local Government Act 1995 – s2.7(2)(b) Determine Local Government’s policies

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 - 2027

Leadership

Work together to enhance trust, participation and community pride

Actively engage and communicate with the community to ensure informed decision making

Corporate Business Plan 2020/21 – 2023/24

Manage Corporate Resources Directorate

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

a ⇩.	EXT 015 - Under Separate Cover
b ⇨.	EXE 019, EXT 030 and ASS 025 - Under Separate Cover
c ⇨.	New Policies - Under Separate Cover

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council

1. Endorse the following Policies inclusive of additions, deletions and amendments;

· EXE 019: Risk Management;

· ASS 025: Internal Drone (Remotely Piloted Aircraft System) Use

· New: Electoral Caretaker Period; and

· New: Attendance at Events.

2. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to undertake a 30 day advertising and consultation period for the following proposed policies;

· EXT 015: Outdoor Personal Training in Public Places; and

· EXT 030: Trading in Public Places.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 185

Item: 12.3.4

Multi Sports Pavilion- Lease Reassignment

Author/s	Mary Bidstrup	Governance and Corporate Support Officer
Authorisor/s	Sarah Walsh	Coordinator Governance & Corporate Support

File Ref: D20/28610

Applicants

Esperance Multi Sports Pavilion Management Committee

Esperance Hockey Association

Location/Address

Portion of Lot 500 Black Street

Executive Summary

For Council to consider reassigning the lease with the Esperance Multi Sports Pavilion Management Committee Incorporated for the Multi Sports building and lighting towers located at the Greater Sports Ground to the Esperance Hockey Association.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council agrees to reassign the lease with the Esperance Multi Sports Pavilion Management Committee Incorporated for the Multi Sports building and lighting towers located at the Greater Sports Ground to the Esperance Hockey Association.

Background

The Esperance Multi Sports Pavilion Management Committee renewed the lease for the Multi Sports Pavilion and light towers in May 2019.

Since this time, the Softball association has disbanded due to lack of members and the pavilion has subsequently been used solely by the Hockey association.

As the pavilion now only has one sporting association using it, the Esperance Multi Sports Pavilion Management Committee wishes to disband and transfer the lease and management of the pavilion over to the Esperance Hockey Association. The Esperance Hockey Association have agreed to this.

This is a land only lease and the Hockey association will be responsible for all maintenance and repairs to the building and lighting towers, as the Management Committee were previously.

Vehicle access to the building is via two vehicle access gates for which the Hockey association already has keys.

The Shire maintains the oval grounds in line with other grassed areas at the Greater Sports Ground.

Officer’s Comment

As the Esperance Hockey Association is the only sporting association using the pavilion and the Esperance Multi Sports Pavilion Management Committee is disbanding, effective management of the pavilion will be best achieved by transferring the lease to the Hockey association as per their request.

Consultation

Esperance Multi Sports Pavilion Management Committee

Esperance Hockey Association

Financial Implications

Annual rent $110 Inc GST

Lease variation fee of $215 Inc GST

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

Local Government Act 1995

Policy Implications

COR004: Building and Property Leases

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 - 2027

Community Connection

A variety of accessible sport, recreation, arts and cultural activities that can be pursued by all

Facilitate and support sport, recreation, arts and cultural activities

Corporate Business Plan 2020/21 – 2023/24

G1.1 Manage Shire Leases and Insurances

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

a ⇩.

Multi Sports Pavilion lease reassignment request

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council agrees to

1. Reassign the lease under the existing terms and conditions for the Esperance Multi Sports Pavilion, Portion of Lot 500 on Plan 411499, Black Street, Esperance, from the Esperance Multi Sports Pavilion Management Committee to the Esperance Hockey Association; and

2. A lease variation fee of $215 Inc GST being payable.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 189

Item: 12.3.5

Appointment of Representative - Council Committee

Author/s	Sarah Walsh	Coordinator Governance & Corporate Support
Authorisor/s	Beth O'Callaghan	Acting Director Corporate Resources

File Ref: D20/28820

Applicant

Valma Shultz

Location/Address

N/A

Executive Summary

To appoint an External Organisational Representative to the Reconciliation Action Plan Working Group to fill a vacancy.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council appoint an External Organisational Representative to the Reconciliation Action Plan Working Group to fill a vacancy.

Background

Under the Local Government Act s.5.11 Committee Membership expires on the Ordinary Election Day of Council which occurs biennially. Following the Ordinary Elections in October 2019 all positions on Council Committees were vacant. At the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 16 November 2019, Council appointed Elected Members to Committees and resolved to contact identified organisations for representatives.

Since January 2020 Council has appointed a number of Organisational representatives to Council Committees, however a number of positions remained vacant.

Officer’s Comment

Following the November Ordinary Council Meeting, a request was sent to all organisations asking for representatives to be nominated. These new representatives will ensure adequate representations from relevant organisations on the council committees.

Since the appointments made in August, one (1) organisation has responded to the request for a representative. It is being recommended that this representative be appointed by Council to allow them the ability to represent their organisation on the respective committee.

Consultation

Nil

Financial Implications

N/A

Asset Management Implications

N/A

Statutory Implications

Local Government Act 1995 – s5.10

Policy Implications

Terms of Reference – Council Committees

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 - 2027

Leadership

Community confidence and trust in Council

Encourage community participation and insight into activities and decisions

Corporate Business Plan 2020/21 – 2023/24

Facilitate Councillors requirements to represent the community

Environmental Considerations

N/A

Attachments

a ⇩.

Valma Shultz Nomination

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council agrees to;

1. Appoint deputy organisational representatives as members of council committees as per the following table;

Committee	Organisation	Representative
Reconciliation Action Plan Working Group	Ngadju Native Title Aboriginal Corporation	Valma Schultz

Voting Requirement Absolute Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 192

Item: 12.3.6

Review of Wards and Representation

Author/s	Sarah Walsh	Coordinator Governance & Corporate Support
Authorisor/s	Beth O'Callaghan	Acting Director Corporate Resources

File Ref: D20/28875

Applicant

Internal

Location/Address

Shire of Esperance

Executive Summary

For Council to consider moving to a no ward system while retaining the current level of representation for the Shire of Esperance following the review of submissions received during the advertising period for the Shire’s current review of wards and representation.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council resolve to;

1. Move to a no ward system for the Shire of Esperance and retain the current level of representation; and

2. Request that the CEO prepare a report to be presented to the Local Government Advisory Board proposing that an order be made under section 2.2(1) of the Local Government Act 1995 to abolish all wards for the Shire of Esperance district.

Background

Currently the Shire of Esperance operates under a two ward system with nine Elected Members, three representing the Rural Ward and six representing the Town Ward. The last review of ward boundaries and representation was completed in 2012, with no changes being made.

Schedule 2.2 of the Local Government Act 1995 requires a local government that has a ward system to carry out a review of the ward boundaries and representation (number of Elected Members) for each ward so that no more than eight years elapse between successive reviews.

A report was put to Council in April 2020 advising that a review of the Shire’s wards and representation was due to be undertaken. The following was resolved by Council;

O0420-108

Council Resolution

That Council agrees to;

1. Commence the review of its ward boundaries and representation in accordance with Schedule 2.2 of the Local Government Act 1995; and

2. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to undertake the steps required to facilitate the review.

In accordance with the Local Government Act 1995 Schedule 2.2, advertising was undertaken in the Kalgoorlie Miner on 1 May 2020 for a period of six weeks which called for submissions as part of the review. A discussion paper was prepared and made available as part of this process and further advertising was undertaken on the Shire’s social media pages, noticeboards and website.

The submission period closed at 4pm 12 June 2020 with two submissions received.

In July 2020, Council resolved to lay the matter on the table to allow for further information and investigation on the effect of removing wards, and further consultation with the community.

The subsequent submission period was advertised from 8 August 2020 and closed on 18 September 2020 with 20 submissions being received;

Option	Number of submissions received
Option 1: Maintain current wards	5
Option 2: Maintain current wards, reduce councillor numbers	0
Option 3: Expand Town Ward	3
Option 4: Expand Rural Ward	3
Option 5: Remove Wards to have whole district as one ward	6
Other	4

Please refer to Attachment A for details of submissions received.

Council is now required to review these submissions and determine the outcome of the wards and representation review.

Officer’s Comment

The table below shows the Shire’s Councillor to Elector ratios at the time of the 2019 elections.

Ward	Number of Councillors	Number of Electors	Councillor to Elector Ratio	% Ratio Deviation
Rural	3	2,720	1:907	+13.53%
Town	6	6,717	1:1,120	-6.77%
TOTAL	9	9,437	1:1,049	N/A

(Source: Statistics provided by the WA Electoral Commission October 2019 Ordinary Local Government Elections)

The percentage ratio deviation gives a clear indication of the percentage difference between the average councillor/elector ratio for the whole local government and the councillor/elector ratio for each ward.

The Local Government Advisory Board has expressed the view that it will tolerate a +/-10% deviation in the Councillor to elector ratio. The above table clearly shows that there is an unacceptable (greater than 10%) deviation for the Rural Ward; therefore a change of boundaries to amend the Councillor to elector ratio needs to occur.

Five options were outlined within the discussion paper, which included moving existing ward boundaries, removing the ward system or keeping the current boundaries in place. The options also included adjustments to councillor numbers, whether overall or between the wards.

Two further options were put forward by the community through the consultation, being as follows;

1. Introduce a second Rural Ward

2. Introduce a third ward for semi-rural areas

Please refer to Attachment B for the assessment of these options.

The submissions received were reasonably balanced across the options.

It is recommended that the Shire move to a no ward system as this would simplify the election process, remove existing confusion regarding the current ward system, ensure that elected members are elected by the whole community and remove the ability for electors to vote more than once in an election.

The community of interest for the Rural and Town ward share many similarities as electors from both wards share facilities such as secondary schools, shops and sporting grounds. Many electors from the Rural Ward have employment within the Town Ward, with some considering themselves to reside ‘in town’ rather than rurally.

Removing the ward system for the district would also eliminate the risk of unbalanced levels of representation between the wards in future, with regard to population growth and elector numbers, as elected members would represent the whole community rather than just a certain area. This would also result in cost savings and reduced resources required for electoral management.

Currently Elected Members are nominated to a specific ward, however the community expectation is that they will represent the whole community’s interests when making decisions. By removing the ward system, this expectation would be more firmly set.

It is recommended that this change be implemented at the next ordinary election day. Subject to approval by the Advisory Board, elected members whose terms do not expire at the next ordinary election would continue to serve in the whole district ward and represent electors of the whole district.

Alternatively if Council prefer to retain a Ward system, it is recommended that Option 3 be adopted as this option is best suited to meet the community’s perception of where they are located, while maintaining the current level of representation in the district.

Alternative Recommendation:

That Council resolve to;

1. Adjust the electoral ward boundary to increase the size of the Town Ward and reduce the size of the Rural Ward;

2. Adjust the number of councillors representing the Rural Ward to be two (2) and the number of councillors representing the Town Ward to be seven (7); and

3. Request that the CEO prepare a report to be presented to the Local Government Advisory Board proposing that orders be made under the following sections of the Local Government Act 1995;

· s. 2.2(1) to change the boundary of wards within the Shire of Esperance district; and

· s. 2.18(3) to change the number of offices of councillor for wards within the Shire of Esperance district.

It is recommended that this change be implemented at the next ordinary election day. Subject to approval by the Advisory Board, elected members whose terms do not expire at the next ordinary election would continue to serve in their current ward, while the adjusted number of representatives would be reflected by the number of vacant positions in each ward at the election.

Under Schedule 2.2(9) once a review has been completed, the local government is to make a report in writing to the Advisory Board and by absolute majority, may propose to the Board the making of any order under section 2.2(1), 2.3(3) or 2.18(3) that it thinks fit.

Consultation

Public consultation was conducted for the required period of six weeks with a discussion paper was prepared to encourage discussion and thought on the issue.

Financial Implications

Nil

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

Local Government Act 1995 – Schedule 2.2

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 - 2027

Leadership

Work together to enhance trust, participation and community pride

Actively engage and communicate with the community to ensure informed decision making

Corporate Business Plan 2019/20 – 2022/23

Facilitate Councillors requirements to represent the community

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

a ⇩.	Submissions Received
b ⇩.	Assessment of Options

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council resolve to;

1. Move to a no ward system for the Shire of Esperance and retain the current level of representation; and

2. Request that the CEO prepare a report to be presented to the Local Government Advisory Board proposing that an order be made under section 2.2(1) of the Local Government Act 1995 to abolish all wards for the Shire of Esperance district.

Voting Requirement Absolute Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 217

12.4 Executive Services

Item: 12.4.1

Agenda Briefing and Ordinary Council Meeting Dates - 2021

Author/s	Alli McArthur	Administration Officer - Executive Services
Authorisor/s	Shane Burge	Acting Chief Executive Officer

File Ref: D20/25757

Applicant

Internal

Executive Summary

For Council to accept the proposed dates for the Agenda Briefing Session and Ordinary Council Meeting for 2021 as attached.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council agrees to the attached schedule of Agenda Briefing Session and Ordinary Council Meeting dates for 2021.

Officer’s Comment

Each year Council endorses proposed Agenda Briefing and Ordinary Council Meeting (OCM) dates for the following year which allows for public advertisement as per section 5.25(1)(g) of the Local Government Act 1995 and 12(1) of the Local Government regulations 1996.

Council meets on the third Tuesday of every month at 1pm for an Agenda Briefing Session and on the fourth Tuesday of every month at 4pm for the Ordinary Council Meeting. It is recommended that this practice continues with the exception of the January OCM, the December meetings and the October meetings to accommodate public holidays, the festive season and the 2021 local government elections. To accommodate these events it is proposed the January OCM be moved to the fourth Wednesday of the month (27 January 2021) and the December and October Agenda Briefing and OCM be held a week earlier.

The September 2020 OCM was held at Cascade Community Hall and was reasonably well attended. It is recommended that Council have the next September OCM at another rural site. An option could be Condingup as the new recreational centre will be complete by that time.

Statutory Implications

Under Section 5.25(1)(g) of the Local Government Act 1995 and 12(1) of the Local Government regulations 1996 Council must give public notice of the date and agenda for Council meetings.

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 – 2027

Community Leadership

Community confidence and trust in Council

Provide transparent and accountable leadership

Attachments

a ⇩.

Agenda Briefing Sessions & Ordinary Council Meetings Dates
January - December 2021

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council:

1. Agree to continue holding an Agenda Briefing at 1pm on the third Tuesday of every month commencing January 2021,

2. Agree to the attached schedule of Ordinary Council Meeting dates from January 2021 until December 2021, noting the following inclusions:

a. The January Ordinary Council Meeting, which will be moved back a day to accommodate the Australia Day Public Holiday,

b. The October meetings, which will be moved forward one week to accommodate for the Local Government Elections; and

c. The December meetings, which will be moved forward one week to accommodate the Festive Season.

3. Agree to hold the September Ordinary Council Meeting to be held at ______________, and

4. Request the Chief Executive Officer to undertake all statutory advertising in this regard.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 220

Item: 12.4.2

Common Seal Usage July 2020 to September 2020

Author/s	Alli McArthur	Executive Assistant
Authorisor/s	Shane Burge	Chief Executive Officer

File Ref: D20/25760

Applicant

Executive Services

Location/Address

Windich Street, Esperance.

Executive Summary

For Council to receive the Common Seal Register.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council receive the register containing information relating to the use of the Shire of Esperance Common Seal.

Background

The Chief Executive Officer and the Shire President are jointly authorised to affix all seals jointly to documents for dealings initiated by a Council resolution. In this regard, the Council resolution need not refer to the sealing action and may only express its wish for certain action which may, ultimately, require the affixing of the seal to a document to achieve the Council’s intention.

Exceptions to the above are:

1. Council staff may take independent action in the use of the seal if, in the opinion of the Shire President and Chief Executive Officer jointly such action is necessary to protect Council’s interest; e.g. Lodging of caveats and easements and being of the opinion that the protection is no longer necessary, the Shire President and Chief Executive Officer may jointly withdraw the protection.

2. The disposition of Council property for which a Council resolution is required expressly stating that the final document be signed and sealed and the transaction finalised.

A detail of all instances where the seal has been affixed is recorded in both a signed register and an electronic register, which is available for inspection by Councillors during normal office hours. This register will be tabled at an Ordinary Council Meeting biannually to be received by Council.

Officer’s Comment

Both the signed register and the electronic register are available for inspection by Councillors during normal office hours. A copy of the electronic register will be tabled at an Ordinary Council Meeting to be received by Council.

Consultation

WALGA

Financial Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

LGA – 9.49a Execution of Documents

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

a ⇩.

Common Seal Register - July 2020 to September 2020

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council receive the report titled The Shire of Esperance Common Seal Usage for the period of July 2020 to September 2020.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

13. Reports Of Committees

Item: 13.1

Minutes of Committees

Author/s	Alli McArthur	Executive Assistant
Authorisor/s	Shane Burge	Chief Executive Officer

File Ref: D20/27171

Attachments

a ⇨.	Esperance Roadwise Committee - 7 September 2020 - Under Separate Cover
b ⇨.	Audit Committee - 9 September 2020 - Under Separate Cover
c ⇨.	Community Support Sub Committee - 10 September 2020 - Under Separate Cover
d ⇨.	Bush Fire Advisory Committee - 16 September 2020 - Under Separate Cover
e ⇨.	CEO Recruitment Committee - 17 September 2020 - Under Separate Cover
f ⇨.	Local Recovery Committee - 21 September 2020 - Under Separate Cover
g ⇨.	CEO Recruitment Committee - 21 September 2020 - Under Separate Cover
h ⇩.	Streetscape Advisory Committee - 14 October 2020 - Under Separate Cover

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council accept the following unconfirmed minutes:

1. Esperance Roadwise Committee - 7 September 2020

2. Audit Committee - 9 September 2020

3. Community Support Sub Committee - 10 September 2020

4. Bush Fire Advisory Committee - 16 September 2020

5. CEO Recruitment Committee - 17 September 2020

6. Local Recovery Committee - 21 September 2020

7. CEO Recruitment Committee - 21 September 2020

8. Streetscape Advisory Committee – 14 October 2020

Simple Majority

Item: 13.2

Bush Fire Advisory Committee - Recommendations

Author/s	Mel Ammon	Manager Community Support
Authorisor/s	Scott McKenzie	Acting Director External Services

File Ref: D20/27387

Applicant

Bush Fire Advisory Committee

Location/Address

N/A

Executive Summary

For Council to consider the recommendations arising from the Bush Fire Advisory Committee meeting held on 16 September 2020.

Committee Recommendation 1

That Council write to the Minister for Emergency Services; Corrective Services and the Minister for Environment; Disability Services; Electoral Affairs and request an update on the Coronial Inquest Recommendations.

Committee Recommendation 2

That Council writes to the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions to provide an update on the endorsement of additional (private) airstrips within the Shire of Esperance as highlighted in the Coroner’s Report – Recommendation 9. Request the Department provide required standards for the endorsement of private airstrips.

Background 1-2

In November 2019 the Coronial Inquest findings from the 2015 Esperance Fires were handed down with 12 recommendations made by Coroner Sarah Linton.

Of these recommendations, the State Emergency Services Minister, Francis Logan, immediately ruled out Recommendation 2, being the funding of a career fire and rescue service station in Esperance.

Of the 11 remaining recommendations, there has been limited public comment from the State or relevant State Agencies on the intention or outcomes for some of these findings.

In concluding her report Ms. Linton reiterated her concern about rising bushfire risks and called on the State Government to act, “The people of Esperance, the staff of DFES and DPAW, and many others, have all contributed to the outcomes in this finding. I hope their work is not in vain and the State Government gives due regards to what the people who actually fight these fires say they need to save lives in the future when the next bushfire inevitably rages in Esperance”.

At the Council Meeting held on 28 July 2020, Council directed the CEO to write to the Department of Fire and Emergency Services and request an update on the Coronial Inquest Recommendations. A Letter was sent on 21 August 2020 and at the recent Bushfire Advisory Committee Meeting held on 16 September 2020, DFES Area Officer advised on 31 June 2020 the Department of Fire and Emergency Services submitted its position on the Coroners Recommendations to the Minister for Emergency Service and this now sits with the State.

Officer’s Comment 1-2

In preliminary reports, the 2020/21 fire season has the potential to be an active season across Australia, following on from a very warm and dry start to the year. The Australian Season Bushfire Outlook within the Esperance Shire is predicted to be above normal fire potential.

Understanding that many of the recommendations handed down will involve change to current practices and substantial financial impost to agencies concerned, it is hoped that, with the commencement of the new financial year upon us, progress in implementing some of these changes will start to be seen.

The Committee, on behalf of the Esperance community and emergency services volunteers, request that Council seek an update from the State Government in order to establish the intent of implementing the recommendations outlined in the Coronial Inquest.

Officer’s Recommendation 1

That Council request the CEO write to the relevant Ministers to seek an update on actions undertaken and planned with regard to the outstanding 2015 Coronial Inquest Recommendations.

Officer’s Recommendation 2

That Council request the CEO to write to the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions to provide an update on the endorsement of additional (private) airstrips within the Shire of Esperance as highlighted in the Coroner’s Report – Recommendation 9. Request the Department provide required standards for the endorsement of private airstrips.

Committee Recommendation 3

That Council review Policy EXT:024 Bushfire Management and amend the Policy to reflect:

· A Harvesting, Machinery and Vehicle Movement Ban will be put in place when the Fire Danger Index (FDI) reaches 32 on the Grass Land Fire Danger Meter – McArthur Mark 4, wind speed to be calculated @ 2m.

· On days of Very High fire danger or above is forecast by the Bureau of Meteorology, a radio sched will conducted as required, through the use of WhatsAPP and SMS Text Message Senior Control officers will be advised when a radio sched is required.

Background 3

During adverse fire weather, Bush Fire Control Officers (BFCO) may be required to ban agricultural activities involving engine, vehicle, plant, equipment or machinery, when they are of the opinion the activity is likely to cause a fire or would be conducive to the spread of a bush fire. If a Total Fire Ban (TFB) has not been declared, there is no specific Fire Danger Index (FDI) at which a HMV Ban is to be imposed. There is great variation in different shires in this space, some as low as 26, others 32 or even higher. Accordingly, the Shire of Esperance can set a FDI value in relation to HMV that meets it’s needs, currently in the Shire of Esperance this is set at an FDI of 32 as per Policy EXT:024 Bushfire Management.

A Total Fire Ban (TFB) is imposed by the FES Commissioner as a risk-based prevention measure to restrict activities and reduce the likelihood of ignition in bushland/vegetation and increase awareness in the wider community on the day the ban is declared. A TFB may be declared when fires are most likely to threaten lives and property due to adverse weather conditions or when widespread fires are stretching firefighting resources. The Shire of Esperance sits within Zone 2 of the Total Fire Ban Parameter Scale, FDI 60+ (along with affecting more than 10% of the district in 1hr). Bush Fire Control Officers must impose HMV bans when the local measured Grassland FDI reaches 35, as per the Bush Fires Regulation 1954 s24C(2)(3). On average 4-6 Total Fire Bans are declared every year.

Officer’s Comment 3

When using the Grass Land Fire Danger Meter – McArthur Mark 4 wind readings should be converted to “tower height.” The standard is 10m above the ground. To convert a 2m value you are supposed to multiply the 2-metre value by 1.25 to approximate the 10 metre value. This is not a practise used within Esperance and readings are generally calculated at ground level (2m). If BFCO’s were to calculate at 10m the HMV FDI value of 32 would need adjusting, however as this may have further implications ie Total Fire Ban, recognising within the Policy the calculation will be done at ground level (2m) ensures consistency within the Shire and removes the need to increase the recognised and known figure of 32 FDI.

Officer’s Recommendation 3

That Council adopt the revised Policy EXT:024 Bushfire Management to reflect:

Consultation

Bush Fire Advisory Committee

DBCA

DFES

Financial Implications

Some recommendations within this report may result in a financial input from Council. Should endorsement be provided, further work will be required prior to funds being expended and Council will be informed of specific associated costs accordingly.

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

Bush Fire Act 1954

Bush Fires Regulation 1954

Policy EXT:024 Bushfire Management

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 - 2027

Community Connection

A feeling of safety and confidence within our neighbourhoods and a sense of security

Develop and maintain a safe environment for the community

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Ordinary Council: Agenda

27 October 2020 Page 269

PDF Creator

Item: 13.3

Wrought Iron Seat - Post Office Square

Author/s	Dylan Gleave	Manager of Parks & Environment
Authorisor/s	Mathew Walker	Director Asset Management

File Ref: D20/29874

Applicant

Streetscape Advisory Committee

Location/Address

Post Office Square, Esperance CBD

Executive Summary

For Council to consider the recommendation from the Streetscape Advisory Committee on the placement of the wrought iron seat in Post Office Square.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council install the wrought iron seat unmodified around the Paperbark tree closest to Dempster Street in Post Office Square including landscaping internally.

Background

The wrought iron seat in Post Office Square was previously around the Norfolk Island Pine tree in the Post Office Square. The Norfolk Island Pine tree in Post Office Square is considered to be the oldest Norfolk Island Pine tree in Esperance with historical evidence indicating the tree was planted in 1896. The Norfolk Island Pine tree in Post Office Square is heritage listed on the Western Australian State Heritage Place 5054. The seat was designed and built locally and contains interpretive information on Esperance

The Shire of Esperance Norfolk Island Pine Tree Management Plan 2016 completed by Arboricultural Consultant Paperbark Technologies, indicated that the permeable area around the structure root zones of the Norfolk Island Pine trees in the CBD needs to be increased. The report indicated that to date this had not happened in relation to the heritage listed Norfolk Island Pine tree in Post Office Square.

The seat was removed and refurbished as part of the recent CBD upgrades to increase the permeable area around the tree and its structural root zone. During the removal of the seat it was found that the fixings on the seat and the seat footings were directly impacting on the root flare and structural root zone of the heritage listed Norfolk Island Pine tree in Post Office Square. It is not recommend that the seat be replaced unmodified around the Norfolk Island Pine tree in Post Office Square as the seat would continue to impact on the structural root zone of the tree.

At the council meeting 23 June 2020 the following resolution was passed:

That the Council request the Chief Executive Officer to requisition the essential repairs and modification of the unique wrought iron seat so that it can be returned to its rightful place which is around the pine tree in the Esperance post office square.

Since this motion, Council wished to seek the view of the Streetscape Advisory Committee on Committees view of where the Wrought Iron seat should be placed. A meeting was called for the 14 October 2020 to provide this advice to Council.

The Streetscape Advisory Committee resolved the following resolution:

That the Streetscape Committee provide advice to Council on the placement of the wrought iron seat in Post Office Square recommending to install the wrought iron seat unmodified around the Paperbark tree closest to Dempster Street in Post Office Square including landscaping internally.

Officer’s Comment

The Streetscape Advisory Committee have recommended the wrought Iron Seat be placed around the Paperbark tree closest to Dempster Street unmodified as per the diagram below, the seat outline is in blue, landscaping in brown.

The reasoning’s for the Committees recommendations were:

· The priority should be the protection of the Heritage Listed Norfolk Island Pine tree in Post Office Square.

· For the protection of the Norfolk Island Pine tree the wrought iron seat would have to be modified to fit in which would not be a good outcome for the seat and would not fit into the space well.

· The wrought iron seat would still be in a place of prominence in Post Office Square.

· The placement of the wrought iron seat around the Paperbark would best fit in with the Landscaping Concept Plan for Post Office Square.

· Landscaping inside the wrought iron seat around the Paperbark would make sure the seat did not look out of place.

· This outcome is a good compromise based on the communities’ interest in the Norfolk Island Pine tree and the wrought iron seat.

Consultation

Paper Barks Technologies - Arboricultural Consultant

Streetscape Advisory Committee

Financial Implications

CBD street furniture is a budgeted item in the shire 2020/21 budget.

Asset Management Implications

CBD street furniture will be managed with annual CBD maintenance budget.

Statutory Implications

Nil

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2017 - 2027

Built Environment

Provide infrastructure and places that support the services we provide

Maintain the Shire’s robust asset management practices and maintenance programs

Environmental Considerations

The environmental considerations arising from this report the placement of any street furniture in Post Office Square must not adversely impact on the health of the heritage listed Norfolk Island Pine tree.

Attachments

a ⇩.	Diagram Seat Options Post Office Square
b ⇩.	Photo Refurbished Seat

Committee’s Recommendation

That Council install the wrought iron seat unmodified around the Paperbark tree closest to Dempster Street in Post Office Square including landscaping internally.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

a ⇩.	Information Bulletin - September 2020
b ⇨.	Corporate Performance Report - Quarterly Report - July to September 2020 - Under Separate Cover
c ⇩.	Letter of Appreciation - Victorian Councils
d ⇩.	Letter - Coronial Investigation - Department of Fire & Emergency
e ⇩.	Letter - Radio Repeaters - Department of Fire & Emergency
f ⇩.	Letter of Appreciation - Tor Youth Shed Incorporation - Conrad Lowe
g ⇩.	WALGA Quarterly Overview Report - Shire of Esperance
h ⇩.	Outstanding Council Resolutions - Quarterly Report - July to September 2020