Attachments To Agenda Items

 

 

 

FOR THE

 

Ordinary Meeting of Council

 

26 November, 2015


SHIRE OF BROOME

Ordinary Meeting of Council

26 November 2015

 Attachments To Agenda Items

 

              

9.2.1      COMMENTS ON DRAFT 2015 LIVEABLE NEIGHBOURHOODS AND PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING POLICY - STRUCTURE PLAN AND SUBDIVISON STANDARDS

Attachment 1      Attachment No 1 - 2015 Liveable Neighbourhoods              3

Attachment 2      Attachment No 2 - Options for Footpath Locations          144

Attachment 3      Attachment No 3 - Draft Submission to WAPC                   145

Attachment 4      Attachment No 4 - Advertised Version of Draft LPP         150

Attachment 5      Attachment No 5 - Updated Version of LPP                       190

Attachment 6      Attachment No 6 - Schedule of Submissions                      224

Attachment 7      Attachment No 7 - Deemed Provisions (Structure Plans) 235

9.2.2      FINAL ADOPTION - AMENDMENT NO 1 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO 6 - BROOME NORTH LOCAL CENTRE

Attachment 1      ATTACHMENT NO 1 - LOCATION PLAN                                 246

Attachment 2      ATTACHMENT NO 2 - AMENDMENT MAP                              247

Attachment 3      ATTACHMENT NO 3 - SCHEME AMENDMENT DOCUMENT 248

9.2.4      Yawuru Conservation Estate - Draft Recreation Master Plan

Attachment 1      Draft Recreation Master Plan                                                270

Attachment 2      Draft Recreation Master Plan Maps                                     308

9.2.5      PREPARATION OF AMENDMENT 2 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO. 6 - IDENTIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS AREA  AND PREPARATION OF DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN

Attachment 1      Attachment 1 - Development Contributions Area            316

Attachment 2      Attachment 2 - Local Planning Strategy Map                    317

9.2.7      Closure of a Portion of Coghlan Street Road Reserve - Outcome of Public Advertising

Attachment 1      Survey of Area D                                                                      318

Attachment 2      Context Plan - Portion of Coghlan Street Road Reserve to be Closed                                                                                                    319

9.3.1      PROPOSAL FOR HOLIDAY PARKS AND CAMPING GROUNDS LEGISLATION
SECOND CONSULTATION

Attachment 1      Proposal for Holiday Parks & Camping Grounds Legislation 321

Attachment 2      Submission Proposal for Holiday Parks and Camping Grounds Legislation                                                                                 396

9.3.2      BROOME AS A REGIONAL GROWTH CENTRE - HIGH LEVEL PROJECT SCOPE AND CONSIDERATION OF MOU WITH STATE GOVERNMENT

Attachment 1      Formal Advice Broome selected as a Growth Centre    427

Attachment 2      Growth Centre Project Scope                                              429

Attachment 3      Existing MOU between Shire and State Government       440

Attachment 4      Proposed new MOU between Shire and State Government         446

Attachment 5      Letter of Agreement                                                               454

9.3.3      Kimberley Regional Offices Redevelopment

Attachment 1      Governance Management Plan                                          457

Attachment 2      Procurement Advice                                                              476

9.4.1      PAYMENTS - OCTOBER 2015

Attachment 1      PAYMENTS - OCTOBER 2015                                                    478

9.4.2      MONTHLY STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITY REPORT - OCTOBER 2015

Attachment 1      October Financial Activity Report                                        499

Attachment 2      October 2015- General Fund Summary and Details          593

9.4.3      COUNCIL MEETING DATES 2016

Attachment 1      Proposed Council Meeting Schedule 2016                         668

Attachment 2      Calendar of Proposed 2016 Meeting Dates                       669

9.4.5      APPOINTMENTS TO COMMITTEES AND WORKING GROUPS

Attachment 1      Draft Committee Booklet 2015                                              671

9.4.6      CAPE LEVEQUE ROAD: PARTIAL ROAD CLOSURE FOR 2015/2016 WET SEASON

Attachment 1      Cape Leveque Road Partial Road Closure advertisement 846

10.1       MINUTES OF THE BROOME CEMETERY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING HELD 7 OCTOBER 2015

Attachment 1      Minutes BCAC 7 October 2015                                              847

10.2       MINUTES ARTS CULTURE AND HERITAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING 15 OCTOBER 2015

Attachment 1      ACHAC Minutes 151015                                                          879

10.3       BUSH FIRE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 14 OCTOBER 2015

Attachment 1      BFAC Minutes - 14 October 2015                                           892

Attachment 2      Attachment 2: BFAC Action Status Report                         902

10.4       LOCAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 14 OCTOBER 2015

Attachment 1      LEMC Minutes - 14 October 2015                                          904

Attachment 2      Attachment 2: LEMC Action Status Report                         912                       


Item 9.2.1 - COMMENTS ON DRAFT 2015 LIVEABLE NEIGHBOURHOODS AND PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING POLICY - STRUCTURE PLAN AND SUBDIVISON STANDARDS

Attachment No 1 - 2015 Liveable Neighbourhoods

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Item 9.2.1 - COMMENTS ON DRAFT 2015 LIVEABLE NEIGHBOURHOODS AND PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING POLICY - STRUCTURE PLAN AND SUBDIVISON STANDARDS

Attachment No 2 - Options for Footpath Locations

 

 


Item 9.2.1 - COMMENTS ON DRAFT 2015 LIVEABLE NEIGHBOURHOODS AND PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING POLICY - STRUCTURE PLAN AND SUBDIVISON STANDARDS

Attachment No 3 - Draft Submission to WAPC

 

 


 


 


 


 


Item 9.2.1 - COMMENTS ON DRAFT 2015 LIVEABLE NEIGHBOURHOODS AND PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING POLICY - STRUCTURE PLAN AND SUBDIVISON STANDARDS

Attachment No 4 - Advertised Version of Draft LPP

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Item 9.2.1 - COMMENTS ON DRAFT 2015 LIVEABLE NEIGHBOURHOODS AND PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING POLICY - STRUCTURE PLAN AND SUBDIVISON STANDARDS

Attachment No 4 - Advertised Version of Draft LPP

 

 


Item 9.2.1 - COMMENTS ON DRAFT 2015 LIVEABLE NEIGHBOURHOODS AND PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING POLICY - STRUCTURE PLAN AND SUBDIVISON STANDARDS

Attachment No 4 - Advertised Version of Draft LPP

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Item 9.2.1 - COMMENTS ON DRAFT 2015 LIVEABLE NEIGHBOURHOODS AND PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING POLICY - STRUCTURE PLAN AND SUBDIVISON STANDARDS

Attachment No 5 - Updated Version of LPP

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Item 9.2.1 - COMMENTS ON DRAFT 2015 LIVEABLE NEIGHBOURHOODS AND PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING POLICY - STRUCTURE PLAN AND SUBDIVISON STANDARDS

Attachment No 5 - Updated Version of LPP

 

 


 


Item 9.2.1 - COMMENTS ON DRAFT 2015 LIVEABLE NEIGHBOURHOODS AND PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING POLICY - STRUCTURE PLAN AND SUBDIVISON STANDARDS

Attachment No 5 - Updated Version of LPP

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Item 9.2.1 - COMMENTS ON DRAFT 2015 LIVEABLE NEIGHBOURHOODS AND PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING POLICY - STRUCTURE PLAN AND SUBDIVISON STANDARDS

Attachment No 6 - Schedule of Submissions

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


Item 9.2.1 - COMMENTS ON DRAFT 2015 LIVEABLE NEIGHBOURHOODS AND PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING POLICY - STRUCTURE PLAN AND SUBDIVISON STANDARDS

Attachment No 7 - Deemed Provisions (Structure Plans)

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Item 9.2.2 - FINAL ADOPTION - AMENDMENT NO 1 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO 6 - BROOME NORTH LOCAL CENTRE

ATTACHMENT NO 1 - LOCATION PLAN

 

 


Item 9.2.2 - FINAL ADOPTION - AMENDMENT NO 1 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO 6 - BROOME NORTH LOCAL CENTRE

ATTACHMENT NO 2 - AMENDMENT MAP

 

 


Item 9.2.2 - FINAL ADOPTION - AMENDMENT NO 1 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO 6 - BROOME NORTH LOCAL CENTRE

ATTACHMENT NO 3 - SCHEME AMENDMENT DOCUMENT

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Item 9.2.2 - FINAL ADOPTION - AMENDMENT NO 1 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO 6 - BROOME NORTH LOCAL CENTRE

ATTACHMENT NO 3 - SCHEME AMENDMENT DOCUMENT

 

 


 


Item 9.2.2 - FINAL ADOPTION - AMENDMENT NO 1 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO 6 - BROOME NORTH LOCAL CENTRE

ATTACHMENT NO 3 - SCHEME AMENDMENT DOCUMENT

 

 


 


 


 


Item 9.2.4 - Yawuru Conservation Estate - Draft Recreation Master Plan

Draft Recreation Master Plan

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Item 9.2.4 - Yawuru Conservation Estate - Draft Recreation Master Plan

Draft Recreation Master Plan Maps

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Item 9.2.5 - PREPARATION OF AMENDMENT 2 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO. 6 - IDENTIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS AREA  AND PREPARATION OF DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN

Attachment 1 - Development Contributions Area

 

 


Item 9.2.5 - PREPARATION OF AMENDMENT 2 TO LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO. 6 - IDENTIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS AREA  AND PREPARATION OF DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN

Attachment 2 - Local Planning Strategy Map

 

 


Item 9.2.7 - Closure of a Portion of Coghlan Street Road Reserve - Outcome of Public Advertising

Survey of Area D

 

 


Item 9.2.7 - Closure of a Portion of Coghlan Street Road Reserve - Outcome of Public Advertising

Context Plan - Portion of Coghlan Street Road Reserve to be Closed

 

 

 


Item 9.3.1 - PROPOSAL FOR HOLIDAY PARKS AND CAMPING GROUNDS LEGISLATION

SECOND CONSULTATION

Proposal for Holiday Parks & Camping Grounds Legislation

 

 

Myriad graphicConsultation Paper

Proposal for Holiday Parks
and Camping Grounds Legislation

Myriad graphicSecond Consultation – August 2015

Consultation Paper
Proposal for Holiday Parks and Camping Grounds Legislation – Second Consultation

28 August 2015

Prepared by:

Department of Local Government and Communities

Gordon Stephenson House

140 William Street

PERTH 6000

GPO Box R1250

PERTH WA 6844

Telephone: (08) 6551 8700

Fax: (08) 6552 1555

Freecall (Country Only): 1800 620 511

Email: caravan@dlgc.wa.gov.au 

Website: www.dlgc.wa.gov.au/CPCG-Consultation-Paper-2/

All or part of this document may be copied. Due recognition of the source would be appreciated.

Translating and Interpreting Service (TIS) telephone: 13 14 50

Disclaimer: Although every care has been taken to ensure accuracy in the preparation of this paper, the information has been produced as general guidance for persons wishing to make submissions to the review. The contents of the paper do not constitute legal advice or legal information and they do not constitute government policy. This paper should not be used as a substitute for a related act or professional advice.

This publication is free. The Department of Local Government and Communities has no objection to copying all or part of this document. Due recognition of the source would be appreciated.


 

Contents

Executive Summary. 4

Introduction. 6

1.... Structure of the Paper 7

2.... Effect of Proposed Amendments on Permanent Park Residents. 7

3.... Rationale for Proposed Development of New Legislation. 7

4.... Terminology and Definitions. 9

5.... What Will the Legislation Apply To?. 12

5.1..... Application of the legislation to facilities. 12

5.2..... Camping at a place other than an approved facility. 18

5.3..... State government and local government facilities. 24

5.4..... What will not be covered by the proposed legislation. 29

6.... Licencing of Facilities. 30

7.... Licence Categories. 35

8.... Conditions for Approval to Operate. 41

9.... Penalties. 46

10.. Prerequisites of Accommodation Vehicles. 49

11.. Advisory Committee. 53

12.. Transitional Provisions. 56

12.1... Holiday parks and camping grounds. 56

12.2... Converted accommodation vehicles. 59

14.. Regulations. 64

Appendix 1. 65

Summary of proposed options and suggested provisions. 65

Appendix 2. 73

 

Acronyms

Caravan Parks Act                               Caravan Parks and Camping Grounds Act 1995

Caravan Parks Regulations                 Caravan Parks and Camping Grounds         Regulations 1997

Building Act                                          Building Act 2011

The Minister                                          Minister for Local Government

Road Traffic Act                                   Road Traffic Act 1974

Food Act                                               Food Act 2008

SAT                                                      State Administrative Tribunal


Item 9.3.1 - PROPOSAL FOR HOLIDAY PARKS AND CAMPING GROUNDS LEGISLATION

SECOND CONSULTATION

Proposal for Holiday Parks & Camping Grounds Legislation

 

 

Executive Summary

The purpose of this paper is to put forward proposed options for inclusion in new caravan and camping legislation in Western Australia. The objectives to be achieved from developing new legislation are as follows:

·    Clarity in the interpretation of the legislation

·    Consistency in the application of the legislation by local governments and state government agencies, and

·    Flexibility of prescribed requirements for existing and new developments.

The responses to the first Consultation Paper have identified that the necessary changes to the legislation are significant. Given the extent of the changes necessary, it is intended that the existing Caravan Parks Act and Regulations be repealed, and new legislation be developed in their place.

The paper proposes a raft of recommendations to achieve the objectives. These recommendations are:

1.   That the current Caravan Parks Act and Regulations are repealed and a new Act and Regulations are developed in their place. 

2.   A facility that has designated two or more sites for short-stay accommodation vehicles and/or tents requires approval to operate. Sites predominantly for the purpose of long-term residence, such as park home parks, must provide at least 10 designated short-stay campsites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents, or a prescribed percentage of such sites, to be eligible for an approval to operate. 

3.   Any person making available a campsite for an accommodation vehicle and/or tent will need approval if it will be available for use for any more than three nights in any 28 day period.

4.   An emphasis will be placed on the development of management plans that address the operator’s target market.

5.   Unless it is owned by the landowner, any building on a facility must be, and remain at all times, transportable.

6.   Any permanent structure on a facility that is not registered under the Road Traffic Act is to be assessed as a building.

7.   A set of minimum standards will apply to all facilities operating under the Caravan Parks Act.

8.   The Caravan Parks and Camping Grounds Advisory Committee will be abolished in favour of consultation with relevant stakeholders.

9.   All penalties will be increased.

10. Transitional arrangements will be put in place for existing facilities and vehicles.

The department is seeking submissions on the proposed recommendations presented in this consultation paper. A summary of the proposed recommendations, including suggested provisions and options for implementation, can be found at Appendix 1 to this paper.

Submissions close on 30 November 2015.


 

Introduction

The state government is undertaking a review of the Caravan Parks and Camping Grounds Act 1995 (Caravan Parks Act) with a view to developing new legislation which provides a clear framework for operators, regulating authorities and users. In 2009 the Economics and Industry Standing Committee (EISC) conducted an inquiry into the caravan park and camping ground industry in Western Australia.

The EISC reports are available on the Parliament website, which can be found at www.parliament.wa.gov.au/parliament/commit.nsf/WebReportsByName. Following that inquiry, a group of government agencies developed the Western Australian Caravan and Camping Action Plan 2013-2018, with the goal of improving the supply, delivery and promotion of caravan and camping experiences through the implementation of 11 recommendations. This review is a response to Recommendation 1 of the Action Plan, which is that the Caravan Parks Act and Regulations be reviewed. The full Action Plan can be viewed on the Tourism WA website at www.tourism.wa.gov.au/Industry/Infrastructure_Growth/Caravan-Camping/Pages/Action-Plan-Strategy.aspx.

Since the introduction of the Caravan Parks Act, there have been significant changes to the industry, together with a desire for legislation that would reduce red tape and allow operators more flexibility. As one of the key objects of the legislation is to protect the health and safety of users and the environment, the review has focused on these aspects. Consideration of these factors, along with the overall objectives of the review, has guided the development of the options and proposed recommendations.

A first Consultation Paper was released by the department in May 2014 for public comment. The consultation period ended on 1 September 2014 and more than 120 submissions were received. Respondents were from a range of stakeholder groups, including caravan park and camping ground users, local governments, park operators, peak bodies and state government agencies. A breakdown of feedback received by stakeholder group can be found at Appendix 2 to this paper. The feedback received in response to the first Consultation Paper has been used to inform the development of options in this second paper. Reference is made to the general content of feedback throughout this paper. The first Consultation Paper, and submissions received in response, can be found on the department’s website at www.dlgc.wa.gov.au/CPCG-Consultation-Paper.  


 

1.   Structure of the Paper

This paper is divided into a number of parts dealing with the key themes of proposed items for inclusion in the new Caravan Parks Act. The document outlines the relevant background information for each topic and recommends the option considered most appropriate to address the specific issue, along with other key options considered. Where possible, the benefits, potential costs and other impacts that may flow from the recommended options have been identified.

Feedback received through consultation undertaken in 2014 has been analysed and has assisted in forming the options and recommendations presented in this paper.

Please note the detailed mechanics of implementation and operation does not form part of this paper; however, feedback on these areas is welcome during the consultation period. Where possible, suggested means of implementation have been identified and included in this paper (see Appendix 1). Guidance questions at the end of each section seek comment on suggested implementation methods, as well as on general matters. This will be taken into account in the review of the regulations.

2.   Effect of Proposed Amendments on Permanent Park Residents

Feedback received in the previous round of consultation highlighted concerns that the new Caravan Parks Act may have significant impacts on current permanent residents in caravan parks.

Sections 10 and 12 address proposed amendments to converted accommodation vehicles, including recommended transitional provisions to implement the legislation.

3.   Rationale for Proposed Development of
New Legislation

The Caravan Parks Act is the overarching legislative framework binding park operators, regulating authorities and consumers to ensure the health and safety of users of caravan parks and camping grounds.

Since the Caravan Parks Act took effect in 1997, no substantial amendments have been made. The result is that some provisions are no longer relevant to the current market or consumer expectations. In addition to being overly prescriptive, regulatory failure has resulted in the legislation being applied inconsistently by local governments. As a result of the feedback received on the recommendations proposed in the first Consultation Paper and the significant nature of the changes required to the Act, it has been determined that the existing Caravan Parks Act should be repealed and a new Act developed to replace it.

The new legislation will aim to provide a more flexible operating environment, which will provide more opportunities for operators and greater choice for consumers. This should allow operators to more readily respond to specific market segments which drive this aspect of the tourism industry.

The intention of this review is to develop a new Caravan Parks Act which will improve the following:

·    Interpretation of the legislation

·    Consistency in the application of the legislation by local governments and state government agencies, and

·    Flexibility of prescribed requirements for existing and new developments.

The key principles that have guided the review and development of the options for the new regulatory framework are to:

·    Protect the health and safety of users and lower the environmental risk as a result of caravan parks and camping grounds

·    Introduce a minimalist regulatory approach to reduce red tape while continuing to manage the risks associated with the operation of facilities

·    Allow for a sustainable, market-driven approach to product mix and park design

·    Provide a flexible operating environment to meet the changing needs and expectations of users of facilities, and

·    Promote a consistent approach to administration and enforcement of the legislation across the state.

Consideration of the above principles has driven the recommended options presented in this paper.

·   

Recommendation:

·    That the existing Caravan Parks and Camping Grounds Act 1995 and Regulations be repealed and a new Holiday Parks and Camping Grounds Act and Regulations be developed to replace them. 

4.   Terminology and Definitions

Before consideration is given to addressing the range of issues to be dealt with in the new legislation, the current terminology needs to be reviewed. It is important that the definitions and terminology are appropriate given the context of today’s tourism environment, particularly since caravan parks have evolved to cater for a large variety of travellers, including the provision of cabins and chalets, not just campsites. Contemporary usage of the term ‘caravan’ has also evolved, with trailers, recreational vehicles and buses all being used for accommodation. The term ‘caravan park’ is therefore no longer reflective of modern facilities.

Issues

The issue is that the current terminology and definitions used in the Caravan Parks Act and Regulations are not reflective of the different accommodation types and services provided for users and occupiers of caravan parks and camping grounds.

Objective

The objective is to clarify and update terminology so it is reflective of the diverse nature of accommodation types and facilities and will remain applicable into the future.

Consultation feedback

Previous consultation proposed a raft of changes to the terminology currently used throughout the Caravan Parks Act and Regulations. A key proposal was to change the definition of ‘caravan park’ to ‘holiday park’, with the view that this term more accurately reflected the different types of accommodation provided by a facility.

Of the submissions received, 64 per cent were supportive of the term ‘holiday park’; however, concern was noted that it may imply that residential use is not allowed.

Changes to other terminology were uniformly supported.

Options

(i)         Status quo

This option proposes that terms defined under the Caravan Parks Act and Regulations will not change.

Some of the definitions worth noting include:

‘camp’ means any portable shed or hut, tent or tent fly, awning, blind or other portable thing used as or capable of being used for habitation and includes a vehicle of a prescribed type or in prescribed circumstances.

‘caravan’ means a vehicle that is fitted or designed for habitation, and unless the contrary intention appears, includes an annexe.

‘caravan park’ means an area of land on which caravans, or caravans and camps, are situated for habitation.

‘vehicle’ means a conveyance (other than a train, vessel or aircraft) capable of being propelled or drawn on wheels.

(ii)        Update definitions to reflect current terminology

This option proposes that some definitions are changed to more appropriately reflect terminology which encompasses the range of accommodation types that may be provided under the legislation.

If this option is preferred, it is suggested that the following definitions are adopted:

·    ‘Holiday park’ will mean an area of land on which accommodation vehicles and/or tents are situated for habitation, primarily by short-stay occupiers. In accordance with section 2, zoning and local planning schemes will dictate what buildings are allowed on the land.

·    ‘Accommodation vehicle’ is the term used to reflect all types of vehicles used or capable of being used for habitation. This includes caravans and campervans.

·    ‘Vehicle’ is any vehicle as defined under the Road Traffic (Administration) Act 2008.  The current definition is:

·    vehicle includes —

     (a) every conveyance, not being a train, vessel or aircraft, and every object capable of being propelled or drawn, on wheels or tracks, by any means, and  

     (b) where the context permits, an animal being driven or ridden.

·    ‘Facility’ will mean a holiday park or camping ground.

·    ‘Camp’ (noun) will be replaced by ‘tent’ to mean any portable tent which, apart from any rigid support frame, has walls and a roof of canvas or other flexible material.

·    ‘Camp’ (verb) will mean to stay or lodge in a tent, or other accommodation vehicle. This definition will be based on the definition in the Conservation and Land Management Regulations 2002.

·    The legislation is to be titled the Holiday Parks and Camping Grounds Act.

This option is not expected to have a significant impact on users, local governments or private operators.

Discussion

Option (ii) proposes a change in a number of definitions to bring the terminology into line with current practices and recognise the mixed uses of caravan parks and camping grounds.

The reason for the proposed change in terminology from ‘caravans’ to ‘accommodation vehicles’ is because ‘caravan’ does not capture the range of vehicles that may be used for habitation, including buses, campervans, caravans and recreational vehicles (RVs).

A park home will no longer be considered to be a caravan and will instead need to be compliant with, and be regulated under, the Building Act 2011 and associated Regulations.

It is proposed to replace the term ‘caravan park’ with ‘holiday park’. Caravan parks and camping grounds have the primary intention of being for short-stay occupiers and to encourage tourism. As part of encouraging tourism, operators should consider providing a range of accommodation types to suit a variety of tourists and budgets. Parks today are much more than places where only caravans are located and the Caravan Parks Act and Regulations should reflect this.

Whilst the term ‘holiday park’ may imply that residential use is not allowed, this will not be the case. Residential use will continue to be permitted, subject to zoning and local planning schemes.

It is not expected that a change in terminology to the term ‘holiday park’ will affect the marketing of facilities, as operators have previously, and will continue to be able to, title their facilities as they see fit. Therefore, there will be no financial impact on operators as a result of option (ii).

As it is proposed to develop a new Act rather than amend the existing one, it is important to ensure that terminology and definitions are reviewed and updated and, as much as possible, will remain relevant into the future, which is why option (ii) is recommended.

Where appropriate, this paper will refer to the definitions proposed in option (ii).

Recommendation

·    Option (ii)      Update definitions to reflect current terminology.

 

Guidance questions

·    Question 1:   Are there any additional definitions or terms that should be updated as part of the review? What are they?

·    Question 2:   Do you support the proposed changes to the terminology? Why or why not?

·    Question 3:   Can you identify any significant costs or benefits that would result from a change in terminology? What are they?

5.   What Will the Legislation Apply To?

5.1 Application of the legislation to facilities

Since the Caravan Parks Act took effect in 1997, there have been substantial changes to traditional caravan parks and what is required by users of these facilities. Caravan parks and camping grounds have evolved in recent years towards being mixed-use, including for residential and higher tourism use. Nature based parks are also being established which offer a range of facilities, from lower level basic facilities to higher end luxury safari camps.

Issues

The issue is that the current provisions have resulted in anomalies that do not allow the objects of the Caravan Parks Act to be met. Different planning policies, zoning, building legislation and the complexities of the Caravan Parks Act have created confusion on the legality of placing certain types of accommodation in caravan parks.

A specific example of the complexities is that the current definition of ‘caravan’ includes ‘park homes’. This has meant that land which should be used to improve and promote caravanning and camping (in accordance with the objects of the Caravan Parks Act) has been available for the development of residential, long-stay park home parks. Long-term use will continue to be permitted in holiday parks under the new legislation. 

Objective

The objective is to ensure that the scope of the Caravan Parks Act is appropriate for the needs of the industry and provides protection to both users and the environment now and into the future.

Consultation feedback

In the first round of consultation, it was proposed that the new legislation should focus on holiday parks and relevant holiday accommodation, rather than long-stay park home parks. It was also proposed that park homes and rigid annexes should be regulated under the Building Act rather than the Caravan Parks Act.

Approximately 68 per cent of submissions supported the proposal for park home parks to be recognised as residential developments rather than holiday parks. Most submissions also supported park homes coming under the jurisdiction of the Building Act, although it was noted that park home owners could lose their park homes if the homes were treated as fixtures if a facility goes into receivership. While these concerns are noted, the new legislation is not expected to change how park homes are treated in these circumstances. Security of tenure in long-stay parks is regulated by the Residential Parks (Long-Stay Tenants) Act 2006. That Act is currently being reviewed by the Department of Commerce – Consumer Protection. Documentation related to the review of that Act can be accessed on the Department of Commerce’s website at www.commerce.wa.gov.au/consumer-protection/residential-parks-review-2012.  

Feedback received noted that it should not be the responsibility of the Caravan Parks Act to determine what buildings are allowed on land designed for caravans or camping; rather, this should be determined through the planning process. This is consistent with the objects of the Review, which include increased flexibility for operators.

Options

(i)         Status quo

This option proposes no changes to what is covered under the existing legislation.

In accordance with the Caravan Parks Act, a facility, which means a caravan park or camping ground, cannot operate without a licence.

Under the current Caravan Park Regulations, a park home is considered a caravan, enabling park home parks to be established on caravan park land. Park homes are allowed on a licensed caravan park, but chalets and/or cottages are not.

Stopping on the road in roadside rest areas for up to 24 hours will continue to be permitted under other legislation. The management of roadside rest areas is discussed further in this paper at Section 5.

(ii)        A facility that has designated two or more sites for short-stay accommodation vehicles and/or tents requires approval to operate. Residential parks must provide 10 such sites, or a prescribed percentage of such sites, to be eligible for an approval to operate

This option proposes that for the purpose of simplifying when the legislation applies, if a facility has two or more sites designated for short-stay accommodation vehicles and/or tents, the facility would be considered a holiday park and an approval to operate would be required.[1] An approval to operate would take the place of a licence. Park home parks and other residential developments consisting mostly of park homes for the purpose of long term residential living, which do not provide at least 10 designated short-stay sites for tents and/or accommodation vehicles, will not be considered holiday parks for the purposes of the Caravan Parks Act. Alternatively, a required percentage of sites must be designated for short-stay accommodation vehicles and/or tents for a residential park home park to qualify for an approval to operate under the Caravan Parks Act.

It is proposed that holiday parks and camping grounds would have to obtain an approval to operate (in the form of a certificate which must be publically displayed in the office – this is addressed under Section 6), and prepare a management plan (addressed under Section 8). The legislation will not specify the mix of accommodation allowed on the facility; rather, it will focus on the health and safety of users and protecting the environment. The approval of buildings provided on a facility will be determined through the planning process. The mix of accommodation will be a matter for local planning schemes and regulated at the local government level.

This option also proposes that all buildings on a facility, including transportable buildings, must be compliant with the Building Act, and would therefore be regulated under that Act rather than captured by the Caravan Parks Act. This includes accommodation vehicles which have been converted into buildings for the purposes of permanent habitation (refer to Section 10).

If this option is preferred, it is suggested that the following provisions are adopted:

·    Any facility that provides two or more sites designated for accommodation vehicles and/or tents requires an approval to operate

·    Any residential development consisting mostly of park homes for the purposes of long-term residential living must provide 10 designated sites for short-stay accommodation vehicles and/or tents, or a prescribed percentage of such sites, to be eligible for an approval to operate

·    Residential parks already established on caravan park or tourism zoned land will continue on that land; however, proposed new residential park developments should not access caravan park or tourism zoned land in the future

·    Land zoning, local planning schemes and other planning instruments will determine the types of accommodation allowed on a park, with the mix of accommodation types forming part of the approved management plan (see Section 8)

·    Unless owned by the owner of the facility, any buildings and associated structures on that facility must be transportable

·    All buildings, including transportable buildings, must be compliant with the Building Act, and

·    Park homes are to be treated as buildings under the Building Act and must comply with the relevant provisions of that Act. Park homes will no longer be considered caravans or captured under the Caravans Act.

Discussion

Under the current Caravan Parks Act, there are a range of provisions which do not appear to align with its objects, including to promote caravanning and camping and to protect the health and safety of users. If option (i), to maintain the status quo, is adopted, it will allow these inconsistencies to continue. This includes allowing park home parks to be built on caravan park-zoned land, which should be used for the purposes of encouraging caravanning and camping through the provision of caravan parks. Additionally, in accordance with the current legislation, park homes are required to have wheels, which are an unnecessary and costly impost to builders when there is never an intention for them to be readily moved. Nor is there an identifiable added safety benefit in making park homes transportable.

The overarching principle of option (ii) proposes an entirely different set of guidelines to support holiday parks and camping grounds. The general principle is that any facility making available two or more campsites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents requires an approval to operate. If a park home park facility, such as a development consisting predominantly of park homes for the purposes of residential living, does not provide 10 or more short-stay sites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents, then it is not classed as a holiday park under the Caravan Parks Act. It may also be an option for the legislation to prescribe a set percentage of sites be designated for short-stay accommodation vehicles and/or tents rather than a set figure. Prescribing a percentage of sites relative to the size of the facility may be more flexible for the range of different facilities provided across the state. Alternatively, if a smaller facility, such as a farm stay, wished to provide short-stay camp sites and provided two such sites, it would be captured under the legislation and have to comply with the minimum standards. This option would create a simple framework which easily allows facilities to determine if they need to be approved under this legislation. It also ensures that people staying in temporary accommodation that is not a building have health and safety protection.

Option (ii) also proposes that anything on a facility that is not a licensed vehicle or tent must be compliant with the Building Act. The Building Act already contains provisions applicable to transportable buildings, and therefore it is appropriate for these buildings to be captured under those existing provisions rather than requiring potentially onerous and expensive retroactive changes to such buildings in order to make them compliant with the Caravan Parks Act.

As owners of buildings in a park (other than the park owner) have no rights to the land on which they are located, these buildings will be required to be transportable and remain transportable. This protects the asset and title of the owner, allowing them to be relocated if the park closes or is redeveloped. The owner of a facility will be able to provide a flexible range of accommodation types subject to planning requirements and their approved management plan.

A significant impact as a result of option (ii) is that park home park developers will lose the ability to access land zoned for caravan parks. Although it is ultimately a decision for each local government to allow park home park developers access to caravan park and tourism zoned land (provided such use is consistent with the local planning scheme), such use of the land should be discouraged. The argument is that these parks provide a low cost accommodation solution. However, the object of the Caravan Parks Act is not to provide low cost accommodation options, but to encourage caravanning and camping. Option (ii) will address this. The availability and zoning of low cost land for these developments should be addressed by alternative means, but is not within the scope of this review. Parks intended primarily for long-stay, residential or non-tourism purposes should be accessing land zoned for Special Use – Park Home Park.

It is important to note that under option (ii), existing park home parks would remain on the land they are already established on, regardless of the zoning discrepancy. However, proposed new park home park developments should no longer be able to access caravan park or tourism zoned land in the future. If option (ii) were adopted and park home parks were no longer captured by the Caravan Parks Act, this would apply to existing and potential new developments. Given that park homes are likely to be seen to be ‘buildings’, subject to the removal of the current ‘park home’ exemption in the Building Regulations, they would require a building permit under the Building Act. It is expected that, for the purpose of ensuring compliance with the Building Code of Australia, future buildings located in park home park developments going forward could be assessed and regulated under the Building Act rather than the Caravan Parks Act.

To ensure that the Caravan Parks Act encourages and supports caravanning and camping in Western Australia, it is recommended that option (ii) is adopted. The new legislation will focus on protecting the health and safety of users and the environment, and address the interaction between these users and other accommodation types provided on a facility.

 

 

 

Recommendation

·    Option (ii)      A facility that has designated two or more sites for short-stay accommodation vehicles and/or tents requires approval to operate. Residential parks must provide 10 such sites, or a prescribed percentage of the sites, to be eligible for an approval to operate.

 

Guidance questions

·    Question 4:   Are there any circumstances where this recommendation will not capture facilities that should be licenced? Please provide examples.

·    Question 5:   Is it appropriate for residential park home park developments to be regulated under the Building Act and Code rather than the Caravan Parks Act? Why or why not?

·    Question 6:   Do you agree that a residential park home park must provide a set number (for example, 10) of designated short-stay sites to be eligible for an approval to operate under the Caravan Parks Act? Why or why not?

·    Question 7:   Should residential park home parks instead set aside a prescribed percentage of the facility for short-stay use? What should that percentage be?

·    Question 8:   Can you identify any additional costs or benefits arising from this option? What are they?

5.2 Camping at a place other than an approved facility

It is a requirement under the Caravan Parks Act that a facility making available sites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents is approved; however, there are circumstances where camping also occurs on land outside of a recognised facility (such as on private property).

Under the Caravan Parks Regulations, a person may camp for up to three nights in any period of 28 consecutive days on land with the approval of the owner. To camp for longer than this period of time, approval must be sought. Such approval can be granted by the local government for up to three months or the Minister for Local Government (the Minister) for longer than three months.

 

 

Issues

It is important to acknowledge that people camp on private property for a range of reasons and for different lengths of time. In addition to potentially disturbing neighbours, camping of this type may have a significant impact on the environment and the health and safety of the campers may not be assured, especially if there is limited access to necessary health and hygiene facilities such as toilets, water or dump points.

One significant area of demand is the requests to camp for extended periods of time outside holiday parks due to land owners needing accommodation on their property while they are building a home. This is particularly prevalent in rural and remote areas where local accommodation options are limited and there is a need to supervise or personally undertake the building work.

Objective

The objective is to ensure the health and safety of people who are staying in accommodation vehicles and/or tents outside of approved facilities.

Consultation feedback

No consultation has been undertaken on this matter.

Options

(i)         Status quo

Under this option, a person is allowed to camp on land outside of a holiday park or camping ground for three nights in any 28 day period if they have the approval of the land owner. For periods greater than this length of stay, a local government may grant an application for up to three months, or for longer periods, the Minister may grant approval.

(ii)        Local governments can grant unlimited approvals to the landowner to offer a campsite for an accommodation vehicle and/or tent for up to three months at a time subject to appropriate consultation and risk assessment

Under this option, it is proposed that if a person wants to camp outside of an approved holiday park or camping ground (for example, on private property) for any period greater than three nights in any 28 days, approval can be sought from the local government. Approval will also be required if a landowner intends to make their property available to campers for more than three nights in any 28 day period.

This option is not intended to allow for multiple accommodation vehicles and/or tents to camp outside of holiday parks or camping grounds. It is proposed that allowing more than one accommodation vehicle and/or tent on a site would require a different class of approval to operate – this would be known as an event approval. This is discussed further at Section 7.

A local government will be able to grant an approval for up to three months at a time, subject to consultation with any affected neighbours and a thorough risk assessment of the conditions. Consideration will also need to be given to the feasibility of staying in an approved facility rather than camping outside of one.

Applications must be submitted by the landowner, who will need to prepare a simplified management plan to address basic health and safety concerns, including access to water, waste management and reducing the environmental impact of the stay (refer to Section 8 for more information on management plans). Applications will need to be accompanied by a fee to cover the administration and inspection cost involved.

It is proposed that local governments can grant unlimited renewals; however, each renewal will require a complete review of the circumstances. If a local government refuses an application, the applicant will be able to appeal directly to the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT).

If this option is preferred, it is suggested that the following provisions are adopted:

·    A person may camp for up to three nights in any 28 day period on land where the landowner has given permission

·    A landowner may apply to the local government seeking approval for a person to camp longer than three nights but not more than three months. This includes if the intention is to make their property available for more than three nights in any 28 day period

·    Applications will need to be accompanied by a prescribed fee

·    Only one accommodation vehicle and/or tent is allowed on the property at any time without an event approval

·    A local government must consult with the affected neighbours, consider the health and safety of users, impact on the environment and feasibility of staying in an approved facility before an approval can be granted

·    A local government can continue to renew an approval; however, a full assessment is required with each renewal

·    A management plan must be submitted with each application which addresses basic health and safety concerns, including waste management and access to water, and

·    If a local government refuses an application, the applicant can appeal to the SAT.

(iii)       Local governments can grant approval to camp up to three months at a time subject to appropriate consultation and risk assessment. An extension can only be approved four times, following which a request for approval may be made to the Minister or CEO of the department

This option is similar to option (ii); however, it provides that a local government can only approve an application four times, following which an application can be made to the Minister, or CEO of the department, for a further extension. This would effectively allow a person to camp for up to 12 months at a time before Ministerial or departmental approval is required.

It is expected that 12 months is a sufficient period of time in the majority of cases and that Ministerial or departmental approval would only be necessary in exceptional circumstances.

If this option is preferred, it is suggested that the following provisions are adopted:

·    A person may camp for up to three nights in any 28 day period on land where the owner has given permission

·    A landowner may apply to the local government seeking approval for a person to camp for longer than three nights but not more than three months. This includes if the intention is to make their property available for more than three nights in any 28 day period

·    Applications will be accompanied by a prescribed fee

·    Only one accommodation vehicle and/or tent is allowed on the property at any time without an event approval

·    A local government must consult with the affected neighbours, consider the health and safety of users, impact on the environment and feasibility of staying in an approved facility before an approval can be granted

·    A management plan must be submitted with each application which addresses basic health and safety concerns, including waste management and access to water

·    A local government can only renew an extension three times (for a total stay of 12 months), and

·    Following four approvals by the local government, an application can be made to the Minister, or the CEO of the department, for approval.

Discussion

All three options recognise that a person may need to seek approval to camp for a period of time outside the scope of the legislation. Under option (i), the applicant is the person who wants to camp, whereas in options (ii) and (iii), the applicant is the landowner, who bears the onus of seeking that approval.

Options (ii) and (iii) reflect the emphasis placed on protecting the health and safety of users and the environment, as they propose a range of factors that must be considered before approval can be granted. Such considerations are not mandatory in option (i), which is not in line with the objectives of the review.

It is acknowledged that there are times when a person may need to camp in an accommodation vehicle or tent for an extended period of time. However, in these circumstances, it is important that the occupier’s health and safety is protected and there is no significant impact on neighbours or the environment. It is appropriate that landowners who allow such camping on their property take greater responsibility for and ownership of the process.

Option (ii) gives local governments the autonomy to make decisions on whether a person should be allowed to camp on private property and for how long. The legislation will, however, provide guidelines around what a local government must consider before granting approval. This would ensure that the objectives of the new Caravan Parks Act are met. Additionally, approvals can only be granted for three months at a time, following which a full review of the circumstances is required. Even though this places an administrative burden on both applicants and local governments, it is important that the circumstances are reviewed after three months to ensure there are no significant impacts on the neighbours or environment and that there is still a genuine requirement to camp outside of a facility.

Option (iii) operates in the same manner as option (ii); however, a local government can only approve an application four times (for a total of 12 months’ stay on the land), following which an application must be made to the Minister or CEO of the department. The purpose of this is to introduce a second party to critically review applications. This process will place an administrative burden on the department to assess applications. To simplify the process and reduce the expectation that applications are automatically approved, guidance material such as a policy and application form would be prepared by the department.

Under option (ii), if a local government refuses an application, the applicant can appeal to the SAT. Under option (iii), if a local government declined any of the four allowable applications, applicants could seek review of that decision by the Minister or CEO of the department. It is important to ensure that applicants have an alternative means for their application to be reviewed; however, when considering applications to the Minister or CEO of the department for an extension of time to camp outside of an approved facility (greater than the already approved 12 month period), the department would contact the local government for background and comment. This does not necessarily allow for the independent review that the SAT provides.

There is a financial burden on local governments under options (ii) and (iii) to undertake inspections before approving an application; however, this will be addressed through the imposition of an appropriate fee. The cost to the applicant is likely to be significantly less than the cost of staying in an approved facility for the same length of time.

There has recently been an increase in landowners making their properties available to campers on both a paid and unpaid basis. To ensure that this practice does not impose undue inconvenience on neighbours, which is especially applicable in suburban areas with closer living quarters, and that the user’s health and safety is protected, options (ii) and (iii) propose that if the intention is to have a property available for more than three nights in any 28 days, approval must be sought from the local government. Requiring approval is a cost to the landowner, which may not be offset if the landowner is offering free accommodation; however, it is important to protect both the users and neighbours.

It is arguable that even though there is an impact on landowners and local governments, an application process is crucial to ensure the necessary objects of the legislation are met. As option (ii) gives local governments the discretion to determine what is best for their district without Ministerial or departmental intervention, this is the recommended option.

Recommendation

·    Option (ii)      Local governments can grant approval to camp for up to three months at a time subject to appropriate consultation and risk assessment.

 

Guidance questions

·    Question 9:   Is it appropriate to ask applicants who wish to make their property available for camping to provide a management plan outlining basic health and safety requirements (refer Section 8 for more information)? Please provide reasons why or why not.

·    Question 10: Is it appropriate for local governments to undertake a complete review of the circumstances every three months? Why or why not?

·    Question 11: Should local governments have the autonomy to decide how long a person is allowed to camp on private property in their district? Why or why not?

·    Question 12: What are the potential costs and benefits of allowing people to camp outside of approved facilities for extended periods of time?

5.3 State government and local government facilities

Holiday parks and camping grounds are not only owned or operated by private operators. Local governments and state government agencies, such as the Department of Parks and Wildlife (DPaW), operate their own facilities. DPaW owns approximately 300 facilities, directly operating around 260 of those facilities, and are the biggest park provider in the state. Under the current Caravans Park Act, facilities operated by public sector bodies are exempt.

This exemption applies only to a public sector body as defined in the Public Sector Management Act 1994, and not to local governments. This means that, if a local government operates a facility, it must ensure compliance with the prescribed standards, but a state government agency is not under this same obligation.

Caravan parks and camping grounds operated by DPaW are already managed under the Conservation and Land Management Act 1996 (CALM Act) and associated regulations. In accordance with the CALM Act, DPaW has introduced a management regime which includes issuing lessees a lease for approximately 40 years based on a comprehensive management plan submitted by the lessee. The development and operation of camping grounds on CALM land are governed by the Conservation Commission of Western Australia.

Issues

The exemption of public sector bodies from the provisions of the Caravan Parks Act has resulted in a perception that different standards apply to facilities on Crown land compared to private and local government facilities, notwithstanding the significant regulation of DPaW sites under the CALM Act.

Consideration must also be given to how a local government or state government facility is licenced and how compliance could be enforced.

Objective

The objective is to ensure that all facilities, regardless of who owns or operates them, have minimally acceptable standards for the health and safety of users and protection of the environment.

Consultation feedback

Feedback has previously been sought on the proposal that all caravan parks, regardless of the operator, should be required to comply with the same health and safety standards.

A majority of respondents supported this approach. Concerns were raised however that it may increase red tape and reduce the ability of the state to deliver low-cost caravanning and camping options if DPaW facilities, which are predominantly nature-based parks, are required to be upgraded to achieve the health and safety standards specified in the Caravan Parks Act for holiday parks.

Options

(i)         Status quo

This option proposes that public sector bodies would continue to be exempt from the health and safety standards prescribed under the Caravan Parks Act and Regulations. DPaW would continue to manage its lessees in accordance with its own rigorous management plan framework under the CALM Act and Regulations.

Local governments would be able to operate a facility in their district without a licence; however, they must comply with the legislation. In the event of non-compliance, the Minister could issue a direction to meet a specified standard, comply with a provision, or do any specified thing necessary for effective operation of the Caravan Parks Act.

(ii)        All providers must comply with the Caravan Parks Act and Regulations

Under this option, all facilities providing sites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents will be required to comply with the minimum health and safety standards for users. It will be mandatory for all operators to meet the minimum standards prescribed. Public sector bodies and local governments would not be exempt.

The Minister, or CEO of the department, will be able to issue directions to local government-run facilities in the event of non-compliance. This option also proposes that the department could appoint an independent person to inspect facilities and enforce the legislation in accordance with the provisions outlined in Section 8.

If this option is preferred, it is suggested the following provisions are adopted:

·    All facilities providing sites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents are required to have an approval to operate and complete a management plan

·    The relevant local government or state government agency will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the prepared management plan

·    The Minister or CEO of the department may give directions to the local government to undertake a particular function of the legislation, and

·    The department may appoint an independent person to inspect facilities and enforce the legislation. Operators will be required to pay the costs associated with inspection and enforcement.

(iii)       Facilities leased from a public sector body are required to comply with the Caravan Parks Act and Regulations. A facility owned and operated by a public sector body is exempt. Local government facilities must comply with the standards

Under this option, any facility which is leased from a public sector body, such as DPaW, will be required to comply with the minimum standards under the Caravan Parks Act. A facility which is operated by DPaW, however, will not be required to comply with the Caravan Parks provisions.

Local governments will have to comply with the provisions and the Minister or CEO of the department will be able to issue a directive in the event of non-compliance.

 

 

If this option is preferred, it is suggested the following provisions are adopted:

·    All facilities providing sites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents are required to have an approval to operate and complete a management plan

·    A facility that is operated by a public sector body as defined under the Public Sector Management Act 1994 is exempt

·    The relevant local government or state government agency will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the prepared management plan

·    The Minister or CEO of the department may give directions to the local government to undertake a particular function of the legislation, and

·    The department may appoint an independent person to inspect facilities and enforce the legislation. Operators will be required to pay the costs associated with inspection and enforcement.

Discussion

Under option (ii), all facilities providing sites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents would be required to comply with the same set of minimum outcomes-based standards to be prescribed in regulations. While a benefit of this option is that all users of these facilities are afforded the same health and safety protections, it is likely to result in a duplication of regulatory framework for state government agencies and any lessees they issue a lease to, with little or no clear benefits to justify the additional costs to bodies such as DPaW, who advise they already maintain high standards for their sites. In comparison, option (i) of retaining the status quo allows for a more efficient legislative response, with no introduction of additional regulatory burden on either state government agencies or businesses that lease sites from the Crown. This would allow DPaW, the single biggest operator of low-cost caravanning and camping sites in the state, to continue to develop and deliver affordable and safe holidays in Western Australia.

Option (iii) separates out facilities that are run by or leased from a state government agency. A facility run by a state government agency would be exempt from the minimum standards, but a facility leased by that agency to a private operator would be required to comply. This could lead to difficulties in transitioning when a facility is leased or run by the state government agency. It is also more difficult to argue why a state government agency should not be required to comply with the same minimum standards as all other facilities, but any business leasing the same park should be required to be compliant.

Options (ii) and (iii) could have a significant financial impact on operators of facilities who are not compliant with the new minimum standards and need to improve them; however, there is no expectation that these standards will be higher than those currently in place, especially as they will be outcomes-based, meaning that operators will have flexibility to meet them. Outcomes-based standards would be less prescriptive than the current legislation and ensure operators have flexibility in meeting the standards in a way that would allow them to cater directly to their target markets. DPaW states that their facilities comply with their own standards, which may not be substantially different to what will be proposed under this legislation. It is also a possibility that the new minimum standards may be modelled on the DPaW provisions. If this is the case, requiring government agencies, predominantly DPaW, to comply with existing provisions may not improve standards but could still result in additional set-up and compliance costs.

Difficulties may arise under options (ii) and (iii) in relation to approving management plans and ensuring compliance through regular inspections. State and local government agencies will be responsible for preparing their own management plans and ensuring compliance, and if the facilities are found to be non-compliant, undertaking the necessary action to rectify the situation and bring the facilities into compliance. Under this option, the operator and regulator are effectively the same entity, which could risk the perception of a conflict of interest. This risk could be mitigated by including a provision that requires the approved management plan to be published, so that the conditions of approval are available for users of the facility to review. This would ensure transparency and accountability, despite the dual operator/regulator role.

Nevertheless, to address circumstances of potential operator/regulator conflict, options (ii) and (iii) provide the ability for the department to appoint an independent person to both inspect facilities and enforce the provisions of the legislation, on facilities owned or operated by local government and state government agencies. The Minister, or CEO of the department, will also be able to issue directions to require a local government or state government agency to undertake a particular function; for example, issuing a direction to inspect a particular facility.

Option (i) is recommended as it provides a streamlined no-impact approach consistent with the policy of red-tape reduction, while still providing for the health and safety of users as there are already regulatory provisions in place under other state government legislation.

 

Recommendation

·    Option (i)       Status Quo.

 

Guidance questions

·    Question 13: Should local governments and state government agencies be held accountable for complying with the legislation? Why or why not?

·    Question 14: Should users have the ability to lodge a complaint against a state government-run or local government-run facility with the Minister or SAT? Why or why not?

·    Question 15: Can you identify any other potential costs or benefits that may result from keeping the status quo? What are they?

5.4 What will not be covered by the proposed legislation

In accordance with the recommendations made above, the following areas will no longer be covered under the proposed Caravan Parks Act.

Park Home Parks: Park home parks are currently able to be situated on land zoned for caravan parks because a park home is classified as a caravan. The proposed amendments remove the definition of park home as a caravan, but also require that the legislation does not take effect unless there are 10 or more sites designated for short-stay camping within the park home park. This means that facilities which are solely or predominantly developed for the provision of long-stay residential park homes will not be captured under this legislation or be able to access caravan park-zoned land. The same applies for other residential developments such as a collection of chalets or cottages. Without providing 10 designated short-stay campsites or a prescribed percentage of sites within their facility, these facilities would not be classed as holiday parks or eligible for an approval to operate under the Caravan Parks Act.

Roadside rest areas: The current regulations allow a person to camp in a roadside rest area for 24 hours in a caravan or other vehicle. The enforcement of stopping in roadside rest areas is currently undertaken in an ad hoc manner, as it is unclear which agency is responsible for inspections and enforcement. During consultation it was proposed that roadside rest areas should be dealt with under existing road and parking legislation rather than the Caravan Parks Act. Approximately 56 per cent of respondents supported this proposal. As the proposed legislation is focused on camping, rather than stopping, and roadside rest areas are provided for fatigue management under Main Roads legislation, these areas will no longer be covered under the Caravan Parks Act.

If a person overstays at a roadside rest area, this will be treated as a traffic offence, and authorised officers will be able to enforce it similar to illegal parking. It has been raised that due to the number of overseas and interstate users, if a local government infringes a user for overstaying, it is easy for the user to give false information, and the infringement notice is never paid and cannot be tracked. However, if a roadside rest area infringement becomes enforceable as a traffic offence, the registered owner of the car could be tracked through the registration number. If the vehicle is a hire car, the hire company can identify the hirer of the car at the time of the offence. This adds an additional measure of accountability and transparency for both roadside rest area users and local governments. 

6.   Licencing of Facilities

The current provisions of the Caravan Parks Act require that a person operating a caravan park or camping ground must have an appropriate licence. Applications to licence a facility are made to the relevant local government and are accompanied by a prescribed fee.

In accordance with the Caravan Parks Regulations, the duration of a licence is one year to the day on which a licence is granted or renewed. A licence remains in force for the year unless otherwise specified in its conditions, or it is cancelled.

Before a licence can be issued or renewed, it is a local government’s responsibility to ensure the Caravan Parks Act is complied with and that the applicant is the owner of the land, or has approval from the landowner, to apply for the licence in respect of the land.

Issues

Annual licensing of caravan parks imposes a risk on operators as there is no certainty that the park will be approved to operate from year to year. In addition to possibly affecting the economic viability of the facility, it is also an administratively burdensome provision for local governments to enforce. Generally, annual licences do not align with the period a lease is granted for, which can restrict access to financing and create unnecessary red tape for all parties.

Annual inspections allow for regular checks of compliance against minimum prescribed standards; however, provided that the Caravan Parks Act states that a licence may be cancelled for non-compliance, it would seem unnecessary to align the period of a licence with an annual inspection timeframe.

Objective

The objective is to introduce a licensing regime which is simple to enforce, provides increased certainty for operators, provides flexibility for operators and enforcement agencies and ensures the necessary minimum standards are maintained.

Consultation feedback

During the previous round of consultation, it was proposed that the validity of a licence be extended from one year to five years. Some submissions suggested that the licence period should be extended to 20 years. It was also questioned whether a licence was required at all.

Submissions also suggested that appropriate and proactive enforcement is more important than the period of the licence. It was proposed that, following the granting of a licence, an inspection should be carried out within 12 months, and that the frequency following that initial inspection would be no more than annually, but no less than once every three years.

The majority of respondents advised that regular inspections are necessary to ensure compliance and that the frequency of inspections should be specified in the legislation. Feedback from local governments and the Western Australian Local Government Association indicated strong support for the ability for local governments to charge inspection fees.

Options

(i)         Status quo

Under this option, caravan parks will continue to be licensed annually, and local governments will be required to ensure compliance with the legislation before the granting or renewal of a licence.

(ii)        A once-off approval to operate is granted, followed by annual inspections

This option proposes that before a facility can operate, it must be granted an approval to operate by the relevant authority. The approval, which will be modelled on the Food Act 2008, will be once-off and accompanied by regular inspections to ensure compliance. The approval to operate would, for all intents and purposes, replace the current annually renewed licence.

A facility operator will be required to submit an application for approval to operate with a management plan (refer to Section 8 for further discussion). The management plan will be used to assess the application, set the conditions under which a facility can operate, and be used as the basis for ongoing and subsequent inspections. An initial inspection will be required before an approval to operate can be granted, and subsequent inspections must then be undertaken annually. Local governments will be able to charge inspection fees and have the discretion to extend the period between inspections to two years, if the facility is fully compliant at the previous inspection and no substantiated complaints have been received since that time.

If a new planning approval application is submitted or there are any redevelopments or substantial changes to a facility, a new application for approval to operate must be submitted to the relevant authority. A substantial change would be defined as one requiring amendments to the management plan. Such changes may include, but are not limited to, a change of owner, operator or lessee, and the removal of facilities.

If this option is preferred, it is suggested that the following provisions are adopted:

·    An approval to operate is required for all facilities that provide two or more short-stay campsites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents

·    An approval to operate is required for all park home park facilities that provide 10 or more short-stay campsites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents or a prescribed percentage of sites on their facility are designated for this purpose

·    A temporary approval to operate can be granted by the relevant authority for specific events (refer Section 7)

·    An approval to operate is to be accompanied by a management plan (refer Section 8)

·    The management plan will provide the minimum conditions under which the facility must operate

·    A local government must undertake inspections annually; however, the period between inspections may be extended to no more than two years under certain conditions, and

·    If a new planning approval application is submitted or there are any redevelopments or substantial changes to a facility (including a change of owner), a new application for approval to operate must be submitted.

(iii)       A five year approval to operate granted by the relevant authority and inspections will be no less than three yearly

This option proposes that rather than an annual licence, an approval to operate is granted for five years. The relevant authority will be required to complete annual inspections but, barring any areas of non-compliance, the approval will remain valid for five years.

In accordance with option (ii), operators will be required to complete a management plan which forms part of the application for approval to operate. Before an approval to operate is renewed, the management plan must be reviewed and resubmitted with the renewal application.

An initial inspection will be required before an approval to operate is granted and inspections must then be undertaken at no less than three yearly intervals. Local governments will be able to charge inspection fees.

If this option was preferred, it is suggested that the following provisions are adopted:

·    An approval to operate is required for all facilities that provide two or more short-stay campsites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents

·    An approval to operate is required for all park home park facilities that provide 10 or more short-stay campsites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents or a prescribed percentage of sites on their facility are designated for this purpose

·    A temporary approval to operate can be granted by the relevant authority for specific events (refer Section 7)

·    An approval to operate is to be accompanied by a Management Plan (refer Section 8)

·    An approval to operate has effect for five years, following which a new application and reviewed management plan must be submitted

·    An application for renewal must be made at least three months prior to the expiry of the approval to operate

·    The management plan will provide the minimum conditions under which the facility must operate

·    A local government must undertake inspections on a no less than three yearly basis, and

·    If a new planning approval application is submitted or there are any redevelopments or substantial changes to a facility (including a change of owner) then application must be made to the relevant authority for a new approval to operate.

Discussion

During the previous round of consultation, feedback was sought on extending the period of a licence to five years. Option (iii) reflects this proposal, which will give operators some certainty to their business and will also reduce the red tape of having to apply annually for a licence when it seems the sole purpose of requiring this is to undertake an inspection to ensure compliance.

As a result of the feedback received, option (ii) proposes that rather than an annual (option (i)) or five year (option (iii)) licence, a facility is granted an initial approval to operate. This is a once off approval, which reduces the financial impost on local governments and operators, as well as reducing red tape generated by repeatedly applying for the same approval.

It was noted during consultation that inspections and enforcement are more crucial than a licence. Under option (i), inspections will form part of the annual licence process, whereas under options (ii) and (iii), the inspections will be separate except for the initial application for approval to operate.

Under option (ii), inspections must be conducted annually; however, local governments will have the discretion to extend that period to two years if the facility was fully compliant at the previous inspection and there have been no substantiated complaints since. This will reward compliant operators, provide an incentive to remain compliant, and reduce the financial impost of those operators through reduced inspection fees. It also enables local governments to focus on operators who are not compliant and reduces the administrative burden imposed by conducting regular annual inspections on all facilities in the local government’s district.

Under option (iii), inspections must be undertaken on a no less than three yearly basis. Compared to option (ii), this option has the benefit of reducing the financial impact on both local governments and operators; however, it does not ensure that the facilities are being maintained to protect the health and safety of users and the environment. The longer the period between inspections, the higher the cost associated with correcting non-compliance could be. Users may also be exposed to longer, and potentially greater, periods of risk. Local governments will be authorised to charge inspection fees at cost recovery, which is expected to increase the sector’s willingness to undertake inspections, which ultimately should improve compliance. As has been discussed previously in this section, proactive enforcement is just as important as ongoing compliance.

It is recommended that option (ii) is adopted. This would place the emphasis on inspections rather than licence renewals, reduce red tape and the financial impost on compliant operators, provide an incentive for remaining compliant, and ensure that operators continuously protect the health and safety of users and the environment.

Recommendation

·    Option (ii)      Initial approval to operate granted, followed by annual inspections.

 

Guidance questions

·    Question 16: Do you believe this proposal is the best option for users, operators and local governments? Why or why not?

·    Question 17: Do you think an annual inspection is appropriate? Do you support the option for local governments to extend the inspection period for up to two years? Why or why not?

·    Question 18: Are there any other potential costs or benefits of this option that have not been addressed? What are they?

7.   Licence Categories

The Caravan Park Regulations currently provide for seven licence categories. These are:

·    Caravan park licence

·    Camping ground licence

·    Caravan park and camping ground licence

·    Park home park licence

·    Transit park licence (stay of no longer than three consecutive nights)

·    Nature based park licence, and

·    Temporary licence.

The legislation prescribes different health and safety standards for many of these categories. Most notably, nature based parks and transit parks can provide fewer facilities than caravan parks, due to the expected length of stay.

Issues

A reported issue with the seven licence categories is that with evolving mixed-use facilities, the existing licence types may not reflect the actual accommodation being provided at each facility. It has been noted that there are difficulties in distinguishing between categories, particularly between nature based parks and transit parks, which create unnecessary confusion and inconsistency in the application of the legislation.

The different categories may also prescribe different health and safety standards. Stakeholders have proposed that there should be uniform minimum standards across all categories to ensure consistency and protect the health and safety of users.

Objective

The objective is to ensure appropriate minimum standards that protect the health and safety of users and mitigate environmental risks across all different circumstances where campsites are provided for accommodation vehicles and/or tents.

Consultation feedback

Feedback was sought on a proposal to reduce the current categories from seven to three (holiday park, transit park and nature based park). This reduction was generally supported; however, it was also suggested that it may be more appropriate to have no categories, as all facilities should comply with the same standards.

Options

(i)         Status quo

Under this option, the seven categories will remain, and operators will be required to apply for the most applicable licence for the accommodation they provide. The licence category will determine the standards an operator must comply with.

 

(ii)        Approval categories are reduced to three: holiday park, transit park and nature based park

Under this option, it is proposed that there are three approval categories:

·    Holiday park approval

·    Transit park approval, and

·    Nature based park approval.

Each approval category will have a set of minimum standards with which operators will be required to comply.

This option was also proposed in the first consultation paper.

If this option is preferred, it is suggested that the following provisions are adopted:

·    An approval to operate a holiday park will include caravan parks that traditionally provide mixed-use accommodation types, but specifically sites for accommodation vehicles and tents. Sites can be provided for both long-stay and short-stay use.

·    A transit park approval will be for operators of facilities where the allowable length of stay is no longer than three consecutive nights.

·    A nature based park approval will be for facilities that are not in close proximity to an area that is built up with structures used for business, industry or dwelling-houses at intervals of less than 100 metres for a distance of 500 metres or more, and has been predominately formed by nature and has limited or controlled artificial light and noise intrusion.

(iii)       One set of minimum requirements for all facilities that provide campsites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents

Under this option, all categories will be removed and there will be one set of minimum standards applying to all facilities providing sites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents. Operators will be able to provide standards above the prescribed minimum, dependent on the facility they are managing. The operator’s target market will effectively determine the standard of services provided in each individual facility.

As there will be only one set of minimum requirements, it removes the need to separately address overflow and temporary areas; however, these may be specifically addressed in a management plan.

If this option was preferred, it is suggested that the following provisions be adopted:

·    All existing licence categories are removed so that the same minimum health, safety and environmental standards apply to all facilities providing campsites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents, and

·    Any overflow or temporary areas will be required to comply with these minimum standards unless an exemption is granted by the relevant local government.

(iv)      Three approval to operate categories: Holiday Park, Nature Based Park and Event approvals, with one set of minimum standards applying to all

This option proposes that there are three approval categories; however, each facility must comply with the same set of minimum outcomes-based standards.

A holiday park approval will be for facilities providing a range of accommodation types, whereas a nature based park approval will be for minimal facilities in non-built up areas. Due to the minimal nature of the facilities and the potential impact on the environment, stays in nature based parks will be restricted to no more than 28 days in any three month period. There will be no restrictions on the length of stay in a holiday park.

An event approval will be available following an application to the relevant local government. A person may apply for an event approval for any reason where there will be more than one accommodation vehicle and/or tent on a property. Similar to a person applying to camp outside of a facility for a period longer than three nights (as addressed at Section 5), an event approval application must be accompanied by a prescribed fee and a management plan addressing basic health and safety concerns of the users, most importantly access to water and waste management. An event approval can only be granted for a maximum of seven days, and a local government will be required to undertake an inspection of the property and consult with any neighbours before granting approval. No more than four event approvals will be approved for a single property in the course of a year.

If this option was preferred, it is suggested that the following provisions are adopted:

·    A holiday park approval will include caravan parks that traditionally provide mixed-use accommodation types, but specifically sites for accommodation vehicles and tents. Sites can be provided for both long-stay and short-stay.

·    A nature based park approval will be for facilities that are not in close proximity to an area that is built up with structures used for business, industry or dwelling-houses at intervals of less than 100 metres for a distance of 500 metres or more, and has been predominately formed by nature and has limited or controlled artificial light and noise intrusion. Stays will be restricted to no more than 28 days in any three month period.

·    An event approval will be for special events where there is more than one accommodation vehicle and/or tent outside of an approved facility. An approval cannot be issued for any period greater than seven days and no more than four approvals can be issued for the property in a year.

·    All facilities must abide by minimum standards as prescribed. These standards will be outcomes-based, rather than prescriptive, to allow for flexibility in approach.

Discussion

It was previously proposed that the licence categories should be reduced to more appropriately reflect the types of facilities. This proposal is reflected in option (ii), which suggests three categories, rather than seven, as proposed in option (i), status quo.

Following an assessment of the consultation feedback, two further options have been included. Option (iii) proposes that there are no categories and all facilities must comply with the same minimum standards. This approach, in addition to reducing red tape by prescribing uniform standards for different categories, also affords the same protection to all users and the environment.

A further option, option (iv), proposes that there are three approval to operate categories: holiday park, nature based park and event. All categories will be required comply with the same minimum standards.

Under option (iv), a person will be able to apply for an approval to operate specifically for an event. Requiring an event approval allows the local government to assess whether the person holding the event has considered all the necessary elements to protect the health and safety of users, and reduce environmental impact.

Options (i) and (ii) may result in confusion when applying different standards to different accommodation types, when it can be argued that all categories should ensure the health and safety of users is protected, whether it be a nature based park with minimal facilities, or a fully equipped holiday park. Although target markets may be variable, health and safety standards are constant and should not change.

While the removal of categories under option (iii) simplifies the process, and all facilities will be required to comply with the same standards, it may ultimately make it more difficult for local governments to assess applications and for operators to apply for an appropriate approval in remote areas or for short-term events. When a local government receives an application for approval to operate, the application cannot be accurately assessed if it does not clearly identify the type of facility proposed. The conditions of a nature based park management plan, where water and waste may have to be dealt with in innovative ways, will be significantly different to a holiday park application.

The benefit of option (iv) is that it categorises the key facility types (holiday parks and nature based parks), and also recognises the need for once-off event approvals.

To assist in the review of applications for approval to operate, while recognising that there are key types of facilities, option (iv) is recommended. Having the same set of minimum standards will also promote flexibility in supplying facilities to meet these standards, while ensuring consistency of health and safety protections for users of all types of facilities.

Recommendation

·    Option (iv)     Three approval to operate categories: Holiday Park, Nature Based Park and Event approvals, with one set of minimum standards applying to all.

 

Guidance questions

·    Question 19: Is it appropriate for all holiday parks and camping grounds to operate under the same set of minimum standards? Why or why not?

·    Question 20: Are there any other types of facilities that should be categorised separately? What are they and why?

·    Question 21: Should event approvals be limited to seven days and four approvals per year? Why or why not?

·    Question 22: Can you identify any additional costs or benefits to this option that have not been discussed? What are they?

8.   Conditions for Approval to Operate

As noted previously, the current Caravan Parks Act sets very prescriptive standards for different types of accommodation. When an approval to operate is granted or renewed, a local government must assess that facility against the prescribed conditions.

If a facility is not compliant, local governments can enforce the provisions with a number of tools, including:

(i)   Work specifications notice – a notification advising that work is required to be undertaken to ensure compliance with the legislation. A penalty applies.

(ii)  Prohibition notice – a written notice prohibiting the facility from admitting new occupiers and collecting any charges from existing occupiers, due to a contravention of the Act or conditions imposed. A prohibition notice stays in force until cancelled by the local government.

(iii) Cancellation of licence – a written notice advising of a cancellation of a licence as a result of the licence holder being convicted under the Caravan Parks Act or any other relevant law, the licence was obtained by fraud or misrepresentation or a licence condition was contravened.

A local government can also take legal action under the Caravan Parks Act and issue infringement notices for a prescribed offence.

Issues

The current legislation is very prescriptive in the requirements that are placed on operators. The provisions do not allow operators the flexibility to think critically about their target market and facility, nor to develop proposals to address these and the particular risks of the location.

Objective

The objective is to introduce outcomes-based mechanisms which allow operators the flexibility to develop their facilities to meet the needs of their users, whilst also complying with the minimum standards for health, safety and the environment.

Local governments also need to be encouraged to enforce compliance.

Consultation feedback

Feedback has previously been sought on whether management plans would be a suitable model for licensing facilities, with the overarching legislative framework providing the minimum standards that must be incorporated in the plan.

Overall, 78 per cent of respondents were supportive of the introduction of management plans. The adverse feedback received related to the financial impact the development of the plans may have.

It was previously proposed that the current enforcement provisions continue to apply under the new legislation.

Options

(i)         Status Quo

Under this option, facilities will continue to be assessed based on the prescribed standards under the Caravan Parks Regulations.

The Caravan Parks Regulations outline in detail the standards that all caravan parks and camping grounds need to abide by, including the distance between sites, size of annexes, parking, ablutions, waste management and laundry facilities and water supply.

A licence holder may apply to the Minister to vary, modify or grant an exemption from the prescribed standards. An exemption can be approved if the Minister is satisfied it is not detrimental to the public interest.

(ii)        Preparation of management plans for all facilities operating under the Caravan Parks Act

In accordance with the recommendation under Sections 7 and 8, it is proposed that there be three categories of approval to operate and all facilities operating under the legislation must comply with a set of minimum standards. These standards will be developed through further consultation following the development of the principal Caravan Parks Act.

In addition to the new legislation setting the minimum standards to apply across all facilities, it is proposed that operators must also complete a management plan and submit it with their initial request for an approval to operate. If the application is for an event approval, a management plan will be required; however, it may not necessarily contain the same level of detail as required for a holiday park or nature based park application.

The requirement for management plans has recently been introduced for nature based parks to enable operators to develop a proposal that is specific to their target market and the facility they wish to establish. Guidance material for nature based park management plans is available on the department’s website at www.dlg.wa.gov.au/Content/Community/CaravanParks/NatureBasedParks.aspx. Similar guidance material would be provided for the preparation of holiday park and event management plans.

Management plans are documents providing essential details on how a facility is to be designed and managed and the type of facilities to be provided. The plan outlines how the operator will meet the minimum standards and address any risks specific to the facility.

Once agreed, the plan will form the basis of an approval to operate and will be the ongoing management tool for the operator and the local government. The approved plan will form the minimum standards with which the facility is required to comply, and compliance with these standards will be checked during inspections.

It is proposed that the regulations will prescribe what needs to be incorporated into the plan, including:

·    The number and type of proposed sites

·    The proposed maximum capacity of the facility

·    Environmental impact and sustainability

·    Waste management

·    Traffic management, and

·    Risk management.

For further information on what is required to complete a management plan, and to view a pre-existing management plan template, please visit the department’s webpage on nature based parks at www.dlg.wa.gov.au/Content/Community/CaravanParks/NatureBasedParks.aspx.

The relevant authority will be required to review the management plan at the time an application is made, and will have the discretion to place conditions on the facility; for example, the authority may stipulate that a particular facility must meet standards above the legislated minimum due to the nature of the facility. If an operator does not support the conditions imposed by the approving authority, this option proposes that they can appeal that decision to the SAT.


 

If this option is preferred, it is suggested that the following provisions are adopted:

·    A management plan must be submitted with applications for approval to operate

·    Management plans must provide for the minimum standards prescribed and any particular risks associated with the facility

·    A local government has the discretion to apply specific conditions to an approved management plan

·    A facility operator can appeal to the SAT to oppose the conditions required by a local government

·    An approval to operate is not issued unless the facility is compliant with the agreed management plan

·    Local governments must keep a register of facilities granted approval to operate

·    Facility operators must comply with the minimum standards as prescribed

·    Facility operators must keep a register of occupiers

·    Local governments to enforce the provisions through use of work specification notices, prohibition notices or cancellation of approval to operate. Court-imposed penalties and infringement notices will be prescribed, and

·    The department can appoint an independent person to enforce the provisions of the legislation on local governments.

Discussion

An overarching objective of the review is to increase flexibility and reduce red tape for operators and local governments, while continuing to ensure that the health and safety of users and the environment are protected.

If the status quo (option (i)) is maintained, operators will continue to operate under the current legislated standards, which are unnecessarily prescriptive. To ensure that operators have the flexibility to tailor their facilities to the needs and expectations of their target market, operators must have the ability to prepare a plan that delivers on those expectations. While option (i) allows an exemption from the standards to be sought, applying for an exemption is additional red tape for the operator, and also places an administrative burden on the department to review applications.

Under option (ii), operators will be able to determine the type of facility and services they want to provide, taking into consideration their target market and the risks of the site, and incorporate that proposal into a management plan. The management plan must be submitted to the relevant authority with an application for approval to operate. It is expected that this increased flexibility will remove the difficulties associated with applying the convoluted current provisions under option (i) and will remove the red tape that currently surrounds some of those provisions, such as the necessity of applying for exemptions from the existing standards.

While option (ii) gives operators increased flexibility, it also provides a necessary measure to allow the relevant authority to place conditions on the facility. An example where this may occur is in a bushfire-prone area, where a local government may require the distance between campsites to be greater than the prescribed minimum, to protect the health and safety of users in the event of a bushfire. While option (ii) has provisions for minimum standards, the standards provided under specific management plans must be appropriate for and specific to the level of facility that is being provided. There is a risk that increased flexibility and less prescriptive regulatory requirements may lead to insufficient information being provided to allow local governments and planners to make an informed decision on an application. Whilst existing facilities already have detailed planning approval documentation, that granular level of detail is unlikely to be necessary for new developments. It is suggested that for new developments, management plans and development approvals be prepared concurrently to ensure that all required information is compiled and provided to the local government at the same time.

Under both options (i) and (ii), the local government will be required to ensure compliance. It is proposed that the current enforcement tools remain, as they allow for a staged approach to compliance, from an initial notice requesting a change, to cancellation of the approval to operate in extreme circumstances. Option (ii) proposes that the department will have the ability to enforce the legislation on local government, which recognises the possibility of regulator/operator conflict and ensures that all facilities are held to the same standard, no matter the operator.

Under option (ii), when inspections are conducted, compliance will be checked in accordance with the management plan for the individual facility, rather than under prescribed standards that may not be relevant to the specific facility (option (i)).

If option (ii) is adopted, the department will prepare guidance material to assist operators in developing management plans. Guidance material would also be prepared to assist local governments in assessing management plans to ensure the plans are compliant with the Caravan Parks Act.

It is recommended that option (ii) is adopted as it allows for increased flexibility for operators to tailor their facilities to their target markets, whilst providing protection to the health and safety of users and the environment.

Recommendation

·    Option (ii)      Preparation of management plans for all facilities operating under the Caravan Parks Act.

 

Guidance questions

·    Question 23: Do you think this promotes a flexible operating environment for operators? Why or why not?

·    Question 24: Will less prescriptive regulatory requirements result in insufficient information being provided in support of development applications?

·    Question 25: Is it feasible to prepare a management plan concurrently with a development approval? Why or why not?

·    Question 26: Do you agree that local governments should have the ability to require that operators provide services at standards above the prescribed minimum? Why or why not? If yes, under what circumstances?

·    Question 27: Can you identify any additional costs or benefits arising from the requirement to prepare a management plan? What are they?

9.   Penalties

The Caravan Parks Act and Regulations contain court-imposed penalties and modified penalties for a range of offences.

Issues

The current penalties in the legislation have not been increased for 20 years, and are therefore unlikely to act as an effective deterrent to non-compliance. It is also unlikely that such outdated penalties are above cost recovery for local governments, which may result in a lack of proactive enforcement.

Objective

The objective is to increase penalties to a level which will both encourage compliance with the legislation and facilitate proactive enforcement by local governments.

Consultation feedback

Feedback was previously sought on the level to which penalties should be increased. Approximately 59 per cent of submissions supported an increase in penalties; however, it was also raised that an increase in penalties should be backed by effective inspection and enforcement.

Options

(i)         Status quo

Under this option, penalties would remain the same. The amounts of court-imposed penalties vary depending on the offence. For example, there is currently a court-imposed penalty of $1,000 for failing to display the licence issued, and a penalty of $5,000 for operating without a licence.

Modified penalties (on the spot fines) range from $50 to $200 depending on the offence.

(ii)        Increase penalties in accordance with the Food Act 2008 and Building Act 2011

Under this option, it is proposed that penalties will be increased to ensure they act as an effective deterrent and are consistent with similar legislation.

This option proposes that penalties are modelled on the Food Act and Building Act, as these Acts also deal with health and safety issues. Overall, this may result in a tenfold increase. For example, court-imposed penalties may increase from $5,000 to $50,000 for breaching notifications and conditions.

In accordance with the Food Act, penalties for a body corporate will be five times higher than for an individual.

If this option is preferred, it is suggested that the following provisions are adopted:

·    All court-imposed penalties are increased to be consistent with similar provisions under the Food Act 2008 and Building Act 2011.

 

 

Discussion

The imposition of penalties is to act as a deterrent and encourage compliance. For this reason, the penalties must be set at a level which both reflects the severity of the offence and deters non-compliance. Penalties that do not financially impact an offender will not encourage compliance, which may ultimately impact on the health and safety of users.

Option (i) would retain the existing penalties with no increase. The concern with penalties that are not increased to reflect the current financial position of society is that they may not be high enough to act as a deterrent. Such penalties may also not be enough to cover the costs to local governments to enforce compliance, which can result in a lack of proactive enforcement.

Under option (ii) it is proposed that penalties are increased in line with existing penalties under the Food Act and Building Act. Both statutes are recent and contain high penalties for non-compliance that reflect contemporary costs of living. Whilst the court-imposed penalty increase will be significant (approximately tenfold), it is crucial that the penalties effectively deter non-compliance and provide an incentive for local governments to enforce the provisions. As noted through consultation, feedback suggests that encouraging enforcement is crucial to increasing compliance. Proactive enforcement should result in increased compliance.

Introducing a penalty which is five times higher for bodies corporate (as suggested under option (ii)) also acknowledges the financial position of bodies corporate compared to individuals.

Option (ii) is recommended because the imposition of greater penalties provides an additional measure of protection for the health and safety of users and the environment. This may assure users and operators that offences against the legislation could result in a significant penalty being imposed. There is no significant impact to compliant operators or users as a result of the increase.

Recommendation

·    Option (ii)      Increase penalties in accordance with the Food Act 2008 and Building Act 2011.

 

 


 

Guidance questions

·    Question 28: Do you think increasing penalties in line with the Food Act and Building Act is appropriate? Why or why not?

·    Question 29: Do you agree that higher penalties will increase enforcement and compliance? Why or why not?

·    Question 30: Do you agree that bodies corporate should be liable for a higher penalty than individuals? Why or why not?

·    Question 31: Can you identify any additional costs or benefits that have not been considered in the discussion of this option? What are they? 

10. Prerequisites of Accommodation Vehicles

It is important that accommodation vehicles, including caravans and campervans, are compliant with the necessary Western Australian legislation. This includes ensuring that accommodation vehicles remain compliant with the mobility provisions of the current Caravan Parks Act.

Issues

Accommodation vehicles are being converted for residential use, which often includes modifications and the attachment of permanent fixed structures such as annexes and carports. These modifications mean such vehicles no longer comply with the mobility provisions of the Caravan Parks Act.

These converted vehicles are currently not captured by legislation that applies to either vehicles or buildings, and some regulation is required to ensure that the health and safety of users and occupiers is maintained and is enforceable through legislation.

The risks associated with residents in structures which do not offer the protection that an approved building does is mitigated by their mobility. In the event of a cyclone or fire within the facility for example, such vehicles should be able to be quickly moved to a safer location.


 

Objective

The objective is to ensure that the health and safety risks of occupiers are minimised by having accommodation vehicles and converted accommodation vehicles compliant with appropriate standards.

Consultation feedback

It was proposed in the first consultation paper that caravans and campervans must be licensed at all times they are in a facility. Submissions received raised concerns that there are currently caravans that have been converted to become more permanent structures by long-term residents and are therefore no longer mobile. These vehicles would not be considered roadworthy and are unlikely to be licensed under the Road Traffic Act. However, most of these converted accommodation vehicles have never been assessed against the requirements of the Building Act and are unlikely to have had appropriate health and safety mechanisms installed as part of those modifications.

A distinction must be made between treatment of converted accommodation vehicles in the future and the treatment of current vehicles that are not roadworthy. The latter is dealt with under Transitional Provisions (Section 12).

Options

(i)         Status quo

It is currently a requirement that caravans and campervans remain mobile and be maintained in such a condition that they can be moved under their own power or by being towed. It is not specifically necessary for the vehicles to be licensed under the Road Traffic Act; however, this is implied, as such vehicles are not allowed on roads without a current licence.

(ii)        Accommodation vehicles in holiday parks are either licensed under the Road Traffic Act 1974 or assessed under the Building Act 2011 as a Class 1a building

This option proposes that any accommodation vehicle in a facility must be licensed under the Road Traffic Act and must remain licensed. For a licence to be issued, it is a requirement that a vehicle is roadworthy.

If the intention is for an accommodation vehicle to become unlicensed and converted into a transportable building by the addition of a rigid annexe, patio or similar, permission must first be received from the owner of the holiday park. If supported by the park owner, an application will then need to be made to the local government in advance of the conversion to ensure it complies with the relevant local planning scheme. The entire structure, including the original accommodation vehicle, must also be assessed as a habitable structure (a class 1a building under the Building Code of Australia). This may require an upgrade to the vehicle.

At all times, the building must remain transportable, as the occupier has no entitlement to the land. Permanent, immovable structures are only allowed if they are owned by the owner of the park.

It is important to recognise that converted accommodation vehicles are different from park homes, which are discussed at Section 5 of this paper. Converted accommodation vehicles were once roadworthy and presumably were capable of being licensed under the Road Traffic Act, whereas park homes have not previously required a vehicle licence under the Caravan Park Regulations. The two intersect in their usage as permanent residences.

If this option is preferred, it is suggested that the following provisions are adopted:

·    Any accommodation vehicle in a holiday park is to be licensed at all times under the Road Traffic Act

·    If the intention is to add rigid structures to an accommodation vehicle, the entire structure is to be assessed and approved under the Building Act as a habitable building. Approval must also be granted by the facility owner/operator, and

·    A converted accommodation vehicle will be considered a transportable building and must remain transportable.

Discussion

Option (ii) provides a model that captures the types of accommodation vehicles that may be found in a holiday park. This model acknowledges that holiday parks may have residents who are permanent, or wish to become permanent, and would like to convert their vehicle into a more permanent structure, such as through the addition of an annexe or carport. Park operators may also use on-site caravans as a form of accommodation for short-stay tourists. These caravans may be plumbed, have gas and electricity, and while they take the form of a caravan, they would no longer be capable of being licensed under the Road Traffic Act.

Option (ii) would ultimately protect the health and safety of users, because the accommodation types are either roadworthy and/or movable in case of an emergency, or otherwise meet the compliance standards required for a building. A person using a converted accommodation vehicle as a residence should have the same safety standards as a person living in a building. This may require the installation of smoke alarms or insulation. The building must, however, remain transportable, as the owner has no claim to the land on which it sits. If the building were to be sold, leased or hired out, it must have smoke alarms fitted prior to the sale taking place. Under the Building Act, local governments may issue infringement notices against, or prosecute, owners who have not installed compliant smoke alarms in a building prior to selling, transferring ownership, renting or hiring.

While option (i) has the benefit of protecting the health and safety of users because all accommodation vehicles must remain moveable, there are issues with compliance and it does not specify how converted accommodation vehicles should be assessed. Option (i) also does not acknowledge that conversions do occur and that converted vehicles should not continue to be defined as accommodation vehicles.

The introduction of a provision that will allow converted accommodation vehicle users to deregister their vehicle for the purposes of conversion into a building is beneficial, particularly for long term occupants who have no intention of keeping the vehicle mobile. However, it is acknowledged that it may be extremely difficult for a converted accommodation vehicle to pass a building inspection. Whilst this may be the case, it is important to ensure that any person who wants to convert an accommodation vehicle into a permanent residence rather than a mobile home must be afforded the same protection as a person in a traditional building. It is also important to ensure that the health and safety of other users in a park is protected, especially in the case of a fire or cyclone.

While it is unlikely that a converted accommodation vehicle would precisely meet the standards of a Class 1a building under the Building Code of Australia, the Code is flexible in application, as it requires that performance requirements be met.  Similarly to the outcomes-based framework suggested in discussion of management plans (see Section 8 of this paper), the Building Code provides flexibility for owners to demonstrate that the broader performance requirements of the Code are met.  This may be through, for example, access to communal toilet and shower facilities (that is, facilities that are owned and maintained by the park operator for the use of residents and tourists alike) rather than the requirement to install a private toilet and shower in the converted accommodation vehicle itself.  Provided it meets the performance requirements of the Building Code, a converted accommodation vehicle may be considered a Class 1a building by the relevant local government conducting an inspection.

The concern with option (ii) is that a vehicle no longer licensed will be in breach of the legislation if approval has not been granted by the local government for the change to a transportable building. Users will be required to apply for the conversion before the vehicle licence expires. This may result in a significant impact on local governments as they will be required to introduce a process for users to apply and for applications to be assessed. However, to ensure health and safety of those users, option (ii) is the recommended option. Guidance material to assist local governments to assess converted accommodation vehicles against the Building Act would be developed and made available.

For information on the transitional provisions for existing converted use accommodation vehicles refer to Section 12.

Recommendation

·    Option (ii)      Accommodation vehicles in holiday parks are either licensed under the Road Traffic Act 1974 or assessed under the Building Act 2011 as a transportable building.

 

Guidance questions

·    Question 32: Do you agree that accommodation vehicles converted for the purpose of permanent habitation should be assessed under the Building Act rather than the Caravan Parks Act? Why or why not?

·    Question 33: What are the costs and benefits of this proposal for both users and facility operators?

11. Advisory Committee

Under the Caravan Parks Act, the Caravan Parks and Camping Grounds Advisory Committee (Committee) is established to make recommendations to the Minister on ways to improve, promote and regulate caravanning and camping in Western Australia.

Issues

In 2010, the Department of the Premier and Cabinet released a circular (Premier’s Circular 2010/02) advising that Ministers and agencies are encouraged to utilise interdepartmental working groups and other forms of consultation in place of establishing a committee. That Circular can be found at the Department of the Premier and Cabinet website, available from www.dpc.wa.gov.au/GuidelinesAndPolicies/PremiersCirculars/Pages/201002StateGovernmentBoardsandCommittees.aspx.

To comply with this directive, consideration must be given to abolishing the Committee in favour of other means of engagement.

Objective

The objective is to introduce a mechanism which facilitates an effective, flexible and responsive approach to stakeholder engagement.

Consultation feedback

Feedback was sought on the proposal to abolish the Committee in place of proactive consultation with relevant stakeholders.

63 per cent of respondents supported the abolition of the Committee, and 87 per cent were supportive of proactive consultation generally.

There was some support to retain the Committee due to concerns that consultation may be ad hoc or not robust.

Options

(i)         Status quo

Under this option, the Committee would continue to provide advice to the Minister. The Committee is comprised of a representative from each of the following stakeholder groups:

·    Western Australian Local Government Association

·    Caravan industry

·    Consumers

·    State government agency with an interest in caravanning and camping

·    Any other interests as the Minister considers appropriate, and

·    Employee of the department.

The functions of the Committee are to provide advice on ways to improve, promote and regulate caravanning and camping throughout the state.

 

(ii)        Proactive consultation with relevant stakeholders in place of an Advisory Committee

This option proposes that proactive consultation with relevant stakeholders replaces the Committee. Consultation will be undertaken by the department as necessary and may be facilitated through workshops and other means of engagement.

If this option is preferred, it is suggested the following provision is adopted:

·    The Caravan Parks and Camping Grounds Advisory Committee is abolished in favour of proactive consultation undertaken with relevant stakeholders as required.

Discussion

If option (i) is adopted, it would not be compliant with Premier’s Circular 2010/02. However, the retention of the Committee may allow the Minister to more readily gather information and feedback, as a list of members and their contact details are already available. While concern was raised during consultation that advisory committees contain self-interest groups, if option (i) is supported, a thorough advertising and selection process should be undertaken to ensure members are selected and appointed based on their skills and ability to provide reliable advice. Having a set Committee, however, may mean that views are only obtained from a very few people and these people may not have the necessary expertise on a particular issue or matter that arises.

Option (ii), in addition to being compliant with the government’s directive, which will mean a cost benefit, will enable direct consultation with relevant stakeholders. With the removal of the Committee, a variety of consultation methods can be used, dependent on the issue. This may include workshops with specific stakeholders or the development of email distribution lists for different topics. With a range of different methods of consultation available, abolishing the Committee in favour of proactive consultation on an as needed basis would both reduce red tape and encourage a wider range of views from stakeholders across the broader caravanning and camping industry.

While option (ii) will remove the cost associated with paying sitting fees of members and the provision of in-kind support from the department, it may still result in some cost involved with consultation. This cost could be both financial and in-kind as some engagement tools may require staff time and workshops. However, compared to an advisory committee, in times of financial constraints, information could be sought by mechanisms which do not impose a financial impact, other than in-kind, for example the use of email distribution lists to disseminate and receive information, request feedback and provide advice on relevant issues.

Previous feedback suggested that running an advisory committee is administratively burdensome. It also does not align with Premier’s Circular 2010/02, as noted above. Option (ii) will allow for targeted consultation to ensure a more appropriate outcome, dependent on the issue. For these reasons option (ii) is the recommended option.

Recommendation

·    Option (ii)      Proactive consultation with relevant stakeholders in place of an Advisory Committee.

 

Guidance questions

·    Question 34: Do you support this recommendation? Why or why not?

·    Question 35: What consultation methods should be used to ensure feedback from the broader industry (including operators, consumers and local governments) in the future?

·    Question 36: Can you identify any particular costs or benefits associated with disbanding the Committee in favour of a more flexible direct consultation framework? What are they?

12. Transitional Provisions

12.1     Holiday parks and camping grounds

If the above recommendations are adopted, particularly the options discussed at Sections 6 (Licensing of facilities) and 10 (Prerequisites of accommodation vehicles), consideration must be given to introducing transitional provisions which would give operators sufficient time to become compliant.

Issues

One of the key principles of this review is to introduce flexible operating conditions so operators can respond to demand and any changes to the sector over time, as well as allowing them the freedom to tailor their facilities and services to a specific market. If different standards are introduced, it may cause difficulties for operators to become compliant. It is not, however, expected that the minimum standards in the new regulations will be higher than the current standards; therefore, the risk of the majority of operators experiencing substantial difficulties complying with the new minimum standards is considered small.

Objective

The objective is to ensure that operators and users have an adequate period of time to become compliant with any new legislative provisions, whilst still ensuring that facilities are compliant under the existing provisions in the meantime.

Consultation feedback

Submissions highlighted a number of current non-compliance issues with the legislation. The submissions also raised concerns that the current transitional provisions create two sets of rules – one set for older facilities which are not currently compliant, and another set for new ones. This has led to perceptions of inequality.

Option

(i)         All facilities must apply for an approval to operate and complete a management plan within five years of the legislation taking effect

Under this option, it is proposed that facilities must apply for an approval to operate, which includes submitting a management plan, within five years of the legislation taking effect. Until the application for approval to operate has been submitted and approved, the annual licensing provisions will continue to apply to ensure that the facility is still being regularly monitored and remains compliant with the prior provisions of the Caravan Parks Act.

If this option is preferred, it is suggested that the following provisions are adopted:

·    All facilities must apply for approval to operate within five years of the legislation taking effect, and

·    Annual licencing and inspections in accordance with the current provisions will continue to apply until an approval to operate is received.

Discussion

It is important to note that one of the key principles of this review is to reduce red tape while managing risks associated with the operation of facilities, and providing flexibility for operators. Hence it is likely that the new legislation will be less prescriptive, and as such, existing facilities which are compliant with the current requirements should not be adversely affected under the new Caravan Parks Act.

It is however acknowledged that there may be some facilities which are not compliant, and enough time needs to be provided to allow those facilities to make the necessary modifications to become compliant with the Caravan Parks Act. Facilities must also be allowed adequate time to prepare a management plan as part of their application for an approval to operate.

As noted, prior consultation identified issues with facilities operating under different provisions as a result of the transitional provisions introduced in 1997 when the Caravan Parks Act first came into effect. For that reason, the option proposed is that all facilities will be required to comply with the same minimum standards. This removes any confusion and difficulties in enforcing the provisions as the relevant enforcement agency is clear on what provisions apply. This is particularly applicable as each facility will eventually have their own management plan which is specific to it, and local governments will assess each facility against its individual management plan.

To enable all facilities to prepare a suitable management plan, it is proposed that an application for approval to operate can be submitted to the relevant local government at any time within the first five years, provided that it is approved by the end of the fifth year. During this period, the annual licensing and inspection requirements as prescribed in the current legislation will continue to apply. The incentive is for facilities to prepare their management plans and apply for the approval to operate, to avoid the ongoing annual licence requirements. Local governments will use the existing provisions as the basis of the inspections until such time as a management plan is approved.

This approach may be burdensome on local governments in the short term during the transition period; however, it is considered to be the best approach to ensure that all facilities have adequate lead time to prepare a compliant management plan.

Recommendation

·    Option (i)       All facilities must apply for an approval to operate and complete a management plan within five years of the legislation taking effect.

 

Guidance questions

·    Question 37: Are there any other options available for transitional provisions?  What advantages would these bring?

·    Question 38: Is five years enough time for operators to prepare management plans, apply for and be granted approvals to operate? Why or why not?

12.2     Converted accommodation vehicles    

Consideration must also be given to transition provisions for accommodation vehicles that are no longer roadworthy and how, or whether, these will be managed under the Caravan Parks Act.

Issues

It is recommended in this paper (at Section 12) that accommodation vehicles with rigid annexes and carports attached, and/or those that have been converted to building-like structures should be assessed under the Building Act. The issue is how this impacts on current occupiers who are in vehicles that cannot be licensed because they cannot be moved - such vehicles may be unlikely to pass a building inspection.

Objective

The objective is to ensure that the financial impact of the new legislation on occupiers of converted accommodation vehicles is minimal, while still introducing measures to protect their health and safety.

Consultation feedback

Feedback received on the previous proposal suggested that caravans that had been converted for permanent residence should be assessed as buildings under the Building Code. Concern was raised in the submissions that this would have a significant impact on occupiers of these vehicles, as they may be unlikely to pass a building inspection.

Options

(i)         All converted accommodation vehicles must be assessed under the Building Act within one year

This option proposes that within one year of the legislation taking effect, all converted accommodation vehicles must undergo a building inspection to ensure they are fit to be occupied.

If this option is preferred, it is suggested that the following provision is adopted:

·    All converted accommodation vehicles that are no longer licensed under the Road Traffic Act must be inspected under the Building Act within one year of the legislation taking effect. These will be required to become compliant habitable transportable buildings for the purposes of the Building Act.

(ii)        The legislation is not applied retrospectively to converted accommodation vehicles

Under this option, it is proposed that any converted accommodation vehicle that has been converted to a transportable building before the legislation takes effect will not be subject to a building inspection unless there are any future substantial modifications.

If this option is preferred, it is suggested that the following provision is adopted:

·    Any converted accommodation vehicles that are no longer licensed under the Road Traffic Act are exempt from the new provisions subject to any future substantial modifications.

(iii)       The legislation is not applied retrospectively to all converted accommodation vehicles; however, basic minimum standards are prescribed to protect the health and safety of the occupiers and surrounding users

This option proposes that any converted accommodation vehicle that is not able to be licensed under the Road Traffic Act will not have to pass a building inspection; however, basic minimum standards will be necessary. These will be designed to protect the health and safety of residents, including neighbours.

It is proposed that the minimum standards will include the fitting of smoke alarms and residual-current devices (RCDs). It would be mandatory that smoke alarms and RCDs be installed prior to the converted accommodation vehicle being sold, rented, leased or hired out. This is already a requirement under the Building Act and Regulations (smoke alarms) and the Electricity Act 1945 and Regulations (RCDs).

If this option is preferred, it is suggested that the following provisions are adopted:

·    Any converted accommodation vehicles that are no longer licenced under the Road Traffic Act are exempt from the new provisions, subject to any future substantial modifications

·    All converted accommodation vehicles must ensure that smoke alarms and RCDs are fitted within 12 months

·    Converted accommodation vehicles must have smoke alarms and RCDs fitted prior to being sold, rented, leased or hired out, and

·    Converted accommodation vehicles must be capable of assessment as a Class 1a building under the Building Code prior to being sold.

Discussion

In considering the various options for converted accommodation vehicles, it is important to acknowledge that occupiers of permanent converted accommodation vehicles may have no other option for accommodation. Additionally, long-stay occupiers provide financial security to facility owners during off-peak times and can be a significant percentage of their market.

Option (i) proposes that all converted accommodation vehicles must be assessed within 12 months of the legislation taking effect. While this option will ensure that converted accommodation vehicles are safe for occupiers, it may also result in significant costs to users and facilities to become compliant. Another concern is that the vehicles may be condemned if they cannot be made compliant. A significant proportion of these vehicles are unlikely to be compliant with the current legislation. In this situation, occupiers will need to find alternative accommodation and the vehicle itself will need to be removed. In addition to imposing costs onto both the occupier and facility, it may remove the financial security of having the permanent occupiers on sites and depending on the location of the park, it may be extremely difficult for occupiers to secure alternative accommodation.

The benefit of option (i) is that if non-compliant vehicles are removed, it creates additional sites for short-stay tourists. It also provides the safest solution.

Options (ii) and (iii) propose that converted accommodation vehicles already in existence when the legislation takes effect do not have to comply with the new requirements to be assessed under the Building Code. This will ensure that current occupiers will not lose their home, and that operators continue to have their guaranteed rent. However, it does place a risk - not only on the occupiers as the vehicles may be unsafe, but also on other users of the parks, especially if the converted accommodation vehicles pose a fire hazard. It does not, however, seem reasonable that a person who cannot afford more substantive accommodation, or who prefers to live a caravan park lifestyle, should be put at risk.

Under option (iii) converted accommodation vehicles will not have to comply with the Building Code; however, basic health and safety measures will be prescribed. This is likely to include the requirement to install smoke alarms and RCDs. This will result in a cost to the owner of the vehicle but the added protection it provides is considered to justify the cost. In addition, if there are any significant future changes to the vehicle, a building inspection will be required to ensure compliance with the Building Code. A change deemed significant enough to require assessment under the Building Code would include, but is not limited to, the construction of a permanent annexe or carport after the legislation has come into effect. The department, in consultation with other relevant agencies, could develop and make available guidance material to assist local governments and occupiers with the assessment process.

As discussed at Section 10 of this paper, it is already a requirement under the Building Act and Regulations that smoke alarms be fitted prior to the sale, rental, lease or hire of a building. Under that legislation, a new owner is able to recover the costs of installing smoke alarms from the previous owner/seller if they were not installed prior to the sale. The Building Regulations already provide options for installation of smoke alarms where it is not possible to connect them to the mains or have them installed by an electrician (as is likely to be the case with most converted accommodation vehicles). The alternative to a mains-connected (or hardwired) smoke alarm under the Regulations is that a smoke alarm may be fitted in an appropriate alternative location provided it has a 10 year life battery that cannot be removed. Under Regulation 61 of the Building Regulations, local governments can approve the installation of such battery powered smoke alarms. The installation of smoke alarms is therefore considered to be a reasonable requirement for all converted accommodation vehicles.

The Electricity Regulations 1947 legislate that residential premises must have at least two RCDs installed prior to sale, leasing or hire, regardless of whether the premises are occupied by the owner. Additionally, common property relating to residential premises must have at least one RCD per switchboard. As it is already a legislated requirement that residential premises must have at least two RCDs installed, it is considered reasonable to require that they be installed in converted accommodation vehicles used for residential purposes.

Preliminary research has suggested that the cost of a compliant smoke alarm may be approximately $50, not including installation. Installation costs may vary dependent on the type of smoke alarm (e.g. battery powered or mains-connected/hardwired).  RCD costs are similarly variable, ranging anywhere from $200 to $500. Some suppliers may also be able to install both smoke alarms and RCDs simultaneously as a package. 

Under option (iii), it would be a requirement that if a converted accommodation vehicle was to be sold, it must first be assessed against the requirements of a Class 1a building under the Building Code. As previously discussed, the Building Code allows flexibility to the extent that buildings must meet the performance standards set by the Code, and local governments have the power to approve alternative building solutions under the Building Regulations.

To provide safety to occupiers and users, with the least financial and emotional impact on users and operators, it is recommended that option (iii) be adopted.

Recommendation

·    Option (iii)     The legislation is not applied retrospectively to converted accommodation vehicles; however, basic minimum standards applying to the vehicle are prescribed to protect the health and safety of the occupiers and surrounding users.

 

Guidance questions

·    Question 39: What other simple, low cost options should converted accommodation users have to comply with to ensure their health and safety?

·    Question 40: Do you agree that the legislation should not be retrospectively applied to converted accommodation vehicles? Why or why not?

·    Question 41: What do you think constitutes a significant change that would trigger assessment under the Building Act?

·    Question 42: Can you identify any additional costs or benefits to assessing converted accommodation vehicles under the Building Act? What are they?

13.

14. Regulations

The new Holiday Parks and Camping Grounds Act will be supported by regulations. While this paper discusses some of the general content that will be incorporated, the final content cannot be finalised until the framework of the legislation is determined.

Overall, it is expected that the regulations will prescribe the following:

·    The minimum standards that facilities must abide by

·    Modified penalties

·    Prescribed form and content of the management plan, and

·    Prescribed forms, including an infringement notice and approval to operate.

The existing Regulations will be reviewed at a later stage, during which time public input will be sought.

 

Appendix 1

Summary of proposed options and suggested provisions

Definitions updated to reflect current terminology

‘Holiday park’ will mean an area of land on which accommodation vehicles and/or tents are situated for habitation, primarily by short-stay occupiers. In accordance with section 2, zoning and local planning schemes will dictate what buildings are allowed on the land.

‘Accommodation vehicle’ is the term used to reflect all types of vehicles used or capable of being used for habitation. This includes caravans and campervans.

‘Vehicle’ is any vehicle as defined under the Road Traffic (Administration) Act 2008.

The current definition is:

vehicle includes —

          (a)     every conveyance, not being a train, vessel or aircraft, and every object capable of being propelled or drawn, on wheels or tracks, by any means; and        

          (b)     where the context permits, an animal being driven or ridden;

‘Facility’ will mean a holiday park or camping ground.

‘Camp’ (noun) will be replaced by ‘tent’ to mean any portable tent which, apart from any rigid support frame, has walls and a roof of canvas or other flexible material.

‘Camp’ (verb) will mean to stay or lodge in a tent, or other accommodation vehicle. This definition will be based on the definition in the Conservation and Land Management Regulations 2002.

The legislation is to be titled the Holiday Parks and Camping Grounds Act.

Implementation of this recommendation is likely to be relatively simple, as it will not have a substantial impact on operators.

A facility that has designated two or more sites for short-stay accommodation vehicles and/or tents requires approval to operate. Residential parks must provide 10 such sites, or a prescribed percentage of the sites, to be eligible for an approval to operate.

·    Any facility that provides two or more sites designated for accommodation vehicles and/or tents requires an approval to operate

·    Any residential development consisting mostly of park homes for the purposes of long-term residential living must provide 10 designated sites for short-stay accommodation vehicles and/or tents, or a prescribed percentage of such sites, to be eligible for an approval to operate

·    Residential parks already established on caravan park or tourism zoned land will continue on that land; however, proposed new residential park developments should not access caravan park or tourism zoned land in the future

·    Land zoning, local planning schemes and other planning instruments will determine the types of accommodation allowed on a park, with the mix of accommodation types forming part of the approved management plan (see Section 8)

·    Unless owned by the owner of the facility, any buildings and associated structures on that facility must be transportable

·    All buildings, including transportable buildings, must be compliant with the Building Act and

·    Park homes are to be treated as buildings under the Building Act and must comply with the relevant provisions of that Act. They will no longer be considered caravans or captured under the Caravans Act.

Implementation of this recommendation may include the preparation of fact sheets for local governments and park operators to assist them in determining whether they need to apply for an approval to operate.  Guidance material would also be prepared to assist in the development of management plans and the assessment of park homes under the Building Act.


 

Local governments can grant unlimited approvals to the landowner to offer a campsite for an accommodation vehicle and/or tent for up to three months at a time subject to appropriate consultation and risk assessment

·    A person may camp for up to three nights in any 28 day period on land where the landowner has given permission

·    A landowner may apply to the local government seeking approval for a person to camp longer than three nights but not more than three months. This includes if the intention is to make their property available for more than three nights in any 28 day period

·    Applications will need to be accompanied by a prescribed fee

·    Only one accommodation vehicle and/or tent is allowed on the property at any time without an event approval

·    A local government must consult with the affected neighbours, consider the health and safety of users, impact on the environment and feasibility of staying in an approved facility before an approval can be granted

·    A local government can continue to renew an approval; however, a full assessment is required with each renewal

·    A management plan must be submitted with each application which addresses basic health and safety concerns, including waste management and access to water, and

·    If a local government refuses an application, the applicant can appeal to the SAT.

Implementation of this recommendation may include the preparation of guidance material to assist park operators to prepare management plans and assist local governments to assess those management plans against the requirements of the Caravan Parks Act.

Status Quo

·    All facilities providing sites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents are required to have an approval to operate and complete a management plan

·    Facilities operated by public sector agencies would remain exempt

·    The relevant local government will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the prepared management plan

·    The Minister may give directions to the local government to undertake a particular function of the legislation, and

·    The department may appoint an independent person to inspect facilities and enforce the legislation. Operators will be required to pay the costs associated with inspection and enforcement.

Implementation of this recommendation may include the preparation of guidance material to assist park operators to prepare management plans and assist local governments to assess those management plans against the requirements of the Caravan Parks Act.

Initial approval to operate granted, followed by annual inspections

·    An approval to operate is required for all facilities that provide two or more short-stay campsites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents

·    An approval to operate is required for all park home park facilities that provide 10 or more short-stay campsites for accommodation vehicles and/or tents or a prescribed percentage of sites on their facility are designated for this purpose

·    A temporary approval to operate can be granted by the relevant authority for specific events (refer Section 7)

·    An approval to operate is to be accompanied by a management plan (refer Section 8)

·    The management plan will provide the minimum conditions under which the facility must operate

·    A local government must undertake inspections annually; however, the period between inspections may be extended to no more than two years under certain conditions, and

·    If a new planning approval application is submitted or there are any redevelopments or substantial changes to a facility (including a change of owner), a new application for approval to operate must be submitted.


 

Implementation of this recommendation may include the preparation of guidance material to assist park operators to prepare management plans and assist local governments to assess those management plans against the requirements of the Caravan Parks Act.

Three approval to operate licence categories; Holiday Park, Nature Based Park and Event approval with one set of minimum standards applying to all

·    A holiday park approval will include caravan parks that traditionally provide mixed-use accommodation types, but specifically sites for accommodation vehicles and tents. Sites can be provided for both long-stay and short-stay.

·    A nature based park approval will be for facilities that are not in close proximity to an area that is built up with structures used for business, industry or dwelling-houses at intervals of less than 100 metres for a distance of 500 metres or more, and has been predominately formed by nature and has limited or controlled artificial light and noise intrusion. Stays will be restricted to no more than 28 days in any three month period.

·    An event approval will be for special events where there is more than one accommodation vehicle and/or tent outside of an approved facility. An approval cannot be issued for any period greater than seven days and no more than four approvals can be issued for the property in a year.

·    All facilities must abide by minimum standards as prescribed. These standards will be outcomes-based, rather than prescriptive, to allow for flexibility in approach.

Implementation of this recommendation may include the preparation of guidance material to assist park operators to determine which category of approval they would need to apply for dependent on their intended facility.

Preparation of management plans for all facilities operating under the Caravan Parks Act

·    A management plan must be submitted with applications for approval to operate

·    Management plans must provide for the minimum standards prescribed and any particular risks associated with the facility

·    A local government has the discretion to apply specific conditions to an approved management plan

·    A facility operator can appeal to the SAT to oppose the conditions required by a local government

·    An approval to operate is not issued unless the facility is compliant with the agreed management plan

·    Local governments must keep a register of facilities granted approval to operate

·    Facility operators must comply with the minimum standards as prescribed

·    Facility operators must keep a register of occupiers

·    Local governments to enforce the provisions through use of work specification notices, prohibition notices or cancellation of approval to operate. Court-imposed penalties and infringement notices will be prescribed, and

·    The department can appoint an independent person to enforce the provisions of the legislation on local governments.

Implementation of this recommendation may include the preparation of guidance material to assist park operators to prepare management plans and assist local governments to assess those management plans against the requirements of the Caravan Parks Act.

Increase penalties in accordance with the Food Act 2008 and Building Act 2011

·    All court-imposed penalties are increased to be consistent with similar provisions under the Food Act 2008 and Building Act 2011.

Implementation of this option may include the development of fact sheets detailing the increased penalties to assist in awareness-raising for both local governments and users.


 

Accommodation vehicles in holiday parks are either licensed under the Road Traffic Act 1974 or assessed under the Building Act 2011 as a transportable building

·    Any accommodation vehicle in a holiday park is to be licensed at all times under the Road Traffic Act

·    If the intention is to add rigid structures to an accommodation vehicle, the entire structure is to be assessed and approved under the Building Act as a habitable building. Approval must also be granted by the facility owner/operator, and

·    A converted accommodation vehicle will be considered a transportable building and must remain transportable.

Implementation of this option may include the preparation of fact sheets detailing the new requirements for accommodation vehicles and to assist local governments in assessing them against the requirements of the Building Act.

Proactive consultation with relevant stakeholders in place of an Advisory Committee

·    The Caravan Parks and Camping Grounds Advisory Committee is abolished in favour of proactive consultation undertaken with relevant stakeholders as required.

Implementation of this option may include establishing a sign-up email distribution list specifically for caravan park and camping ground updates and information, to develop a stakeholder network.

 

 

 

All facilities must apply for an approval to operate and complete a management plan within five years of the legislation taking effect

·    All facilities must apply for approval to operate within five years of the legislation taking effect, and

·    Annual licencing and inspections in accordance with the current provisions will continue to apply until an approval to operate is received.

Implementation of this recommendation may include the preparation of guidance material to assist park operators to prepare management plans and assist local governments to assess those management plans against the requirements of the Caravan Parks Act.

The legislation is not applied retrospectively to all converted accommodation vehicles; however, basic minimum standards applying to the vehicle are prescribed to protect the health and safety of the occupiers and surrounding users

·    Any converted accommodation vehicles that are no longer licenced under the Road Traffic Act are exempt from the new provisions, subject to any future substantial modifications

·    All converted accommodation vehicles must ensure that smoke alarms and RCDs are fitted within 12 months

·    Converted accommodation vehicles must have smoke alarms and RCDs fitted prior to being sold, rented, leased or hired out, and

·    Converted accommodation vehicles must be capable of assessment as a Class 1a building under the Building Code prior to being sold.

Implementation of this option may include the preparation of fact sheets detailing the new requirements for accommodation vehicles and to assist local governments in assessing them against the requirements of the Building Act.  The fact sheets would also make reference to consumer protection requirements upon the sale, transfer or similar of converted accommodation vehicles.


 

Appendix 2

Breakdown of submissions received in response to first Consultation Paper

The first consultation paper was released for an initial three month consultation period in 2014. Due to the number of submissions received, the consultation period was extended to four months.

In total, 127 submissions were received. These submissions can be categorised as follows:

Stakeholder Group                     Submissions

Caravan Park users                               42 submissions

Local governments                                39 submissions

Caravan Park operators                        22 submissions

Consumer representative groups                 9 submissions

State government agencies                 8 submissions

General public                               4 submissions

Industry representatives                        3 submissions


Item 9.3.1 - PROPOSAL FOR HOLIDAY PARKS AND CAMPING GROUNDS LEGISLATION

SECOND CONSULTATION

Submission Proposal for Holiday Parks and Camping Grounds Legislation

 

 

 

Co-badged Department of Local Government and Communities with the Department of Regional Development logo, and the Royalties for Regions logo

DLGC Myriad graphic element with caravan and camping icons


Second Consultation Paper - Feedback Form
Proposal for Holiday Parks and Camping Grounds Legislation

This form is part of an invitation for public comment on the Development of New Holiday Parks and Camping Grounds Act Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement, which can be found on the Department of Local Government and Communities’ website here: www.dlgc.wa.gov.au/CPCG-Consultation-Paper-2

The consultation paper is an initiative of the Western Australia Caravan and Camping Action Plan, which is supported by the State Government’s Royalties for Regions program to improve caravan park and camping experiences.

This form has been developed to assist you in preparing your submission. It contains all the proposals and guidance questions from the consultation paper. Please enter your comments in the boxes provided. It is not expected that all questions are answered.

Comments on all or part of the consultation paper are appreciated.

Submissions

Comments, queries and submissions should be forwarded no later than
30 November 2015. Please direct all comments and submissions:

By email to:   caravan@dlgc.wa.gov.au
noting ‘Caravans and Camping Review’ in the subject line.

By post to:          Senior Legislation and Strategy Officer – Caravans and Camping Review

Department of Local Government and Communities

GPO Box R1250, Perth WA 6844

All responses to the consultation paper may be made publicly available on DLGC’s website. If you would prefer your name to remain confidential, please indicate this in your submission. If you would like the entire submission to remain confidential, please mark it “Private and Confidential”.

More information

If you have any queries in relation to the consultation paper and this form,
please contact:

Email: caravan@dlgc.wa.gov.au 

Telephone: (08) 6551 8700
Freecall (country only): 1800 620 511

Fax: (08) 6552 1555

For a Translating and Interpreting Service (TIS) telephone 13 14 50.


Item 9.3.1 - PROPOSAL FOR HOLIDAY PARKS AND CAMPING GROUNDS LEGISLATION

SECOND CONSULTATION

Submission Proposal for Holiday Parks and Camping Grounds Legislation

 

 

About you                                  

Title:

Mr

Mrs

Ms

Miss

Other

If other, please specify:

[Click here to enter text.]

Given names:

Kenn

Surname:

Donohoe

*Street or postal address:

27 Weld Street Broome WA 6725

*Telephone:

Home

[Enter text.]

Mobile

[Enter text.]

Business

[Click here to enter text.]

*Email address:

[Click here to enter text.]

Which best describes you? (You can select more than one.)

A Camper

A Caravan User

A Recreational Vehicle Owner

A Long-Stay Tenant

A Camping Ground Operator

A Caravan Park Operator

A Local Government

A State Government Agency

An Organisation

Other

If Other, please state:

[Click here to enter text.]

If you are representing a local government, organisation or business, please state your job title:

Chief Executive Officer

Privacy and permissions. Submissions may be made public and published on the Department’s website. Would you like to:

Allow your submission to be published – without your name and *personal contact details.

Keep your submission Private and Confidential – do not publish anything.

I agree to all of my submission being published, including my name, except for my *personal contact details. (Your personal contact details will not be published.)

 

Your caravan and camping experiences (as an individual)

A. How often do you stay at caravan parks?

[Click here to enter text.]

B. When was the last time you stayed in a caravan park?

[Click here to enter text.]

C. What region of Western Australia was the caravan park in (if known)?

[Click here to enter text.]

D. How would you rate your last stay in a caravan park?

Poor

Average

Good

Excellent

E. What were the best things about the caravan park?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

F. What could be improved at the caravan park?

    

 

G. How often do you stay at camping grounds?

[Click here to enter text.]

H. When was the last time you stayed at a camping ground?

[Click here to enter text.]

I. What region of Western Australia was the camping ground in (if known)?

[Click here to enter text.]

J. How would you rate your last stay at a camping ground?

Poor

Average

Good

Excellent

K. What were the best things about the camping ground?

 

 

L. What could be improved at the camping ground?

 

 

M. How often do you stay or camp at place outside of a camping ground or caravan park?

 

 

General comments                     

Use the space below for general comments about the consultation paper and/or caravan parks and camping ground

 Overflow camping outside an approved facility does not seem to be addressed – a common issues in the Northwest, it should be included in a suitable category.                                                                                                            Need to be conscious of duplicitous administration and sequencing related to requiring both a Development Application (which would be conditioned) and a Management Plan (which too presumably will come with conditions).                                           Need to ensure that BCA can be used effectively in relation to class 1A building assessments and clarity on assessment process in regard to section 10 ( Prerequisites of accommodation vehicles). Residential Park home parks should be subject to their own specific legislation as they are not Holiday parks. Management Plans will need clarification, specific templates and training and be prepared by a skilled person.                                               

 

 

 

 

Guidance Questions from the Consultation Paper

This section contains all the proposals and guidance questions from Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement ‘Development of new Holiday Parks and Camping Grounds Act’, which can be found online at: www.dlgc.wa.gov.au/CPCG-Consultation-Paper

It is recommended that you read the relevant section of the consultation paper before answering a question. Please note: it is not expected that all questions are answered. Comments on all or only part of the consultation paper are appreciated.

If you require more space for an answer, you can attach a separate page or pages as part of your submission.

Definitions

Question 1: Are there any additional definitions or terms that should be updated as part of the review? What are they?

Yes

Whilst park homes will be classified as a building under BCA, the definition of what a park home actually is, needs to be clearly stated in the new definitions of Holiday Park and Camping Ground Act .The distinction between permanent buildings/structures and caravans, mobile homes, accommodation vehicles, buses etc needs to be clarified.         

 

Extend definition of “tent” to include a swag which are commonly used in regional settings.         

 

 

 

Question 2: Do you support the proposed changes to the terminology? Why or why not?

Yes .                                                                                                                 Will assist end users with clarity in the context of the legislative changes proposed.                                                                                                       There is a more reflective and contemporary representation of holiday accommodation.                                                                                                                         Will assist with the assessment of accommodation types in Holiday Parks.

 

 

 

 

 

Question 3: Can you identify any significant costs or benefits that would result from a change in terminology? What are they?

Benefits :                                                                                                             Clarity for end users .More reflective of current market conditions and experience.                                                                                                             A park home will no longer be considered a caravan and will have the added safety of an assessment under the BCA.                                                                      Costs: Assessments under BCA for some installations might have associated cost. However this cost could be reduced by using an “alternate solution” process as per BCA provisions.  It may be possible to develop suitable guidelines for some structures by using relevant BCA provisions as a reference standard.                                                            The safety benefits will out weight the cost of applications under BCA.                                                                                                               Some providers may voluntarily wish to update signage and directory listings to reflect Holiday Park in the longer term but it is unlikely this would be a significant impost.                                                                                                                            There may be a time and cost impact if new park homes loose access to land zoned for caravan parks.                                                                                                                                  .                                                                                                            

 

 

 

Application of the legislation to facilities

Recommendation: A facility that has designated two or more sites for short-stay accommodation vehicles and/or tents requires approval to operate. Residential parks must provide 10 such sites, or a prescribed percentage of the sites, to be eligible for an approval to operate.

Question 4: Are there any circumstances where this recommendation will not capture facilities that should be licensed? Please provide examples.

Yes. Residential park home parks.                                                          They should be licensed under their own regulation. They do not require a minimum number of short stay sites as they are not Holiday Parks.                                                                     However for holiday parks with residential accommodation, consideration of the target market of the caravan park owner must be taken. As the number of total sites for each establishment will vary, a prescribed percentage of short stay of the sites would be more appropriate.                                                                                                      One of our current Shire Policies (4.2.9 ) states the maximum number of sites at caravan parks within our townsite that can be used at a facility for long stay sites and /or on site caravan sites is to be limited to 40%. This is to ensure adequate sites are available at Caravan Parks during tourist season. The main reason of a holiday park is for short stays as defined in its definition. 68% of people in the first consultation already supported park homes to be recognised as residential development rather than holiday parks

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 5: Is it appropriate for residential park home park developments to be regulated under the Building Act and Code rather than the Caravan Parks Act? Why or why not?

 

 Yes.  Residential Park homes parks are being used for permanent residential use, so should comply with the Building Act and Code.                                                                                                              Apart from temporary facilities on a building site (site office, storage and ablutions) or temporary structures proposed to be located no longer that one month on site, the Building Act, Regs & BCA applies to permanent buildings and structures like park homes.  

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Question 6: Do you agree that a residential park home park must provide a set number (for example, 10) of designated short-stay sites to be eligible for an approval to operate under the Caravan Parks Act? Why or why not?

 Residential park home park with short stay could be eligible for an approval to operate under the Caravan Parks Act, but this should be set on a % instead.      Large residential park home parks should be subject to separate legislation as they are not used for camping, and are not a “holiday park” .Their standards should meet needs for permanent dwelling facilities development.     

This would assist in the shortage of short stay sites during high peak season.

                                                                                                            

 

 

 

 

 


 

Question 7: Should residential park home parks instead set aside a prescribed percentage of the facility for short-stay use? What should that percentage be?

Yes, as explained in question 6

The % should be left to each Local Government.

 

 

 

Question 8: Can you identify any additional costs or benefits arising from this option? What are they?

Issuing an approval to operate as opposed to a licence would reduce the annual licence renewal income for local Gov. This could be recovered by an inspection fee based on cost recovery. Issuing an approval as opposed to annual licence would reduce an annual administrative burden on Local Government.  For new operators, there may also be some time and cost impact if new park homes loose access to land zoned for caravan parks.                               

                

  

 

 

 

 

 

Camping at a place other than an approved facility

Recommendation: Local governments can grant approval to camp outside of an approved facility for up to three months at a time, subject to appropriate consultation and risk assessment.

Question 9: Is it appropriate to ask applicants who wish to make their property available for camping to provide a management plan outlining basic health and safety requirements? Why or why not?

Yes. Primarily a baseline for public health, safety and amenities to be met. This practice is already in place in many Local Governments enabled by policies and works well to ensure the activity is not causing health harm, nuisance & negative impact on surrounding amenities. Our policy limits in most cases for up to 3 months to enable people to temporarily use caravan accommodation for short stays in a period of shortage, family assistance but to limit/discourage current abuses of extended and unapproved stays in certain areas, e.g. light industrial areas. After 3 months most visitors are gone and an extension would need strong valid reasons as caravan parks would be available to meet extended time demands.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 10: Is it appropriate for local governments to undertake a complete review of the circumstances every three months? Why or why not?

No. The Shire of Broome as per policy ( 4.2.10) does not support renewal of approval after 3 months by Local Government.

However, the Shire of Broome as per same policy does approve occupation for up to 12 months with Building Permit for building of the main residence out of town where caravan parks would not be accessible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 11: Should local governments have the authority to decide how long a person is allow to camp on private property in their district? Why or why not?

No  . Our current policy prevents pressure and liability put on Local Government to extend periods over 3 months of camping outside a caravan park and allows consistency across the town and subsequently a better rate of success with enforcement of illegal camping.  We support the status quo in regards to a request for a referral to the Minister for an extension after 3 months. This would reduce pressure on Local Government to approve and liability to go to SAT with requests of renewal that would be unlikely to be supported.

Local Government would continue to support application of renewal by providing letter of support to the State in response to local conditions that would benefit from an extension of 3 months up to one year. This would help with variance of circumstances across regional and urban areas and allow some level of discretion to allow site specific considerations and renewals based on need.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 12: What are the potential costs and benefits of allowing people to camp outside of approved facilities for extended periods of time?

Benefits  to camp up to 3 months allows a site specific response to local issues that may arise such as maintaining site security via a groundskeeper in a rural or regional area, allow family/ friends to stay by providing some help during illness, child care, assistance when building/ renovating a house.  Travelling from in and out of a caravan park might not be always practical when living in remote areas. This might assist with shortage of sites in busy periods.                                                Cost: Holiday parks would loose income. Local government does incur costs with assessment and consultation requirements, cost is recovered with a lodgement fee.

If not approved, cost of enforcement of long term illegal camping.                                                     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

State government and local government facilities

Recommendation: Status Quo.

Question 13: How should local governments and state government agencies be held accountable for complying with the legislation?

As per Status Quo otherwise it would lead to an increase in costs, complexity and bureaucracy and potentially would have an impact on the usage of the parks – which is counter to the intent of the revised policy. Both State and Local Government agencies work well and provide affordable and safe facilities.                                                             Also there is a need to be conscious of joint management facilities to ensure legislation is enforceable and consistent.         

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 14: Should users have the ability to lodge a complaint against a state government-run or local government-run facility with the Minister or the State Administrative Tribunal? Why or why not?

No ultimately the additional administration and cost would outweigh the benefit for parties - there is little evidence of issues at the present as they seem to be dealt withefficiently across facilities by State and Local Government agencies. SAT is to facilitate the review of decisions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 15: Can you identify any other potential costs or benefits that may result from keeping the status quo? What are they?

The benefit is the legislation reinforces the intent and keeps costs static – increased regulation will likely be passed on to end users making facilities less attractive and less price competitive. In regards to Crown and State facilities being exempt to comply, it is worthwhile noting the new Health Bill will bind the Crown/ State government. Aligning legislation would be good timing and allow consistency across agencies. The new Act should consider changes in a near future.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Licencing of facilities

Recommendation: Initial approval to operate granted, followed by annual inspections.

Question 16: Do you believe this proposal is the best option for users, operators and local governments? Why or why not?

Yes – It reduces administration and red tape and allows cost recovery but does not create the large chance of backlogged maintenance requirements which may result under option 3.                                                                                                                      

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 17: Do you think an annual inspection is appropriate? Do you support the option for local governments to extend the inspection period for up to two years? Why or why not?

Yes Annual appropriate. Each Local Govt is different (level of isolation, number of facilities, type of facilities with variable risks.) and Loc Gov should be left to decide what is best. Risk rating premises using an industry consistent risk rating tool for parks would determine the frequency of inspection. Isolated and remote premises should be inspected yearly as the risk is higher to encounter non-compliance. (They have a high turnover of itinerant staff and maintenance availability is lower). Isolated CP are generally off the water scheme and need to be visited up to 2 times a year to sample drinking water so a second shorter visit is generally undertaken under requirement of the Health Department for drinking water.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 18: Are there any other potential costs or benefits of this option that have not been addressed? What are they?

Local Government will miss out on income of annual renewal fees, but this can be alleviated by adoption of inspection fees based on recovery costs.

The approval process including the review of management plans could be lengthy for Local Government if the quality of the management plan is poor and not prepared by skilled people. Guideline documents and templates recently published for Nature Base are very broad and lacking technical guidance leaving the applicant with little technical information to support their application.

Further guidance material will need to be available to assist operators to determine which category of approval they would need to apply for and what supporting information they need to include in their application.

We are currently receiving poor management plans for Nature Base applications. Loc Gov. will need to be consulted to establish how management plans will be assessed.

Training would be required for local government and applicants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Licence categories

Licence categories

Recommendation: Three approval to operate categories: Holiday Park, Nature Based Park and Event approvals, with one set of minimum standards applying to all.

Question 19: Is it appropriate for all holiday parks and camping grounds to operate under the same set of minimum standards? Why or why not?

 We also support the 3 levels of categories: holiday parks, nature based and events approval but they should not be operating under the same set of standards. Due to the varying nature of the use, camping experience and ability to provide amenities each should be treated with their own separate set of minimum requirements. For these reasons  a combination of option (ii) and (iv) would be better. Have 3 categories: holiday park, nature based and events approvals but with a set of minimum standards for each category.

 
Yes, as camping grounds are included in the proposed category of Holiday parks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 20: Are there any other types of facilities that should be categorised separately? What are they and why?

Yes. Overflow facilities outside a caravan park should be included somewhere. Our Council has a policy limiting stay for 7 days.            Residential park home parks should have their own legislation.

 

 

 

 

Question 21: Should event approvals be limited to seven days and four approvals per year? Why or why not?

Seven days would cover almost all event scenarios allowing two days bump in and out and a three day festival, Seven days would be in line with our overflow facility policy due to lower level of amenities required in the category. Approvals on the same property should not be be limited to 4 / year as this should be left for each Council to address according to  regional needs. Some towns might have a limited number of suitable properties and may be used up in peak season and therefore not support the development of shoulder season activity. Risk can be assessed and managed without requiring upgrade to a caravan  park facility.                                         

                                                              

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 22: Can you identify any additional costs or benefits to this option that have not been discussed? What are they?

Compliance and time costs in lodging applications, understanding requirements and having to be across new categories of regulation which may get confusing. This is a cost for the applicant and Local Government.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Conditions for approval to operate

Recommendation: Preparation of management plans for all facilities

Question 23: Do you think this promotes a flexible operating environment for operators? Why or why not?

Yes. Although we would advocate being conscious that it is another form of administration which requires resources, time to develop and assess. This process will need to be as streamlined as much as possible with examples of management plans provided to Local Govt for assessment guidance and applicants for lodgement guidance. Each type of category (Holiday/Nature Based/events) needs its own specific management plan template which includes the details specific to the type of use. As mentioned earlier the new management plans templates for Nature Based are not specific enough and lack clear direction. To prevent confusion for the applicant, a different set of standards for each category with specific template should be used as opposed to operators proposing how they can meet a minimum set of standards.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 24: Will less prescriptive regulatory requirements result in insufficient information being provided in support of development applications?

Possibly. Applications can be assessed in a manner that is specific to the circumstance and facility allowing for flexibility to region and context as long as the information provided is of good quality. Generally, guidance material for nature based park management plans available is broad and lacking technical guidance leaving the applicant with little technical evidence to support their application. The lack of specific skills and experience of nature base applicants in preparing management plans has the potential to lead to application of poor quality.

The quality of the application and management plan is critical and therefore should have more detailed guidelines to assist and streamline preparation of such plans and assessment by Local Government.

 We should focus on different set of standards for each different categories as opposed to operators proposing how they can meet the standards. The management plan should not be used as a tool to vary the minimum set of standard of a category.

Small facilities might be less financially able to obtain specialist advice and this highlights the importance of creating clear guideline documents, examples and templates that are defined and request specific information for each category.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 25: Is it feasible to prepare a management plan concurrently with a development approval? Why or why not?

 Yes. The operator should know the target market, their design and their intentions at the time that they put the planning application in. Otherwise both would require conditions and this dual submission could be problematic; it is more likely that the DA would be determined with conditions therefore influencing the format or content of the management plan this then again may possibly increase confusion.  The management plan should not be used as a tool to vary the minimum set of standard of a category.

Minimum standards should be fixed for each category.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 26: Do you agree that local governments should have the ability to require that operators provide services at standards above the prescribed minimum? Why or why not?

Yes as this allows for site specific safety and other community concerns to be addressed – the state is vast and different so there should be a level of discretion in areas such as bushfire zones, proximity to culturally significant sites, remoteness and cyclone prone areas.

 

 

 

 

 

Question 27: Can you identify any additional costs or benefits arising from the requirement to prepare a management plan? What are they?

 People will likely to require consultant input in their preparation which will come at a cost. The local Govt will require training in assessment.                                Consideration should be taken to include a noise management element into the Management Plan in some applications not discussed so far.

Small facilities might be less financially able to obtain specialist advice and this highlights the importance of creating clear guideline documents, examples and templates that are clear and requesting specific information for each category.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Penalties

Recommendation: Increase penalties in accordance with the Food Act 2008 and Building Act 2011

Question 28: Do you think increasing penalties in line with the Food Act and Building Act is appropriate? Why or why not?

Yes it makes it more reflective of modern requirements and creates an incentive for compliance meaning best practice is more likely to be factored into the risk management regime of operators.

In addition, there could be a provision for modified penalties (fines on the spot) as an easier process of enforcement for Local Government. This would be in line with the BCA having higher fees and modified penalties as a quicker process.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 29: Do you agree that higher penalties will increase enforcement and compliance? Why or why not?

Yes it ultimately acts as an incentive and places more focus on owners doing the right thing, increasing customer satisfaction.

 

 

Question 30: Do you agree that bodies corporate should be liable for a higher penalty than individuals? Why or why not?

Yes these entities will generally have more resources, governance structures and insurance coverage and baseline compliance and processes in place. Decisions of body corporate are made by a group, so all should bear the cost.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 31: Can you identify any additional costs or benefits that have not been considered in the discussion of this option? What are they?

The industry would benefit from a lead in period and a schedule of revised penalties to be given time to adjust and understand the new penalties.

 

 

 

 

 

Prerequisites of accommodation vehicles

Recommendation: Accommodation vehicles in holiday parks are either licensed under the Road Traffic Act 1974 or assessed under the Building Act 2011 as a transportable building.

Question 32: Do you agree that accommodation vehicles converted for the purpose of permanent habitation should be assessed under the Building Act rather than the Caravan Parks Act? Why or why not?

 The BCA does not recognise or address temporary structures and vehicle accommodation. So trying to assess accommodation vehicles or similar, whether existing or new under this regime would be inappropriate and impractical as the vehicle would have to be assessed with all the requirements of a permanent Class 1a dwelling.                                                                                                                It would be highly unlikely to achieve this particularly in cyclonic regions. Notwithstanding this there are some provisions in the BCA that could be developed as a suitable standard/guidelines for such vehicles.                                                Any associated permanent structures associated with accommodation vehicles( hard annexe, carports) would need to be covered under Building Act and BCA provisions. 

 

No.– The practicality and feasibility might have been overlooked and simplified. Would recommend a generous phase in period to support this change and examination of how well this assessment will work on the ground in regards to people being able to achieve BCA compliance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Question 33: What are the costs and benefits of this proposal for both users and facility operators?

Costs could be large for those requiring approval and may not be appropriate and may be impracticable.

Transportable or demountable type buildings are structures that are manufactured in a factory under a suitable QA process that allows then to be designed and constructed to meet BCA requirements along with a suitable structural tie down system to be incorporated into the onsite construction especially for cyclonic regions. These are permanent buildings so to apply these provisions whether retrospectively or new to accommodation vehicles or similar are not appropriate and highly impracticable.                                                                                                                      It would be wise to seek comment from industry associates bodies on what alternative solutions/ guidelines that could be implemented for accommodation vehicles. Most CP would require regular audits of accommodation vehicles by a private building surveyor/ engineer to deem the building still complying once installed to ensure no modifications have been included and maintenance program in place.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Advisory Committee

Recommendation: Proactive consultation with relevant stakeholders in place of an Advisory Committee.

Question 34: Do you support this recommendation? Why or why not?

Yes this reduces costs and allows communication across areas experiencing the same issues as opposed to one size fits all committee arrangement

 

 

 

Question 35: What consultation methods should be used to ensure feedback from the broader industry (including operators, consumers and local governments) in the future?

Surveys, blogs, app based real-time feedback of consumer experience, cluster of local governments that have the same environmental or demographic factors to share experience.

 

 

 

Question 36: Can you identify any particular costs or benefits associated with disbanding the Committee in favour of a more flexible direct consultation framework? What are they?

Benefits would be that feedback can be more targeted and relevant by talking to the right bodies (regional, tourist, beachfront, nature based) this avoids non relevant administration of a one size fits all committee arrangement

 

 

Transitional provisions

1.         Holiday parks and camping grounds

Recommendation: All facilities must apply for an approval to operate and complete a management plan within five years of the legislation taking effect.

Question 37: Are there any other options available for transitional provisions? What advantages would these bring?

We agree with the proposed transition. However, there is hesitation about MP and outcome based standards in preferred option presented in consultation as explained in question 24 .Other option preferred would be an approval process for each category that would have its own standards.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 38: Is five years enough time for operators to prepare management plans, apply for and be granted approvals to operate? Why or why not?

Yes overall 5 years allows adequate examination of market trends, positioning and time to resource and create a management plan although examples and support should be given to assist operators in this process with a starting point and format including what a MP looks like and what it should include. Assessment training should also be given to Local Governments to meet the legislative desire for consistency of application.

 

 

 

 



 

 

2.         Converted accommodation vehicles

Recommendation: The legislation is not applied retrospectively to converted accommodation vehicles; however, basic minimum standards applying to the vehicle are prescribed to protect the health and safety of the occupiers and surrounding users.

Question 39: What other simple, low cost options should converted accommodation users have to comply with to ensure their health and safety?

Fire safety provisions using smoke alarms, distance separation, RCD’s, Gas compliance/safety certification,suitable structural tie downs for cyclonic regions could be considered, bearing in mind actual accommodation vehicles and similar could not be considered as structurally adequate as there are not designed as buildings. Possible to consider some basic light and ventilation provisions from the BCA as guidelines. Loc Government should not have to cover expenses in doing inspections for retrospective illegal works as this would be a conflict of interest. We support that the legislation is not applied retrospectively to existing converted accommodation vehicles; however, basic minimum standards such as smoke detectors and RCDs are fitted within 12 months or earlier when converted accommodation is being sold, rented, leased or hired out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 40: Do you agree that the legislation should not be retrospectively applied to converted accommodation vehicles? Why or why not?

Yes, a vehicle is not a structure; therefore the provisions of the Building Act cannot apply. Retrospective applications would be costly and difficult for most converted accommodation vehicle owners to meet and would unfairly disadvantage people who may struggle to meet the compliance costs.                                       However, vehicle accommodation could be brought to higher compliance prior to a sale or when upgrades are proposed. Many structures are old, have not been maintained or have been modified since installation. This would offer a smoother transition with less financial burden on owners in the immediate term. Some compromise is needed to ensure safety of converted accommodation vehicles and not being able to apply the provisions of the BCA. Requirement for already converted accommodation vehicles to maintain registration is another unnecessary cost – keep the wheels on the vehicle, so that it can be moved with a Dept of Transport “temporary movement permit” or loaded onto a flat bed truck if relocation was necessary.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 41: What do you think constitutes a significant change that would trigger assessment under the Building Act?

Permanency in a location or the affixing of materials / enhancements that are not quickly and easily reversible in response to safety of emergency factors (i.e. a cyclone warning. This could include hard annexe, carport, park homes modifications, shed other hard wall structures

 

 

 

 

 

Question 42: Can you identify any additional costs or benefits to assessing converted accommodation vehicles under the Building Act? What are they?

Benefits primarily relate to safety and buyers knowing what they are getting, costs associated with trying to assess and convert accommodation vehicles under BCA requirements would be unreasonable and potentially prohibitive. Better off trying to develop suitable low cost guideline requirements like mentioned in question 39.

 

 

 

 

Thank you for participating in this consultation process. Your comments are important to us and will be considered for the development of the new caravan parks and camping grounds legislation. For enquiries email: caravan@dlgc.wa.gov.au  or telephone: (08) 6551 8700 or Freecall (country only): 1800 620 511.

 

 

 


Item 9.3.2 - BROOME AS A REGIONAL GROWTH CENTRE - HIGH LEVEL PROJECT SCOPE AND CONSIDERATION OF MOU WITH STATE GOVERNMENT

Formal Advice Broome selected as a Growth Centre

 

 


 


Item 9.3.2 - BROOME AS A REGIONAL GROWTH CENTRE - HIGH LEVEL PROJECT SCOPE AND CONSIDERATION OF MOU WITH STATE GOVERNMENT

Growth Centre Project Scope

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Item 9.3.2 - BROOME AS A REGIONAL GROWTH CENTRE - HIGH LEVEL PROJECT SCOPE AND CONSIDERATION OF MOU WITH STATE GOVERNMENT

Existing MOU between Shire and State Government

 

 


Item 9.3.2 - BROOME AS A REGIONAL GROWTH CENTRE - HIGH LEVEL PROJECT SCOPE AND CONSIDERATION OF MOU WITH STATE GOVERNMENT

Existing MOU between Shire and State Government

 

 


Item 9.3.2 - BROOME AS A REGIONAL GROWTH CENTRE - HIGH LEVEL PROJECT SCOPE AND CONSIDERATION OF MOU WITH STATE GOVERNMENT

Existing MOU between Shire and State Government

 

 


Item 9.3.2 - BROOME AS A REGIONAL GROWTH CENTRE - HIGH LEVEL PROJECT SCOPE AND CONSIDERATION OF MOU WITH STATE GOVERNMENT

Existing MOU between Shire and State Government

 

 


Item 9.3.2 - BROOME AS A REGIONAL GROWTH CENTRE - HIGH LEVEL PROJECT SCOPE AND CONSIDERATION OF MOU WITH STATE GOVERNMENT

Existing MOU between Shire and State Government

 

 


Item 9.3.2 - BROOME AS A REGIONAL GROWTH CENTRE - HIGH LEVEL PROJECT SCOPE AND CONSIDERATION OF MOU WITH STATE GOVERNMENT

Existing MOU between Shire and State Government

 

 


Item 9.3.2 - BROOME AS A REGIONAL GROWTH CENTRE - HIGH LEVEL PROJECT SCOPE AND CONSIDERATION OF MOU WITH STATE GOVERNMENT

Proposed new MOU between Shire and State Government

 

 

 

 

 

Memorandum of Understanding

 

between the:

•   Shire of Broome

•   Kimberley Development Commission

•   Department of Planning

•   LandCorp

•   Department of Regional Development

 

in relation to the –

Broome Growth Plan

 

Insert logos Shire of Broome and DoP

KDC_CMYK                             

 


 

Purpose

This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is between the Shire of Broome, Kimberley Development Commission, Department of Planning, LandCorp and the Department of Regional Development.

The purpose of the MOU is to:

·    Provide for an agreement for each party to partner in the development of a Growth Plan for the future economic and social development of Broome and its economic activity area.

·    Establish the terms to enable the resourcing to support the development of a Broome Growth Plan under the terms and conditions set by the Regional Centres Development Plan (RCDP), including allocation of RCDP funding in pursuit of the project plan approved by the RCDP Steering Committee.

 

Background

The State Planning Strategy 2050 identifies Western Australia’s network of Regional Centres and Sub-regional Centres, and RCDP and Pilbara Cities supports those of the highest strategic importance to the State’s economy and regional communities. The State Planning Strategy 2050 identifies the need for these strategic regional centres to build on their competitive and collaborative advantages to support sustained growth and prosperity of Western Australia.

The RCDP Framework provides a platform for the establishment of Growth Plan Partnerships and the development of Growth Plans through RCDP and Pilbara Cities. It is being implemented by the State Government to provide the necessary economic and strategic planning and partnerships to meet the objectives of the State Planning Strategy 2050 and Regional Blueprints with respect to strategic regional centres. The Growth Plan is designed to unlock growth potential in a 21st century global economy, and require commitment across sectors to both develop the plan and implement it.

The outcome required is a comprehensive strategic economic and social development plan for Broome as a regional centre. It will identify objectives for economic and population growth, establish actions which are realistic and capable of being executed within an agreed time frame, and that are based on a defensible and comprehensive economic and social analysis.

The Growth Plan will note and have regard to the economic and social connections with communities within the boundaries of the Shire of Broome and its economic activity area.

Participation in this MOU also incorporates a commitment by the parties to cooperate in the implementation of the Growth Plan following formal acceptance by Local Government Council resolution, adoption by the Board of the Kimberley Development Commission and noting by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) on endorsement by the RCDP Steering Committee.

 


 

Signatories

Signatories to this MOU are authorised by each participating body through appropriate resolution or delegation.

 

Timeframe

The agreement commences on the date of the signing of the MOU by all parties and is applicable until the Broome Growth Plan is noted by the WAPC.

Nothing in the MOU prevents the parties changing any provision by mutual agreement at any time.

 

Objectives

The objectives of this agreement are:

1.    Creation of a collaborative partnership to investigate, develop and promote a Growth Plan for Broome as a regional centre.

2.    Widely engage with industry and community stakeholders to promote the concept of a Growth Plan, build ownership, and obtain stakeholder input into the development of the plan.

3.    Produce a Growth Plan based on well researched economic and social development strategies for Broome by 1 October 2016.

4.    Develop a brand and marketing suite to promote and broker investment in Broome and its region.

5.    Collaborate with other regional centres to advance economic opportunities and to share knowledge.

 

Agreed Principles

Signatories agree to:

1.    Use their best endeavours to achieve a collaborative partnership committed to the objectives of the MOU.

2.    To operate on an inclusive basis, seeking the views and aspirations of industry, community and other government stakeholders.

3.    Cooperate and share information with other participants in the RCDP program as appropriate in the interests of building a state wide collegiate approach to regional growth and economic development.

4.    Recognise the Kimberley Regional Investment Blueprint as the guiding regional economic and social development strategy.

 


 

Resourcing Commitments

Signatories to this MOU will commit sufficient resources, which will be agreed between the parties, to undertake their role as specified in this MOU to achieve the Objectives, including the support of the Growth Plan Partnership and to the development and review of a Growth Plan.

 

Project Funding

Funding will be made available through the Royalties for Region RCDP Program, subject to the RCDP Steering Committee endorsing this executed MOU, a project plan and a budget for preparing a Growth Plan.

Funding will be administered by LandCorp in accordance with the approved project plan and budget, and in consultation with the Growth Plan Partnership.

Additional work outside of the scope of works described in the project plan approved by the RCDP Steering Committee is to be resourced and funded by the Signatories, unless approved by the RCDP Steering Committee as a variation to the approved project plan. 

 

Roles and Responsibilities

RCDP Steering Committee

The RCDP Steering Committee has been established to provide oversight of RCDP.  It is responsible for approving the Growth Plan project plan and budget, and any variations.  The RCDP Steering Committee is required to approve the final Growth Plan prior to its referral by the Growth Plan Partnership to the Western Australian Planning Commission for noting.

The RCDP Steering Committee is also responsible for the provision of advice to the Regional Development Council and to the Minister for Regional Development and the Minister for Planning.

The Steering Committee membership includes:

·     A member of the Regional Development Council (Executive Chair)

·     The Director General, Department of Regional Development

·     The Chair, Western Australian Planning Commission

·     The Director General, Department of Planning

·     The Chief Executive Officer of LandCorp

 


 

Regional Development Commission

The Kimberley Development Commission will support the development of the plan through participation in the Growth Plan governance groups, adopt the final draft Growth Plan by resolution of the Board and submit the final draft Growth Plan to the RCDP Steering Committee.

Upon approval of the Growth Plan by the RCDP Steering Committee, the Kimberley Development Commission is to ensure the Growth Plan Partnership refers the Growth Plan to the WAPC for noting.

The Kimberley Development Commission will nominate a Board Member and the CEO to the Growth Plan Partnership and will nominate staff to provide technical and administrative support as required.

The Kimberley Development Commission is responsible for strategic alignment and integration of the Growth Plan and Regional Blueprint, and promoting and brokering investment in the Broome as a regional centre.

 

Shire of Broome

The Shire of Broome will consider adoption of the final draft Growth Plan by Local Government Council resolution and submit the final draft Growth Plan to the Kimberley Development Commission.

The Shire of Broome is responsible for strategic alignment and integration of the Growth Plan and Local Government’s integrated planning framework, and promoting and brokering investment in Broome.

The Shire of Broome will nominate one elected representative and the CEO to the Growth Plan Partnership and will nominate staff to provide technical and administrative assistance as required.

 

LandCorp

In relation to this MOU LandCorp will:

a)    provide project management services in accordance with the project plan approved by the RCDP Steering Committee in March 2015, for which LandCorp will be remunerated; and

b)    nominate a representative to the Growth Plan Partnership to provide, on request, technical support and advice in relation to principles of land development economics, identification of development opportunities and advice in relation to brand development for investment attraction.

c)    nominate staff to provide technical and administrative support as required.

d)    administer funding in accordance with the Broome Growth Plan Partnership’s approved project plan and budget, and in consultation with the Broome Growth Plan Partnership.

 


 

Department of Planning

The Department of Planning will, on request, nominate a representative to the Growth Plan Partnership to provide technical advice in relation to urban and regional land use research, data, information and planning, and strategic advice on alignment and integration with land use planning policy and strategy frameworks, and infrastructure coordination.

 

Department of Regional Development

The Department of Regional Development will, on request, nominate a representative to the Growth Plan Partnership to provide technical advice in relation to regional development research, data and information, and strategic advice on alignment and integration with regional development policy and strategy frameworks.

 

Governance and Decision Making

Growth Plan Partnership

A Growth Plan Partnership will be established to oversee the development of the project and ensure that it meets the objectives of this MOU. In accordance with the Roles and Responsibilities outlined above the participating bodies are:

·     Shire of Broome

·     Kimberley Development Commission

·     LandCorp

·     Department of Planning

·     Department for Regional Development

 

The Growth Plan Partnership will establish a stakeholder reference group that represents industry and community stakeholders within the Broome and its economic activity area, and ensuring their views are incorporated into the development of the Growth Plan.

The Growth Plan Partnership will set its own terms of reference to effectively oversee the project’s delivery.

The Growth Plan Partnership will submit bi-monthly progress reports through the Program Coordinator to the RCDP Steering Committee.

The Growth Plan Partnership will be required to endorse the Growth Plan prior to referring it to the RCDP Steering Committee. 

Upon approval of the Growth Plan by the RCDP Steering Committee the Growth Plan Partnership will refer the approved Growth Plan to the WAPC for noting.

Project Control Group

The Project Control Group will be responsible for managing the operational delivery of the Growth Plan by the Lead Consultant in accordance with the approved project plan and budget and direction provided by the Growth Plan Partnership. 

 

Membership of the Project Control Group will be:

·    Tim Bray                              Kimberley Development Commission

·    Paul Martin                                     Shire of Broome

·    Director Development Services          Shire of Broome

·    Simon Proud                                  LandCorp

·    Other Stakeholders  - as required

Representatives of other organisations (eg DoP and DRD) may be invited to attend from time to time.

The Project Control Group will establish its own terms of reference.

The Project Control Group will provide the RCDP Program Coordinator a monthly progress report.

 

Dispute Resolution

All parties agree to use best endeavours to resolve disputes. Disputes of a technical or strategic nature within the Project Control Group will be referred to the Growth Plan Governance Group for Resolution. Disputes are to be resolved on the basis of the intent of the RCDP, and the objectives set out in this MOU.

 

Media and Communications

All Signatories will undertake communications relating to Growth Plans in accordance with a communications plan approved by the Growth Plan Partnership and by the Department of Regional Development.

All media communications in relation to the Broome Growth Plan will be undertaken in accordance with that agreed communications plan, agreed key messages and in consultation with other relevant signatories when appropriate and if time permits.

Royalties for Regions (RfR) funding recipients are required to acknowledge the funding provided by the Western Australian Government, in accordance with the approved format. 

 

Legal Facilitation

The MOU is not intended to be a legal document.  It is an administrative document that seeks to ensure mutually beneficial working arrangements and to clarify the relationship between the parties to this MOU in view of their responsibilities under the Local Government Act 1995 and other relevant legislation.

The MOU is not intended to define, create, recognise, affirm, deny or amend any rights or obligations of the parties or any other individual or group nor restrict any of the parties from participation in similar activities or arrangements with other public or private agencies or parties.


Item 9.3.2 - BROOME AS A REGIONAL GROWTH CENTRE - HIGH LEVEL PROJECT SCOPE AND CONSIDERATION OF MOU WITH STATE GOVERNMENT

Proposed new MOU between Shire and State Government

 

 

 

Signatories

 

Signed on behalf of the Shire of Broome by the President and Chief Executive Officer:

Shire President

The Chief Executive Officer

Cr Ron Johnson

Kenn Donohoe

 

_________________________________

 

_________________________________

Signature

Signature

Date

Date

 

 

Signed on behalf of the Kimberley Development Commission by the Chair and Chief Executive Officer:

The Chair

The Chief Executive Officer

Michael McConachy

Jeff Gooding

 

_________________________________

 

_________________________________

Signature

Signature

Date

Date

 

 

Signed for an on behalf of LandCorp

 

 

Signed for an on behalf of the Department of Regional Development

Chief Executive Officer

Director General

Frank Marra

Ralph Addis

 

_________________________________

 

_________________________________

Signature

Signature

Date

Date

 

 

Signed for an on behalf of the Department of Planning

Director General

 

Gail McGowan

 

 

_________________________________

 

Signature

 

Date

 


Item 9.3.2 - BROOME AS A REGIONAL GROWTH CENTRE - HIGH LEVEL PROJECT SCOPE AND CONSIDERATION OF MOU WITH STATE GOVERNMENT

Letter of Agreement

 

 


 


 


Item 9.3.3 - Kimberley Regional Offices Redevelopment

Governance Management Plan

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Item 9.3.3 - Kimberley Regional Offices Redevelopment

Governance Management Plan

 

 


Item 9.3.3 - Kimberley Regional Offices Redevelopment

Procurement Advice

 

 


 

 


Item 9.4.1 - PAYMENTS - OCTOBER 2015

PAYMENTS - OCTOBER 2015

 

 

 

Part 5. Division 4. Section 5.42 Delegation of some powers to CEO. Sub Section Finance Management Regulation 12.

Each payment must show on a list the payees name, the amount of the payment, the date of the payment and sufficient

information to identify the transaction

This report incorporates the Delegation of Authority (Administration Regulation 19)

PAYMENTS BY EFT & CHEQUE AND FROM TRUST - OCTOBER 2015

 

EFT

Date