Ordinary Meeting of Council Council Chambers, Service Centre 275 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe 30 May 2016 commencing at 7.45pm Following the public forum commencing at approximately 7.30pm and may be extended to 8pm if necessary.
AGENDA
Acknowledgement of the Traditional Owner, the Wurundjeri willam people "Our meeting is being held on the Traditional Land of the Wurundjeri willam people and, on behalf of Banyule City Council, I wish to acknowledge them as the Traditional Owners. I would also like to pay my respects to the Wurundjeri Elders, past and present, and to the Elders of other Aboriginal peoples who may be here today” Apologies and Leave of Absence Confirmation of Minutes Ordinary Meeting of Council held 9 May 2016 Special Meeting of Council held 9 May 2016 Disclosure of Interests 1. Petitions Nil REPORTS: 2. People – Community Strengthening and Support 2.1 Request for Over Mass Fire Truck Access on Local Roads ....................................3 2.2 Spirit Walk & Babarrbunin Beek Activation: Employment of an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Development Worker........................7 2.3 Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, Watsonia - Possible Treatment Options ................................................................................................11 3. Planet – Environmental Sustainability 3.1 Resilient Melbourne - metropolitan strategy for a sustainable, liveable and prosperous Melbourne ......................................................................19
AGENDA (Cont’d) 4. Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment 4.1 Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C110 - Results of Public Exhibition ..............................................................................................................25 4.2 Status of Closure of Myrtle Street, Linden Avenue and Forster Street, Ivanhoe .....................................................................................................32 4.3 Erect a carport within the front setback on a lot less than 500 sqm at 1/33 Coventry Street, Montmorency (P1070/2012) ...........................................36 4.4 Naming of the new public open space between Bonar and Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights....................................................................................42 4.5 Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe - New Pedestrian Crossing .........................................46 4.6 Grimshaw Street / Flintoff Street, Greensborough, Intersection Improvement Funding ...........................................................................................48 4.7 Reallocation of 2015/2016 Local Roads Resurfacing Program Funding.................................................................................................................54 5. Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life 5.1 Proposed City Plan & Budget - Consideration of Submissions Received...............................................................................................................59 6. Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely 6.1 Items for Noting ....................................................................................................77 6.2 Assembly of Councillors........................................................................................84 7. Sealing of Documents 7.1 Sealing of Documents...........................................................................................89 8. Notices of Motion 8.1 Banyule Mobile App and Smart-Device Functionality ............................................91 8.2 Access on to the M80 Ring Road from the Greensborough Bypass (north bound)................................................................................................92 8.3 Banyule Theatre ...................................................................................................93 8.4 Stormwater Harvesting and Pollution Mitigation at Olympic Park ..........................95 9. General Business 10. Urgent Business Closure of Meeting to the Public That in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989, Council close the Meeting to members of the public and adjourn for five minutes to allow the public to leave the Chamber prior to considering the following confidential matter: 11. Confidential Matters 11.1 Contractual Matters Matters Discussed in Camera That all confidential matters and reports related to the above items remain confidential unless otherwise specified. Closure of Meeting
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 2
2.1
REQUEST FOR OVER MASS FIRE TRUCK ACCESS ON LOCAL ROADS
Author:
Justin Dynan - Senior Transport Engineer, City Development
Ward:
All
2.1
People – Community Strengthening and Support
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A request has been received from VicRoads for the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) to use Unimog 4000M fire trucks in emergency situations on Council’s local roads. The vehicles will be the primary mode of transport in emergency situations, mainly in rural bush fire areas, and the last mile access on local roads is critical. However, they exceed the mass axle limit that VicRoads would normally allow for a special purpose fire truck of this type. Investigations have found that in terms of effects on bridges, the vehicle has no greater impact than a Higher Mass Limit (HML) vehicle. Currently there are no local roads within Banyule that have been granted approval for HML access, in accordance with a Council resolution of 4 February 2008. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.
Grants approval for the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) to use Unimog 4000M fire truck vehicles in emergency situations on all local roads within Banyule, except for Henty Road, Lower Plenty, which has a 2 tonne bridge load limit.
2.
Notifies VicRoads of this resolution.
CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “plan and prepare for emergency events”. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions. In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 3
2.1
People – Community Strengthening and Support
REQUEST FOR OVER MASS FIRE TRUCK ACCESS ON LOCAL ROADS cont’d BACKGROUND A request has been received via VicRoads for the use of over mass fire trucks on Council’s local roads. At its meeting on 4 February 2008, Council considered a report in relation to a request from VicRoads for Council’s roads to be made available for use by B-Doubles and Higher Mass Limits (HML) vehicles. At the meeting, Council resolved as follows: 1. 2.
3.
4.
5.
That Council receives the report. The Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) be advised that Council supports its process for assessing and nominating those local roads that may be suitable and appropriate for use by B-Double and Heavy Mass Limits vehicles, as set out in its email to councils dated 20 December 2007. Such advice to be forwarded to the MAV before 15 February 2008. Council advises VicRoads that there are no local roads within Banyule that are suitable for B-Double or HML. If VicRoads insist on a study to confirm this opinion, that it not be at ratepayer expense. Council advises VicRoads that in principle Council supports the push for a more efficient freight transport system, but believes that our local network is already severely congested and does not have the capacity to accommodate larger and heavier vehicles. Council writes to all local State and Federal members of Parliament and advising them of our decision not to increase B-double and HML network within Banyule and requests that they work to create long term solutions to our freight issues, that do not impact on our residents.
LEGAL CONSIDERATION Councils have the power to set mass limits on local roads under Schedule 11 Clause 12(1) of the Local Government Act 1989. Where mass limits on roads are not set by Councils the Victorian general mass limit for vehicles applies. The Victorian general mass limit is set as a total mass of 42.5 tonnes and no more than 8 tonne on the drive axel. Mass limits are generally set to protect the road network from being damaged by heavy vehicles or to manage the amenity impacts of heavy vehicles in local streets. In this instance the proposed new generation fire truck (Unimog 4000M) could improve the response and management of emergency events, with minimal impact on the road network. DISCUSSION The Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) is planning to purchase a fleet of Unimog 4000M fire trucks in preparation for the 2016/17 fire season. The vehicles will be DELWP’s primary mode of managing emergency situations, such as fires and floods in regional Victoria, so the last mile access on local roads is critical. The mass on the drive-axle of the Unimog 4000M fire trucks is 8.5 tonnes which slightly exceeds the limit of 8 tonnes that VicRoads would normally allow for a special purpose fire truck of this type.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 4
REQUEST FOR OVER MASS FIRE TRUCK ACCESS ON LOCAL ROADS cont’d VicRoads has assessed the vehicle against the current Higher Mass Limit (HML) network and has determined that in terms of effects on bridges, the vehicles have no greater impact on the network than that of a HML vehicle. A HML vehicle is heavier than those that comply with current standards for the general road network. General Mass Limit (GML) vehicles, currently permitted to travel along local roads, can operate up to a total of 42.5 tonnes. HML vehicles can operate up to 45.5 tonnes and require permission to travel on local roads. In accordance with item 3 of the Council resolution of 4 February 2008, there are no local roads within Banyule where approval for HML access has been granted. VicRoads has granted approval for the Unimog 4000M fire trucks to be used on arterial roads and has advised that it is highly unlikely that these vehicles will be used in metropolitan areas such as Banyule, as they will mainly be used in rural bush fire prone areas. VicRoads has advised that generally other councils are granting approval for access on all local roads except specific roads that should not be used, including roads with bridges which have load limits. The only bridge in Banyule that has restrictions is on Henty Road, Lower Plenty, where there is a 2 tonne load limit over Plenty River. Given that the last mile access on local roads is critical in the case of an emergency and that the Unimog 4000M fire trucks will be the primary mode of vehicle to be used in these situations, it is considered that approval should be granted for these vehicles to access all local roads within Banyule, except Henty Road which has a 2 tonne load limit. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CONCLUSION The Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) is proposing to purchase Unimog 4000M fire trucks to use on all local roads as their primary mode of transport when managing emergency situations. The mass on their drive axle slightly exceeds the limit that VicRoads would normally allow for a special purpose fire truck of this type. VicRoads has assessed the vehicle and determined that in terms of its effect on bridges, it has no greater impact on the network than a Higher Mass Limit (HML) vehicle. However, in accordance with the current Council resolution, there are no local roads within Banyule that have approval for HML access.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 5
2.1
People – Community Strengthening and Support
2.1
People – Community Strengthening and Support
REQUEST FOR OVER MASS FIRE TRUCK ACCESS ON LOCAL ROADS cont’d The vehicles will mainly be used in bush fire prone areas of regional Victoria, but should an emergency occur within Banyule, the last mile access on local roads is critical. Therefore, it is considered that approval should be granted for the Unimog 4000M fire trucks to access all local roads within Banyule, except Henty Road Lower Plenty which has a 2 tonne load limit.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 6
2.2
2.2
People – Community Strengthening and Support
SPIRIT WALK & BABARRBUNIN BEEK ACTIVATION: EMPLOYMENT OF AN ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT WORKER
Author: Theonie Tacticos - Team Leader Community & Social Planning, Community Programs
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council has undertaken significant work to support the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community through the development of the Inclusion Access and Equity Framework, the establishment of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee and capital investment in the Babarrbunin Beek Aboriginal Gathering Place. Council is currently in its planning phases for the Commemorative Spiritual Walk at Babarrbunin Beek. Council will continue to hold a number of events in recognition of Reconciliation Week. In March 2016, Council employed an Aboriginal Cultural Development contractor in a temporary capacity to support the development and activation of Babarrbunin Beek. Since this appointment considerable outcomes have been achieved. A further investment over a three year period is recommended to support current projects and initiatives. The Banyule Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee at its meeting of the 14 April 2016, made a recommendation to Council to consider the employment of an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Development worker which was considered by Council on the 9 May 2016. Council resolved that officers prepare a report for consideration of the employment of an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Development worker to assist with the further development of the Commemorative Spiritual Walk and the further activation of the Babarrbunin Beek Gathering Place Costings, benefits and opportunities of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Development position are outlined in this report. RECOMMENDATION 1. That Council support the allocation of $50,000 per annum, for a three year period, to employ an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Development Officer for 20 hours per week. 2. A further report be presented to Council of the development of the Commemorative Spiritual Walk once concepts for the design are established.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 7
2.2
People – Community Strengthening and Support
SPIRIT WALK & BABARRBUNIN BEEK ACTIVATION: EMPLOYMENT OF AN ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT WORKER cont’d CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “celebrate and promote Banyule’s diversity and heritage”. BACKGROUND On 5 May 2014, Council resolved to establish Babarrbunin Beek Aboriginal meeting space at the Fred Howe Annex, and has since allocated more than $75,000 to the refurbishment of the building. The building is leased and managed by Banyule Community Health. In December 2014, Council adopted the Inclusion Access and Equity (IAE) Framework which guides Council’s work and adopted plans for communities at risk of exclusion: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders; Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender & Intersex (LGBTI); Multicultural; and people with Disabilities and their families. In August 2015 the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee was established and four meetings have been held to date. On 21 Sep 2015 Council resolved to cost, plan and if approved, construct a Commemorative Spiritual Walk at Babarrbunin Beek. The Banyule Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee have advised that the best outcomes will be achieved if the design and scoping of this project is undertaken by an Aboriginal cultural development worker in partnership with the local community. In March 2016, Council partnered with the Banyule Community Health Service (BCHS) in support of their application to the Victorian Legal Services Board for a three year project. If successful the funding will be used by BCHS to employ two legal staff who will have dedicated time and support at Babarrbunin Beek. The funding announcement is expected in August 2016. At its meeting of the 14 April 2016, the Banyule Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee has made a recommendation to Council to consider the employment of an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Development worker. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS There are no direct legal implications arising from the recommendation contained in this report, the recommendations supports Council’s requirements under the Human Rights Charter which is discussed further. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions. In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 8
SPIRIT WALK & BABARRBUNIN BEEK ACTIVATION: EMPLOYMENT OF AN ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT WORKER cont’d The nature of Council’s work in supporting the Babarrbunin Beek Gathering Place, implementing the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Plan, and establishing the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander in fact enhances Council’s advocacy function in affirming the individual’s rights to freedom of expression especially in underrepresented groups in our community. These also enhance the individual’s rights to Freedom of Expression as contained in section 15 of the Charter and Cultural Rights as contained in section 19 of the Charter. CURRENT SITUATION Council has made a capital investment to the establishment of Babarrbunin Beek. However it has been identified that an experienced Aboriginal Cultural Development worker to support the development and activation of Babarrbunin Beek would be advantageous. In March 2016, Council employed a contractor to take on this role in a temporary capacity working sixteen (16) hours per week over a six (6) month period. Since this appointment considerable outcomes have been achieved including: •
The success of the Nhalinggu Bagung (Come Gather) Aboriginal Art Exhibition. The officer was instrumental in attracting artist to this exhibition. The opening night was attended by over 100 people and was a great showcase and celebration of Aboriginal artwork. This exhibition has now been sponsored by Telstra to tour to another venue as part of Aboriginal Awareness Training supported by the Wurundjeri Land Council.
•
Relocating the Sista Circle Women’s group from Darebin Community Health to Babarrbunin Beek. This group will now meet every Tuesday at Babarrbunin Beek and will also assist the implementation of a Little Sistas group for girls.
•
Discussion have begun to re-establish the meetings and activities of the Men’s Group
•
Consulting with the local community to commence the storyline project, for which Barbarrbunin Beek received a grant.
•
Consulting with the local community and regarding the design and development of the Commemorative Spiritual Walk.
The employment of a Aboriginal Cultural Development Worker has connected Council to the local community and established a respected relationship with local aboriginal community members.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 9
2.2
People – Community Strengthening and Support
2.2
People – Community Strengthening and Support
SPIRIT WALK & BABARRBUNIN BEEK ACTIVATION: EMPLOYMENT OF AN ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT WORKER cont’d FUNDING IMPLICATIONS Staff have identified that the employment of an Aboriginal Cultural Development Officer for 20 hours per week for a three year period would continue to assist with the success of Babarrbunin Beek through further activation of the space. The officer would also assist in a applying for external funding to support initiatives at the space. The position would also assist Council in its many projects in the space including the development of the Commemorative Spiritual Walk. The funding required to support the appointment of this officer would be $50,000 per annum over the three year period. Three years of employment will enable Council to establish a sustainable program with community ownership and involvement and also seek external funding. After this period an evaluation of benefits of extension could be considered. The officer could also assist Council in being culturally inclusive to our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. CONSULTATION At its meeting of the 14 April 2016, the Banyule Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee has made a recommendation to Council to consider the employment of an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Development worker. The minutes of this meeting are included in a separate Council report listed for 30 May 2016. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CONCLUSION Considerable progress has been made through the employment of a contractor to undertake the role of Babarrbunin Beek Cultural Development Officer. A further investment over a three year period would be considered advantageous to support current projects and initiatives.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 10
2.3
RUSHWORTH STREET AND REEVES STREET, WATSONIA - POSSIBLE TREATMENT OPTIONS
Author:
Justin Dynan - Senior Transport Engineer, City Development
Ward:
Grimshaw
Previous Items Council on 7 March 2016 (Item 8.2 - Traffic Investigation - Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, and Watsonia Primary School) Council on 9 May 2016 (Item 2.1 - Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, Watsonia Possible Treatment Options) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At its meeting on 7 March 2016 Council resolved to investigate road safety concerns at the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, Watsonia. Investigations found that the speed and volume of traffic in Rushworth Street are within acceptable limits and consistent with other local residential roads of similar status within the municipality. There are many locations in Banyule which have more significant traffic issues and have a higher priority for road safety consideration. Notwithstanding, due to the width and alignment of the intersection, modifications can be made to reduce the speed of turning vehicles and improve pedestrian facilities. It is proposed that alterations to the intersection layout be trialled using rubber kerbing and line marking, funded at a cost of $12,000 as part of the 2016-17 budget. This item was originally listed for consideration at the 9 May 2016 Council meeting but was deferred. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.
Notes that the installation of devices to reduce the speed of vehicles along Rushworth Street, Watsonia, or at its intersection with Reeves Street, is not warranted at this time.
2.
Considers allocating $12,000 in the 2016/17 Capital Works budget for trial road safety improvements at Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, Watsonia. The scope of the project would include the redesign and modification of the intersection by installing temporary kerb outstands, a splitter island and line marking.
3.
Notes that VicRoads has indicated that it will approve 40km/h speed limits in Nell Street West and Knight Street Watsonia adjacent to Watsonia Primary School.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 11
2.3
People – Community Strengthening and Support
2.3
People – Community Strengthening and Support
RUSHWORTH STREET AND REEVES STREET, WATSONIA - POSSIBLE TREATMENT OPTIONS cont’d 4.
Notes the area bounded by Grimshaw Street, Watsonia Road and Greensborough Highway has no history of casualty crashes (crashes where people are injured) with speeds and volumes within acceptable limits, and other locations within the municipality having a greater need. Therefore it is not considered appropriate to pursue an area based 40km/h speed zone at this time.
5.
Informs residents adjacent to the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, Watsonia of this resolution.
CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “develop and promote safety and resilience in our community”. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions. In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. BACKGROUND At its meeting on 7 March 2016 Council resolved to: 1.
“Note the road safety concerns raised by residents at the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, Watsonia.
2.
Note the actions that Council officers are already pursuing in response to these concerns, namely to: a.
b. c. d. e.
Seek approval from VicRoads to install 40km/h sign limits along Nell Street West, Knight Street and Meagher Street in Watsonia adjacent to Watsonia Primary School; Investigate introducing short-term parking at the southern end of Meagher Street between Nell Street West and the school crossing; Review the line marking, sight distance and turning circles at the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street; Undertake traffic speed and volume counts along Rushworth Street; Request from VicRoads an area-wide 40kph speed zone in local streets bounded by Grimshaw Street, Watsonia Road and Greensborough Highway.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 12
RUSHWORTH STREET AND REEVES STREET, WATSONIA - POSSIBLE TREATMENT OPTIONS cont’d 3.
Report back to Council on possible treatment options at the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, Watsonia that would be suitable for installation on a trial basis and to seek funding for a trial in the 2016-17 budget.
4.
Write to local residents on this resolution and include the Ward Councillor’s contact details in the correspondence.”
It is noted that the matter was listed for consideration at the Council meeting of 9 May 2016 but was deferred to a future meeting. This report responds to items 2 and 3 in the above resolution. A locality plan of the intersection is provided in Figure 1.
Figure 1 – Locality Plan BACKGROUND As part of Council’s Road Management Plan which was adopted in June 2013, all roads and pathways within the municipal road network were categorised in accordance to their specific function, types of users, user numbers and potential risk. The hierarchy classification is used to assist in prioritising works programs and intervention responses to remedy infrastructure defects. Both Rushworth Street and Reeves Street are classified as ‘residential’ roads which are generally expected to carry less than 2,000 vehicles per day. Their primary function is to provide access to properties and generally carry local traffic. These streets have a default speed limit of 50km/h. The Rushworth Street and Reeves Street intersection is a T-intersection with Reeves Street intersecting Rushworth Street at an acute angle. Rushworth Street has a downward slope from Watsonia Road to Knight Street. Motorists on Reeves Street have to give way to traffic on Rushworth Street.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 13
2.3
People – Community Strengthening and Support
2.3
People – Community Strengthening and Support
RUSHWORTH STREET AND REEVES STREET, WATSONIA - POSSIBLE TREATMENT OPTIONS cont’d LEGAL CONSIDERATION Council’s power over traffic are defined within Schedule 11 of the Local Government Act 1989, and include undertaking works to regulate traffic and protect road users. As the current linemarking at the intersection does not meet with relevant Australian Standards some liability may accrue to Council should a crash occur as a result of the linemarking. This however could be addressed by installing compliant linemarking in the same general configuration. While there are shortfalls with the layout of the intersection, there is no record of any casualty crashes at the site and the operation of traffic is within acceptable limits. Therefore it is not considered to be a priority for funding as other locations within the municipality have a greater need. If a crash did occur at this location due to the road layout it is unlikely that any liability would accrue to Council as Council delivers a needs based capital works program to prioritise and address road safety issues. CURRENT SITUATION Investigation into the actions outlined in Resolution 2 has been completed. The results are: Item 2a - Seek approval from VicRoads to install 40km/h sign limits along Nell Street West, Knight Street and Meagher Street in Watsonia adjacent to Watsonia Primary School. VicRoads has indicated that it will approve 40km/h speed limits in Nell Street West and Knight Street adjacent to Watsonia Primary School, but has indicated that the issue of a speed zone should first be resolved. Item 2b - Investigate introducing short-term parking at the southern end of Meagher Street between Nell Street West and the school crossing. Consultation has been undertaken with Watsonia Primary School about possible short term parking at the southern end of Meagher Street. The school has indicated it would be supportive of 2-hour parking restrictions on the east side of Meagher Street, between Nell Street West and the children’s crossing, subject to consultation with residents in this section of the street. The installation of the parking restrictions is being pursued and residents will be consulted. Item 2c - Review the line marking, sight distance and turning circles at the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street. The intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street is currently a wide T-intersection due to the alignment of the two roads (Figure 2). It does not force motorists to slow down when conducting turning movements at the intersection and may also create conflict with pedestrians. The give way linemarking is non-standard and a painted splitter island is installed, however there are no physical treatments to prevent motorists cutting the corner or turning on the wrong side of the island. Due to the acute angle of the intersection, the site lines are restricted and traffic tends to cut the corner.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 14
People – Community Strengthening and Support
2.3
RUSHWORTH STREET AND REEVES STREET, WATSONIA - POSSIBLE TREATMENT OPTIONS cont’d
Figure 2 – Existing Layout of the Rushworth Street and Reeves Street Intersection A pedestrian count was undertaken on Wednesday 13 April 2016 between 3pm and 4pm to coincide with school finish time at nearby Watsonia Primary School. A total of five (5) pedestrians crossed Reeves Street at the intersection. The distance between kerb ramps at this location is approximately 21 metres, which is considered wide for pedestrians and creates safety concerns. Sight distance for pedestrians on the south-west corner of the intersection was found to be restricted due to the adjacent property fence. Item 2d – Undertake traffic speed and volume counts along Rushworth Street. In accordance with item 2d of the resolution, a traffic speed and volume survey was undertaken in Rushworth Street, immediately east of Reeves Street, for one week commencing on 18 March 2016, prior to the Easter school holidays. The surveys were conducted outside No 17 Rushworth Street, immediately east of the Reeves Street intersection. Table 1 summarises the results of this survey. Table 1 – Speed and Volume Count Results Street and Location Rushworth Street East of Reeves Street
Direction Combined East West
Average Weekday Volume (vehicles per day)
85th Percentile Speed* (km/h)
332 169 163
48 49 47
th
*The 85 percentile speed is the speed at which 85% of vehicles are travelling at or below.
Item 2e – Request from VicRoads an area-wide 40kph speed zone in local streets bounded by Grimshaw Street, Watsonia Road and Greensborough Highway. Meagher Street currently has a 40km/h speed limit. VicRoads has advised that consideration could be given to an area wide 40km/h speed zone, but indicated that this approach is likely to generate requests for the installation of traffic management treatments so that motorists are physically forced to slow down to 40km/h.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 15
2.3
People – Community Strengthening and Support
RUSHWORTH STREET AND REEVES STREET, WATSONIA - POSSIBLE TREATMENT OPTIONS cont’d In accordance with Australian Standards, traffic speeds may be controlled to less than the default built-up area limit of 50km/h by means of an area speed zone, if a Local Area Traffic Management scheme has been implemented. Given the lack of traffic management treatments in this residential area, it is considered that an area wide 40km/h speed zone is not appropriate at this time. It is estimated that the cost of the design and construction of suitable traffic safety measures would be around $465,000. This is based on the provision of treatments at appropriate locations in each of the ten (10) streets and selected intersections in the proposed speed zone, at an average cost of $20,000. DISCUSSION The traffic speed and volume survey revealed that the average daily traffic volume on Rushworth Street was 332 vehicles and the 85th percentile speed (the speed at which 85% of the vehicles are travelling at or below) was 49km/h. The 85th percentile speed is the recommended figure used in accordance with Australian Standards for Speed Controls as the primary determinant of the appropriate speed limit on roads. Further, the 85th percentile speed is taken as representative of drivers’ general perception of a reasonable travel speed on a particular section of road. The traffic survey data indicates that the speed and volume of traffic in Rushworth Street are within acceptable limits and consistent with other local residential roads of similar status within the municipality. A review of VicRoads’ CrashStats data found there have been no reported casualty crashes in the past five (5) years at the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street. Based on the available traffic data, the installation of devices to reduce the speed of vehicles along Rushworth Street, or at its intersection with Reeves Street, is not warranted at this stage. Further, there are many locations in Banyule which have more significant traffic issues and have a higher priority for road safety consideration. The sight distance, width of the intersection for pedestrians, linemarking and alignment of the intersection warrant consideration to make the intersection safer for pedestrians and turning traffic. A proposed treatment to improve the intersection design is discussed below. From a broader area perspective, the issues of rat-running and concerns of traffic speed and volume using this local street network to get from Grimshaw Street to Watsonia Road have been investigated in the last year or so. The outcome of the investigation was that traffic speeds and volumes are well within acceptable limits, and as such no further action was taken. Victoria Police were asked to enforce turn bans on Grimshaw Street, and they have as they have been able. POSSIBLE TREATMENT The existing painted island at the intersection (Figure 2) does not provide protection for pedestrians crossing the road, or reduce the speed at which vehicles travel on the roads. Therefore, it is proposed that the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street be modified to control the movement of turning vehicles and improve pedestrian facilities.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 16
RUSHWORTH STREET AND REEVES STREET, WATSONIA - POSSIBLE TREATMENT OPTIONS cont’d Kerb outstands and a splitter island can be installed, on a trial basis, to control the movement of turning vehicles and reduce the width of road for pedestrians crossing Reeves Street. Any permanent modifications to the intersection would need to consider existing stormwater pits, kerb ramps and residential crossovers. A proposed trial layout of the intersection which takes in to consideration line marking, sight distance and turning circles is provided in Figure 3.
Figure 3 – Proposed Trial Layout of the Rushworth Street and Reeves Street Intersection It is recommended that funding be considered as part of the 2016-17 budget for the installation of temporary treatments. The estimated cost of the proposed trial works at the intersection is $12,000 which is based on the use of rubber kerbing, line marking and compliant give way markings. A typical example of this treatment is provided in Figure 4. The trial is reasonably straightforward and could be implemented within three months. Drivers usually take several months to become familiar with changes to traffic layouts of this nature. It is proposed that the trial be monitored for six months and a report be provided to Council following an assessment of the trial, including a survey of local residents, and recommending further actions.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 17
2.3
People – Community Strengthening and Support
2.3
People – Community Strengthening and Support
RUSHWORTH STREET AND REEVES STREET, WATSONIA - POSSIBLE TREATMENT OPTIONS cont’d
Figure 4 – Typical Example of Rubber Kerbing OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CONCLUSION Following Council’s resolution on 7 March 2016, road safety concerns were investigated at the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, Watsonia. The speed and volume of traffic in Rushworth Street was found to be within acceptable limits and consistent with other local residential streets in the municipality. No casualty crashes have been recorded. However, concerns were found to exist regarding the intersection alignment and speed of turning vehicles and pedestrian safety at the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street. To address these concerns it is proposed to redesign the intersection through the installation of kerb outstands, splitter island and line marking, on a trial basis, at an estimated cost of $12,000 as part of the 2016/17 budget. From an area perspective, there is no casualty crash history, traffic speeds and volumes are within acceptable limits, and other areas within the municipality have a greater need for intervention. Despite VicRoads support for a 40km/h speed zone, the cost to implement such a scheme would cost in the order of $400,000 - $500,000. Therefore it is not considered appropriate to pursue an area wide 40km/h speed zone at this time.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 18
3.1
RESILIENT MELBOURNE - METROPOLITAN STRATEGY FOR A SUSTAINABLE, LIVEABLE AND PROSPEROUS MELBOURNE
Author: John Milkins - Environmental Sustainability Co-ordinator, City Development
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Resilient Melbourne is Melbourne’s first metropolitan wide strategy for a viable, sustainable, liveable and prosperous Melbourne. The strategy presents the synthesis of over 12 months work developing the evidence base for how to improve the resilience of metropolitan Melbourne’s in ways that benefit our communities, relevant to local government. This has involved research into existing and emerging shocks and stresses, understanding resilience building efforts already underway and the identification of opportunities as a result of facilitating and liaising with a dynamic network of resilience practitioners. Banyule was a lead partner in the development of the “healthier environment” focus area which resulted in the Resilient Melbourne flagship action for the development of a metropolitan wide urban forest strategy, and a further key action to develop an integrated water management framework. There are further flagship and supporting actions in the strategy under the themes of Adapt, Survive and Embed. The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s endorsement of the Resilient Melbourne Strategy.
RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.
Endorse the Resilient Melbourne strategy.
2.
Consider future opportunities for involvement in, and resourcing implications for the implementation of the Resilient Melbourne strategy beyond the first year, as they arise.
CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “develop and promote safety and resilience in our community”. BACKGROUND In 2014, Melbourne applied for and was selected to join the 100 Resilient Cities network (pioneered by the Rockefeller Foundation). Melbourne’s Chief Resilience Officer has led the Melbourne project, tasked with the development of a resilience strategy to deliver tangible benefits for metropolitan Melbourne and its communities.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 19
3.1
Planet – Environmental Sustainability
3.1
Planet – Environmental Sustainability
RESILIENT MELBOURNE - METROPOLITAN STRATEGY FOR A SUSTAINABLE, LIVEABLE AND PROSPEROUS MELBOURNE cont’d A Briefing Paper with a project background was presented to Council on 10 March 2016. The Resilient Melbourne strategy (Attachment 1) has been developed with the active support and input from Melbourne’s metropolitan councils, Victorian government departments, academics, the community and private sectors. It was the CEOs of councils that particularly informed the guiding principles for the strategy development that it must: build on existing structures; avoid duplication; and deliver tangible benefits for our communities today, with the long-term in mind. The final stage of engagement was a metropolitan meeting of Mayors and CEOs on 14 April 2016 at which councils were provided with an overview of feedback received from councils and how it has been incorporated into the now final strategy. Comments from Mayors and CEOs at the meeting also informed the finalisation of the document. On 17 May 2016 the City of Melbourne Council unanimously endorsed the Resilient Melbourne strategy. The strategy is the culmination of work by people from across sectors, council boundaries and community groups, coming together to consider a shared challenge: what can we do to protect and improve the lives of Melburnians, now and in the future? The strategy seeks to build on the collaboration established so far and delivering a series of distinct, yet connected, actions that will help make Melbourne an even more viable, sustainable, liveable and prosperous city, today and long into the future. LEGAL CONSIDERATION There are no specific legal considerations at this time other than compliance with existing statutory obligations under the Local Government Act. As opportunities arise in implementing some elements of the strategy in the future, any legal considerations will determined at that time HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions. In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. POLICY IMPLICATIONS It is considered that that the Resilient Melbourne Strategy is in accord with Banyule City Council’s City Plan and the range of policies and strategies under the City Plan.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 20
RESILIENT MELBOURNE - METROPOLITAN STRATEGY FOR A SUSTAINABLE, LIVEABLE AND PROSPEROUS MELBOURNE cont’d DISCUSSION The strategy Resilient Melbourne marks an important point in Melbourne’s development. It presents the first of our city’s resilience strategies: a starting point that brings together individuals and organisations critical to the resilience of Melbourne and its diverse communities. It offers a new way to deal with the chronic stresses and acute shocks we are likely to experience, and to achieve our vision of a city that is viable, sustainable, liveable and prosperous, today and long into the future. This vision is supported by four long term objectives and related action areas, which developed from our Preliminary Resilience Assessment, which had been informed and supported by metropolitan Council representatives in June 2015. The objectives will be achieved through collaboration between disciplines and sectors on three flagship actions, 15 supporting actions and 15 aligned local actions. Actions presented in the strategy were selected upon recommendation from focus area working groups, each led by a CEO from inner, middle and outer metropolitan councils. The proposed actions were further reviewed by the project Steering Committee, an expert panel and the five council CEOs, as well as with the 100 Resilient Cities executive. Banyule led the development of the “healthier environment” focus area which resulted in the flagship action for the development of a metropolitan wide urban forest strategy, and a further key action to develop an integrated water management framework. There are further actions under on the themes of Adapt, Survive and Embed. Stakeholder engagement This strategy is the result of the work of more than 1000 individuals from 230 organisations, representatives of Melbourne’s 32 councils, and many Victorian Government departments. The strategy has been widely tested with metropolitan councils in its development and highlights of specific local government engagement are listed in Attachment 2. The document has been reviewed and feedback provided by representatives of local government authorities, the Victorian Government, community and private sector organisations. A draft was circulated twice for stakeholder consultation; the second round was specifically for local government input. Feedback on the draft Resilient Melbourne strategy was received in the following ways: 56 full document reviews and over 1200 individual comments. Additionally, the Chief Resilience Officer, Toby Kent, met with 30 of 32 metropolitan council CEOs during February and March 2016 to discuss the draft strategy. To ensure the strategy built on existing efforts and to avoid the risk of duplication, a survey was circulated and responded to by 80% of metropolitan Melbourne councils documenting exemplary projects already building resilience.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 21
3.1
Planet – Environmental Sustainability
3.1
Planet – Environmental Sustainability
RESILIENT MELBOURNE - METROPOLITAN STRATEGY FOR A SUSTAINABLE, LIVEABLE AND PROSPEROUS MELBOURNE cont’d Value to councils There are a range of benefits that are likely to arise from the Resilient Melbourne strategy, including: • • • • •
Leveraging metropolitan collaboration to attract funding and greater investment for project implementation, notably through the ‘Platform Partners’ made available through participating in the 100RC network; New opportunities to achieve efficiencies of scale; The effective sharing of information and knowledge about what is working and what isn’t and build on each other’s experiences, both within Melbourne and by drawing from the international network of 100 Resilient Cities; Participation in actions that correspond to and implement individual council plans; The acknowledgement the issues that occur across municipal boundaries and work together to build long term effective solutions.
Implementation and funding The implementation of the strategy is proposed to be led by a Resilient Melbourne Delivery Office (Office), a unit to be hosted at City of Melbourne for five years, staffed by a cross-section of councils, and jointly funded by City of Melbourne, State agencies (through the Department of Premier and Cabinet) and from the second year onwards, by participating metropolitan councils. The Office will be guided by an expanded Steering Committee comprising representatives from Melbourne’s five sub-regions and will: 1.1. facilitate the projects and commitments in the strategy; 1.2. develop resilience capacities in metropolitan local government; and 1.3. embed resilience principles across metropolitan Melbourne and relevant institutions, as well as determining the appropriate institution to take forward this work over the long term. TIMELINES Following Council considerations across Melbourne the Resilient Melbourne strategy will be launched on 1 June 2016. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 22
Planet – Environmental Sustainability
3.1
RESILIENT MELBOURNE - METROPOLITAN STRATEGY FOR A SUSTAINABLE, LIVEABLE AND PROSPEROUS MELBOURNE cont’d CONCLUSION The Resilient Melbourne Strategy is Melbourne’s first metropolitan wide strategy for a viable, sustainable, liveable and prosperous Melbourne. It is part of the 100 Resilient Cities network (pioneered by the Rockefeller Foundation), and was developed over more than 12 months with input from a project Steering Committee, an expert panel and five council CEOs, the 100 Resilient Cities executive. A consultation phase honed the final strategy, to be launched on 1 June, 2016. Over the initial five year implementation phase, Resilient Melbourne objectives will be achieved through collaboration between disciplines and sectors (industry, NGOs, State and local government) on three flagship actions, 15 supporting actions and 15 aligned local actions.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
2
Attachment 2 Resilient Melbourne Highlights
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 98 272
Page 23
4.1
BANYULE PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 - RESULTS OF PUBLIC EXHIBITION
Author:
Anne North - Senior Strategic Planner, City Development
Ward:
Bakewell
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In February 2014 Council resolved to review the Greensborough Structure Plan by re-examining the development guidelines for Precincts 2, 5 and 6 and translating them into better controls in the planning scheme. This review is strengthening the ‘Vision’ for the Centre with clearer opportunities for development in these precincts. A review of Precincts 2, 5 and 6 has been completed and guidelines were adopted by Council on 30 November 2015. Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C110 proposes to translate the reviewed guidelines into planning scheme provisions, with changes to the details in the Activity Centre Zone (ACZ). These changes were publicly exhibited from 22 March to 3 May 2016. Nine submissions raising issues and seven supporting submissions were received. A summary of submissions is in Attachment 1. It is considered that Council should continue discussions with submitters until the end of June 2016 to address issues raised with remaining unresolved submissions then referred to an Independent Planning Panel. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.
Determines that public exhibition of Amendment C110 is now complete, and no further submissions will be considered for this Amendment.
2.
Continue discussions with submitters to determine final, unresolved submissions and explore beneficial refinements to the exhibited proposal to address issues raised with discussions to be completed by 30 June 2016.
3.
Refer any unresolved submissions remaining after 30 June 2016 to an Independent Planning Panel.
CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “strengthen local activity and employment areas”.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 25
4.1
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.1
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
BANYULE PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 - RESULTS OF PUBLIC EXHIBITION cont’d BACKGROUND Since the 2003 Greensborough Structure Plan was adopted by Council it has become evident that local economic development would be better supported with reviewed development guidelines. In February 2014 Council resolved to do a review of the Greensborough Structure Plan by re-examining the Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines (the Guidelines) for Precincts 2, 5 and 6 and translating any new controls into planning scheme changes. Locality Plan The Locality Plan shows the location of the Precincts in the Activity Centre boundary. The Precincts being reviewed are 2, 5 and 6 and are highlighted on the following plan.
Figure 1: Location of Precincts 2, 5 and 6 within the Greensborough Activity Centre
A review of Precincts 2, 5 and 6 of the Greensborough Structure Plan has been done and revised Guidelines were adopted by Council on 30 November 2015. The Guidelines make changes to building heights and setbacks in these precincts. At the meeting Council also sought the Minister’s Authorisation to prepare and exhibit Planning Scheme Amendment C110 and do pre-amendment consultation with land owners in the Precincts.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 26
BANYULE PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 - RESULTS OF PUBLIC EXHIBITION cont’d On 18 December 2015 a consultation brochure was sent to land-owners in the Precincts (Attachment 2) advising of the preparation and adoption of the Guidelines. The brochure gave an overview of the Guidelines and where to find more information through Council’s website or by contacting Council. On 17 February 2016 the Minister for Planning gave Authorisation to prepare Planning Scheme Amendment C110 (Attachment 3). Public Exhibition then ran from 22 March to 3 May. Notice of this exhibition was sent to landowners and occupiers in the precincts, along with a Community Update Brochure (Attachment 4) that described the various projects in Greensborough that Council is doing. These include: • • • • • •
Pedestrian and road improvements on Grimshaw and Flintoff Street; Main Street streetscape improvements outside Greensborough Plaza; New Council officeaccomodation and commercial office space on top of WaterMarc; Sale of 9-13 Flintoff Street for a new medical centre; Relocation of Greensborough Service Centre and Banyule Bpi (Building Permits) to WaterMarc Increases to free public car parking on Grimshaw Street and at the Henry Street car park.
Support and approvals for new commercial and residential developments including the recently completed Omnico Development on Greensborough Walk and recent approvals for several apartments on Main Street and apartments at Grimshaw/Flintoff Street. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS Amendment C110 has been prepared and exhibited by Banyule Council. If Council resolves to abandon the Amendment or part of the amendment, it could preclude itself from referring the Amendment to an independent panel appointed under Part 8 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions. In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 27
4.1
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.1
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
BANYULE PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 - RESULTS OF PUBLIC EXHIBITION cont’d AMENDMENT C110 Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C110 implements the revised heights, setbacks and landscaping controls of the Greensborough Activity Centre – Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines for Precincts 2, 5 and 6. The Amendment changes the Banyule Planning Scheme as follows: •
Amends the Schedule to Clause 37.08-1 to the Activity Centre Zone with key recommendations.
•
Amends Clause 21.08 to implement the key map changes and include the new reference document Greensborough Activity Centre – Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines for Precincts 2, 5 and 6.
•
Amends the Schedule to Clause 37.08-1 with a new reference document Greensborough Activity Centre – Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines for Precincts 2, 5 and 6.
•
Rezones land at 25 and 27 Howard Street from General Residential Zone 1 to Activity Centre Zone 1.
•
Deletes the Vegetation Protection Overlay 5 from land at 25 and 27 Howard Street.
•
Applies the Parking Overlay to 25, 27 and 29 Howard Street to apply car parking rates across the Greensborough Principal Activity Area.
•
Applies the Environmental Significance Overlay Schedule 4 (ESO4) to land at 38, 40 and 42 Warwick Road, Greensborough
CONSULTATION Initial Information Sessions Information sessions were held with land owners and occupiers in the Precincts at the start of the review in March 2015, when information about the review was shared. The sessions gave local people an opportunity to discuss the Greensborough Activity Centre. Feedback included: • • • • • •
The need for safe pedestrian crossing points at Grimshaw Street, Para Road and Flintoff Street. Potential overshadowing and overlooking by future developments. Increased parking in residential streets, generated from development. Querying how higher built form will revitalise Greensborough. General appearance of the Greensborough Activity Centre. Concern about closure of some retail tenancies in Greensborough.+
Further consultation In December 2015 further consultation about building height and setbacks was done (Attachment 2). A summary of the guidelines was produced to show proposed changes. This leaflet helped explain the guidelines and invited feedback. Letters to landowners explained how to use Council’s website, request more information or prompt a discussion with Council staff. This further consultation included letters to local Members of Parliament, advising of Council’s review of the buildings heights and setbacks and inviting discussions.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 28
BANYULE PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 - RESULTS OF PUBLIC EXHIBITION cont’d Exhibition of Amendment C110 Notice and Exhibition of C110 involved: • • • • • • • •
Letters to all landowners and occupiers in Precincts 2, 5 and 6 as well as neighbouring streets. Greensborough Community Update brochure sent with the Amendment Exhibition letters. Letters to a few people who had shown interest in the initial and further consultation phases. Letters to prescribed Ministers, as per the Planning and Environment Act. Advertising in local Leader Newspapers and the Government Gazette. Information on Council website at http://www.banyule.vic.gov.au/Services/Planning/Banyule-Planning-Schemeand-Amendments/Exhibited-AmendmentsCurrent-Amendments Meetings with interested parties. ‘Drop-In’ session at WaterMarc on Thursday 21 April 2016.
Collectively, the initial Information Sessions, further consultation and the suite of actions for public exhibition, reflect Council’s commitment to ensure effective community participation goes beyond statutory obligations. As a result, a total of 16 written submissions were received. Of these, 7 supported the proposal and 9 want changes or raised issues with the proposal. Initial review of submissions indicates that some of the issues raised in submissions do not directly relate to the proposal. The process of considering submissions is continuing. DISCUSSION The received submissions have been summarised in Attachment 1. Below is a categorisation of the issues raised into seven main themes. Issues 1 - 4 relate to other projects and issues in Greensborough. Issues 5 - 7 relate directly to the proposal. The themed issues are: 1. Traffic and Parking in Warwick Road It is considered that Council’s proposal to impose ‘No Stopping’ signs on the bends in Warwick Road will substantially address concerns about traffic safety in the street. 2. Pedestrian Safety Council is committed to a safer road environment along Grimshaw Street for pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles. These safety improvements will ultimately result in the movement of traffic around the activity centre rather than through it. 3. Proposed Carparks The decision to provide additional free parking in the centre was based on data collated through a Car Parking Management Plan (CPMP) for Greensborough. The CPMP identified the possible provision of additional car parking on Council owned land within the Activity Centre.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 29
4.1
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.1
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
BANYULE PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 - RESULTS OF PUBLIC EXHIBITION cont’d 4. Greensborough needs a facelift and more trees and playgrounds Streetscape improvements are being made to Main Street in front of the Greensborough Plaza. In terms of ‘greening’ Greensborough, Amendment C110 promotes building setbacks that can accommodate existing trees or new trees. The Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines also identify Significant Trees that are to be retained in Precinct 5. 5. Inadequate building heights and unnecessary setbacks The building heights and setbacks proposed are considered to be appropriate to guide permit applicants to achieve outcomes that balance the importance of intensifying development in an activity centre while designing with the topography and the landscape setting. 6.
Proposed three additional properties in the Environmental Significance Overlay 4 (ESO4). The retention of the Significant Tree does not necessarily preclude the development of these sites if an appropriate Tree Protection Zone is enforced. 7.
Removal of Vegetation Protection Overlay Schedule 5 (VPO5) from two properties The only Precinct that is affected by the Vegetation Protection Overlay 5 (VPO5) is Precinct 5 (Southern Residential Precinct). The purpose of removing these two properties from the VPO5 is to achieve consistency with the existing planning controls for Precinct 2. A more detailed response to each of the issues raised can also be found in Attachment 1. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CONCLUSION A review of Precincts 2, 5 and 6 has been completed and guidelines were adopted by Council on 30 November 2015. Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C110 translates the reviewed guidelines into planning scheme provisions, with changes to the details in the Activity Centre Zone (ACZ). These changes were publicly exhibited from 22 March to 3 May 2016. Nine submissions raising issues and six supporting submissions were received. A number of the issues outlined in the written submissions do not relate to the proposed changes to the planning scheme. It would be beneficial to allow further time to meet with submitters and resolve these issues before referring them to an Independent Planning Panel.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 30
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.1
BANYULE PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 - RESULTS OF PUBLIC EXHIBITION cont’d It is anticipated that at least one submission raising issues will be referred to a Panel. This submission asserts that Amendment C110 does not go far enough in terms of encouraging higher built form within the Activity Centre.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Summary of Submissions
273
2
Consultation Brochure - December 2015
279
3
Ministerial Authorisation
281
4
Community Update Brochure - March 2016
283
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page
Page 31
4.2
STATUS OF CLOSURE OF MYRTLE STREET, LINDEN AVENUE AND FORSTER STREET, IVANHOE
Author:
Sanjev Sivananthanayagam - Transport Engineer, City Development
Ward:
Olympia
File:
D16/52520
Previous Items Council on 8 February 2016 (Item 8.2 - Status of Closure of Myrtle Street, Linden Avenue and Forster Street, Heidelberg Heights) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At its meeting on 8 February 2016, Council considered a Notice of Motion in relation to the status of the closure of Myrtle Street, Linden Avenue and Forster Street, Ivanhoe and whether they were formally gazetted as permanent road closures. There are no Council records or Titles Office records to indicate that the closure of Myrtle Street, Linden Avenue and Forster Street, Ivanhoe, were formally gazetted. Notwithstanding, Schedule 11 of the Local Government Act 1989 does not require a notice in the Government Gazette for a road closure to be carried out. Community consultation was undertaken at the time and the road closures were implemented following Council resolution in February 1991. Given the above, it is considered that all necessary steps were undertaken for the closure of Myrtle Street, Linden Avenue and Forster Street, Ivanhoe, and as such they are recognised as permanent road closures. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.
Notes that there are no records of the road closures of Myrtle Street, Linden Avenue and Forster Street, Ivanhoe, being formally gazetted.
2.
Notes that the road closures of Myrtle Street, Linden Avenue and Forster Street, Ivanhoe are recognised as permanent road closures, as necessary steps were undertaken prior to closures as per Schedule 11 of the Local Government Act 1989.
CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “develop and promote safety and resilience in our community”.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 32
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
STATUS OF CLOSURE OF MYRTLE STREET, LINDEN AVENUE AND FORSTER STREET, IVANHOE cont’d HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions. In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. BACKGROUND At its meeting on 8 February 2016, Council considered a Notice of Motion in relation to status of closure of Myrtle Street, Linden Avenue and Forster Street, Ivanhoe. At the meeting it was resolved: “That Council: 1.
Notes that the proposed development at 37-63 Bell Street and 45 Linden Avenue, Ivanhoe may have an impact on traffic in the area.
2.
Receives a report on whether the closure of Myrtle Street, Linden Avenue and Forster Street, Ivanhoe, were formally gazetted as permanent road closures and what would need to happen to make them permanent closures.”
This report responds to item 2 of the above resolution. A locality plan is provided in Figure 1.
Figure 1 – Locality plan
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 33
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
STATUS OF CLOSURE OF MYRTLE STREET, LINDEN AVENUE AND FORSTER STREET, IVANHOE cont’d LEGAL CONSIDERATION Council’s powers over roads is defined under Schedule 11 of the Local Government Act 1989, which allows for the closure of roads. Section 207 of the Act requires a consultation process in accordance with Section 223 of the Act, give public notices and seeking submissions, prior to the closure of a road. More recently under the Road Management Act 2004 all road closures are published in the State Government gazette. The status of the road closures may be drawn into question by surrounding land owners or occupiers and potentially challenged. However regardless of status, Council controls access to its roads via crossover permits and permissions to undertake works. In the absence of these permissions access cannot be obtained. DISCUSSION Following community consultation in Myrtle Street, Linden Avenue and Forster Street, Ivanhoe, Council resolved at its meeting on 29 October 1990 to install road closures in Myrtle Street and Forster Street for a period of three (3) months as a trial. These temporary roads closures were in place from 19 November 1990 to 4 February 1991. In conjunction with these closures, VicRoads closed Linden Avenue for works associated with the Bell-Banksia road project, and at the time this temporary closure was to be retained until about October 1992. Subsequently, after further community consultation, the results of the trial were reported to Council in February 1991, and at the meeting it was resolved: “1.
That Council agree in principle to close the following roads at the specified locations: a) b) c)
Forster Street at Upper Heidelberg Road; Linden Avenue at or near 44 Linden Avenue; Myrtle Street at the southern boundary of the right-of-way parallel to Bell Street.
2.
That upon receipt of responses from the three emergency services, Council commence procedures to close those roads specified in (1) above.
3.
Refer to estimates 1991/92, a sum of $30,000 for construction and landscape works.”
Following this, State Emergency Services were consulted in relation to permanent closures. There are no Council records to indicate that the closure of Myrtle Street, Linden Avenue and Forster Street, Ivanhoe, were formally gazetted. An investigation of Titles Office records was undertaken to seek or locate a copy of a government gazette closing the roads. No road closures gazetting these sections of the streets was able to be located.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 34
STATUS OF CLOSURE OF MYRTLE STREET, LINDEN AVENUE AND FORSTER STREET, IVANHOE cont’d Notwithstanding, Schedule 11 of the Local Government Act 1989 does not require a notice in the Government Gazette for a road closure to be carried out. Given the above, it is considered that all necessary steps were undertaken for the closure of Myrtle Street, Linden Avenue and Forster Street, Ivanhoe, and as such they are recognised as permanent road closures. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CONCLUSION At its meeting on 8 February 2016, Council considered a Notice of Motion in relation to status of closure of Myrtle Street, Linden Avenue and Forster Street, Ivanhoe and whether they were formally gazetted as permanent road closures. There are no Council records or Titles Office records to indicate that the closure of Myrtle Street, Linden Avenue and Forster Street, Ivanhoe, were formally gazetted. Notwithstanding, Schedule 11 of the Local Government Act 1989 does not require a notice in the Government Gazette for a road closure to be carried out. Community consultation was undertaken at the time and the road closures were implemented following Council resolution in February 1991. Given the above, it is considered that all necessary steps were undertaken for the closure of Myrtle Street, Linden Avenue and Forster Street, Ivanhoe, and as such they are recognised as permanent road closures.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 35
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.3
ERECT A CARPORT WITHIN THE FRONT SETBACK ON A LOT LESS THAN 500 SQM AT 1/33 COVENTRY STREET, MONTMORENCY (P1070/2012)
Author:
Amanda Opie - Development Planner, City Development
Ward:
Hawdon
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report considers a planning permit application for the erection of a carport within the front setback of a dwelling on a lot less than 500sqm. It is considered that the proposal fails to adequately address Council’s Residential Neighbourhood Character local policy in respect to the bulk of a carport structure being located within the front setback of the dwelling. It is considered that the application should be refused. RECOMMENDATION That Council having complied with Section 52, 58, 60, 61 and 62 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, issue a Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit in respect of Application No. P1070/2015 for erection of a carport within the front setback of a dwelling on a lot less than 500sqm at 1/33 Coventry Street, Montmorency, on the following ground: Mass, bulk, scale and neighbourhood character 1.
The mass, bulk and scale of the built form of the proposal carport is contrary to both the existing and preferred character of the neighbourhood and would erode the spacious and well landscaped character and have an adverse visual impact on the streetscape contrary to Clause 22.02 - Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy and Standards A1 – Neighbourhood Character and A19 – Design detail of Clause 55 (ResCode) of the Banyule Planning Scheme.
Planning Permit Application:
P1071/2015
Development Planner:
Amanda Opie
Address:
1/33 Coventry Street, Montmorency
Proposal:
Erect a carport within the front setback of a dwelling on a lot less than 500sqm
Existing Use/Development:
Single dwelling
Applicant:
Mont Eltham Drafting
Zoning:
Neighbourhood Residential Zone schedule 3
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 36
4.3
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
ERECT A CARPORT WITHIN THE FRONT SETBACK ON A LOT LESS THAN 500 SQM AT 1/33 COVENTRY STREET, MONTMORENCY (P1070/2012) cont’d Overlays:
Vegetation Protection Overlay schedule 1 Design and Development Overlay schedule 8
Notification (Advertising):
Sign on-site Notices sent to surrounding properties
Objections Received:
Nil
Ward:
Hawdon
BACKGROUND/HISTORY Details of previous planning applications for the site are as follows: P432/1995 permit issued 14/12/1995 allowed for the construction of two additional dwellings at the rear of an existing dwelling (3 units). This permit approved the provision of two open car spaces within the front setback of the existing dwelling (subject site). P150/1996 permit issued on 04/06/1996 allowed for the three (3) lot subdivision of the land. The approval created lot 1 which is the subject site, a total area of 388sqm. P772/2011 a permit was issued on 21 May 2011 for an extension of the subject dwelling. It is noted that this application originally included a carport within the front setback of the dwelling (similar in design to the current proposal). However, at the time indicated that the carport would not be supported on neighbourhood character grounds, and a condition of approval of the double storey extension required that the carport be removed. The extension of the dwelling has since been completed. LEGAL CONSIDERATION The process for considering a Planning Permit matter and the decision by Council must be in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. In this case compliance with Section 52, 58, 60, 61 and 62 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 is relevant. PROPOSAL It is proposed to erect a double carport adjacent to the front southern elevation of the dwelling to be accessed via a shared driveway along the eastern side boundary. The proposed carport is 6m wide and 6m long. The hipped roofline of the existing dwelling would be extended out to cover the carport. The maximum height of the carport is 4.6m high. The proposed carport is to be setback a minimum of 1.54m from Coventry Street, 2.15m from the western side boundary and 9.2m from the eastern side boundary. The dwelling is the original house (with frontage to Coventry Street) that has been retained with two further dwellings constructed to the rear. The dwellings were subdivided in 1996 creating the subject site of 388sqm. Under the controls of the Clause 32.09-4 NRZ3 a planning permit is required to construct or extend a dwelling on a lot less than 500sqm.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 37
4.3
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.3
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
ERECT A CARPORT WITHIN THE FRONT SETBACK ON A LOT LESS THAN 500 SQM AT 1/33 COVENTRY STREET, MONTMORENCY (P1070/2012) cont’d The original multi-unit approval allowed for the provision of two open car spaces within the front setback of the subject site (P432/1995 approved in 1996). It is noted that there was no Neighbourhood Character local policy in place at the time the original multi-unit development, including car spaces within the front setback, was supported. The dwelling was altered in 2011 with the construction of a second storey extension (P772/2011). The current application is seeking approval to erect a double carport with a hipped roofline similar in design of the carport which was previously not supported and was deleted from the plans approved under permit P772/2011. SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA
Figure 1
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Locality Plan
Page 38
ERECT A CARPORT WITHIN THE FRONT SETBACK ON A LOT LESS THAN 500 SQM AT 1/33 COVENTRY STREET, MONTMORENCY (P1070/2012) cont’d
Figure 2
View of 1/33 Coventry from the street
Figure 3
Proposed location of carport
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION It was considered that the proposal may cause material detriment to surrounding properties, and as such public notification was conducted by means of erecting a sign on the site and posting notices to the owners and occupiers of surrounding properties. No objections have been received.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 39
4.3
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.3
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
ERECT A CARPORT WITHIN THE FRONT SETBACK ON A LOT LESS THAN 500 SQM AT 1/33 COVENTRY STREET, MONTMORENCY (P1070/2012) cont’d PLANNING CONTROLS Table 1: Planning Controls Control Neighbourhood Residential Zone schedule 3 Vegetation Protection Overlay – Schedule 5 Car Parking ResCode
Clause 32.09-4 42.02 52.06 54
Permit Triggered Yes No No Yes
POLICIES CONSIDERED Relevant policies considered in the assessment of this proposal are outlined in Table 2 below: Table 2: Relevant Planning Scheme Policy Policy State Planning Policy Framework Settlement Built Environment and Heritage (including sub clauses) Housing (including sub clauses) Local Planning Policy Framework Land Use Built Environment (Limited Incremental area) Local Places Residential Neighbourhood Character – Bush Garden (East) Precinct Safer Design Policy
Clause 11 15 16 21.04 21.06 21.08 22.02 22.03
Attachment 1 includes a copy of the plans and elevations. A complete assessment of the proposal against the relevant planning policy is detailed in Attachment 2 to this report. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION It is considered that the proposed double carport should not be supported on neighbourhood character grounds. The mass and bulk of the proposed carport within the front setback will be dominant within the streetscape and detract from the landscape setting of the street. Mass, bulk, scale and neighbourhood character Under Council’s Residential Neighbourhood Character local policy the subject site is located within a Bush Garden (East) Precinct. An objective of the local policy is: To minimise excavation for vehicle access, loss of front garden space, and dominance of vehicle access, vehicle storage facilities and built form as viewed from the street.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 40
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.3
ERECT A CARPORT WITHIN THE FRONT SETBACK ON A LOT LESS THAN 500 SQM AT 1/33 COVENTRY STREET, MONTMORENCY (P1070/2012) cont’d The original multi-unit permit for the site allowed for the provision of two (2) open car spaces within the front setback of the dwelling. While it is noted that other dwellings within the streetscape have carports located forward or partially forward of the dwellings (35, 39 and 43 Coventry Street), it is considered that this is not a predominant characteristic of Coventry Street and the proposal for a carport to be setback 1.54m from the street boundary is a precedent that should not be supported. To reduce the impact of the proposed carport within the streetscape the applicant was encouraged to revise the plans to provide a single carport with a flat roof and one open car space. It was considered that this would be a less invasive proposal and allowed for at least one car space to be covered. The applicant opted to proceed with the plans as originally submitted rather than amend the proposal as recommended. The proposed carport is not supported on neighbourhood character grounds due to the bulk and scale of the carport structure. The proposed hipped roofline and reduced front setback will result in the structure being dominant when viewed from the street. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CONCLUSION The proposed development has not achieved an appropriate level of compliance with the relevant State and Local Planning Policies and has failed to adequately address key objectives of Council’s Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy and Clause 54 of the Banyule Planning Scheme as detailed in the attachment to this report. As such, the application should not be supported.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
1/33 Coventry Street, Montmorency - P1070/2015 - Plans and Elevations
287
2
1/33 Coventry Street, Montmorency - P1070/2015 - Planning Controls Assessment
291
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page
Page 41
4.4
NAMING OF THE NEW PUBLIC OPEN SPACE BETWEEN BONAR AND HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS
Author:
Nicola Rooks - Project Support Officer, City Development
Ward:
Olympia
Previous Items Council on 2 February 2015 (Item 2.1 - Naming Options: Haig Street Development Site) Council on 18 April 2016 (Item 4.2 - Renaming the Reserve in Casey Crescent, Viewbank) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At its meeting on 2 February 2015, Council resolved to “Initiate a consultative exercise to name the public open space between Bonar Street and Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights nearer to the finalisation of its construction and present finding to a future meeting of Council”. Consistent with the resolution and content of the Council report the local community was consulted on the proposal to name the new reserve in honour of the late Vin Heffernan OAM. Consultation closed on 15 April 2016. This report provides an overview of the consultation undertaken and seeks Council support for naming the new reserve ‘Vin Heffernan Park’. RECOMMENDATION That: 1.
At the appropriate time, a formal submission be lodged with the Office of Geographic Names to name the new public open space between Haig Street and Bonar Street, Heidelberg Heights, ‘Vin Heffernan Park’.
2.
Following the outcome of the submission to the Office of Geographic Names the local community and relevant authorities be advised of the renaming.
3.
Appropriate identification signage be placed at ‘Vin Heffernan Park’ after the park landscape works are completed.
CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “celebrate and promote Banyule’s diversity and heritage”.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 42
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
NAMING OF THE NEW PUBLIC OPEN SPACE BETWEEN BONAR AND HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS cont’d HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with the Charter and consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions. In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. BACKGROUND A central component of the development site situated at 52 Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights, is 2,400m2 of new public open space located in the heart of that site, as indicated on the plan in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1: New public open space (shown hatched yellow), Haig Street Development Site, 52 Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights
The new public open space is to be developed by Metricon who are the developers of the new residential estate under construction. After the maintenance period of 12 months, management and ongoing maintenance of the new public open space will become Council’s responsibility. At its meeting on 2 February 2015, Council resolved to “Initiate a consultative exercise to name the public open space between Bonar Street and Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights nearer to the finalisation of its construction and present finding to a future meeting of Council”. CURRENT SITUATION Naming of the new public open space is dependent on renaming the current Vin Heffernan Reserve in Casey Crescent, Viewbank in order to release that name.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 43
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
NAMING OF THE NEW PUBLIC OPEN SPACE BETWEEN BONAR AND HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS cont’d Public consultation on renaming the reserve at Casey Crescent has been completed and a report was presented to Council on 18 April 2016. A notification and objection period must now occur before Council can formally submit a renaming request to the Office of Geographic Names (OGN). At the time of writing this report it is anticipated the request to rename the reserve at Casey Crescent will be submitted on 24 May 2016. Approval from OGN should then be received by early June 2016. A formal proposal to rename the new public open space can be submitted once gazettal confirmation is received on the renaming of the reserve in Casey Crescent. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS Council is a naming authority responsible for the development of proposals to name or rename any feature, road or locality within Council’s jurisdiction as provided in the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010 (Guidelines). The Guidelines are provided for under the Geographic Place Names Act 1998 and are mandatory for all naming authorities in Victoria. The proposal to name this public open space conforms to the relevant principles in Sections 1 and 2 of the Guidelines. The Registrar of the Office of Geographic Names (OGN) has the authority to approve, defer or reject naming proposals for entry in VICNAMES, which is the online register of Geographic Names. CONSULTATION Consultation on the proposed name for the new public open space occurred in conjunction with consultation on the design and composition of the site. The following consultation was undertaken: • • • • • •
Flyer sent to 479 local property owners and residents (see attachment 1) Flyer sent to purchasers of the 117 new dwellings Information on Councils website including a community consultation listing on the home page Flyer sent to two local children’s centres Drop in session held 5-7pm, 16 March 2016, at Council Chambers, Ivanhoe Article in the Heidelberg Leader, 29 March 2016
Consultation closed on 15 April 2016 with a total of four responses on the naming proposal being received. A summary of responses is provided below: Proposal to name the open space in honour of Vin Heffernan 1 Support 1 No preference 2 Opposed The response rate to the naming proposal was very low. Four responses out of 598 represents 0.67% of the population surveyed and two objections only represent 0.33% of total population surveyed.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 44
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.4
NAMING OF THE NEW PUBLIC OPEN SPACE BETWEEN BONAR AND HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS cont’d The two responses opposed to the naming proposal suggested names with a connection to nature or indigenous plants/trees would be preferable to naming after a former Councillor/State Government Member of Parliament. If there was strong opposition to the naming proposal within the local community it is expected the number of responses received would have been much higher. In this instance it is considered reasonable to conclude that community objection to the naming proposal is minimal. Council is now in a position to proceed with the proposal to name the new public open space ‘Vin Heffernan Park’, subject to the OGN finalising the renaming of the reserve in Casey Crescent. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CONCLUSION Consultation with the local community does not indicate strong opposition to the proposal to name the new public open space. Council should support the proposal to name the new public open space ‘Vin Heffernan Park’, subject to the OGN finalising the renaming of the reserve in Casey Crescent, Viewbank.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Community Update - Haig Street open space and naming - March 2016
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page
Page 45
298
4.5
HEIDELBERG ROAD, IVANHOE - NEW PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
Author:
David Bailey - Engineering Co-Ordinator, City Development
Ward:
Griffin
4.5
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
Previous Items Council on 8 February 2016 (Item 8.1 - New Pedestrian Crossing - Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe, near The Boulevard) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council wrote to the Minister for Roads and Road Safety and VicRoads on 22 March 2016 requesting that consideration be given to the provision of a new formalised pedestrian crossing facility on Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe, in the vicinity of The Boulevard. The Minister has responded, confirming that VicRoads will investigate the provision of a new pedestrian crossing facility on Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe, near The Boulevard. RECOMMENDATION That Council note that a letter has been received from the Minister for Roads and Road Safety confirming that VicRoads will investigate the provision of a new pedestrian crossing facility on Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe, near The Boulevard.
CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “develop and promote safety and resilience in our community”. BACKGROUND At its meeting on 8 February 2016, Council resolved to write to the Minister for Roads and Road Safety and VicRoads requesting that consideration be given to the provision of a new formalised pedestrian crossing facility on Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe in the vicinity of The Boulevard. LEGAL CONSIDERATION VicRoads has care and responsibility for declared Main Roads under the Road Management Act 2004, and is therefore responsible for the traffic management on Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe. VicRoads also grants permission to install traffic signals as a Major Traffic Control Item under the Road Management Act 2004. Accordingly Council of its own volition cannot install pedestrian operated signals on Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 46
4.5
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
HEIDELBERG ROAD, IVANHOE - NEW PEDESTRIAN CROSSING cont’d HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions. In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CONCLUSION Following Council’s letter to the Minister for Roads and Road Safety and VicRoads requesting that consideration be given to the provision of a new formalised pedestrian crossing facility on Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe, in the vicinity of The Boulevard. The Minister has responded, confirming that VicRoads will investigate the provision of the crossing facility.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Response from Minister 12 May 2016
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 300
Page 47
4.6
GRIMSHAW STREET / FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH, INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT FUNDING
Author:
Ana Caicedo - Traffic & Transport Team Leader, City Development
Ward:
Bakewell
4.6
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
Previous Items Council on 15 December 2014 (Item 8.1 - Grimshaw Street / Flintoff Street Greensborough - Pedestrian Safety) Council on 7 September 2015 (Item 4.2 - Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough - Proposed Traffic Treatment) Council on 30 November 2015 (Item 4.5 - Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough - Proposed Traffic Treatment) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At its meeting on 30 November 2015 Council resolved to approve a design for the reconfiguration of the intersection of Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough, including the installation of pedestrian operated signals. Council included $400,000 in the draft 2016-17 budget ($300,000 Council and $100,000 Transport Accident Commission (TAC) funding) to part fund the project. Council sought financial support from the State Government for the delivery of the project on a 50/50 basis given that Grimshaw Street is a declared Main Road under the care and responsibility of VicRoads. The project was not included within the Victorian State Budget for 2016-17, which means that Council must now decide how to proceed. The high concentration of trip attractors in the area generates a great number of pedestrian and cyclist movements. This, coupled with the high volume and speed of vehicles on Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, increases the risk and severity of pedestrian and cyclist crashes. It is considered appropriate that Council continue to pursue the delivery of the project during the 2016-17 financial year due to the importance of the project to the Activity Centre. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.
Write to the local members of State Parliament expressing Council’s disappointment that, despite Council’s commitment to fund half of the important road safety project at Grimshaw Street / Flintoff Street, Greensborough, it was not funded in the State budget. The letter is to request that all State Government opportunities are explored to fund the project within the 2016-17 financial year.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 48
GRIMSHAW STREET / FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH, INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT FUNDING cont’d 2.
Write to the Regional Director of VicRoads Northern Metropolitan Region requesting that VicRoads deliver the Grimshaw Street / Flintoff Street, Greensborough, intersection improvement project in the 2016-17 financial year should funding become available. The delivery is to include Council staff in the governance arrangements of the project.
3.
Write to the Federal Government requesting a contribution towards funding the Grimshaw Street / Flintoff Street, Greensborough, intersection improvement project as many pedestrians crossing at this location originate from or are destined for the CentreLink building on Grimshaw Street.
CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “maintain and improve Banyule as a great place to live”. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions. In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. BACKGROUND The Greensborough Activity Centre is a high pedestrian and bicycle activity area. The precinct includes the Main Street Shopping Precinct, the Greensborough Plaza, Centrelink, a Community Health Centre and other medical suites, one of Council’s service centres, and WaterMarc. It is well served by public transport with eight bus routes and the Hurstbridge Railway Line connecting the Centre to the City. The Lower Plenty River Bicycle Trail runs along the east side of the Centre and some roads in the area are part of Principal Bicycle Network, and Council’s Local Bicycle Network. The high concentration of trip attractors generates a great number of pedestrian and cyclist movements in the area. This, coupled with the high volume and speed of vehicles on Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, increases the risk and severity of pedestrian and cyclist crashes. The need for improvements to road safety in the area is supported by regular correspondence received by Council from residents and visitors. The intersection of Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street (Figure 1) is a particular focus due to vehicle speeds and volumes, and pedestrian sightlines.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 49
4.6
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.6
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
GRIMSHAW STREET / FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH, INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT FUNDING cont’d
Figure 1. Location of Proposed Works Following Council providing ‘in-principle’ support for a concept design for a safe pedestrian crossing across Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough, at its meeting on 7 September 2015, meetings have been held between interested Councillors, Council Staff, the State Member for Bundoora and VicRoads. At its meeting on 30 November 2015, Council considered a report on the outcome of the meetings and a reviewed design for the intersection. At the meeting, it was resolved: “That Council: 1.
Approves the attached functional design for Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough, and formally submits the design to VicRoads for approval. The functional design includes: • • • • • •
Reconfiguration of the Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street intersection and inclusion of pedestrian operated signals. Installation of a pedestrian crossing point on Grimshaw Street, between Stubley Court and Eldale Avenue. Installation of a pedestrian crossing point on Flintoff Street, midblock between Grimshaw Street and Para Road. Reduction of the effective road width of Grimshaw Street, between Church Street and Stubley Court. Installation of bicycle lanes along Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street. Redesign of the Flintoff Street and Para Road intersection to include a pedestrian crosswalk on the eastern approach and a double left turn lane on the northern approach.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 50
GRIMSHAW STREET / FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH, INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT FUNDING cont’d 2.
Accepts the Transport Accident Commission (TAC) grant of $100,000 for pedestrian and cyclist safety improvements at the Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street intersection in Greensborough, and agrees to allocate $100,000 of match funding for the intersection improvements in the 2016/17 capital works budget.
3.
Allocates a further $200,000 in the 2016/17 financial year for the implementation of works associated with the functional design for Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough in the 2016/2017 capital works budget on the basis that the State Government / VicRoads provides $400,000 on a 50/50 basis for the 2016/2017 financial year towards the project.
4.
Writes to the Minister for Transport, VicRoads and the local State Member seeking support for the functional design for Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough and requesting State funding for $400,000 on a 50/50 basis for the 2016/2017 financial year.”
Accordingly, Council sought the State Government’s financial support for the delivery of the project. LEGAL CONSIDERATION Grimshaw Street, Greensborough, is a declared Main Road with VicRoads being the Coordinating Road Authority under the Road Management Act 2004. Accordingly, VicRoads approval is required to undertake works on Grimshaw Street. The installation of traffic signals also requires VicRoads approval as they are Major Traffic Control Items under the Road Safety Act 1986. Council routinely provides funding for road safety improvements on local roads that are its responsibility, and is therefore addressing road safety issues. CURRENT SITUATION The State Government announced its 2016-17 budget in May 2016. VicRoads has indicated that the project “was in the list under the Business Case for the Optimising Transport Network Performance & Productivity program that did not get further funding in the recent budget.” FUNDING IMPLICATIONS In order to bridge the funding gap of $400,000 for the project Council should continue to seek a contribution from the State Government as a discretionary spend within budget allocations or from its reserves. A contribution could also be sought from the Federal Government as many of the pedestrians crossing at this location have the CentreLink building on Grimshaw Street as their origin or destination. It is unlikely that such a request would be supported as VicRoads is responsible for Grimshaw Street and its intersection with Flintoff Street.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 51
4.6
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.6
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
GRIMSHAW STREET / FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH, INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT FUNDING cont’d Alternatively, if additional funds are not received from the State or Federal Governments Council could chose to fully fund the project itself, either from reserves or by re-allocating funds in the 2016-17 budget. A re-allocation of funds could be accommodated by deferring a package of projects that have been identified in Council’s draft budget. DISCUSSION The intersection of Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street provides a significant role in the viability of the Greensborough Activity Centre, as there are significant land uses on either side. It is the gateway between the residential area to the south with the retail and commercial core of the centre via Greensborough Walk. WaterMarc is a significant destination immediately to the north of the intersection with the medical precinct to the south and CentreLink to the east on Grimshaw Street itself. Much of the parking for Greensborough is located off Flintoff Street, which generates vehicle and pedestrian trips. The intersection itself has a complicated alignment that prioritises the movement of traffic over other modes. In recent times the level of pedestrian activity has increased dramatically due to the development of the WaterMarc aquatic facility, the CentreLink building and medical precinct to the south of Grimshaw Street. Despite the speed limit being reduced to 40km/h there is an increase risk of pedestrian crashes at the intersection. To make the intersection safer it is proposed to install a signalised crossing across both Flintoff Street and Grimshaw Street, and make alternations to the configuration to slow vehicles down and improve sight lines. While funding has not been allocated by the State Government in the 2016-17 State budget the project is considered to be a priority for Council, and every avenue for funding should be explored. If funding is made available, VicRoads are best placed to deliver the project and they should be requested to do so. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CONCLUSION For a number of years, Council has worked toward the provision of a safer road environment at the intersection of Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough. In 2015, a design for the area was endorsed by Council and support from the State Government was sought for the delivery of the project. However, the project was not included within the Victorian State Budget for 2016-17.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 52
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.6
GRIMSHAW STREET / FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH, INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT FUNDING cont’d The high concentration of trip attractors in the area generates a great number of pedestrian and cyclist movements. This, coupled with the high volume and speed of vehicles on Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, increases the risk and severity of pedestrian and cyclist crashes. It is considered appropriate that Council pursues funding for the project from the State and Federal Governments so that it can be delivered during the 2016-17 financial year. If additional funding cannot be achieved, Council could consider undertaking the project from its own resources. Should funding be made available it would be appropriate for VicRoads North West Metropolitan Region to deliver the project, and they should be requested to do so.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street - Concept Plan endorsed by Council December 2015
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page
Page 53
303
4.7
REALLOCATION OF 2015/2016 LOCAL ROADS RESURFACING PROGRAM FUNDING
Author:
Claudia Oqueli - Engineer, Assets & City Services
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council, through the 2015/2016 Capital Works Budget process allocated a total of $1,992,000 to the resurfacing of local roads. To date $1,751,229 has been spent leaving $240,770 currently underspent. This under expenditure is mainly due to the requirement to defer two roads while utility works are being completed. In conjunction to the above funding Council receives funding under the Roads to Recovery program each year from The Department of Infrastructure and Transport, the funding award for the 2016/2017 totals $1,276,388. Council has an obligation to fully expend all allocated fund received within the allocated year. The purpose of this report is to seek Council approval for the reallocation of the underspent $240,770 of Local Roads resurfacing funding within 2015/16 Capital Works Budget to roads identified in the 2016/17 capital works resurfacing program. It further seeks to approve the consideration of additional roads in the draft 2016/17 capital works budget. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.
Reallocate the available funds from the 2015/2016 Local Roads Resurfacing Program to the following resurfacing projects: a. b. c. d. e. f. g.
2.
Beverley Road, Viewbank Bonds Road, Lower Plenty Carmichael Street, Ivanhoe East Clifton Grove, Ivanhoe East Derwent Place, Watsonia North Russel Street, Greensborough Sherbourne Road, Montmorency
Consider the inclusion in the draft 2016/2017 Local Roads Resurfacing Program the following Roads: a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h.
Milton Court, Heidelberg Heights Tobruk Avenue, Heidelberg West Leonard Crescent, Bundoora Mountain View Road, Montmorency Eileen Street, Viewbank Leslie Court, Lower Plenty Rhonda Court, Bundoora Paragrene Court, Montmorency
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 54
4.7
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
REALLOCATION OF 2015/2016 LOCAL ROADS RESURFACING PROGRAM FUNDING cont’d CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “maintain and improve Banyule as a great place to live”. BACKGROUND In 2015/2016 Council allocated as part of the capital works program a total of $1,992,000 for the resurfacing of Local Roads. In the same year the Department of Infrastructure and Transport as part of the Roads to Recovery Program, allocated Council a total of $1,276,388. Roads to Recovery conditions outline Council’s obligation to also source funds for road projects, equal to or greater than the amount received, and to ensure that the allocated funds must be fully spent within the awarded year. Due to some of the programed resurfacing works being deferred as a direct result of utility works being conducted within these roads and also savings in the overall programme, an under spend of $240,770 has been identified. The two streets that have been deferred are; •
Milton Court, Heidelberg Heights, requires the removal and relocation of a condemned electrical pole which has impede the repairs to the kerb and channel. The Service authority has not confirmed the schedule time for the works. The project will be deferred to 2016/17 resurfacing program.
•
Paragrene Court, Montmorency, requires the removal of a Gum Tree which has created extensive damage to the pavement, kerb and footpath. Parks and Gardens department is assessing the tree. The project will be deferred to 2016/17 resurfacing program.
The identified savings and deferrals have created an underspend $240,770 of Local Roads Resurfacing funding for this financial year.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 55
4.7
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.7
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
REALLOCATION OF 2015/2016 LOCAL ROADS RESURFACING PROGRAM FUNDING cont’d Council officers have undertaken a review of the four year Capital Works resurfacing program and recommend the following projects are brought forward and completed utilising the underspent funding. The decision to bring forward the resurfacing of these streets is to ensure that Councils assets renewal target is achieved. •
• • • • • •
Beverley Rd, Viewbank from Louise St to Faye St $69,620 (It is programed to resurface the south section of Beverley Road as part of the 2015/2016 program in June 2016, it has been identified that an opportunity to undertake the above section at the same time will provide potential savings to Council and create less traffic disruptions to the residents and road users over a shorter period of time). Bonds Rd, Lower Plenty from Stawell Rd to Rosehill Rd $64,970. Carmichael St, Ivanhoe from York Av to Maltravers Rd $19,665. Clifton Gv, Ivanhoe from Ivanhoe Pde to Waterdale Rd $14,235. Derwent Pl, Watsonia from Hakea St to Cul-de-sac (W) $13,360. Russell St, Greensborough from Warralong Av to Elder St $19,015. Sherbourne Rd, Montmorency from Baldwin Av to Elmo Rd $39,905 (It is programed to resheet a section of Sherbourne Road as part of the 2015/2016 Roads to Recovery program so there are opportunities to undertake the works, providing potential savings to Council).
All the above roads can be completed by 30th June 2016. As these roads have been brought forward there will be funds available in the draft 2016/17 resurfacing program in the capital works project. As such, a number of projects from future years can be considered in the 2016/17 resurfacing project as outlined below: • • • • • • • •
Tobruk Avenue, Heidelberg West Leonard Crescent, Bundoora Mountain View Road, Montmorency Eileen Street, Viewbank Leslie Court, Lower Plenty Rhonda Court, Bundoora Paragrene Court, Montmorency (deferred from the 2015/16 program) Milton Court, Heidelberg Heights (deferred from the 2015/16 program)
LEGAL CONSIDERATION There are no direct legal implications arising from the recommendation contained in this report. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions. In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 56
REALLOCATION OF 2015/2016 LOCAL ROADS RESURFACING PROGRAM FUNDING cont’d FUNDING IMPLICATIONS Council has an obligation to fully expend all allocated fund received from the Department of Infrastructure and Transport as part of the Roads to Recovery program within the allocated year. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CONCLUSION It is recommended that Council supports the reallocation of the identified underspent funds in the current 2015/2016 Local Resurfacing Program to the resurfacing of Beverley Road, Bonds Road, Carmichael Street, Clifton Grove, Derwent Place, Russell Street, Sherbourne Road. It is also recommended that the deferred projects, Milton Court, Heidelberg Heights, and Paragrene Court, Montmorency, are programmed into the 2016/17 budget. In addition the following roads be considered for funding in the draft 2016/17 capital works budget: Tobruk Avenue, Leonard Crescent, Mountain View Road, Eileen Street, Leslie Court and Rhonda Court.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 57
4.7
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
5.1
5.1
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED
Authors: Tania O'Reilly - Manager Finance & Procurement, Corporate Services & Peter Utri – Manager Organisational Systems, Corporate Services Previous Items Council on 18 April 2016 (Item 6.3 - Preparation of City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4)) Council on 18 April 2016 (Item 6.4 - Preparation of Budget for Period 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is to enable Council to formally hear and consider written submissions received regarding the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 and the Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4). At the Council Meeting on 18 April 2016, Council resolved to give notice for ‘Preparation of Budget for period 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017’ and ‘Preparation of City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4)’. Subsequently, Council commenced the public exhibition period in accordance with the Local Government Act 1989. Copies of the proposed Budget 2016/2017 and City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4) were made available for community consideration from 19 April 2016 to 19 May 2016, enabling members of the community to provide formal written submissions. Copies of the plans were available via Council’s website, customer service centres, local libraries and neighbourhood houses. Two public information sessions were held during this period, in Greensborough and Ivanhoe. The public notice informed the community of Council’s intention to adopt Banyule’s City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4) and Budget 2016/2017 at a Council Meeting on Tuesday, 14 June 2016. Formal submissions were received until close of business on Thursday 19 May 2016, with thirty five (35) formal submissions received in relation to the Budget and City Plan. This report provides summary information on the submissions received to date. Full copies of all submissions have been provided to Councillors for their information and review prior to the 30 May 2016 Council Meeting. All eligible submitters have been informed of their right to be heard regarding their submission, on the night they are considered by Council.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 59
5.1
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d RECOMMENDATION That: 1.
Council receives, hears and considers the submissions in respect of Council’s intention to adopt the proposed Budget 2016/2017 and proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4) in accordance with sections 125, 129, and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989.
2.
Following the adoption of the Budget 2016/2017 and Banyule City Plan 20132017 (Year 4), Council write to submitters advising of the outcomes of their submissions.
CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “engage meaningfully with our community” and “Provide responsible financial management and business planning processes”. BACKGROUND The report is to inform Council about written submissions received for the proposed Budget 2016/2017 and proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4). Council uses this forum to enable its community to raise any matters in response to the proposed City Plan and Budget. At the Council Meeting on 18 April 2016, notice was given for the ‘Preparation of Budget for period 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017’ and the ‘Preparation of City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4)’, including notification of the public exhibition period. In summary, the public notice has informed the community that: •
‘The City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4) be the proposed Council Plan prepared by Council for the purposes of Sections 125 and 126 of the Local Government Act 1989.’
•
‘The proposed Budget 2016/2017 be the Budget (for the financial year 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017) prepared by Council for the purposes of Section 127 of the Local Government Act 1989.’
•
‘Council will hold a Council Meeting at 7.45pm Monday 30 May 2016 to hear and consider submissions on the proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4) and the proposed Budget 2016/2017.’
•
‘Council will hold a Council Meeting at 7.45pm Tuesday 14 June 2016 to consider adopting the proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4) and the proposed Budget 2016/2017’ (This is in accordance with sections 125, 126 and 130 of the Local Government Act 1989)
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 60
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
5.1
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d The public notice advertisement also informed the community of the following: • • • •
Any person making a submission must state in the submission that he or she wishes to appear in person, or to be represented by a person specified in the submission, at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on Monday 30 May 2016 details about how and where to make a submission details about accessing the proposed Budget and proposed City Plan information about Information Sessions held for the community.
Copies of the proposed Budget 2016/2017 and City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4) were made available for community comment from 19 April 2016 to 19 May 2016, available via Council’s website and customer service centres, local libraries and neighbourhood houses. Two public meetings regarding the proposed City Plan and Budget were held between 6:00pm and 7:00pm on the following dates at the following locations. Date Thursday 28 April 2016 Thursday 5 May 2016
Venue WaterMarc Community Meeting Room, 1 Flintoff Street, Greensborough Tom Roberts Room, 275 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe
As at the conclusion of the public exhibition period, at 5.00pm on Thursday 19 May 2016, thirty five (35) formal submissions had been received in relation to the proposed Budget and City Plan. All submissions received have been incorporated into this report and are presented for Council consideration. Any late submissions received between the development of this report and the consideration of submissions by Council on the night will be presented but will not be able to be heard through the section 223 process. A summary of all submissions received to date is contained within this report. Submissions are de-identified to the public where privacy concerns are evident. All Councillors receive copies of all the full submissions for consideration. LEGAL CONSIDERATION The required statutory notice appeared on Council’s website on Tuesday 19 April 2016, and in ‘The Age’ on Wednesday 20 April 2016. This was supported with a copy of the public notice being placed in local papers the following week, along with a Banyule in Brief advertorial during April. Copies of the proposed Budget 2016/2017 and proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4) were then made available for community comment from 19 April 2016 to 19 May 2016, available via Council’s website and customer service centres, local libraries and neighbourhood houses. The public exhibition period is a statutory requirement under the Local Government Act 1989, and enables members of the community to make formal submissions under section 223 of the Act.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 61
5.1
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d In accordance with the provisions of Section 223 of the Act, submitters have been provided with the opportunity to be heard and address Council in support of their submissions. Council must consider any submissions on a proposal (or proposals) contained in the proposed Budget and City Plan (Council Plan) in accordance with the Local Government Act 1989. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions. In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter of the City Plan does not raise any human rights issues but enhances the human rights of our community. As a part of Council’s commitment to community engagement, the City Plan and Budget have been developed through extensive consultation and engagement. This process of community involvement has promoted and facilitated specific rights outlined in the Charter, namely the right to take part in public life and the right to freedom of expression. The preparation and adoption of Council’s Budget facilitates the protection of many of our communities’ Human Rights as funding for many Council projects, programs and initiatives is directly related to protecting and enhancing the Human Rights of our community. Council continues to work on behalf of its community to ensure the upholding of Human Rights for all.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 62
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
5.1
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED City Plan and Budget Submissions The submissions received are presented in a summary form. Full copies of all submissions have been made available to Councillors prior to this meeting. Submission
Summary
1.
Comments regarding the initial draft of the proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4)
Submission from a member of the community.
The proponent has provided feedback on the initial draft City Plan (available during 22 March – 5 April 2016) and outlined suggestions relating to the following: • Inclusion of top priorities at the front of the plan • Advocating to other levels of government to address priority issues such as traffic volumes and public transport and parking (with specific examples included) • The need for continued access to Council services in the South, particularly for older residents. An initial response has been provided to the proponent providing reference to the Integrated Transport Plan and the Ivanhoe Civic Precinct Master Plan, and outlining Council’s intention to retain a Customer Service presence in Ivanhoe following the move to One Flintoff, Greensborough in early 2017. The proponent has thanked Council for this response and has suggested some enhancement to the front section of the initial draft City Plan, for example an executive summary. The proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4) includes the’ Mayor and Chief Executive Officer Overview’, which follows the format of an executive summary, and highlights Council’s areas of emphasis and priority key initiatives.
2.
3.
Submission on behalf of Riverland Conservation Society Inc
Tree planting in Burgundy Street Heidelberg Shopping Centre
Submission from a member of the community.
Animal permit fees and Animal registration fees
The proponent requests that Council allocate budget monies in 2016 for tree planting in Burgundy Street, Heidelberg Shopping Centre.
This submission is in support of the proposed Budget 2016/2017 as it relates to the reduction in permit fees for excess animals. The proponent also highlights that there is no cease of fees for animals that are 10 years of age and over, and requests this be reviewed by Council.
4.
Submission from a member of the community.
Lighting and Traffic infrastructure works The submission is a request for the following works to be included in the proposed Budget 2016/2017: 1. Installation of a public light in the laneway from Norman Street to Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 63
5.1
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d Submission
Summary 2. Reconstruction of roadway intersection of Kenmare Street and Lambourn Road, Watsonia (under the heading of Localised Traffic Infrastructure). (Note: Item 1 above is supported by Submission No. 35)
5.
Submission from the President, Plenty Valley Cricket Club and President, Watsonia Football Club
Installation of fencing at AK Lines Reserve The submission is a joint request for the installation of improved fencing around the ground at AK Lines Reserve (for the benefit of both the cricket and football clubs). The proponents have obtained an initial quote of approximately $30,000 for the works. The submission is presented in support of $20,000 in the proposed Budget 2016/2017, carried forward from 2015/2016. It suggests that the allocated funds be prioritised and used for fencing rather than outfield works which are also required. The proponents have confirmed both the tenant sporting clubs will contribute $2,500 each, a total of $5,000 towards this project. Therefore the proponents request an additional $5,000 to enable the fencing works to be undertaken in 2016/2017.
6.
7.
Submission on behalf of Banyule Community Health (BCH)
Ongoing part time Aboriginal Community Development role for the Banyule Aboriginal Gathering Space (Babarrbunin Beek)
8. Two (2) submissions Submission from the President, Watsonia Traders Association (WTA) on behalf of businesses in the Watsonia Shopping Centre and the WTA, and a submission on behalf of WTA.
Watsonia Shopping Centre – Support of Budget items, Watsonia Motor Show (or related community event), and request regarding Watsonia Street Banners.
The submission is presented in support of Council’s 15 hour per week Aboriginal Community Development position, funded until August 2016. It highlights the positive feedback that BCH has received (in relation to this role) from its Aboriginal Health Care Team and the Aboriginal people who use the health service. The submission requests that Council vary its budget to enable the position to continue in an ongoing part-time capacity within Council.
The submissions are in support of the proposed Budget 2016/2017. In particular, the submission from the President highlights support for various items relating to Watsonia contained in the budget, and the benefits of the Special Rates and Charges Scheme and working together with Council., including: the ‘far better shopping atmosphere’, improvements in traffic flow, opportunities for businesses, and the achievement of marketing initiatives and projects. The two submissions also thank Council for its continued support of the $15,000 allocated for Watsonia Motor Show and highlight the potential to use this funding for a related community festival (WTA event). The WTA proposes to reinvent the Motor Show to a ‘Celebrate Watsonia, Family Fun Day’ The submissions also seek Council support for the Watsonia Street Banners Project. The objective of this project is: ’To create street banners to showcase a new look and feel to the Watsonia Shopping Centre and create life and decoration to the street scape’. The WTA
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 64
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
Submission
5.1
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d Summary has estimated this project to cost $30,000, and requests $20,000 contribution towards this from Council (with the WTA contributing $10,000). The submission on behalf of the WTA also supports the possibility of a pedestrian/ zebra crossing in the local area. 9.-13 Five (5) Submissions from individuals representing Kintala Dog Club.
Dog Club Shelter behind Old Shire Office
14.-15. Two (2) Submissions from individuals representing interests for Price Park, Viewbank
Lighting for fenced dog park in Price Park, Viewbank
16. Submission from the President, Heidelberg Central Traders Association (HCTA)
Heidelberg Shopping precinct – support for Special Rates and Charges Scheme
These submissions are in support of the proposed Budget 2016/2017 - allocation of $50,000 for a Dog Club Shelter behind the Old Shire Office. The submissions highlight the benefits provided by Council’s support for local clubs such as Kintala Dog Club, especially in terms of helping dogs and owners, the related community health and wellbeing aspects, providing shelter for training conducted in all weather conditions, and making Banyule such an attractive and inclusive area. Submitters have also highlighted that the club has just celebrated its 40th anniversary, and has trained over 8,000 dogs during this time.
The submissions highlight the benefits of the new fenced dog park at Price Park, Viewbank. They request that Council consider installing lighting to this area to make it more safe and useable at night and in the winter months. One submitter notes that the budget for 2016/17 includes dog park fence maintenance of $15,000. The submitter requests that an additional $20,000 be provided for the provision of lighting in the fenced dog park.
The submission is in support of the proposed Budget 2016/2017. The submission highlights HTCA’s strong working relationship that continues with Council. It mentions the benefits of the Special Rates and Charges Scheme (‘best practice’) and the opportunities for activity centres – including unique improvements to streetscape and infrastructure. Key achievements such as the upgrade to the public toilet block, bridge painting, upgrading walkways, etc, are highlighted in the submission, providing many benefits to the community. The submission outlines the positive future and importance of the working relationship with Council to ensure a vibrant and welcoming environment for Heidelberg shoppers.
17. Submission from the President, Greens-borough Chamber of Commerce (Greens-borough Town Centre)
Greensborough Town Centre – Support on behalf of over 400 businesses The submission is in support of the proposed Budget 2016/2017 – in particular the submission highlights its support for various items contained in the budget. In summary, the items listed in the submission highlight the
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 65
5.1
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d Submission
Summary partnerships with Council and other agencies and levels of government to deliver improvements to the area, including: safety, infrastructure, parking plans, shopping centre maintenance, economic and business development, investment attraction initiatives, and improved public transport. The submission also acknowledges the significant contribution of funds allocated within the proposed budget.
18. 20. Three (3) Submissions from the Bundoora Junior Football Club (BJFC) – from the President of BJFC on behalf of the Club, and from a Club member
NJ Telfer Reserve Redevelopment The submission is in support of Council’s proposed Budget 2016/2017 and endorses the budget for the redevelopment of the NJ Telfer Reserve. In summary, the submissions highlight: • The BJFC was established in 1964 and has had a proud history of providing a service for residents • The current pavilion dates from the 1960s and is in much need of replacement, and the car park is in much need of expansion. • The BJFC is committed to creating a family friendly environment where boys and girls can participate in sport and learn the values of being involved in a team and a community • The NJ Telfer reserve is shared by other community organisations • The new rooms will provide a dedicated social hub that can be used by the BJFC, Bundoora Tennis Club, Girl guides, Bundoora Cricket Club and local organisations. • Developments like the one proposed well bring community organisations together in a facility that will attract more members and grow these Clubs. • The current facilities at Telfer Reserve make it difficult to attract new members but the potential of the site if developed is one of great anticipation for a great junior sporting hub. • The club is aiming to start a female team within the next 2 seasons and this new pavilion can help facilitate this.
21 Submission from the President, Rosanna Village on behalf of the Rosanna Traders Association (RTA)
Rosanna Village The submission is in support of the proposed Budget 2016/2017 – in particular the allocation of Place Improvement and Capital Works budget to Rosanna. The submission highlights the community and economic benefits of revitalising the area (with the Council’s consolidation of staff accommodation and community facilities to Greensborough), and that the RTA looks forward to continuing to work with Council on projects that help with the community’s economic sustainability, infrastructure needs and wellbeing – that these are supported and implemented in Rosanna.
22 Submission from the President,
Volunteers of Banyule – Winding up of Organisation
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 66
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
Submission Volunteers of Banyule (VOB)
5.1
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d Summary The submission is a request for a one-time grant of $25,000 in the 2016/2017 budget to assist with the costs of moving and reestablishing in Ivanhoe. The submission highlights the goals of the Volunteers of Banyule in terms of stretching its wind-down period, including: • An appeal to Council, to help achieve these important goals through an expression of goodwill support in the form of provision of an extraordinary one time grant of funding to assist subsidise some of the costs involved in the move • VOB is not seeking to re-open the ongoing funding discussion with council, whilst not agreeing with council’s decision regarding its future, VOB has accepted that this is position and is moving on in an endeavour to responsibly conclude its service tenure. • Such an amount, whilst by no means meeting the full costs of the move and the activity plan, will nonetheless make an immense difference to what VOB will be able to achieve and, in making such a contribution, Council will be directly investing in effective future volunteer participation in the region.
23 Submission on behalf of Austin Health
The Wellness Walk 2016 - Sponsorship Arrangements.
24 Submission from a member of the community.
Speed Humps on Macorna Street Watsonia North
The submission is a request for Sponsorship (by Banyule City Council) of ‘The Wellness Walk 2016’ in the form of a cash contribution of $25,000 (excluding GST) and in-kind support valued at $10,000. The submission outlines the direct sponsorship benefits offered to Council.
The submission is a request to investigate the modification of speed humps on Macorna Street, Watsonia North, in line with those in the rest of Banyule. The proponent suggests that they ‘have no alternative than to generally use Macorna Street as it is the only exit from Watsonia North with traffic lights’. The proponent suggests that these speed humps are causing the vehicles in their household to ‘constantly lose the toe alignment and incur premature suspension wear’, and that ‘these speed humps are harsher than any other speed humps in Banyule, but are rated at 20Km/Hr as per the rest of the speed humps’ (resulting in premature tyre wear and replacement of steering components). The proponent suggests the changes made to speed humps in Sellars Street are ‘now reasonable’ and asks why the Macorna Street speed humps have not ‘followed suit’.
25 Submission from the Committee of management of the Banyule Support & Information Centre Inc (BANSIC)
Banyule Support & Information Centre – request for funding support The submission is a request for funding support from Council, for ‘an alternative way for Council to provide support for the services offered by BANSIC’. The submission includes: • ‘A key objective for BANSIC now and into the future is to develop new initiatives in fund raising in order to reduce
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 67
5.1
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d Submission
Summary reliance on funding from Council. BANSIC will also work in close co-operation with other agencies who deliver community support and information services to Banyule residents. This is in line with Council's key stated objective of providing an integrated community information service with a focus on "capacity building".’ • ‘BANSIC is in the final stages of signing a lease on a local opportunity shop which, in the past, has realised an annual profit of $20,000. We are committed to substantially improve this by 2017. BANSIC is also exploring other fundraising options that will contribute to its operating costs.’ • ‘In this submission BANSIC is seeking Council support of $75,000 to enable it to continue offering its services for the 2016-17 financial year. The figure of $75,000 includes $62,000 for the Manager's salary and $13,000 for other operational costs. BANSIC will meet the cost of renting a premises out of the profits from the opportunity shop and or its reserves. As at 30 June 2016, we anticipate our reserves will be between $40,000 and $45,000. The support required from Council will reduce in subsequent financial years.’ • ‘By providing this portion of operating costs, Banyule City Council and BANSIC will work in partnership to deliver essential community support and information services, including emergency relief, to the citizens of Banyule. Together, we can achieve an effective and more sustainable outcome.’
26 Submission from the President Heidelberg Primary School Council
Heidelberg Primary School – appropriate infrastructure and improved conditions for traffic and pedestrians around the school This submission provides feedback on the proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4) and Budget 2016/2017 and how these relate to the items that the school raises. The submission includes: • ‘From what we understand the streets around Heidelberg Primary are not currently listed as being allocated funds in the current budget and we would therefore like to draw the attention of the following areas around the school that are in desperate need of improved pedestrian conditions; Cape Street and Darebin Street Roundabout Hawdon Street and Darebin Street Roundabout’ • ‘Both these roundabouts are close to the school and are extremely busy and hazardous for pedestrians to cross (especially children) and both have minimal infrastructure to encourage safe passage. Students and families walking from the Heidelberg area (between Darebin Street, Cape Street and Upper Heidelberg Road) and from Heidelberg Heights have to cross through both these roundabouts to reach a Crossing Supervisor. The school requests appropriate infrastructure for pedestrians to be installed on both these roundabouts to allow safe passage and to connect pedestrians with the Crossing Supervisor.’ • ‘The School is also keen to encourage students and families to
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 68
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
Submission
5.1
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d Summary utilise active transport modes to and from school to reduce the traffic caused by our own school community.’ • ‘All improvements to the traffic conditions around Heidelberg Primary will benefit the wider community too, including students from nearby St John's Primary School, Our Lady of Mercy Secondary College, the ABC Childcare centre on Rosanna Rd and Burgundy Street shoppers.’ • ‘Heidelberg Primary School believes funding needs to be allocated to address the unsafe traffic conditions that have emerged over the past few years in direct response to the increase of activity in the Heidelberg Precinct zone.’ 27 Submission from President, Macleod Village Traders Association (MVTA) on behalf of the MVTA
Macleod Shopping Village – Traders Association This submission provides feedback on the proposed Budget 2016/2017 regarding ‘road surfacing of Macleod Park, and drainage and roof upgrades / replacement to the pavilion in Macleod Park.’ The submission includes: • ‘Given that the upgrade to the pavilion is in the vicinity of $35K, and our traders have not noticed any issues with the pavilion drainage, we question if this is necessary.’ • ‘An item that we believe has been overlooked is funds allocated to improved lighting and if required upgrades along Aberdeen Road, outside the shops, and also along the laneway at the rear of these shops. The request for laneway lightning is new, however, we have tried on numerous occasions to improve the street lighting along Macleod Park and on the same side as the retail shops. They were replaced late last year, but the energy efficient globes selected do not throw out sufficient light. Improved lighting will act as a deterrent to any unsavoury behaviour or public nuisance and protect people and property.’
28 Submission from the Senior Manager— Refugees, Immigration & Multiculturalism (RIM) on behalf of the Brotherhood of St Laurence, Ecumenical Migration Centre
Brotherhood of St Laurence - Ecumenical Migration Centre Stepping Stones program This submission is in support of the proposed Budget 2016/2017 as it relates to the inclusion of the ‘Stepping Stones’ program. The submission includes: • ‘In its five years of existence, Stepping Stones has supported more than 120 women to develop their small business skills and, for about a third of the participants, to pursue steps towards establishing their own business.’ • At the proposed location of the Banyule digiDECL, the proposed budget of $25,000 would enable us to offer a suite of measures tailored for the learning needs of 20 women from diverse backgrounds’ • ‘Research indicates that it takes approximately three years to build a business. Given this, we believe it is important to provide long-term support to this cohort, to build on the initial investment and learning. Hence, we would welcome a threeyear investment to support women through the different
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 69
5.1
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d Submission
Summary phases, from a start-up to running a successful business.’ • ‘Our strongest focus is on making sure we continue to have a robust, sustainable program which has a strong positive impact on the women involved and their family and local community. We are therefore pleased to support the Banyule City Council's inclusion of Stepping Stones in its 2016-2017 budget.’
29 Submission from the Centre Coordinator Ivanhoe Traders Association (ITA) on behalf of the ITA
Ivanhoe Traders Association – Special Rates and Charges Scheme and ITA Loan repayment This submission is in support of the proposed Budget 2016/2017 as it relates to the Special Rates and Charges Scheme. The submission seeks funding support for ‘repayments (expiring May 2017) towards their streetscape loan’ and ‘The ITA would appreciate if the BCC considers wiping off the remainder of the loan (40k) in the next financial year in order to carry out further marketing initiatives’. The submission also includes concerns related to the funding for the Ivanhoe Fiesta, given ‘Austin Health's decision to move their event to La Trobe University’ and when ‘Banyule moves their offices in early 2017 from Ivanhoe to Greensborough’. It also includes: • ‘This is expected to have a significant negative effect on the Ivanhoe economy.’ • ‘The ITA would also like the BCC to consider removing their rate capping towards the matched contribution of the Special Rate & Charge Scheme.’
30 Submission from the Centre Coordinator Bell St Mall Traders Association (BSMTA) on behalf of the BSMTA
Bell Street Mall Traders Association – Special Rates and Charges Scheme and public lighting in the Mall. This submission is in support of the proposed Budget 2016/2017 as it relates to the Special Rates and Charges Scheme. The submission highlights benefits that have been achieved over the past 12 months due to the scheme such as cultural events and promotions. The submission includes: • A request that ‘BCC considers taking control and paying for all the public lighting in the Bell St Mall’ and states that in the past ‘this has been a cost to the Association of approximately $8,000 per year (8% of our budget)’ • ‘The BSMTA would also like the BCC to consider removing their rate capping towards the matched contribution of the Special Rate & Charge Scheme.’
31 Submission from President, Eaglemont Village Traders Association (EVTA) on behalf of the EVTA
Eaglemont Village Traders Association -– Support for Special Rates and Charges Scheme and relevant Budget items The submission is in support of the proposed Budget 2016/2017 – in particular the submission highlights its support for various items contained in the budget including retaining the Special Rates and Charges Scheme.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 70
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
Submission
5.1
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d Summary In summary, the submission highlights: • ‘Through development of a yearly marketing plan and employment of Marketing and PR consultant we have finally started to attract new developments and begin the revitalization of Eaglemont Village.’ • ‘To enable Eaglemont Village to prosper, connect and be of more benefit to the local community it requires the support from Council as outlined in the 2016/17 budget.’ • ‘The special rate and charges scheme is vital in the development and marketing of our Centre to provide economic sustainability to Eaglemont Village.’ • ‘We look forward to continuing work with Council through projects that are supported and implemented to help the community's economic sustainability and infrastructure needs’ 32 Submission from the Chief Executive Officer of Kalparrin Early Childhood Intervention Service (ECIS)
Kalparrin Early Childhood Intervention Service (ECIS) - Building and Refurbishment Project The submission is a request by Kalparrin ECIS that its revised Business Case for the Building and Refurbishment Project be put forward as a submission for Council’s Budget 2016/2017 considerations. The submission includes: • ‘The proposed cost of the project represented in this Business Case is estimated at $361,020 for construction and $80,000 for refurbishment, a total of $441,020.’ • ‘Kalparrin will commit $41,020 from its own funds (on top of its existing $150,000 investment to date) to the new building extension and existing building refurbishment and is therefore asking Banyule City Council for a $400,000 contribution over two years to this Project….’ • The total estimate for Construction and Refurbishment is $ 441,020 over 2 years. The request is for Council to contribute $100,000 in 2016/2017 and $300,000 in 2017/2018. The business case outlines benefits of the project, including: ‘For Kalparrin: • Kalparrin’s capacity under the NDIS will increase by 150 places to around 350 families by 2019 • Kalparrin’s 40 year old facility will be fully repaired, refurbished and extended by 2017 • Kalparrin’s future operational volume and turnover will have achieved sufficient ‘critical mass’ to warrant further long term planning and investment • Kalparrin’s responsibility under the NDIS to meet a higher quotient of early intervention places will be fulfilled’ ‘For Banyule Council: • Council’s leasehold site will be fully optimised and enhanced ensuring maximum community yield • Council’s constituents will benefit from a world class early
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 71
5.1
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d Submission
Summary childhood intervention service • Council’s capacity to respond to community need under the NDIS will be significantly enhanced • Council’s support of Kalparrin’s lease in terms of its community investment will be fully justified’
33 Submission from a member of the community.
Tree Protection (VPO5 and ESO4) The submission relates to the proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4) and is based on concerns regarding protection of indigenous vegetation. The submitter provides specific examples including an ‘Indigenous River Red Gum in nature strip adjacent to 111 Bond Street Ivanhoe’ and a eucalypt, and comments on aspects such as disruption to canopy and tree root systems. The submitter states: ‘If the developments at 250 Waterdale Road and removal of an indigenous River Red Gum street tree outside a Bond Street Ivanhoe development is the future, then Council should revisit its "four P's" and its approach to planning approvals and indigenous vegetation management.’
34 Submission from a member of the community.
Overlooking of Unit 3, 4-6 Noel Street, Ivanhoe The submission relates to the proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4) and is based on concerns regarding a three storey development at 15 Ivanhoe Parade and potential impacts on a neighbouring property at Unit 3, 4-6 Noel Street, Ivanhoe. The submitter comments on aspects such as proximity and height issues associated with a concrete slab fence next to a Right of Way (ROW). The submission includes: • ‘The Structure Plan speaks of the benefits of infill developments.’ • ‘If this development at 15 Ivanhoe Parade is the future, then Council should revisit its "four P's" and its approach to planning approvals.’
35 Submission from a member of the community.
Lighting of Right of Way (ROW) - Ivanhoe Station to Town Hall The submission is in relation to the proposed Budget 2016/2017 regarding ‘Lighting of the heavily used Right of Way (ROW) from Ivanhoe Station to Town Hall’. The submitter states that this ‘has been requested in budget submissions for several years and recognised in the Ivanhoe Structure Plan. If this development at 15 Ivanhoe Parade is the future, then lighting the ROW is even more necessary.’ The submitter also states: ‘Provision of lighting is an urgent requirement and should be included in the 2016-17 Budget.’
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 72
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
Submission
5.1
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d Summary (Note: This submission is in support of Submission No. 4, Item 1)
ADVOCACY Council works in partnership with community groups, local agencies and different levels of government to advocate for improved services, infrastructure and social outcomes. Council also advocates seeking opportunities for equitable funding and service arrangements. This report has an important link with Council’s City Plan key direction to: ‘Engage meaningfully with our community’ This key direction sits within Banyule’s ‘Participation’ objective: Participation: Community Involvement in Community Life – Govern effectively by appropriately engaging the community in issues that affect them, and advocate for the broader interest of the community. FUNDING IMPLICATIONS Council may consider changes to the proposed Budget due to submissions received or may determine alternate funding mechanisms to incorporate the funding of submissions with financial implications. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The City Plan sets the direction and priorities for Council under the objectives of People, Planet, Place, Participation and Performance: People – Community strengthening and support Planet – Environmental sustainability Place – Amenity and built environment Participation – Community involvement in community life Performance – Use our resources wisely The City Plan helps guide the services Council provides to the community. The Plan is reviewed and updated each year after extensive consultation with the community, Councillors and staff. The review includes a broad range of other key considerations such as legislative changes, research, socio economic data and industry trends. This comprehensive annual review process ensures Council continues to deliver the most appropriate services and projects for Banyule. Feedback has helped Council to plan specific initiatives and priorities for Year 4 of the City Plan, which encompasses the 2016/17 financial year. Each year Council reconsiders the areas of emphasis outlined for its four year plan. These views have been considered to develop City Plan key initiatives for 2016/17. •
Fiscal sustainability – practice prudent financial management and responsibility within a new rate capping environment.
•
Effective communication – improve how we inform, engage and listen to the community.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 73
5.1
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d • • • • • •
Environmental focus – protect and improve our environment and embrace sustainable practices. Community building – work with the community to encourage participation, partnerships, and reach its potential. Investing in infrastructure – ensure our city’s infrastructure meets community needs, today and tomorrow. Prudent planning – use comprehensive planning frameworks, processes and reporting to inform strategic decision making. Good governance – employ the best possible processes to operate transparently, efficiently and make informed decisions. Advocacy – represent the community to secure services and funds from other levels of government, organisations and agencies.
A full listing of the services resourced through the Budget 2016/2017 is contained in the proposed City Plan (Appendix A – Our Activities and Services). The City Plan is underpinned by a key strategic framework. Each strategic objective is underpinned by comprehensive supporting policies, strategies and plans. Council’s key policy and strategic documents informing the City Plan are continuously reviewed to ensure relevance and responsiveness to community needs and best industry practice: • •
Banyule People: Health and Wellbeing Policy & Strategy Banyule Planet: Environmental Sustainability Policy & Strategy
• • •
Banyule Place Policy & Strategy Banyule Participation Policy & Strategy Banyule Performance Framework: Banyule Management System
The key policy and strategic documents include the rationale and policy context for each of the key directions that have been set to achieve Council’s objectives. CONSULTATION An overview of our consultation approach Council is committed to engaging with local communities, and continually improving the ways that people can have their say about the places they live, work and play, and the services they use. Community feedback, along with things such as legislative changes, reviews of service standards, budget information and industry trends all contribute to shaping Council’s direction. Council is proud of its commitment to consultation and engagement, which supports conversations and greater understanding between Council and the community, and increases civic engagement and participation in community life. The four year City Plan 2013-2017 was developed initially in 2013 after extensive community consultation. Each year Council reviews and modifies the City Plan. The consultation approaches are designed so that community feedback and pertinent strategic information is included in the City Plan as it is reviewed and updated each year.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 74
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d Banyule’s 2016 Engage, Discuss, Respond Consultation report outlines Council’s consultation and engagement approach and captures a range of consultation and engagement projects that have been conducted over the last eighteen months. Consultation for Year 4 of the City Plan In developing year 4 of the City Plan, Council has evolved its consultation approach. During the past 18 months Council conducted a broad range of consultations on a variety of issues including Year 3 of the City Plan, other important strategic plans and a number of smaller local projects. Council also worked closely with the community advisory committees who represent the needs of particular community groups. In addition to relying on consultation to inform specific projects Council also uses the outcomes of all the community consultation to feed into the development of Year 4 of the City Plan. Council has also conducted a specific community engagement activity between November 2015 and March 2016 where the community had the opportunity to provide feedback on how they felt about Council’s performance, and to share ideas about how to make Banyule an even better place to live. Consultation and Research Council uses a broad range of consultation and data sources to inform the development of the City Plan. This means that Council can hear from and represent a broader range of people’s views. This is especially true for those who do not like going to meetings or completing surveys, or where other ways of engaging are more appropriate. A comprehensive summary of Council’s consultation activities is contained in the body of the City Plan. TIMELINES The public notice has informed the community that Council will hold a Council Meeting at 7.45pm Tuesday 14 June 2016 to consider adopting the proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4) and the proposed Budget 2016/2017. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CONCLUSION The submissions received by Council cover a wide and varied range of community proposals both in support of the proposed Budget and proposed City Plan and requests for additional funding to be provided for a specific purpose. The submissions primarily deal with issues related to the proposed Budget 2016/2017.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 75
5.1
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
5.1
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
PROPOSED CITY PLAN & BUDGET - CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED cont’d Council may consider changes to the proposed Budget due to submissions received or may determine alternate funding mechanisms to incorporate the funding of submissions with financial implications. All submitters will be advised of the outcomes of their submissions in writing after the adoption of the City Plan and Budget.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 76
6.1
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
ITEMS FOR NOTING
Authors: India Mortlock - Community & Social Planner, Community Programs & John Milkins - Environmental Sustainability Co-ordinator, City Development
RECOMMENDATION That Council note the following minutes/reports: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.
Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee Meeting on 18 February 2016 Age Friendly City Advisory Committee Meeting on 11 March 2016 Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee Meeting on 5 April 2016 LGBTI Advisory Committee Meeting on 12 April 2016 Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Meeting on 13 April 2016 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee Meeting on 14 April 2016 Age Friendly City Advisory Committee Meeting on 15 April 2016 Multicultural Advisory Committee Meeting on 18 April 2016 Banyule Environmental Advisory Committee (BEAC) Notes April 2016 Banyule Environmental Advisory Committee (BEAC) Notes May 2016
The following Minutes or Reports are presented for noting: 1.
Report/Committee Name: Officer: Brief explanation:
Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee Colin James The Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee held its first meeting for 2016 on 18 February in the Hatch Contemporary Arts Centre. The minutes from the meeting are in Attachment 1. The aim of the Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee is to provide a formal mechanism for Council to consult with key stakeholders, seek specialist advice and enable community participation in the strategic development of arts, culture and heritage planning, policy and development. Councillors did not attend the meeting. Six committee members attended the meeting. There were no recommendations from the meeting.
2.
Report/Committee Name: Officer:
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Age Friendly City Advisory Committee Catherine Simcox
Page 77
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
ITEMS FOR NOTING cont’d Brief explanation:
The Aged Friendly Advisory Committee met on Friday 11 March in the Tom Roberts Room. The minutes from the meeting are in Attachment 2. The aim of the Aged Friendly Advisory Committee is to provide Council with advice on older adult issues and ageing well in Banyule. The Committee also oversees Council’s involvement in the World Health Organisations Global Network of Age-friendly Cities. Cr Mulholland chaired the meeting and Councillor Langdon also attended the meeting. Eight committee members attended the meeting. There were no recommendations to Council from this meeting.
3.
Report/Committee Name: Officer: Brief explanation:
Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee Meeting Colin James The Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee held its second meeting for 2016 on 5 April in the Hatch Contemporary Arts Centre. The minutes from the meeting are in Attachment 3. The aim of the Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee is to provide a formal mechanism for Council to consult with key stakeholders, seek specialist advice and enable community participation in the strategic development of arts, culture and heritage planning, policy and development. Councillor Melican chaired the meeting. Six committee members attended the meeting. There was one recommendation from the committee: That Council supports the development of the Public Art Policy in its current timeline, and reinstates the Public Art Funding as planned. Officers have subsequently confirmed that Council has committed to the funding in the draft budget for 2016-17, the policy process is on track for adoption in August and that no further action is required of Council.
4.
Report/Committee Name: Officer:
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
LGBTI Advisory Committee Meeting India Mortlock
Page 78
ITEMS FOR NOTING cont’d Brief explanation:
The LGBTI Advisory Committee met on Tuesday 12 April 2016 in Rosanna. The minutes from the meeting are in Attachment 4. The aim of the LGBTI Advisory Committee is to provide Council with advice and information on issues facing the LGBTI community and on the development and implementation of Council’s LGBTI Plan. Councillor Mulholland chaired the meeting and Councillor Langdon also attended the meeting. Seven committee members attended the meeting. There were no recommendations from the meeting.
5.
Report/Committee Name: Officer: Brief explanation:
Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Meeting Shawn Neilsen The Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee met on Wednesday 13 April 2016 in the Rosanna meeting rooms. The minutes from the meeting are in Attachment 5. The aim of the Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee is to provide Council with advice and information on issues facing people with disabilities and on the development and implementation of Council’s Disability Action Plan. Councillor Mulholland chaired the meeting and Councillor Langdon also attended the meeting. Nine committee members attended the meeting. There were no recommendations from this meeting.
6.
Report/Committee Name: Officer:
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Aboriginal and Torres Committee Meeting Theonie Tacticos
Strait
Islander
Advisory
Page 79
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
ITEMS FOR NOTING cont’d Brief explanation:
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee held its second meeting on 14 April at Babarrbunin Beek in Heidelberg West. The minutes from the meeting are in Attachment 6. The aim of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee is to provide Council with advice and information on issues facing the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community and on the development and implementation of Council’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander plan. Uncle Colin Hunter chaired the meeting and Cr Langdon also attended the meeting. Three other committee members attended the meeting. There was one recommendation to Council: That Council fund the Babarrbunin Beek Cultural Project Officer as an ongoing position. This recommendation is being addressed through a separate report to Council on 30 May 2016.
7.
Report/Committee Name: Officer: Brief explanation:
Age Friendly City Advisory Committee Meeting on 15 April 2016 Catherine Simcox The Aged Friendly Advisory Committee met on Friday 15 April in the Tom Roberts Room. The minutes from the meeting are in Attachment 7. The aim of the Aged Friendly Advisory Committee is to provide Council with advice on older adult issues and ageing well in Banyule. The Committee oversee Councils involvement in the World Health Organisations Global Network of Age-friendly Cities. Cr Mulholland chaired the meeting and Councillor Langdon also attended the meeting. Seven committee members attended the meeting. There were no recommendations to Council from this meeting.
8.
Report/Committee Name: Officer:
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Multicultural Advisory Committee Meeting India Mortlock
Page 80
ITEMS FOR NOTING cont’d Brief explanation:
The Multicultural Advisory Committee met on Monday 18 April in the Nellie Ibbott room. The minutes from the meeting are in Attachment 8. The aim of the Multicultural Advisory Committee is to provide Council with advice and information on issues facing the Multicultural community and on the development and implementation of Council’s Multicultural Plan. Councillor Di Pasquale chaired the meeting and Councillor Langdon, Cr Tom Melican and Cr Mulholland also attended the meeting. Seven committee members attended the meeting. There were no recommendations from the meeting for Council’s consideration.
9.
Report/Committee Name: Officer: Brief explanation:
Banyule Environmental Advisory Committee (BEAC) Notes April 2016 Daniel Kollmorgen, John Milkins BEAC discussed the following matters: 16.01 Beyond Paris : Hazelwood advocacy BEAC recommended that Council consider writing to the State government urging the rapid decommissioning of Hazelwood and investment in renewable energy sources. 14.23 Urban Forest Strategy Manager Parks and Gardens to facilitate a meeting with DF & colleagues and the Urban Forest Strategy consultants to discuss the scientific basis of carbon sequestration figures in the local Australian context 16.08 Ethical Paper Pledge BEAC to consider the presentations and submissions and provide a recommendation to Council at its May meeting 16.09 Great Forest National Park BEAC to consider the presentations and submissions and provide a recommendation to Council at its May meeting
10.
Report/Committee Name: Officer:
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Banyule Environmental Advisory Committee (BEAC) Notes May 2016 Daniel Kollmorgen, John Milkins
Page 81
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
ITEMS FOR NOTING cont’d Brief explanation:
16.01 Beyond Paris:Beyond Zero Emissions Case Study BEAC recommended that Council consider opportunities to support a suburb or defined area of the municipality in seeking to achieve the status of a high ambition community (zero carbon / zero net carbon emissions) 16.08 Ethical Paper Pledge BEAC recommended that Council sign the Ethical Paper Pledge, noting that Council’s paper usage is already in accord with the pledge. 16.09 Great Forest National Park BEAC supports the proposal for a Great Forest National Park and recommended that Council also indicate its support for the creation of a Great Forest National Park due to the direct and indirect benefits to Banyule residents. BEAC noted that the precautionary principle should be applied to facilitate benefit realisation in the areas of : • biodiversity • water quality • drinking water supply • tourism opportunities • wildlife corridor connectivity • mental health • clean air • the uniqueness of the old growth tall forests of SE Australia • inter and intragenerational equity • natural heritage 16.11 Sister City proposal BEAC encouraged the development of community to community links with the Swedish town of Växjö, and will review further information to be provided on MOUs that might facilitate Council to Council links. 16.12 Plastic Bag Free Victoria BEAC recommended that Council develop a policy addressing the use of single use plastics at events conducted on land, roads or building managed by Council.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 82
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.1
ITEMS FOR NOTING cont’d ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee (BACAC) Minutes 18 February 2016
305
2
Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee Minutes 11 March 2016
309
3
Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee (BACAC) minutes 5 April 2016
314
4
LGBTI Advisory Committee Minutes 12 April 2016
319
5
Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Minutes 13 April 2016
323
6
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee Minutes 14 April 2016
326
7
Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee Minutes 15 April 2016
332
8
Multicultural Advisory Committee Minutes 18 April 2016
336
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page
Page 83
6.2
ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS
Author:
Ellen Kavanagh - Governance Officer, Corporate Services
6.2
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Under the Local Government Act 1989 an Assembly of Councillors is defined as: A meeting of an advisory committee of the Council, if at least one Councillor is present or; A planned or scheduled meeting of at least half of the Councillors and one member of Council staff which considers matters that are intended or likely to be: a) b)
the subject of a decision of the Council or; subject to the exercise of a function, duty or power of the Council that has been delegated to a person or committee.
In accordance with Section 80A of the Local Government Act 1989 Council is required to report as soon as possible to an Ordinary Meeting of Council a record of any assemblies of Councillors held. Below is the latest listing of notified assemblies of Councillors held at Banyule City Council. RECORD OF ASSEMBLIES 1
Date of Assembly:
2 May 2016
Type of Meeting:
Confidential Councillor Briefing / Strategic Planning
Matters Considered:
Conflict of Interest:
Confidential Matters considered: Proposed Developments Contractual Matters Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Scott Walker – Director City Development Joseph Tabacco – Manager Property & Economic Michael Hutchison – School Sites Redevelopment Project Coordinator Nil
Date of Assembly:
2 May 2016
Type of Meeting:
Strategic Planning
Matters Considered:
La Trobe Employment Cluster
Councillors Present:
Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Scott Walker – Director City Development
Councillors Present:
Staff Present:
2
Staff Present:
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 84
ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d
Conflict of Interest:
Marc Giglio – Director Corporate Services Geoff Glynn – Director Assets & City Services Joseph Tabacco – Manager Property & Economic Michael Hutchison – School Sites Redevelopment Project Coordinator Members of the Metropolitan Planning Authority: Peter Seamer, Paul Byrne and Lucy Botta Nil
Date of Assembly:
9 May 2016
Type of Meeting:
Councillor Briefing
Matters Considered:
Items on the Council Agenda for the Special and Ordinary Meetings of 9 May 2016 (excluding confidential items) as listed below:
Others Present:
3
Special Meeting: 6.1 Councillor Code of Conduct – review Ordinary Meeting: 1.1 Request for Council to fund the continuation of JETS Programs and Services. 2.1 Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, Watsonia - Possible Treatment Options 2.2 Draft Child Youth and Family Plan 2016-2020 2.3 2016-2017 Community Sports Infrastructure Fund Application Outcome 2.4 Disability Review - Provision of services within the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) 4.1 Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020 4.2 Progress report for a Development Contribution Plan 4.3 Chandler Highway Widening 4.4 Metropolitan Over-Dimensional Vehicle Routes 4.5 Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan 2016 - 2026 4.6 Watsonia Railway Station Infrastructure and Amenity Improvements 4.7 54-62 Main Street, Greensborough - proposed mixed use development (P1024/2015) 4.8 Proactive Enforcement of Replacement Tree Planting - Results 4.9 Public Open Space Plan 4.10 Greensborough War Memorial Sculptures 5.1 Olympic Park - Sports Field Training Lights Upgrade 5.2 Seniors festival morning tea 5.3 Defence Force School of Signals (DFSS) to exercise its right to march in Banyule City by Granting of Freedom of Entry (FOE) 6.1 Items for Noting 6.2 Quarterly Financial Management Report - 31 March 2016 6.3 Assembly of Councillors
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 85
6.2
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.2
ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d 6.4 6.5
7.1 8.1 8.2 8.3
Sale of 14A Bannerman Avenue, Greensborough Extension for Banyule Support and Information Centre 's (BANSIC) use of 80 Hawdon Street until 31 July 2016 Sealing of Documents Spirit Walk Babarrbunin Beek Managing amenity impacts and construction activity for large development sites Safety and Amenity Improvements - Rosanna Road and Station Street, Rosanna Dedication and launch of new reserve celebrating Margaret Heathorn OAM
Others Present:
General Business: Youth Summit Ivanhoe Ladies Golf Club 80th Birthday Luncheon Aida Ivanhoe Girls Grammar Duplication of the Rosanna and Heidelberg Railway Line Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Rick Garotti Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Wayne Phillips Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Allison Beckwith – Director Community Programs Scott Walker – Director City Development Geoff Glynn – Director Assets & City Services Marc Giglio – Director Corporate Services Vivien Ferlaino – Governance Co-ordinator Gina Burden – Manager Governance and Communication Joel Elbourne – Manager Urban Planning and Building Bailey Byrnes – Transport Planning Team Leader Joseph Tabacco – Manager Property & Economic Development Daniel Kollmorgen – Manager Transport, Sustainability & Municipal Laws Peter Benazic – Manager Parks and Gardens Jeff Parks – Open Space Planning Co-Ordinator Stephanie Neville – Executive Customer Support Officer Nil
Conflict of Interest:
Nil
Councillors Present:
Staff Present:
RECOMMENDATION That the Assembly of Councillors report be received.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 86
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.2
ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 87
7.1
SEALING OF DOCUMENTS
Author:
Andrea Turville - Property Officer, City Development
Ward:
Olympia
7.1
Sealing of Documents
RECOMMENDATION That the Common Seal of the Banyule City Council be affixed to the following documents: 1.
Deed of Variation of Lease between Banyule City Council and Bellfield Community Centre Inc for the Premises located at 96 Oriel Road, Bellfield, to reflect the installation of a bin storage area adjacent to the existing building.
2.
Lease and Service Level Agreement between Banyule City Council and Heidelberg Occasional Child Care Inc in respect of the Council-owned land and improvements at 26 Leicester Street, Heidelberg Heights, for the two year period expiring on 30 June 2017.
3.
Lease and Service Level Agreement between Banyule City Council and Watsonia Occasional Child Care Inc in respect of the Council-owned land and improvements at 56 Gabonia Avenue, Watsonia, for the two year period expiring on 30 June 2017.
The following documents require the affixing of the Common Seal of Council: 1
PARTY\PARTIES: OFFICER: FILE NUMBER: DOCUMENT: ADDRESS: WARD: BRIEF EXPLANATION:
2
PARTY\PARTIES: OFFICER: FILE NUMBER: DOCUMENT: ADDRESS:
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Banyule City Council and Bellfield Community Centre Inc Andrea Turville F2013/1018 Deed of Variation of Lease 96 Oriel Road, Bellfield Olympia Council is the owner of premises located at 96 Oriel Road, Bellfield which is currently leased to Bellfield Community Centre Inc (“Centre”). The Centre administers the hiring of the buildings’ hall, meeting rooms and kitchen facilities. The Centre has proposed to install a bin storage area adjacent to the existing building. A Deed of Variation of Lease has been prepared to reflect this change. Ratification of the proposal to vary the lease is required by Council resolving to affix Council’s Common Seal to the Deed of Variation of Lease. Banyule City Council and Heidelberg Occasional Child Care Inc. Andrea Turville F2013/1007 Lease and Service Level Agreement 26 Leicester Street, Heidelberg Heights
Page 89
7.1
Sealing of Documents
SEALING OF DOCUMENTS cont’d
3
WARD: BRIEF EXPLANATION:
Olympia Council is the owner of the land and improvements at 26 Leicester Street, Heidelberg Heights, currently occupied by Heidelberg Occasional Child Care Inc (HOC). A two (2) year Lease and Service Level Agreement has been negotiated with HOC commencing 1 July 2015 and expiring 30 June 2017. In recognition of the community service provided by HOC, the potential commercial rental income, valued at $32,500 per annum, should be waived and a nominal rent of $104.00 plus GST for the two (2) year term applied. The proposal should be supported by Council formally ratifying the Lease and Service Level Agreement by resolving to affix its Common Seal.
PARTY\PARTIES:
Banyule City Council and Watsonia Occasional Child Care Inc. Andrea Turville F2013/1259 Lease and Service Level Agreement 56 Gabonia Avenue, Watsonia Bakewell Council is the owner of the land and improvements at 56 Gabonia Avenue, Watsonia, currently occupied by Watsonia Occasional Child Care Inc (WOC). A two (2) year Lease and Service Level Agreement has been negotiated with WOC commencing 1 July 2015 and expiring 30 June 2017. In recognition of the community service provided by WOC, the potential commercial rental income, valued at $32,500 per annum, should be waived and a nominal rent of $104.00 plus GST for the two (2) year term be applied. The proposal should be supported by Council formally ratifying the Lease and Service Level Agreement by resolving to affix its Common Seal.
OFFICER: FILE NUMBER: DOCUMENT: ADDRESS: WARD: BRIEF EXPLANATION:
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 90
8.1
BANYULE MOBILE APP AND SMART-DEVICE FUNCTIONALITY
Author:
Cr Craig Langdon
TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move: “That a report be prepared which reviews the current functionality available to residents through their mobile phones and tablets as well as the potential costs and benefits in Council developing a Banyule App.� Explanation The proportion of residents that have access to the internet through their smart phones and tablets has dramatically risen over the years. A number of other Victorian Councils have developed their own mobile app. The functionality that is available allows residents to transact with their Council when they are away from a computer and includes the ability to pay for parking, request services from Council and obtain information from Council on their local area and services that may be close by. The report will assist Council to understand the technologies that exist and are available to residents, whether the community are aware of these technologies, and the costs and benefits in Council developing a Banyule App.
CR CRAIG LANGDON Olympia Ward
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 91
8.1
Notice of Motion
8.2
ACCESS ON TO THE M80 RING ROAD FROM THE GREENSBOROUGH BY-PASS (NORTH BOUND)
Author:
Cr Mark Di Pasquale
TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move: “That Council discuss with VicRoads facilitating the allowance of dual turning lanes to enter the M80 Ring Road from the Greensborough By-pass (north bound) instead of a single entry lane that is currently in place.� Explanation Works on the M80 Ring Road have been completed and its capacity is holding very well even during peak hour traffic times. The entry point from the Greensborough By-pass remains the same as when construction was taking place which unnecessarily holds back more cars on the Greensborough By-pass (north bound) and its feeders such as Grimshaw Street. As there is enough road space it is possible to allow dual lanes to enter the M80 Ring Road from the Greensborough By-pass. This would ease congestion and pressure that the left hand lane of the Greensborough By-pass experiences currently and would ease the traffic that banks up on Greensborough By-pass (north bound) during morning and afternoon peak times which extends to the Watsonia area.
CR MARK DI PASQUALE Bakewell Ward
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 92
8.2
Notice of Motion
8.3
BANYULE THEATRE
Author:
Cr Steven Briffa & Cr Craig Langdon
8.3
Notice of Motion
TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move: 1.
“That Council seek a report from Council officers on the status of the Banyule Theatre site located off Beverley Road, Viewbank. The report to consider: (a) (b) (c)
(d)
2.
That Council advocate its position by: (a)
(b) (c)
3.
the State Government's position on the site - ie. is it surplus land or to be used for a future Government use?; the State Government's position on possible uses which enhance the local arts community for which this area is well known; The State Government's proposal to protect the community asset from vandalism and prevent damage to the buildings whilst vacant noting Council concern of past examples of excessive damage which occurred at the three school sites in Olympia Ward; and whether or not the Education Department is prepared to commence negotiations on the Banyule Theatre site which may become surplus to the requirements of Viewbank College after 2018/19.
writing to all State Members of Parliament seeking their support in transferring this site to the Banyule Council at no cost or if sold at a community rate and any possible grants available to upgrade the facility; writing to the Viewbank College and local Primary Schools that may use the facility confirming this resolution; and writing to local residents within the catchment area of Viewbank College (east of Rosanna Road and south of Yallambie Road to the Plenty River) - note costs associated with this point to be included in the report outlined in 1 above.
That Council write to the Federal Member and all Candidates for the Federal Seat of Jagajaga seeking: a. b. c. d.
their support to keep the Banyule Theatre and associated buildings in public hands; assurance that the buildings will be protected from vandalism in any interim period; advocate for Federal Funding to enhance the facility; and the opportunity to present the views of the local Federal (including all Candidates) and State Members in a report to Council.�
Explanation Viewbank College has commenced planning for the proposed new facility at the main Warren Road Campus to replace the existing Banyule Theatre in Buckingham Drive. Council has been advised that the work is earmarked for completion in the 2018/19 financial year. The Banyule Theatre may become surplus to the School’s needs.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 93
8.3
Notice of Motion
BANYULE THEATRE cont’d The history of the Education Department maintaining their surplus buildings is less than satisfactory. The vandalism of Haig Street Primary School, Bellfield Primary School and Banksia Secondary College saw these community assets destroyed beyond repair. This included arson and illegal removal of copper pipes. The Banyule Theatre accommodates 250 patrons and has a large meeting room and foyer plus a canteen. The associated building includes the former school library and associated rooms. The site does have some open space and a recently sealed carpark. It is also connected to the Banyule Football Club and the Old Shire Offices and associated carparks. The Banyule area is home to a well-connected art community and the buildings if available would assist arts related and other community uses.
CR STEVEN BRIFFA Hawdon Ward
CR CRAIG LANGDON Olympia Ward
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 94
8.4
STORMWATER HARVESTING AND POLLUTION MITIGATION AT OLYMPIC PARK
Author:
Cr Craig Langdon
Ward:
Olympia
TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move: “That Council: 1.
Consider the opportunity for stormwater harvesting in the draft Olympic Park Master Plan;
2.
Consider opportunities to reduce pollution and improve the quality of stormwater runoff from the Preston Industrial Estate and the Heidelberg West Industrial Estate flowing into the Darebin Creek as part of the Darebin Creek Masterplan;
3.
Advise the Darebin Creek Management Committee and associated community groups, and the tenants of Olympic Park of Council’s consideration of stormwater harvesting in the Olympic Park Masterplan and pollution mitigation measures as part of the Darebin Creek masterplan;
4.
Advocate to the Metropolitan Planning Authority to include stormwater harvesting and pollution mitigation measures for the Darebin Creek as part of the LaTrobe National Employment Cluster planning;
5.
Advocates by writing to: (a)
Darebin City Council and LaTrobe University seeking their support for including stormwater harvesting and pollution mitigation measures in the Olympic Park Masterplan and Darebin Creek Masterplan;
(b)
The State Minister for Environment, Climate Change and Water and the State Minister for Employment identifying the opportunities for stormwater harvesting and pollution mitigation along the Darebin Creek and seeking support and funding for the specific projects that will be identified as a result of the current planning work;
(c)
All local Federal and State Members of Parliament seeking their commitment to improving the Darebin Creek and the Olympic Park area by reducing stormwater pollution and harvesting stormwater in a similar way to the successful projects at Kalparrin Gardens, Chelseworth Park and Dewinton Park;
(d)
All candidates for the Federal Seats of Jaga Jaga and Batman seeking their support for stormwater harvesting and pollution mitigation along the Darebin Creek and funding for the specific projects that will be identified as a result of the current planning work;
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 95
8.4
Notice of Motion
8.4
Notice of Motion
STORMWATER HARVESTING AND POLLUTION MITIGATION AT OLYMPIC PARK cont’d 6.
Receive a report collating the response received on the advocacy actions in resolutions 4 and 5 above. ”
Explanation Much planning work is currently underway along the Darebin Creek and Olympic Park areas, including: • • • •
Olympic Park Masterplan; Darebin Creek Masterplan; Framework for the LaTrobe National Employment Cluster; and Northland Structure Plan.
Integral to this planning work is the need for real improvements to the Darebin Creek that flows through the area and Olympic Park as the key recreational reserve in the area. Stormwater harvesting would help to reduce the reliance on potable water and provide a cost effective option to water sports grounds and parklands in the area that would improve the durability and amenity of the area. Similarly reducing pollution and improving the quality of stormwater runoff from nearby industrial estates will protect the environment of the Creek and ensure that the wide range of wildlife and plantlife have the best opportunity to thrive.
CR CRAIG LANGDON Olympia Ward
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 May 2016
Page 96
ATTACHMENTS
3.1
Resilient Melbourne - metropolitan strategy for a sustainable, liveable and prosperous Melbourne Attachment 1 Attachment 2
4.1
Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C110 - Results of Public Exhibition Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 4
4.3
Attachment 2
Response from Minister 12 May 2016 ........................................... 300
Grimshaw Street / Flintoff Street, Greensborough Intersection Improvement Funding Attachment 1
6.1
Community Update - Haig Street open space and naming March 2016 ................................................................................... 298
Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe - New Pedestrian Crossing Attachment 1
4.6
1/33 Coventry Street Montmorency - P1070/2015 - Plans and Elevations............................................................................... 287 1/33 Coventry Street Montmorency - P1070/2015 - Planning Controls Assessment..................................................................... 291
Naming of the new public open space between Bonar and Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights Attachment 1
4.5
Summary of Submissions .............................................................. 273 Consultation Brochure - December 2015....................................... 279 Ministerial Authorisation ................................................................ 281 Community Update Brochure - March 2016................................... 283
Erect a carport within the front setback on a lot less than 500 sqm at 1/33 Coventry Street Montmorency (P1070/2012) Attachment 1
4.4
Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy .................................... 98 Attachment 2 Resilient Melbourne Highlights................................. 272
Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street - Concept Plan endorsed by Council December 2015 ........................................................... 303
Items for Noting Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 4 Attachment 5 Attachment 6 Attachment 7 Attachment 8
Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee (BACAC) Minutes 18 February 2016............................................................. 305 Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee Minutes 11 March 2016 .................................................................................. 309 Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee (BACAC) minutes 5 April 2016...................................................................... 314 LGBTI Advisory Committee Minutes 12 April 2016 ....................... 319 Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Minutes 13 April 2016.................................................................... 323 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee Minutes 14 April 2016.................................................................... 326 Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee Minutes 15 April 2016 ..................................................................................... 332 Multicultural Advisory Committee Minutes 18 April 2016 ............... 336
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 97
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 98
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 99
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 100
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 101
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 102
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 103
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 104
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 105
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 106
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 107
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 108
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 109
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 110
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 111
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 112
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 113
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 114
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 115
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 116
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 117
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 118
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 119
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 120
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 121
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 122
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 123
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 124
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 125
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 126
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 127
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 128
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 129
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 130
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 131
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 132
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 133
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 134
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 135
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 136
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 137
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 138
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 139
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 140
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 141
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 142
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 143
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 144
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 145
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 146
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 147
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 148
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 149
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 150
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 151
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 152
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 153
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 154
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 155
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 156
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 157
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 158
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 159
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 160
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 161
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 162
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 163
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 164
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 165
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 166
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 167
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 168
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 169
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 170
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 171
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 172
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 173
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 174
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 175
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 176
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 177
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 178
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 179
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 180
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 181
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 182
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 183
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 184
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 185
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 186
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 187
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 188
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 189
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 190
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 191
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 192
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 193
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 194
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 195
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 196
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 197
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 198
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 199
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 200
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 201
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 202
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 203
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 204
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 205
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 206
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 207
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 208
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 209
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 210
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 211
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 212
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 213
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 214
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 215
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 216
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 217
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 218
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 219
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 220
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 221
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 222
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 223
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 224
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 225
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 226
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 227
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 228
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 229
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 230
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 231
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 232
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 233
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 234
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 235
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 236
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 237
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 238
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 239
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 240
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 241
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 242
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 243
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 244
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 245
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 246
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 247
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 248
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 249
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 250
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 251
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 252
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 253
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 254
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 255
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 256
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 257
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 258
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 259
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 260
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 261
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 262
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 263
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 264
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 265
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 266
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 267
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 268
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 269
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
3.1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 270
3.1
Attachment 1: Attachment 1 Resilient Melbourne Strategy
Attachment 1
Item: 3.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 271
3.1
Item: 3.1
Attachment 2: Attachment 2 Resilient Melbourne Highlights
ATTACHMENT 2 Highlights of local government input throughout the strategy’s development 1. 100RC ‘Agenda setting workshop’ – 2014 2. Roundtable workshops – February and March 2015 3. Metropolitan councils CEO workshop – March 2015 4. Metropolitan councils Mayors and CEO meeting – April 2015
Attachment 2
5. Endorsement by Future Melbourne Committee, June 2015 6. Accelerated Design Forums – July and August 2015 7. Focus Area Working groups led by council CEOs – August to December 2015 8. Council survey on successful resilience building actions and programs – October to November 2016 9. Cross council communications working group – ongoing since December 2015 10. Regional workshops hosted by Casey, Darebin and at the MAV – December 2015 11. Project review by council CEOs leading working groups and Steering Committee – November 2015 12. First draft of strategy reviewed by CEOs leading working groups 13. Revised draft strategy circulated for council feedback – February to March 2016 14. Regional briefings hosted Nillumbik, Cardinia, Yarra, Melton and Monash – February to March 2016 15. CEO one on one meetings – February to March 2016 16. Feedback incorporated into straetgy March 2016 17. Meeting of metropolitan mayors and CEOs – April 2016 18. Strategy finalied
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 272
Attachment 1: Summary of Submissions
4.1
Item: 4.1
Table of Submissions
2. 3.
SUPPORT SUPPORT
4.
SUPPORT
5.
OPPOSE
6.
SUPPORT
7.
OPPOSE
Submission Details
Response/Action
a. Happy about a proposed safer crossing point in Grimshaw Street. Access to Watermarc and the Greensborough Plaza is very important. b. Safer bike lanes in the centre are welcomed. N/A a. Proposed changes are ideal for increasing population and further increase business in the AC. b. Supports increased residential density near a major transport hub. a. Greensborough is in dire need of an upgrade. Although there is a lot more to do at least this is a start. a. Too many 2 storey + apartments being built in Greensborough. Warwick Road is very narrow and it is difficult to see cars coming when exiting properties. There is an accident waiting to happen with cars parked on both sides of the street. b. Pedestrian lights are needed opposite Centrelink as it is very dangerous trying to cross the street.
No further action required.
a. A good proposal and an improvement for Greensborough a. Only objection is to trees being retained in the Stubley Court car park as the leaves block the spouting, driveway and front lawn - they are a menace. No objection to the car park but objects to retaining the trees.
No further action required. No further action required.
No further action required. a. Council’s traffic engineers have surveyed the street and found that when vehicles are parked on the inside of the bends in the road, safe stopping sight distance is not achievable in accordance with Australian Standards. In order to reinforce safety, ‘No Stopping’ parking restrictions are proposed. b. Council is financially committed to a safer road environment along Grimshaw Street for pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles. Action: Continuing discussions with submitter. No further action required a. The construction of the car park at 2-4 and 6 Stubley Court will involve the removal of all the trees except for two on the Grimshaw Street elevation and one on the south eastern corner of 6 Stubley Court. This information has been relayed to the submitter both verbally and in writing. ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 273
Attachment 1
Submission Support/ No. Oppose 1. SUPPORT
Attachment 1: Summary of Submissions
4.1
Item: 4.1
Attachment 1
8.
OPPOSE
a. The car parking in the Henry Howard Street carpark is adequate. People in general won't want to walk up from the new major developments like Watermarc and the Council offices. b. There is never enough off street parking provided for new town houses/residential developments. Warwick Road is already too busy and congested as you enter off Grimshaw Street. Warwick Road is dangerous as you round the bend with cars parked on either side. Three storey development on Warwick Road will make it worse. c. More money should be spent on making Greensborough beautiful and treed. The entire MainStreet/Grimshaw Street needs a facelift as does the Plaza and Woolworths.
9.
OPPOSE
a. Does not agree with providing additional parking in the Henry Street carpark (Precinct 2) because it is never more than 50% full. A new multi storey car park should be constructed close to the station. b. New developments are being built in Precinct 5 with no off street parking which is causing more cars to be parked in the street and making it harder to back cars out of driveways. c. Money needs to be sent on rejuvenating park land and making it more kid friendly.
10.
OPPOSE
No details provided in Submission.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 274
Action: Continuing discussions with submitter. a. A Car Parking Management Plan (CPMP) has been developed for Greensborough to better understand the impact of the new Council offices, the commercial office above WaterMarc, and other changes occurring in the Greensborough area. The CPMP considered the management of Council's broader car parking resources, and identified the possible provision of additional car parking on Council owned land within the Activity Centre. b. Council’s traffic engineers have surveyed the street and found that when vehicles are parked on the inside of the bends in the road, safe stopping sight distance is not achievable in accordance with Australian Standards. In order to reinforce safety, ‘No Stopping’ parking restrictions are proposed. c. The area situated on Main Street in front of Greensborough Plaza will soon have a makeover, with an improved footpath, new landscaping and more street furniture. The improvements are being made by Blackstone, the owners of the plaza. Action: Continuing discussions with submitter. Response as above for Submission 8.
Action: Continuing discussions with submitter. A telephone message was left for the submitter on 6 May.
11.
12. 13.
OPPOSE
SUPPORT OPPOSE
a. The service lane is on the title of the property and is subject of a right of way. A further 3m setback will encroach on the building prospects for the property. b. Clarification is sought as to whether future development will be able to use the 3m setback to enable entry into an underground car park. c. Clarification is sought as to whether the vertical lane wall of the building bordering the service lane which is subject to the 3m setback will be subject to any further height setback.
VicRoads supports the proposed amendment. a. Opposes the retention of the tree in the backyard of the subject property as it will impact any future building developments on the land.
Action: Try contacting submitter again to understand the concerns. a. The buildable area that is lost in the 3 metre setback from the boundary with the service lane is made up through the revised ‘0’ metre front setback from Flintoff Street. b. Part of the 3 metre setback can be used to enable entry to an underground car park should it be required. c. As stated in the Precinct Guidelines (5.6.3) in the Activity Centre Zone Schedule 1 (ACZ 1), the upper floor elements above the street wall height should be slender and separated from other built form to ensure views between buildings are maintained and to avoid visual bulk. Therefore, this may mean an upper level setback from the service lane is required. Action: This submitter’s views are also represented by Submitter 14. The Urban Design issues raised will be referred to a Planning Panel. No further action required a. In February 2016 Council’s Environment Team received a nomination for this tree to be added to the Significant Tree Register. The tree is considered to be significant for its prominent landscape contribution – large and atop a ridgeline. It is a large indigenous tree visible from surrounding hills. The retention of the tree does not necessarily preclude development of the site if an appropriate Tree Protection Zone is enforced.
14
OPPOSE
a. The proposals in the planning scheme do not go far enough.
Action: Meet with the submitter to discuss design opportunities for retaining the tree and explain the Panel process to the submitter. Consider splitting this matter into a separate ESO4 Amendment. Action: The Urban Design issues raised will be referred to a Planning Panel.
Precinct 6 ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 275
4.1
Attachment 1: Summary of Submissions
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
Attachment 1: Summary of Submissions
4.1
Item: 4.1
Attachment 1
b. Adjoins the civic hub and railway station and does not abut any lower density residential areas. The max preferred building heights for Precinct 6 undersell the strategic importance of Precincts 6A and 6D in particular. Would rather see higher preferred maximum heights to a suggested 11-12 storeys which would be more viable for investors and would kick start development. c. There is concern about the 3 metre setback to both sides of the service lane. There does not appear to be sound justification for this proposal.
15.
OPPOSE
Precinct 5 d. There would be a 4 metre diffrence in the preferred maximim building heights between precincts 5B and 5C. Some of the blocks on the north side of Warwick Road are quite deep and better outcomes could be achieved with a greater degree of flexibility. e. The proposed setback requirement in the draft schedule requires attention to ResCode's amenity Standards for development at the southern end of Precinct 5B. This needs to be extended to include Clause 55.04-3 (daylight to windows and 55.04-4 (north facing windows). a. DELWP recommends that the VPO5 for 25 and 27 Howard Street be retained to assist implementing the Greensborough Activity Centre Guidelines. This VPO would provide greater protection to Significant Trees which is an objective of the Guidelines and to protect landscape features that contribute to character, identity and sustainable development.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 276
a. Amendment C110 proposes to include numbers 25 and 27 Howard Street in Precinct 2 of the Activity Centre Zone (ACZ). The only Precinct that is affected by the Vegetation Protection Overlay 5 (VPO5) is Precinct 5 (Southern Residential Precinct. The purpose of removing these two properties from the VPO5 is to achieve consistency with the existing planning controls for Precinct 2. It is not considered that the removal of two properties from the VPO5 is going to have a significant impact on the protection of trees and
b. The amendment does not provide clear guidance on how the protection of existing landscaping, further strengthening the environmental features, views and vistas of Greensborough will be achieved. c. DELWP supports the application of the ESO4 to land at 38, 40 and 42 Warwick Road, Greensborough. 16.
SUPPORT
a. The submitter broadly supports the intent of the Amendment C110 and recognises the need for built form controls to provide guidance on Council's aspirations for future development in the Greensborough Activity Centre.
landscaping in the centre. b. Under Section 4.4 – Design and Development in the proposed schedule to the ACZ various requirements are outlined in relation to ‘landscaping.’ These requirements include landscape treatments for public and private realm areas, provision of canopy trees, street planting and landscape upgrade works.
4.1
Attachment 1: Summary of Submissions
Action: Continuing discussions with submitter. Action: The submitter is generally supportive of the Amendment. Two minor changes may be further discussed with the submitter.
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
b. The Objectives and Guidelines for Precinct 6 are supported. c. The proposed precinct requirements are generally supported. It is important that they remain discretionary to allow flexibility for site specific design considerations and opportunities. d. Allowing for discretion to exceed to indicative building envelope where site responsive and good design allows the Precinct Objectives to be met is supported One minor change is proposed for the Building heights & Setbacks Table. e. The benefit of the notional mid block pedestrian link is questioned and believes that it should be removed. ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 277
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 278
Attachment 1: Summary of Submissions
4.1
Attachment 2: Consultation Brochure - December 2015
Attachment 2
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 279
Attachment 2: Consultation Brochure - December 2015
Attachment 2
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 280
4.1
Attachment 3: Ministerial Authorisation
Attachment 3
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 281
Attachment 3
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 282
Attachment 3: Ministerial Authorisation
4.1
Attachment 4: Community Update Brochure - March 2016
Attachment 4
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 283
Attachment 4: Community Update Brochure - March 2016
Attachment 4
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 284
4.1
Attachment 4: Community Update Brochure - March 2016
Attachment 4
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 285
Attachment 4: Community Update Brochure - March 2016
Attachment 4
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 286
4.3
Attachment 1: 1/33 Coventry Street, Montmorency - P1070/2015 - Plans and Elevations
Attachment 1
Item: 4.3
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 287
Attachment 1
4.3
Item: 4.3
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 288
Attachment 1: 1/33 Coventry Street, Montmorency - P1070/2015 - Plans and Elevations
4.3
Attachment 1: 1/33 Coventry Street, Montmorency - P1070/2015 - Plans and Elevations
Attachment 1
Item: 4.3
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 289
Attachment 2: 1/33 Coventry Street, Montmorency - P1070/2015 - Planning Controls Assessment
4.3
Item: 4.3
PLANNING CONTROLS ASSESSMENT The following planning controls are relevant to the assessment of the application: Neighbourhood Residential Zone – Schedule 3
•
To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.
•
To recognise areas of predominantly single and double storey residential development. To limit opportunities for increased residential development.
•
To manage and ensure that development respects the identified neighbourhood character, heritage, environmental or landscape characteristics.
•
To implement neighbourhood character policy and adopted neighbourhood character guidelines.
•
To allow educational, recreational, religious, community and a limited range of other nonresidential uses to serve local community needs in appropriate locations.
Planning approval is required to extend a dwelling on a lot less than 500 sqm under Clause 32.09-4 of the Scheme. Vegetation Protection Overlay – Schedule 1 The overlay aims to retain and protect indigenous vegetation to ensure that the development is compatible with the existing character and landscape conservation of the area. A permit is required to remove, destroy or lop native vegetation which is more than 5 metres high and has a single trunk circumference of more than 0.5 metres at a height of 1 metre above ground level. It is not proposed to remove any vegetation from the site as part of this application. Clause 52.06 Car Parking Provisions Under Clause 52.06-1 car parking rates does not apply to an existing dwelling within a NRZ3. It is noted that the original permit which approved the 3 dwelling development on 33 Coventry Street (P432/1995) allowed for the provision of two open car spaces within the front setback of the subject site. Clause 52.06 does not apply to the proposal. Clause 22.02 Neighbourhood Character Local Policy – Bush Garden (East) Precinct Objective To maintain and enhance the native vegetation dominated vistas, streetscapes and backdrops, retain remnant indigenous vegetation, and encourage the replanting of indigenous plants Design Response 1. Retain existing trees wherever possible. If this cannot be achieved, or a tree is considered appropriate for removal, the site should provide adequate space for offset planting of indigenous or native trees that will grow to a mature height similar to the mature height of the tree to be removed.
Complies? Does Not Comply Yes
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 291
Attachment 2
The purpose of this zone is to:
Attachment 2
4.3
Item: 4.3
Attachment 2: 1/33 Coventry Street, Montmorency - P1070/2015 - Planning Controls Assessment
2.
One medium to large indigenous or native tree should be provided for every 200 sq.m. of site area. These should be predominantly large trees, and may include existing trees that are worthy of retention. At least one of the large trees should be provided in the front setback (Note: sufficient unpaved space must be provided around each tree for growth).
Yes 1 tree required
3.
Building site coverage should not exceed 40%, however it may need to be less than this in order to provide sufficient site area for planting, growth and retention of vegetation. This may be varied if the proposal demonstrates that the vegetated character of the site and Precinct is protected and enhanced by retaining existing vegetation and providing sufficient area for the planting of additional trees and other vegetation.
Does not Comply Proposed site coverage 52%
4.
Buildings should be a sufficient distance from at least one side or rear property boundary to enable the planting and growth of medium to large trees. These setbacks should provide sufficient area for future growth of the mature canopy of trees, and understorey planting.
Yes
5.
If more than one dwelling is proposed, sufficient separation should be provided between each dwelling to allow for the planting and future growth of small to medium trees and understorey vegetation.
NA
6.
Tree species and planting locations should be carefully selected to avoid canopy or root conflicts with overhead wires, easements and existing trees.
7.
If there is no street tree within the frontage of a dwelling, a new street tree should be proposed.
Condition required NA
Discussion The subject site is the original dwelling located on the site within frontage to Coventry St, two further dwellings have been constructed to the rear of the site. All dwellings are accessed via a shared driveway along the eastern side boundary. The permit which approved the multi-unit development allowed for the provision of car parking for the subject dwelling to be located as open car spaces within the front setback. The surface of the car parking spaces is sealed with patterned concrete. A hedge along the front boundary screens the car spaces from view from the street, except when the site is viewed along the shared driveway. It is proposed to construct a double carport within the front setback of 1/33 Coventry St Montmorency. The existing dwelling has a site coverage of 41.7%. The proposed double carport would increase the site coverage to 52.5%, above the 40% preferred for this precinct.
Objective To ensure buildings and extensions do not dominate the streetscape or the building, and do not adversely affect the outlook and amenity of neighbouring dwellings. Design Response 8. Developments should minimise the need for cut and fill throughout the site. 9.
Second storey portions of buildings should be recessed from ground level wall surfaces, incorporated within roof spaces where possible and minimised in height.
10. Buildings at the rear of a site should be designed to follow the topography of the land and
Complies? Yes
Yes NA NA
respond sensitively to each interface. Second storeys (where appropriate) should be modest in size, have generous side and rear setbacks and be screened with vegetation. 11. Buildings should not exceed the predominant tree canopy height.
Yes
Discussion The proposed carport does not require cut or fill and the overall height of 4.6m is below the canopy of surrounding trees.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 292
Attachment 2: 1/33 Coventry Street, Montmorency - P1070/2015 - Planning Controls Assessment
Objective To ensure new buildings and extensions are sympathetic to the current building form and architectural style.
Complies? Yes
Design Response 12. Wall and roof materials for extensions should blend with existing materials.
Yes
13. In BG (East) roof and plan forms should reflect those of the surrounding period houses
Yes
14. In BG (South), reflect the main design elements of the 1970s era, including flat roofs, low wall
NA
including hipped roofs with narrow, boxed eaves.
4.3
Item: 4.3
heights, vertical window proportions. 15. In BG (West) roof and plan forms should reflect those of the surrounding post-war houses,
NA
16. Variation should be provided between each dwelling of a development that faces the street.
NA
This can be achieved through varied roof pitches, window and door placement, materials, faรงade articulation and other design detailing. Discussion The proposed carport is to be located adjacent to the southern front elevation of the dwelling with the hipped roofline of the existing house to be extended to cover the carport.
Objective To ensure that household services are not a visually prominent feature. Design Response 17. Solar panels should be located to minimise their visual impact. Air conditioning, rainwater tanks, bins and storage should be located and/or screened so they are not visually obtrusive in the streetscape. 18. In accessible areas, rooftop plant equipment should be screened and/or located to minimise
Complies? Yes Yes
NA
their visual impact and integrate with the roof form. Discussion Household services are to be located to the side or rear of the dwelling and not visible from the streetscape.
Objective To maintain consistency of current front setbacks whilst enabling tree planting in front gardens.
Complies? Does Not Comply
Design Response 19. Dwellings should be setback in line with the predominant front setback of dwellings along the street.
Does Not Comply
20. For corner sites, the front setback of a dwelling facing the side street should be at a transition
NA
between the predominant setback along the side street, and the side setback of the dwelling facing the front street.
Discussion The proposed carport will reduce the front setback of the dwelling from Coventry Street from 9.176m to a minimum of 1.543m. The adjoining dwelling to the east (1/35 Coventry St) which also has a carport forward of the dwelling has a front setback of 6.5m to the carport and 9.6m to the dwelling. The adjoining dwelling to the west (1/31 Coventry St) has a front setback of 6.3m. The proposed carport will project forward of the predominant front setback. This area is currently used for two open car spaces so there is no opportunity for canopy tree planting within the front setback. A row of hedges are planting along the front boundary of the site.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 293
Attachment 2
including hipped roof with narrow boxed eaves.
Attachment 2: 1/33 Coventry Street, Montmorency - P1070/2015 - Planning Controls Assessment
4.3
Item: 4.3
Attachment 2
Objective To minimise excavation for vehicle access, loss of front garden space, and dominance of vehicle access, vehicle storage facilities and built form as viewed from the street.
Complies? Does Not Comply
Design Response 21. In BG (East) and BG (West), locate carports, garages, and all uncovered parking spaces behind the line of the dwelling. Landscaping such as large shrubs and trees in the front setback should be provided to discourage car parking in the front yard.
Does not Comply
22. In BG (South) dedicated car parking spaces should not be provided between the front wall of a
NA
dwelling that faces the street, and the front property boundary. Landscaping such as large shrubs and trees should be provided in the front setback to discourage car parking in this location. Carports and garages should be located behind the line of the dwelling. 23. Encourage outcomes that consider the Banyule City Council Residential Vehicle Crossing Policy
Yes
2012. 24. Driveways should include curves and bends that provide sufficient room for landscaping at
NA
varying heights. 25. Driveways should be finished with earthy, natural tones such as dark greys and browns to
NA
blend with vegetation. Discussion Technically permit P432/1995 (issued 14/12/1995) which approved the 3 dwelling multi-unit on the site, granted approval for the provision of two open car spaces within the front setback of the subject dwelling. The surface of the car parking spaces is covered by patterned concrete and is not available for canopy tree planting. A hedge has been planted along the front boundary of the site behind a picket fence which screens the car spaces from view. The proposed carport would be an intrusion into the front setback however as mentioned above the front setback area is unavailable for planting due to the open car spaces.
Objective To maintain and strengthen the spaciousness and bush character of front gardens and the view of these gardens and trees from the street.
Complies? Yes
Design Response 26. Front fences should not be provided, where this is the predominant pattern in the street.
Yes
27. Timber and basalt retaining walls are acceptable where necessary.
NA
28. Sufficient space should be provided in front yards for the retention and/or planting of at least
NA
one (1) large tree, and should contain informal understorey planting of indigenous and native species. 29. Secluded private open space should be located behind the line of a dwelling that faces the
street.
Yes
Discussion An existing front picket fence is located along the front boundary with a hedge of trees directly behind. There is insufficient space within the front setback of the dwelling to plant a large canopy tree as previous planning approval allowed for the provision of two open car spaces within the front setback. The secluded open space for the dwelling will continue to be provided to the rear of the site.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 294
Attachment 2: 1/33 Coventry Street, Montmorency - P1070/2015 - Planning Controls Assessment
4.3
Item: 4.3
Complies? NA
Design Response 30. New buildings at or near ridgelines should be designed and sited so that cut and fill is minimised and the building sits below the height of trees along the ridgeline.
NA
31. New buildings at or near ridgelines should have muted colours and tones, and non- reflective
NA
materials. 32. Trees and vegetation that contribute to the landscape should be retained. New native or
NA
indigenous trees should be planted on or near the ridgeline to form a continuous canopy. Discussion The subject site is not located on a ridgeline.
Clause 54 ResCode Clause 54.02 (Neighbourhood Character and Infrastructure) Neighbourhood Character objectives • •
Does Not Comply
To ensure that the design respects the existing neighbourhood character or contributes to a preferred neighbourhood character. To ensure that development responds to the features of the site and the surrounding area Standard A1
Integration with the street objective •
See Residential Neighbourhood Character local policy assessment for details.
Complies
To integrate the layout of development with the street. Standard A2
Clause 54.03 (Site Layout and Building Massing) Street setback objective •
Does Not Comply
To ensure that the setbacks of buildings from a street respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and make efficient use of the site. Standard A3
Existing dwelling is setback 9.317m from Coventry St Proposed carport setback min 1.543m from front boundary Adjoining dwelling to east (1/35 Coventry St) has a front setback of 6m to the carport and the dwelling has a front setback of 9.8m. Adjoining property to west (1/31 Coventry St) has a front setback of 6.3m Average front setback calculation 6m + 6.3m = 12.3/2 = 6.15m required
Building height objective •
Complies
To ensure that the height of buildings respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character. Standard A4
Site coverage objective •
The maximum height of carport is 4.6m below the standard requirement of 9m
Complies
To ensure that the site coverage respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and responds to
Proposed site coverage is 49.97 below the Standard
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 295
Attachment 2
Objective To ensure that developments on or near ridgelines retain existing trees, sit below the tree canopies, minimise excavation, and enable further tree planting to form a continuous canopy, so that the scenic quality is maintained and enhanced.
4.3
Item: 4.3
the features of the site.
requirement of 60%. Standard A5
Permeability objectives
Complies
•
Proposed permeability is 50.03% above the Standard requirement of 20%.
•
To reduce the impact of increased stormwater run-off on the drainage system. To facilitate on-site stormwater infiltration. Standard A6
Energy efficiency objectives
Complies
•
The proposed carport will be attached to the southern front elevation of the dwelling and will not impact on the northern facing secluded open space and adjoining internal living areas located at the rear of the site.
•
Attachment 2
Attachment 2: 1/33 Coventry Street, Montmorency - P1070/2015 - Planning Controls Assessment
To achieve and protect energy efficient dwellings and residential buildings. To ensure the orientation and layout of development reduce fossil fuel energy use and make appropriate use of daylight and solar energy. Standard A7
Significant trees objectives
Complies
•
The proposed carport will not impact on existing vegetation. P432/1195 which approved a 3 dwelling development on the site in 1995. This permit allowed for the provision of two open car spaces within the front setback of the subject dwelling. The surface of the car spaces is covered by patterned concrete and as a result there is limited opportunity for canopy tree planting within the front setback. The existing dwelling does have the benefit hedge planting along the front boundary.
•
To encourage development that respects the landscape character of the neighbourhood. To encourage the retention of significant trees on the site. Standard A8
Parking objectives
NA
•
Under Cl 52.06 existing dwellings do not need to provide the rate of parking specified in the scheme. This aside the proposed carport intends to cover the two open car spaces provided within the front setback of the dwelling.
To ensure that car parking is adequate for the needs of residents. Standard A9
Clause 54.04 (Amenity Impacts) Side and rear setbacks objective
Complies
•
The proposed carport would be setback 2.15m from the western side boundary and 9.2m from the eastern side boundary.
To ensure that the height and setback of a building from a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the impact on the amenity of existing dwellings. Standard A10
Walls on boundaries objective •
NA
To ensure that the location, length and height of a wall on a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the impact on the amenity of existing dwellings. Standard A11
Daylight to existing windows objective
Complies
•
No adjoining habitable windows are adjacent to the proposed carport.
To allow adequate daylight into existing habitable room windows. Standard A12
North-facing windows objective
Complies
•
No north facing windows are within 3m of the proposed carport.
To allow adequate solar access to existing northfacing habitable room windows. Standard A13
Overshadowing open space objective
Complies
•
The proposed carport will not impact on adjoining secluded open space.
To ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow existing secluded private open space. Standard A14
Overlooking objective
NA
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 296
•
Attachment 2: 1/33 Coventry Street, Montmorency - P1070/2015 - Planning Controls Assessment
4.3
Item: 4.3
To limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows. Standard A15
Daylight to new windows objective
Complies
•
The proposed carport is to be located adjacent to the front southern elevation of the existing dwelling directly abutting the window of bedroom 1. It is noted that the existing south facing window receives limited light due to the orientation of the window and the bedroom also has the benefit of a west facing window.
To allow adequate daylight into new habitable room windows. Standard A16
Private open space objective •
NA
To provide adequate private open space for the reasonable recreation and service needs of residents. Standard A17
Solar access to open space objective •
NA
To allow solar access into the secluded private open space of a new dwelling. Standard A18
Clause 54.06 (Detailed Design) Design detail objective •
Does Not Comply
To encourage design detail that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character. Standard A19
Front fences objective •
See Residential Neighbourhood Character local policy assessment
NA
To encourage front fence design that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character. Standard A20
Existing front picket fence to be retained
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 297
Attachment 2
Clause 54.05 (On-site Amenity and Facilities)
Attachment 1: Community Update - Haig Street open space and naming - March 2016
Attachment 1
4.4
Item: 4.4
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 298
4.4
Attachment 1: Community Update - Haig Street open space and naming - March 2016
Attachment 1
Item: 4.4
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 299
Attachment 1: Response from Minister 12 May 2016
Attachment 1
4.5
Item: 4.5
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 300
4.5
Attachment 1: Response from Minister 12 May 2016
Attachment 1
Item: 4.5
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 301
4.6
Attachment 1: Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street - Concept Plan endorsed by Council December 2015
Attachment 1
Item: 4.6
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 303
Attachment 1: Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street - Concept Plan endorsed by Council December 2015
Attachment 1
4.6
Item: 4.6
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 304
Attachment 1: Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee (BACAC) Minutes 18 February 2016
6.1
Item: 6.1
Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee Minutes from committee meeting 18/02/2016 Hatch Contemporary Arts Space
Attendees: Anne Bennett, Rosemary Crosthwaite, Kate Hansen, Irianna Kanellopoulou, Frances Lee, JD Mittmann, Kerry O’Hara (Ivanhoe Library), Darren Bennett (BCC), Colin James (BCC), Stephanie Neoh (BCC), Jacqui Ratcliffe (BCC), Giovanna Savini (BCC) Architects: Catherine Ramsay, Richard Cox Apologies: Wendy Fleming, Les Walkling, Violeta Madireddi, Rebecca Armstrong, Isabella Holding 2. Welcome and Introductions Colin James opened the meeting, and handed over to Giovanna Savini, who is the Project Manager for the proposed Ivanhoe Community/Cultural Hub. Everyone present introduced themselves. 3. Ivanhoe Community/Cultural Hub - Visioning Discussion Giovanna introduced and provided a brief overview of the project. - The main areas that will be accommodated in the building – Maternal Child Health Offices, Theatrette, Community/Flexible spaces, Library, Gallerys, Art Collection storage. - Size requirements and allocation of space were researched by previous Arts team - Introduced the architects and opened the discussion to determine an initial brief for the arts component of the hub. Question posed by architect: what are our current restrictions, what would the new space/s need to fulfil? 1) Touring Exhibitions – in order to accommodate touring exhibitions, the gallery and storage areas need to meet the accepted standard for a museum environment (lighting, climate control, stable environment). 2) Loading bay – accessible for receiving large artworks, be connected to appropriate storage spaces, loading space/goods reception area. 3) Problem of Hatch is that it is a static space, one large room, not flexible 4) Ceiling Height – needs to be high enough to “disappear” but not so high that works can’t be hung from it 5) Plaster walls with MDF backing are required for ease of use and flexibility in hanging methods, with frequent occurrence of weight-bearing studs. 6) Flexible, plentiful lighting, power outlets
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 305
Attachment 1
1. Attendance
Attachment 1
6.1
Item: 6.1
Attachment 1: Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee (BACAC) Minutes 18 February 2016
7) Artist-in-residence spaces to be visible for public engagement, perhaps one of the studios would have a shared glass wall with the gallery or other public access areas so that the artist can be on “display” 8) Intimate spaces required for some works – needs to be considered 9) Hub should be child-safe, inviting to families (so that families will feel welcome, and not be afraid to bring children into the gallery in case they run around and touch stuff and break things. 10) Opportunity to combine spaces – potentially not have all the areas separated into their own rooms/spaces, especially with shared programming? Opportunity to explore how to create spaces based on programming, not who “owns” the space. 11) Activating the in-between spaces – thresholds, corridors, walkways 12) Visible storage (eg. Koorie Heritage Trust) – where some walls are built like glass cabinets. They work to separate spaces, but also used to display artworks (like a permanent display of the art collection) 13) Street Visibility – important not to be an imposing, closed-off building, but have activities visible from the street 14) Provide comfortable spaces, needs the community to engage, feel comfortable in the building, and have a sense of ownership of the hub 15) Façade should include public art – eg permanent projection wall on an external wall (requires programming support in operational considerations) 16) Support for performances - There will be a theatrette, not a full auditorium - Flexible theatrette, but not a “multi-purpose” room. Should be built to serve specific programming e.g small music ensembles, spoken word - Acoustics and aesthetics are extremely important to attract high end programming 17) There are restrictions on height of the building (to protect views), but there will be a bar/café, and possibility of a restaurant with views higher up 18) Outdoor area - Community gardens? - Town square kind of meeting area, an inviting space to hang out and meet friends at, or spill out onto before/after events - Inside/outside - Somewhere where activities have the potential to spill out to - External spaces designed to support events eg power, views, shade 19) We need to meet with key stakeholders to think about programming so that there is no retro-fitting (which is costly and not optimal for results). 20) Shared spaces – is an important discussion to have, to determine where programming crosses over, how to facilitate various activities 21) Use of technology, teaching spaces, computer/digital labs, etc 22) How open and accessible the spaces are at all times – how late will the building be open? Where to place each space so that the building doesn’t look closed and shutdown when there is one or two activities on, or that people will have to walk past lots of locked doors, closed-off spaces to reach an after-hours event, etc. 23) There should be consideration of the Aboriginal history of the area. Architects should work with the Indigenous community, Wurundjeri Council early on to make sure they proceed in the proper manner to include and engage the Indigenous
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 306
community and where appropriate, incorporate acknowledgements of the local Indigenous culture into their design. Things to consider moving forward: a) Consider all our programming, find where we have similar requirements so that those spaces can be shared or built close to each other to share infrastructure (eg. library can share use of artist studios or community art space to conduct their arts and craft sessions; build storage facilities for both art collection and library archive next to each other to share the climate control infrastructure; gallery has a requirement for a kitchen/bar, artist studios should have plumbing or a shared sink/wash area, etc) Need to workshop with other stakeholders about logistics, usage, programming. **This will help architects design the layout of the building based on the infrastructure needed to support each space for maximum efficiency and costeffectiveness, may also free up extra space if we share space for common activities. b) Committee members to share ideas and images of excellent examples of gallery design, anything that you want to see included/considered in the building of this facility. c) Efficiences – consider how the different areas can operate together d) The committee to think of how each space could be used e) Possible connections to festivals around Melbourne (writer’s festival, film festival, comedy festival, projection festival, etc), how to make the building attractive and accessible to facilitate such connections/programming Action Points: • Colin will send out scope document with a framework for responses to the Committee, and set out a timeframe for the next 6-8 weeks where we need to feed this information back to the architects before they complete their first draft design • Emailed responses to be collected from each Committee member. Council staff will collate the responses • Colin will initiate a workshop with key stakeholders (other Council departments, Library) to discuss programming and operations • The outcomes/feedback from the workshop to be reported back to the Committee at a special/extra Committee meeting • Our ideas and requirements to be communicated to the architects This portion of the meeting closed, and non-Committee members left the meeting. 4. Previous Minutes Rosemary Crosthwaite passed the minutes, Kate Hansen seconded. -
Issue of Ella Hinkley joining the Committee was discussed, and it was resolved that she would not normally attend Committee meetings, but can be called upon when there are situations that require her specialised skill set.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 307
6.1
Attachment 1: Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee (BACAC) Minutes 18 February 2016
Attachment 1
Item: 6.1
Attachment 1: Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee (BACAC) Minutes 18 February 2016
Attachment 1
6.1
Item: 6.1
5. Public Art Policy Development: - Colin and Rosemary attended a Public Art Think Tank in Ballarat, 15-16 February. - It was very informative, useful and helped them to re-consider how to approach the development of the Public Art Policy, and will be a useful resource (with a new website as a result), and has provided Colin with valuable new connections - For successful development and adoption of a Public Art Policy, Colin needs to set up a process to engage other Council departments that are necessary for the installation and maintenance of Public Art. They need to be engaged and committed in such a way that they want to do it, and not see it like something they’re doing as a favour for another Council department 6. Programming Schedule: - We hope to begin programming exhibitions/events for the Arts & Culture calendar at least one year in advance. We will begin this year, finalising a program for 2017, and launching it officially around the end of November 2016. - We hope to tie in a public proposal program with the curated program and grants program. - Cross-fertilisation and support of all arts programming a. Community Grants tie-in, possible BACAC involvement - Colin is working on getting an allocation of Arts grants money that can be administered separately from the pool of Community Grants - Potential for BACAC to assess the grant applications - Irianna raised the issue of the allocation of funding between Arts Development and Arts Presentation. If the purpose of Arts Development grants is not fully understood by Council such the artists applying for Arts Development grants fail to receive the funding, would it be better to re-define this grant, or re-allocate the funds to arts presentation so that it does not mislead artists. - Suggestion made by Darren Bennett to consider changing the scope of the Arts Development grants to something like the “Sports Achievement Award”, which awards smaller amounts purely for the development of an individual, without any obligation to “give back” to the community or produce a public outcome. 7. Date of future BACAC Meetings: Due to a clash of meeting dates for Councillors on the third Thursday of the month, we will re-visit the BACAC meeting dates for 2016. It is imperative that we have at least one Councillor present at our meetings to represent our interests in Council meetings. -
Colin will email each committee member to submit their preferences for meeting days (which evening, Monday to Friday), and we will set new meeting dates for 2016.
8. Meeting Close Next meeting: TBC ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 308
Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee Meeting Date: Friday 11th March 2016 Location: Tom Roberts Room, Banyule City Council Present Cr Jenny Mulholland, Banyule City Council (Chair) Cr Craig Langdon Virginia Masters, Resident Glen Reigo, Resident Judy Elsworth, Resident Jenny Dale, Resident Ken Young, OM:NI Men’s Group Robert Barron, COTA Vic Elaine Anderson, Watsonia Probus Julie Watson, North East Primary Care Partnership Lisa Raywood, Banyule City Council Leanne Horvath, Banyule City Council Catherine Simcox, Banyule City Council Apologies Eric Rosario, Resident 1.
Welcome by Cr Mulholland
2. Adoption of February Minutes and noting actions – adopted Item 3 from the February 2016 minutes will be presented to Council as a separate report to their April Council meeting. This item considered options on the Seniors festival morning tea. 3.
Banyule Age-friendly City Champion Program
a.
First birthday celebration
•
General discussion on the success of the first birthday celebration. Committee members enjoyed having the opportunity to talk with other Champions.
•
John Habboush, Age-friendly Banyule Champion was the event photographer and the Committee looked over the photos.
b. •
Volunteer Pack People that attended the first birthday celebration where presented with a volunteer pack. Age-friendly Champions that did not attend the event will have a pack posted to them. Catherine Simcox asked for everyone (Advisory members and Champions) to read over the content and return the forms.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 309
6.1
Attachment 2: Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee Minutes 11 March 2016
Attachment 2
Item: 6.1
6.1
Item: 6.1
c.
Attachment 2: Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee Minutes 11 March 2016
Age in Focus – photographic exhibition @ Shop 48
Age in Focus Photographic Exhibition, Shop 48. 22 – 31st March: The age-friendly Banyule Champions working group have meet and divided in to sub-groups to share the work load. There will be a number of sections within the exhibition: a. Community photographic exhibition: Has been advertised in the Leader and on front page of website. Inviting community to submit photos of older Banyule residents living their amazing lives. http://www.banyule.vic.gov.au/Council/News-
Attachment 2
and-Public-Notices/Age-in-Focus-Submissions b. Photographic exhibition of Council images: Champions have selected Council owned images to arrange a curated exhibit. Been working with Steph, Art Curator. f. Bring the Grandkids: this session will involve two key activities – museum will provide a 45minutes session on toys from 1920 – 1950s and children and grandparents can play and touch the toys. Then the Yarra Plenty library will provide a session on the i-pads and playing interactive apps. c. Farming your ideas: Community engagement workshops with a focus on what the future age-friendly Banyule would look like. Currently finalising arrangements with a local artist to undertake two playful illustrative workshops during the exhibition. d. Ka-Ching movie: Fulfilling our commitment to show the Ka-Ching movie on gambling industry. This film will be shown and then followed up with a discussion. OM:NI will be facilitating the discussion session. e. Advance Style: Fun filmed that will be shown.
4. Safe Travel and Road Safety Plan - Michelle Herbert, Senior Transport Engineer •
Current themes are: encourage walk cycle or use public transport, reduce the vehicle impacts, safe travel.
•
Currently doing the draft action plan for each theme. Draft plan to go to Council early May 2016.
5. Membership of the Advisory Committee and filling vacancies The Advisory Committee membership will consist of up to 15 members and will include representation from: o Two representatives of the Banyule City Council.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 310
Attachment 2: Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee Minutes 11 March 2016
o Five residents representing the community (individual members). o Five representatives of community groups or local agencies.
6.1
Item: 6.1
o Three representatives of State and/or Federal government departments or state-wide organisations. •
Due to ill health and change in life circumstances we currently have a number of vacancies. The Committee discussed that Judy Elsworth could be a U3A
U3A Executive Committee. The current make-up of the Committee is as follows:
Resident Representatives
Glen Reigo Eric Rosario Jenny Dale Virginia Masters VACANCY x1
Representatives Of Community Groups
Robert Barron, COTA Elaine Anderson, Probus Judy Elsworth, U3A (if agreed to by U3A Executive) Ken Young, OM:NI VACANCY x1
Representatives Of State And/Or Federal Government Departments Or State-Wide Organisations.
Lence Markovska, BaptCare Julie Watson, PCP VACANCY x1
Council Representatives
Cr Mulholland (Chair) Mayor Langdon
•
The current term of the Advisory Committee finishes December 2016. The Committee agreed that they would like to fill the vacant space to December 2016.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 311
Attachment 2
community group representative. Judy will seek endorsement from the current
6.1
Item: 6.1
•
Attachment 2: Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee Minutes 11 March 2016
The Committee would like to invite Age-friendly Champions to apply for a vacant position. Council staff are to approach state-wide organisations to fill that one vacancy.
ACTION: •
Age-friendly Champions to be approached to fill the existing vacancies on the Committee.
Attachment 2
•
Council staff to approach state-wide organisations to fill that vacancy.
6.
MAV Age-friendly Communities Forum – feedback • •
7.
MAV and COTA organised a statewide forum on age-friendly communities. Day 1 of the forum was for volunteers involved in local initiatives and the second day was for Council officers. We had two Advisory members attend Judith Elsworth and Glen Reigo. They spoke about some of their key learnings. Measuring the age-friendliness of cities letter to Ministers (5 minutes)
•
In January the World Health Organisation published the book “Measuring the age-friendliness of cities”. This was the end product of the pilot project Banyule had been involved in with the World Health Organisation.
•
Council organised for a letter to be sent from the Mayor to relevant State and Federal Ministers informing of them of the book and Banyule’s role. Council have received congratulations from a variety of Ministers. Fiona Patten, Member for Northern Metropolitan Region has requested a meeting.
8.
MAV New Futures Project – update
Our research has found three key areas that will assist Clubs for Older People build a healthy future: Transportation, Business Management (succession planning), Technology. These three areas will be considered by the Banyule Seniors Network at their meetings during 2016. It will be also further considered in the development of the Age-friendly Banyule strategic direction. 9. Other business Jenny Dale thanked the Council for hosting an event to acknowledge International Women’s Day. It was raised that a future speaker could be an older Banyule resident. Speakers representing the older cohort were noticeably absent. ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 312
Attachment 2: Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee Minutes 11 March 2016
Attachment 2
Next Meeting: Friday 15 April 2016 All meetings will be from 10am – midday Tom Roberts Room, Ivanhoe Council building 275 Upper Heidelberg Rd, Ivanhoe
6.1
Item: 6.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 313
Attachment 3: Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee (BACAC) minutes 5 April 2016
6.1
Item: 6.1
Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee Minutes from committee meeting 05/04/2016 Hatch Contemporary Arts Space
Attachment 3
1. Attendance Attendees: Cr. Tom Melican, Rebecca Armstrong, Anne Bennett, Marcello D’Amico, Wendy Flemming, Frances Lee, Les Walkling, Caitlin Armstrong (BCC), Colin James (BCC), Stephanie Neoh (BCC). Apologies: Cr Jenny Mulholland, Kate Hansen, Violeta Madireddi, JD Mittman, Isabella Holding 2. Welcome and Previous Minutes Cr Melican opened the meeting. The minutes from the 18 May meeting were presented to the committee. The minutes were moved as an accurate record of the previous meeting. 3. Ivanhoe Community/Cultural Hub - latest Colin thanked the committee for feedback submitted on the design of the Ivanhoe Community Cultural Hub. Colin reminded committee that there will be further opportunities to submit feedback after concepts have been developed. The aim is for the final design to be completed by the end of 2016. Cr Melican informed the committee that the Library Board will be touring significant libraries around Melbourne on 21 April, including Docklands, Melton, Williamstown and Craigieburn. 6.40 pm - Wendy Flemming arrived Les Walkling suggested Monash Gallery of Art as a space to look at. It is close to the library and has a space for shared exhibitions and residencies. Action: Colin to re-send feedback spreadsheet to committee Responsibility: Council
4. Public Art Projects Colin provided an update on the legacy of Banyule’s unresolved public art projects. Greensborough War Memorial Twelve works in Greensborough War Memorial Park by Leigh Conkie. The works are carved from pine trees in the shape of soldiers from World War One and World War Two. They are ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 314
Attachment 3: Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee (BACAC) minutes 5 April 2016
currently in a state of disrepair as they were not sealed properly and have considerable internal rotting. The statues were commissioned to last for 10 years, however the deaccessioning date coincided with the centenary of WW1 and there was public pressure to keep the works. Council has applied to the Anzac Centenary Arts and Culture Fund for a $50,000 grant to work with Leigh Conkie and the Australian Blacksmiths Association (Victoria) to revitalise the works. The Greensborough RSL will also contribute financially to the project.
6.1
Item: 6.1
The Family – Bell Street Mall There has been a notice of motion to council to remove and replace this public artwork with three flag poles. The sculpture is in a state of disrepair; initial assessment indicates that it needs to be removed and disassembled to get rid of the rust inside. There are varying levels of community affection for the sculpture, however replacing any artwork with flagpoles will be seen as controversial. Cr Melican indicated that the ward councillor is very keen to replace the sculpture. Colin stated that this issue highlights the need for a Public Art Working Group. All deaccessioning conversations will go through this group once it is established. Steph Neoh noted that another issue is that many pieces considered to be ‘public art’ by the community don’t actually fall under the public art collection, and so the Arts and Culture team and associated committees and groups get bypassed in the decision making process. Mount Street, Heidelberg This work is an LED text-based accessioned public artwork near the Heidelberg Train station in Fred Lasslet Park that hasn’t worked since 2007. The work was delivered by two companies, not an individual artist or arts collective. An initial quote for $2,500 has been received to conduct exploratory work to better understand what needs to be done to fix the piece. A ballpark estimate of between $15,000 and $20,000 has been quoted to replace the work. Colin asked for the committee’s feedback on de-accessioning this piece given the estimated expenses involved, and to instead create a new work with more community input. The committee was in favour of this and agreed that it would be better to invest in a more prominent site like the Bell Street Mall. Greensborough Walk This piece was installed in 2013 and lasted for two weeks before strong winds blew panels down. A decision was then made to take down all panels due to safety concerns. No further action has been taken since the panels removed, and council officers are still trying to obtain a satisfactory safety report from the artist’s engineers. This art work was a $60,000 project and the artist hasn’t been paid his final fee.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 315
Attachment 3
Committee suggested introducing a sculpture prize asking entrants to respond to original works if funding application is unsuccessful.
6.1
Item: 6.1
Attachment 3: Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee (BACAC) minutes 5 April 2016
Council’s draft public art strategy expired in 2015 and Colin is working on a new Public Art Policy to take to council by 25 July 2016. Once the new Public Art Policy has been adopted likely to be in August, the Public Art Budget should be reapproved. Cr Melican queried how the budget will be reapproved if the policy is to be presented to council after the 2016/2017 budget has been finalised. Colin stated that he understands that there is a commitment to re-instating the funds. The committee unanimously resolved to make the following recommendation to council:
Attachment 3
Recommendation: That Council supports the development of the Public Art Policy in its current timeline, and reinstates the Public Art Funding as planned
Action: Council officers to pass on BACAC recommendation for the development of the Public Art Policy in its current timeline, and the reinstatement of Public Art Funding. Responsibility: Council Action: Colin to present final draft of Public Art Policy to the committee at the next meeting. Responsibility: Council Action: Colin to send committee Public Art Policy drafts in the interim. Responsibility: Council
5. 2017 Programming Steph Neoh updated the committee on the plan to launch the Expressions of Interest (EOI) process for the 2017 arts program in July 2016. The finalised program will then be announced and launched in November 2016. The EOI will include opportunities for exhibitions and performances at Hatch, Pinpoint program, workshops, and festivals. The Arts & Culture team will also look to link in with major festivals occurring in Melbourne. 7.45 pm – Marcello D’Amico left meeting 6. Exhibitions Nhalinggu Bagung (Come Gather) Opening night for this exhibition is Wednesday 20 April. Nhalinggu Bagung has been developed with approval from the Wurundjeri Land Council and council has contracted an Aboriginal Community Worker to assist with the exhibition. The exhibition is an opportunity to display works being created in Banyule and foster better understanding of local Aboriginal arts and culture. The Nhalinggu Bagung public program has been developed in collaboration with Yarra Plenty Regional Libraries, Reconciliation Banyule and council’s Community and Social Planning team. Call for entries for Banyule Art Salon The call for entries opened on Monday 04 April. It has been advertised in the Arts & Culture E-news, Banyule Banner and online. The Salon will be a celebration of all artists in Banyule, ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 316
Attachment 3: Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee (BACAC) minutes 5 April 2016
and an opportunity for everyone to have a chance to exhibit in a municipal gallery. There will be no selection process and no size limit for works. The public program will include Pinpoint produced workshops, professional development sessions and networking events for artists.
6.1
Item: 6.1
Two judges for Art Salon Steph asked the committee for nominations to judge the Salon prizes. Prizes are inclusion in the 2016 Pinpoint exhibition and three cash prizes. Action: Steph to email all committee members asking for nominations to judge the Art Salon awards Responsibility: Council
7. Festivals Colin updated the committee on the successes of both Twilight Sounds and the Kids Arty Farty Festival. Council will be conducting its annual festivals review in the second half of the year and committee members will be offered the opportunity to assist. 8. Pinpoint Support for Art Studio Tour in September Caitlin Armstrong updated the committee on the artist studio tour scheduled for September 2016. The committee was asked for feedback on whether to continue with a curated busstyle event, or move to a more traditional self-directed open studios event. The committee discussed the pros and cons of each option, including privacy and safety issues, and accessibility. Action: Caitlin to draft online EOI for studio tour to gauge local artist preferences Responsibility: Council Action: Item to be raised at next meeting to get feedback from committee members who were involved in previous artist studio tour. Responsibility: Council 9. Other Items No other items were raised 10. Meeting Close Meeting closed at 8.30 pm Next meeting: June 07, 6.30 -8.30 at Hatch
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 317
Attachment 3
Solo Performance Night during Art Salon A solo performance night is planned to occur during the Salon to make the event inclusive of performing and literary arts. Acts could include singers, solo instrument performances, or poetry readings. The Arts & Culture team are considering handing over coordination of this event to a community group.
6.1
Item: 6.1
Attachment 3: Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee (BACAC) minutes 5 April 2016
ACTION TRACKER
Attachment 3
ACTION
Colin to re-send feedback spreadsheet to committee Council officers to pass on BACAC recommendation for the development of the Public Art Policy in its current timeline, and the reinstatement of Public Art Funding. Colin to present final draft of Public Art Policy to the committee at the next meeting. Colin to send committee Public Art Policy drafts in the interim. Steph to email all committee members asking for nominations to judge the Art Salon awards Caitlin to draft online EOI for studio tour to gauge local artist preferences Artist studio tour to be raised at next meeting to get feedback from committee members who were involved in previous artist studio tour.
RESPONSIBILITY Council Council
Council Council Council
Council Council
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 318
Attachment 4: LGBTI Advisory Committee Minutes 12 April 2016
6.1
Item: 6.1
Minutes 12 April 2016, 5.30pm-6.30pm LGBTI Advisory Committee Tom Robert Room, Ivanhoe Town Hall
1. Attendances & Apologies
Cr Jenny Mulholland, Cr Craig Langdon (Chair), Karen Joy Mccoll, Jane Grace, Rachel Jovic, Paul Wiseman, Vita Catalano, Nicole Coad, Rhett Mcphie, Thomas Conley, India Mortlock, Theonie Tacticos
Apologies:
Karen Bain, Meaghan Holden, Samantha Soggee, Sharelle Rowe, Allison Beckwith
Welcome and Introductions Councillor Langdon opened the meeting and welcomed Committee members.
2. Previous Minutes Previous minutes adopted 11/3/16 and will be sent to Council on 18/4/16
3. Business Arising 3.1
Update on IDAHOT Events
Council officers provided an update on the following IDAHOT events: -
Photography exhibition “What Makes a Family?” – Launch on Saturday 14 May on Were St
Selected photos depicting the diversity in modern day family structures will be displayed in shopfront windows. The launch event will include speeches and announcement of winners and a live performance from Bluehouse. -
Flag raising Ceremony – 11am Tuesday 17 May outside Centre Ivanhoe
The ceremony will follow a similar format to the previous year in having a speaker and doing the minutes noise. The ceremony will then be followed by a morning tea. The speaker is a transgender advocate who will speak about her personal experience as well as some key issues for the transgender community. Letters have been sent to all secondary schools and to local State and Federal Members inviting them to participate. -
IDAHOT Party – 6pm Tuesday 17 May Tuesday Max’s Burger Bar Montmorency ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 319
Attachment 4
Attendees:
6.1
Item: 6.1
Attachment 4: LGBTI Advisory Committee Minutes 12 April 2016
Tom Ballard and Bluehouse are booked to perform at the event. Catering is being provided by local restaurants and cafes. A marquee will be set up out the front of the Burger Bar. We are aiming to have 150 people attend the event. -
Listen Up Workshop – 9am-3pm Thursday 19 May at Hatch Contemporary Art Gallery
Attachment 4
A workshop around using poetry and spoken word to explore the topics of homophobia, discrimination and bullying.
4. New Business: 4.1 Presentation on opening of new Headspace Greensborough A representative from Headspace Greensborough presented on the opening of the new Headspace Greensborough. The new space opened on 11 April. Headspace Greensborough will provide access to a wide range of youth mental health, drug and alcohol, primary health care, social welfare, education and employment services. They are establishing a youth reference group who will establish the key priorities for the service. This may include services for LGBTIQ young people. The committee asked for a further update once the service is more established.
4.2 Council resolution: Safe Schools Coalition Council officers updated the committee about a resolution that council had passed in support of the Safe Schools Coalition. The resolution was passed by Council on 7 March in response to the Federal Government ordering a review of the Safe Schools Coalition Australia programme in schools. The resolution was: 1. That Banyule City Council advocate and write to the Federal Minister for Education, Senator the Hon Simon Birmingham to continue funding the Safe Schools Coalition Australia program in schools. 2. That Council write to all Federal Members outlining this resolution. On 18 March 2016 the Federal Minister for Education announced that the Government would continue to support the Safe Schools Coalition program however flagged several changes, including that the program will no longer be delivered in primary schools, some of the content will be removed such as the gender diversity role playing activities and removing links to the websites of other organisations (such as Minus 18) The letters were sent on 24 March and acknowledged this announcement. ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 320
By the date of the meeting, the following responses had been received Glen Lazarus, Senator for Queensland Eric Abetz, Senator for Tasmania Warren Truss, MP Clive Palmer, MP Larissa Waters, Senator for Queensland
4.3 Queersphere Activities and HEY Grant A representative from Council’s youth services provided an update on the HEY Grant that Banyule City Council was awarded to work with young people to explore issues of diversity, gender, sexuality and the role of allies. The HEY grant is being used for a number of activities: - to hold a workshop with young people around using poetry and spoken word to explore the topics of homophobia, discrimination and bullying. -
to fund the ongoing activities of Queersphere which is a group for LGBTIQ young people and their allies
-
running drama classes in schools exploring bullying and homophobia and also offering support to teachers
4.4 LGBTI Multicultural Grants The committee discussed that the Victorian Multicultural Grants have been announced and $500,000 has been allocated over four years for projects that either support: -
LGBTI communities and organisations to be more inclusive of people from culturally diverse backgrounds OR
-
Faith based and culturally diverse communities or services, particularly recently arrived and emerging communities, to increase acceptance of LGBTI community members
Council is not in a position to partner with organisations at this stage to apply for this grant however it is good to be aware that this opportunity will be available next year as well.
5. Other Business
A committee member raised that Council should look into reviewing its public toilet policy to consider what would be inclusive for the LGBTI community. One suggestion was that
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 321
6.1
Attachment 4: LGBTI Advisory Committee Minutes 12 April 2016
Attachment 4
Item: 6.1
6.1
Item: 6.1
Attachment 4: LGBTI Advisory Committee Minutes 12 April 2016
toilets should be named ‘accessible toilets’. Council officers will research best practice by other councils and table the item for discussion at the next meeting.
Attachment 4
Action: Research best practice in toilet policy that would be inclusive for the LGBTI community and table it for discussion at the next LGBTI Advisory Committee Responsible: Council Officer
6. Thank you and next meeting
The next meeting will be on Tuesday 21 June. Note – there is no action sheet because there are no outstanding actions.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 322
Attachment 5: Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Minutes 13 April 2016
Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee (BDIAC) Minutes
6.1
Item: 6.1
Committee Meeting 13/04/2016, 5.30 - 7.00pm Council Offices 44 Turnham Avenue, Rosanna 1. Attendance and apologies
Cr Craig Langdon (Substitute Chairperson), Jeff Walkley, Shawn Neilsen (Social Planner), Barbara Brook, Robert Runco, Lisa Raywood (Manager, Health, Aged Services and Community Planning), Nancy Sadka, Anna Constas, Luke Nelson, Louise Pearson, Mick Hollman, Simon Chong, Apologies: Sherridan Bourne, Janice Castledine, Stephanie Krt, Cr Jenny Mulholland. 1. Welcome and introductions Cr Landon formally opened the meeting and noted apologies. Previous minutes The minutes from the February 24 Meeting were emailed on March 21st and considered adopted on March 24th. The minutes were presented to Council and noted at the April 18 meeting of Council. 2. NDIS Update Local Area Coordination The committee was informed that the Brotherhood of St Lawrence (BSL) was successful with their application to provide Local Area Coordination (LAC) services within the NEMA region which includes Banyule. BSL were currently looking to secure their office locations and are starting to recruit staff to commence providing LAC services from July 1. As a part of their application, the BSL signed a statement of intent to work in partnership with the 5 Councils in the NEMA region. The main focus of this partnership would include how BSL and Councils can work together to build the capacity of individuals with a disability and build the capacity of the community to be more inclusive. Information Sessions The committee was informed that the NDIA would be hosting 3, NDIS 101 sessions in Banyule during late April and May. The committee was encouraged to circulate this information and refer to Council’s NDIS webpage for current information about NDIS related events and information. 3. Council Update – NDIS & Disability Review The Committee was presented with the results of the communications program that Council implemented during March and April 2016. Council communicated with current clients, state and ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 323
Attachment 5
Attendees:
6.1
Item: 6.1
Attachment 5: Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Minutes 13 April 2016
federal governments, disability services and the general community. The program outlined Council’s disability review process and introduced the likelihood that Council would not provide its current services within the NDIS.
Attachment 5
The communications program included a detailed survey with current clients and was designed to better understand the concerns, impacts and supports required in the event that Council did not provide its current services within the NDIS. The results of this survey were presented to Council briefing on April 11 along with considerations of how best to respond to the concerns that were raised. While the concerns identified differed depending on what services individual clients accessed from Council, several key themes emerged. The Committee was presented with a summary of the issues relating to HACC and Jets and several proposals for consideration were discussed with the Committee. HACC clients: 1. Issue: Majority know a little bit about NDIS and want more information. Proposed Action: Council continue to work with the NDIA and others to ensure good quality information is available. 2. Issue: Key concern is potentially losing a relationship with a valued worker if Council doesn’t operate in NDIS. Proposed Action: Explore using a transition officer to assist people to transition smoothly to the NDIS including exploring options around maintaining valued existing worker. 3. Issue: People are looking for one on one support to understand options and transition. Proposed Action: Explore options for transition officer. JETS creative arts clients: 1. Issue: Majority know a little bit about NDIS and want more information. Proposed Action: Council continue to work with the NDIA and others to ensure good quality information is available. 2. Issue: Key concern is that there are no similar youth specific social programs that exist for people transition to. Proposed Action: Review broader Jets Service Model to explore how to cater to individuals with support needs and advocate to DHHS & NDIA to continue funding for the program. Seek alternate funding streams to continue to meet supported participant outcomes. 3. Issue: The impact that change can have on vulnerable young people at a critical life stage.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 324
Attachment 5: Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Minutes 13 April 2016
Proposed Action: Increase partnership opportunities with other disability providers to access Jets facility. Develop partnership opportunities with neighbouring LGAs in supporting common families.
6.1
Item: 6.1
4. Issue: Looking for one on one support in individual profiling and goal setting.
The committee was presented with a petition that was being prepared by a member of the committee that related to the Jets creative arts service. The letter that was read to the committee was seeking Council support to maintain the Jets Creative Arts respite programs in their current form. The committee was informed that these programs are currently funded through the Department of Health and Human Services and funding was likely to cease around December 2016 as the NDIS is introduced in Banyule. The committee was informed that the petition would be presented to Council in the near future. The committee discussed these considerations and expressed broad agreement with the proposals to support the transition of current clients to the NDIS. The committee discussed at length the pros and cons of specific programs and services that support people with disability vs general opportunities that are inclusive.
5. Meeting close and Next meeting: The meeting ended at 6:50pm and the Next meeting is scheduled for - Wednesday 29th June 5:30pm – 7:00pm
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 325
Attachment 5
Proposed Action: Explore options for transition officer.
6.1
Item: 6.1
Attachment 6: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee Minutes 14 April 2016
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (ATSI) Advisory Committee Minutes from committee meeting 14/4/16, 6-8pm Location: Babarrbunin Beek, Olympic Park, off Catalina St West Heidelberg 1. Attendances & Apologies
Attachment 6
Attendees: Uncle Colin Hunter (Chair), Cr Craig Langdon, Mark Mann, John Price, , Terry Makin, Allison Beckwith, Theonie Tacticos, Natashia Corrigan, Rob Patton, Kelvin Onus, Charley Woolmore Apologies: Daria Atkinson, Madison Connors, Stephanie Clark, Prue Stewart, Nicole Bloomfield, Sharyn Lovett, Cr Jenny Mulholland, Paula Russell 2. Welcome and Introductions Uncle Colin Hunter opened the meeting and Welcomed people to Wurundjeri land as the traditional owners of the land in which we met. Previous Minutes Previous minutes were adopted 11/4/16 and will be sent to Council for noting on 18/4/16. 3. Babarrbunin Beek Update & Discussion Natashia Corrigan started work on 10th March as the Babarrbunin Beek Cultural Project Officer is working 16 hours a week until the end of August. Natashia provided the Advisory Group with an update of progress over the past four weeks which included: •
Shifting the Sista Circle Women’s group from Darebin Community Health to Babarrbunin Beek. This group will now meet every Tuesday at Babarrbunin Beek and will also assist the start up of a Little Sistas group for girls.
•
Some initial conversations have started with people who had been a part of the Men’s Group
•
There have also been conversations with ‘Murnong’ Dave Crawford and Darren Wandin, members of the Wurundjeri Land Council’s Narrup (environmental management) team who have been making elements of the traditional warrior’s toolkit: spears, shield, boomerang and club.
•
Encouraging local artists to contribute artworks for the Nhalinggu Bagung art exhibition at Hatch.
•
Yarning with the local community about the Babarrbunin Beek storyline project. This part of a community arts grant received by the Health Centre from Banyule City Council.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 326
Attachment 6: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee Minutes 14 April 2016
The Advisory Committee noted the great progress that had been made over the past four weeks through having a paid Aboriginal position for just 16 hours a week. There was also concern about what would happen at the end of August at the end of the funded position. The increased community involvement and activity would not be able to be sustained, after raising expectations at the great work achieved.
6.1
Item: 6.1
Action: Recommendation to Council to fund the Babarrbunin Beek Cultural Project Officer as an ongoing position Responsibility: Council officer.
4. Nhalinggu Bagung (Come Gather) Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Art Exhibition at Hatch 20th April to 4th June Natashia provided the Advisory Group with an update of the exhibition which is opening on 20th April (6-8.30pm). Aunty Dianne Kerr is conducting the Welcome to Country. Everyone is invited to attend the opening night and promote the exhibition. All Advisory Group members are invited to the 3rd May evening session to meet with all seven of Council’s Advisory Groups which is being held at Hatch as a part of the Nhalinggu Bagung exhibition. This is being held on 3rd May, and invitations have been sent. The Wurundjeri Land Council has approached Banyule Council to take the exhibition to another venue as part of a Telstra initiative to provide some Aboriginal cultural education for Telstra staff. Conversations are continuing with Councils Arts Curator Steph Neoh and the Wurundjeri Land Council CEO about progressing this exciting development, which is a great opportunity for the artists. 5. Other Reconciliation week activities A Council officer outlined the planned activities for Reconciliation Week 26/5/16 to 4/6/16: • Sorry Day Flag raising, smoking ceremony & morning tea Hatch on 26th May. • 2 films being shown – one during the day aimed at school children and one in the evening. These are being organised with Reconciliation Banyule. • Library activities – activities are being scheduled in all three libraries. • Aboriginal Cultural Walk in Heidelberg with a Wurundjeri elder – this will be piloted with two walks and will then continue as a self-guided tour.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 327
Attachment 6
The Advisory Committee recommended that Council fund the Babarrbunin Beek Cultural Project Officer as an ongoing position. This was unanimously approved by all those who were present.
6.1
Item: 6.1
Attachment 6: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee Minutes 14 April 2016
Cr Craig Langdon provided the Advisory Group with a copy of the plaque which will be laid in three sites during Reconciliation Week: • May 26th for Sorry Day at Ivanhoe • May 27th for the 1967 Referendum at Greensborough • June 3rd for Mabo Day at Babarrbunin Beek
Attachment 6
The Group provided feedback on the plaques which included: • that the years should be added for the events being commemorated • Some aboriginal artwork or the flags should be included some staffing or community development project based at Babarrbunin Beek would be Action: Work to progress in organising the Reconciliation Week activities beneficial. Responsibility: Council officer. Any-one interested in being involved should contact Council.
6. Progress on Cultural Education & partnerships An update was provided on the Aboriginal cultural education program partnership between Council’s five early years centres and Banyule Community Health Aboriginal Health Team. This was run in 2015 and is continuing in 2016. The Wurundjeri Land Council has now provided a name for the program: ‘bulen-bulen’ which means Lyre bird- as the lyre bird copies everything just like children. This Aboriginal cultural education program is now being adapted and extended to Council’s Maternal and Child Health Centres. Aboriginal Street naming in Ivanhoe Unfortunately, the Wurundjeri naming of four streets in Ivanhoe did not proceed as the names could not be provided after 8 weeks. There was some urgency in the sub-division process which was needed for the development to progress. As a result four other names were submitted for these street names to the Victorian Department of Transport, Planning & Local Infrastructure. We will continue to look for opportunities to use Wurundjeri names for streets, parks and other locations.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 328
Attachment 6: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee Minutes 14 April 2016
7. Update on other Council activity Pool life guard & swim teacher training Work is continuing with Banyule Leisure, Council’s two aquatic centres, to conduct a sponsored training program for life guards. This has now been extended to include swim teachers.
6.1
Item: 6.1
Victorian Legal Service Board Grant submitted: response due in August The Group was informed that the grant application to the Victorian Legal Services Board was submitted on 4th March. This is a joint application by the Community Health Centre and Council for a lawyer and aboriginal community development worker to be based at Babarrbunin Beek for three years. Action: Continue to progress the staff survey and sponsored Pool life guard & swim teacher training. Responsibility: Council officers
8. NAIDOC Week 3-10 July Conversations are continuing with the Babarrbunin Beek Committee regarding NAIDOC week, as this is traditionally a time for ATSI peoples to celebrate and attend their own events. Council will fly the flag for the week. some staffing or community development project based at Babarrbunin Beek would be Action: Explore what community events could be held at Babarrbunin Beek during NAIDOC beneficial. Week. Responsibility: Council officers to liaise with Babarrbunin Beek Committee
9. Update from the Wurundjeri Land Council Uncle Colin Hunter gave an update about some of the ongoing work of the Wurundjeri Land Council regarding land rights, and also the recent review of the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Act. Cheryl Kraus, the Wurundjeri Land Council CEO, will continue to liaise with Telstra and Council’s Arts Team about the next steps for continuing the Nhalinggu Bagung exhibition at another site after it finishes at Hatch on June 4th.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 329
Attachment 6
Staff survey Work is continuing with Council’s Human Resources department to survey Council staff to voluntarily identify as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. ATSI Council staff will also be invited to suggest ideas and participate further if they wish.
6.1
Item: 6.1
Attachment 6: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee Minutes 14 April 2016
10. Emerging advocacy issues & Other Business 10.1
Reconciliation Banyule letter for Yarra Plenty Regional Library (YPRL) to adopt a Reconciliation Action Plan (RAP)
Terry Makin from Reconciliation Banyule provided an update that the letter endorsed at the February Advisory Committee has been received by the Chairperson and new YPRL CEO. The letter asked YPRL to develop a Reconciliation Action Plan. A meeting will be scheduled in May.
Attachment 6
some staffing or community development project based at Babarrbunin Beek would be Action: Reconciliation Banyule to meet with the CEO of the Yarra Plenty Regional Library . beneficial. Responsibility: Reconciliation Banyule
10.2 State of Reconciliation in Australia 2016 Discussion on this item was deferred to the next meeting. Copies of the Summary Report were available at the meeting, and can be downloaded by clicking on the link https://www.reconciliation.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/State-ofReconciliation-Report_SUMMARY.pdf Further copies can be sent to Advisory Committee members if requested. Action: The report will be put on the Agenda for our next meeting to discuss whether there are any actions Council should take based on the recommendations Responsibility: Council officers
11. Review of meeting times As there were low numbers at this later meeting time, one of the members requested that the meeting times of the Advisory Group be re-visited at the next meeting. 12. Thank you and next meeting Uncle Colin Hunter concluded the meeting at 8.15pm. Next meeting: 3-5pm Thursday 9th June 2016 at Council Chambers, 275 Upper Heidelberg Rd Ivanhoe
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 330
Banyule ATSI Advisory Committee – Action Progress Sheet – 14/4/16 Note: The actions in the Action Progress Sheet have come out of the Committee meetings. They are in addition to the actions being progressed through the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Plan. Item:
Action Required:
Responsibility
Status
Heritage
Investigate whether Sacred Site is registered on the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Register
Representative from Wurundjeri Land Council
In progress
Funding
Request consideration of the funded position to be included in Council’s budget.
Council Officer
In progress
Council Staff survey
Conduct a survey of Council staff to voluntarily identify as ATSI
Council Officer
In progress
Sponsored Aboriginal training
Investigate the conduct of a sponsored training for pool life guard and swim teachers Arrange key speakers to speak at future committee meetings about the priority social justice areas Have ‘areas for advocacy’ as a standing item on meeting agendas
Council Officer
In progress
Council Officer
In progress
Council Officer
Completed
Governance Governance
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 331
6.1
Attachment 6: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee Minutes 14 April 2016
Attachment 6
Item: 6.1
6.1
Item: 6.1
Attachment 7: Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee Minutes 15 April 2016
Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee
Attachment 7
Meeting Date: Friday 15th April 2016 Location: Tom Roberts Room, Banyule City Council Present Cr Jenny Mulholland, Banyule City Council (Chair) Cr Craig Langdon Virginia Masters, Resident Glen Reigo, Resident Judy Elsworth, U3A Jenny Dale, Resident Ken Young, OM:NI Men’s Group Robert Barron, COTA Vic Elaine Anderson, Watsonia Probus Lisa Raywood, Banyule City Council Leanne Horvath, Banyule City Council Catherine Simcox, Banyule City Council Gillian Radaza, Banyule City Council (student) Apologies Eric Rosario, Resident Julie Watson, North East Primary Care Partnership 1.
Welcome by Cr Mulholland
2. Adoption of March Minutes and noting actions Alteration on the tense of one word, alteration to Judy Elsworth membership status. Judy was a resident representative at the March meeting. Judy has received approval from U3A Executive Committee and will now be a U3A representative. Include words on the International Women’s Day event. ACTION: Catherine to make alterations to the March 2016 minutes.
3.
Welcome Gillian Radaza, Health Promotion student
Gillian is a Deakin University Health Sciences student with a major in health promotion. She has been undertaking a student placement in Age Services and Social Planning. For Age Services she has been providing support in the establishment of the Age-friendly Banyule position statement.
4.
Exhibition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Art - Special viewing
for Banyule Advisory Committee members, 3rd May
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 332
•
Attachment 7: Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee Minutes 15 April 2016
Members felt that this would be a great opportunity to break down barriers across the Advisory Committees and a fun way to get to know the other
6.1
Item: 6.1
Committees. •
Hearing loop requested for the speeches at the venue.
•
Jenny Dale said thank you to the Councillors for providing the Advisory Committees with an opportunity to mix. The Committee had a brief discussion about membership and terms of reference. There was concern raised about an entire new Committee being appointed, as everyone’s term finishes in December 2016. Cr Mulholland noted that BEAC (Environmental Advisory Committee) have a flow on clause so it will not be an entire new Committee. Recommend further investigation.
5.
Banyule Age-friendly City Champion Program
a.
Age in Focus – photographic exhibition @ Shop 48
•
Members spoke on their impressions of the Age in Focus photographic exhibition. Highlight was the ability to meet new people. One member mentioned that their personal highlights was trying water colour painting at the launch and attending the Museum toy session (grandparents sessions).
•
It was felt the Shop 48 (the Harmony Centre) was a great space and would be happy to consider using this space again in the future.
•
The grandparent session was the lowest attended. It took place the day after Easter long weekend and was on a cold windy wet day. If we conducted this session in the future, we would build a stronger relationship with the kindergartens to attract grandparents and children via the kindergartens.
•
The Ka-Ching pokie nation movie attracted 25 people. The discussion group which followed the movie demonstrated that the OM:NI method for conducting open discussions can be used in many situations.
•
OM:NI has commenced discussions about expanding to a group to open in the Ivanhoe area.
•
Next steps: Members would like the photographic exhibition to be taken on the road. It could be presented through the libraries, stall at arty farty festival, seniors festival morning tea. Could always be used at a COTA or MAV forum.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 333
Attachment 7
•
6.1
Item: 6.1
Attachment 7: Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee Minutes 15 April 2016
b. Volunteer Pack •
Judy Elsworth found the position description disturbing and very age- unfriendly. She felt that the position description was not volunteer friendly and very official. This view was not held by all Committee members.
•
Jenny Dale said it was important for volunteers to feel equal to paid staff.
•
It was noted that Volunteer Australia has a package on writing a volunteer
Attachment 7
position description. There are also some Council guidelines which must be followed. •
Judy Elsworth showed a name tag design used by U3A to have easy access to emergency details of volunteers if urgently required. Virginia Masters also mentioned the ICE application for mobile telephones which has emergency contact details. ACTION: Judy and Ken to work with Catherine and Council’s Human Resources representative on reviewing the position description before the June meeting. ACTION: Catherine to consider a design similar to U3A for volunteer name tags.
c. Elder Abuse Event – 14 June 2016 A free community event will be held at Greensborough Community Hall 203 Henry Street, Greensborough from 10am to 11.30am on 14th June. The session will include how you can protect your own rights and also how you can assist others in the community to prevent elder abuse. During the morning, information will be provided about where to go for assistance and support should you become aware of elder abuse happening to yourself or others. There are Age-friendly Champions on the working group. Jenny Dale offered to be the link between the project and the Advisory Committee.
6. •
•
MAV New Futures Project – update The Committee looked over the draft illustrations done by Kevin Burgemeestre. From reading over the written documents on the street survey and the workshops. Kevin drew a variety of illustrations highlighting key issues facing the future survival of Clubs for older people. The Committee made a number of suggestions which will be feed back to the illustrator.
7. Measuring the age-friendliness of cities meeting with Fiona Patten MP ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 334
•
Attachment 7: Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee Minutes 15 April 2016
In January 2016, the Mayor sent letters to relevant members of parliament to tell them about Banyule’s contribution in the development of the World Health
6.1
Item: 6.1
Organisation measures of age-friendliness. A number of members have sent correspondence noting Council’s involvement. Fiona Patten MP for the Northern Metro Region requested a meeting. •
Lisa Raywood, Leanne Horvath and Catherine Simcox will be meeting with Fiona Patten on 20th April to discuss the World Health Organisation measures of age-
ACTION: The Committee would like a list of members of parliament that responded to the Mayors letter. 8. Banyule Age-friendly City planning - update Committee were shown the summary of comments collected at the Age in Focus photographic exhibition. This community engagement technique invited people viewing the exhibition to make comments about their neighbourhoods, leisure time and what is an age-friendly Banyule. 9. Other business Robert Barron brought forward a letter from Jenny Macklin, member for Jagajaga. The letter was on reduced Council funds towards volunteer programs. Cr Mulholland explained that the information within the letter was not fully informed and that Banyule has a number of volunteer resource centres working within this municipality. Yesturday, the Victorian government released an age-friendly declaration. Council officers will investigate this announcement and inform the Advisory Committee at the next meeting. ACTION: Council officers to prepare a briefing report for the Advisory Committee on the Victorian governments age-friendly direction.
Next Meeting: Friday 10 June 2016 All meetings will be from 10am – midday Tom Roberts Room, Ivanhoe Council building 275 Upper Heidelberg Rd, Ivanhoe
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 335
Attachment 7
friendliness.
Attachment 8: Multicultural Advisory Committee Minutes 18 April 2016
6.1
Item: 6.1
Banyule Multicultural Advisory Committee (BMAC): Minutes from committee meeting 18/4/16 Nellie Ibbott room – Ivanhoe Town Hall
Attachment 8
1. Attendances & Apologies Attendees: Cr Mark Di Pasquale, Cr Craig Langdon, Cr Jenny Mulholland, Cr Tom Melican, George Giuliani, Simeon Yang, Rosemary Crosthwaite, Hussein Haraco, Jane Grace, Beverley Moss, Amina Gadid, India Mortlock, Lisa Raywood, Theonie Tacticos, Lella Caridi Apologies: Cr Steven Briffa, Abdirizak Mohamed, Elizabeth Young, Uma Vijay, Albert Fatileh, Maxine Matthews, Gillian Hirst, Ryoko Williams, Allison Beckwith 2. Welcome and Minutes of previous meeting Cr Di Pasquale formally opened the meeting and the apologies were noted. Previous minutes adopted 25/3/16 and sent to Council for noting on 18/4/16 3. Business Arising 3.1 Engagement with Victorian Multicultural Commission A council officer updated the committee on the progress on engaging with the Victorian Multicultural Commission. Council wrote to the Victorian Multicultural Commission on 3 February 2016 seeking advice on how Council can engage with the regional advisory councils and specifically: -
whether positions are available on the North and West Metropolitan Regional Advisory Council
-
whether the minutes from the meetings can be shared
-
how Council can raise emerging issues with the regional advisory councils
A response was received from Tony O’Hea, Research and Coordination Manager at the Victorian Multicultural Commission. In regards to positions available on the North and West Metropolitan Regional Advisory Council, there is currently one position available for a youth representative and an application can be made however other applications have already been received. The current term of the committee is due to finish in October this year and then there will be a new round of recruitment. The Committee discussed that, given the short time remaining, it was better to wait until the new round of recruitment. The committee had an initial discussion about who would be ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 336
Attachment 8: Multicultural Advisory Committee Minutes 18 April 2016
best placed to nominate to represent Banyule Council and the Multicultural Advisory Committee on the committee. This will be discussed in greater detail at the next meeting. In the meantime, Council officers will circulate the expression of interest form to Committee members.
6.1
Item: 6.1
In regards to the question about how council can raise questions about emerging issues, Tony advised that Council officers could contact him directly if there were emerging issues that we wished to raise with the Commission. Action: Write a letter to the Commission asking for access to the minutes of the North and West Metropolitan Regional Advisory Council meetings Responsible: Council officer
3.2 Cultural Diversity Week Council officers provided an update about Cultural Diversity Week activities. The Indian Holi Festival was held on Sunday 13 March at the Centre Ivanhoe and the Multicultural Festival and Twilight Market was held in the Bell St Mall on Friday 18 March. Council also ran a mini grants program offering $300 to clubs, schools and community organisations to host a cultural performance. Ten grants were awarded and most of the events were held during Cultural Diversity Week and a couple of the events were held early in Term 2. The committee discussed that it was pleasing that so many organisations applied for the grants and recommended that Council use funds allocated to the multicultural plan to run this program again in 2017. There was also a suggestion that the Citizenship ceremonies could have cultural performances. 4. New Business 4.1 Bell St Mall Cultural Precinct Stavros Zikou from the Bell St Mall Traders Association presented to the committee about discussions with the Victorian Government to establish the Bell St Mall as an African Cultural Precinct. The cultural precinct program is a state funded initiative. There are currently ten cultural precincts in Victoria but none are in North East Melbourne and none are African. The Bell St Mall Traders Association, in partnership with Council, has put in an EOI for a
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 337
Attachment 8
In regards to having access to the minutes of the meetings, the response from Tony O Hea was that the minutes are not circulated and are only provided directly to the Commission. However Tony undertook to enquire whether the minutes could be shared with Banyule Council. The Committee resolved to write a letter to the Commission requesting access to the minutes.
6.1
Item: 6.1
Attachment 8: Multicultural Advisory Committee Minutes 18 April 2016
grant which would fund the development of a master plan for what the precinct would look like. There was discussion from the committee about the need to be aware of the impact of developing an area and how it could make it less affordable for local residents.
Attachment 8
Stavros also briefly mentioned that the Traders Association had received a grant from the Victorian Multicultural Commission to run two festivals; an event for cultural diversity week (that was held in March) and an Iftar event to be held on 10 June. 4.2 Northland Prayer Space Cr Langdon raised that some members of the local community have raised concern that there is no prayer space in Northland shopping centre which is resulting in Muslim shoppers having to leave the centre to go home and pray. The committee recommended that Council write a letter to the Centre Manager of Northland Shopping Centre advocating for a prayer room and also to request a meeting to discuss any barriers to establishing the prayer space. Action: Write to the Centre Manager of Northland Shopping Centre advocating for a prayer room Responsibility: Council Officer
4.3 What happened at the Pier – Exhibition of Migration Stories Lella Carridi presented on the ‘what happened at the pier’ project. The project collects and exhibits stories of migrants who arrived through Princes Pier. She has received a grant from Banyule Council to produce a publication of 15 stories of migrants living in Banyule who arrived through Princes Pier. The publication will be launched on 13 September at a launch event. The event will also include a panel of speakers reflecting on the theme ‘from displacement to social inclusion’ and will include First Australians and newly arrived Australians. 5. Other Business Council officers discussed that there had been difficulty in attracting nominations under the multicultural volunteer of the year award category. The committee discussed that there could be confusion around the language of the award category or perhaps people prefer to be nominated in the main category of volunteer of the year award, rather than the specific multicultural category. 6. Thank you and next meeting Cr Di Pasquale closed the meeting. The next meeting will be held on 27 June 2016.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 338
Banyule Multicultural Advisory Committee – Action Progress Sheet – 18 April 2016 Note: The actions in the Action Progress Sheet have come out of the Committee meetings. They are in addition to the actions being progressed through the Multicultural Plan. Item:
Action Required:
Responsibility
Status
Bus Tour for new arrivals
Map out the draft routes and plan the pilot bus tour for service providers
Council Officer
In progress
Engaging with Victorian Multicultural Commission Regional Advisory Councils Cultural Precinct
Write to the VMC to request access to the minutes
Council Officer
In progress
Invite the Centre Manager from the Mall to present to the Multicultural Advisory Committee about becoming a cultural precinct
Council Officer
Prayer Room at Northland Shopping Centre
Write to the Centre Manager of Northland Shopping Centre advocating for a prayer room
Council Officer
Completed Stavros will presented at 18 April meeting In progress
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 MAY 2016 Page 339
6.1
Attachment 8: Multicultural Advisory Committee Minutes 18 April 2016
Attachment 8
Item: 6.1