Logo_Primary_BlackWhite%20(JPG)

Agenda

 

OF Ordinary
COUNCIL MEETING

HELD ON

Tuesday 27 June 2017

AT 6.30PM

summons

 

You are advised that a Meeting of Council has been called by the Acting Chief Executive Officer on Tuesday, 27 June 2017 in Council Chamber, 25 Ferres Boulevard, South Morang at 6.30PM for the transaction of the following business.

 

L THOMPSON

ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

 

 

COUNCILLORS

 

RICKY KIRKHAM                            MAYOR, NORTH WARD

JOHN BUTLER                                NORTH WARD

EMILIA LISA STERJOVA               NORTH WARD

NORM KELLY                                  DEPUTY MAYOR, SOUTH EAST WARD

SAM ALESSI                                    SOUTH EAST WARD

ALAHNA DESIATO                         SOUTH EAST WARD

MARY LALIOS                                 SOUTH EAST WARD

LAWRIE COX                                   SOUTH WEST WARD

STEVAN KOZMEVSKI                   SOUTH WEST WARD

CAZ MONTELEONE                       SOUTH WEST WARD

KRIS PAVLIDIS                               SOUTH WEST WARD


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

 

 

SENIOR OFFICERS

 

 

LIANA THOMPSON                          ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

RUSSELL HOPKINS                         DIRECTOR COMMUNITY SERVICES

STEVE O’BRIEN                                DIRECTOR PLANNING AND MAJOR PROJECTS

PETER ALI                                         ACTING DIRECTOR CITY TRANSPORT & PRESENTATION

HELEN SUI                                        DIRECTOR CORPORATE SERVICES

BELGIN BESIM                                  ACTING DIRECTOR PARTNERSHIPS & ENGAGEMENT

MICHAEL TONTA                              MANAGER GOVERNANCE

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

 

ORDER OF BUSINESS

The Acting Chief Executive Officer submits the following business:

1.            Opening.. 9

1.1         MEETING OPENING AND PRAYER.. 9

1.2         ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF TRADITIONAL OWNERS STATEMENT.. 9

1.3         Present.. 9

2.            Apologies.. 9

3.            Declarations of Interest.. 9

4.            Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meeting.. 9

5.            Consideration and Action on Petitions and Joint Letters.. 11

5.1         Petitions.. 11

5.1.1       Petition - 47 and 53 The Boulevard, Thomastown - Objection to the construction of a four story residential building   11

5.1.2       PETITION - REMOVAL OF EUCALYPTUS TREES ON NATURE STRIP IN ANCONA DRIVE MILL PARK.. 11

5.2         Joint Letters.. 13

Nil Reports.. 13

6.            Officers' Reports.. 15

6.1         Planning and Major Projects.. 15

6.1.1       Cooper Street West Position Paper.. 15

6.1.2       360 McDonalds Road Development Plan.. 97

6.1.3       Whittlesea Planning Scheme Amendment C206 - Exhibition Outcomes.. 119

6.1.4       Amendment to the Bassetts Road Development Plan.. 129

6.1.5       Authorisation for a Planning Scheme Amendment to the Heritage Overlay.. 151

6.1.6       280 Bridge Inn Road, Mernda- Proposed Planning Scheme Amendment C203. 179

6.1.7       Removal of Native Vegetation Associated with the proposed signalisation of the High Street, Epping Road, O'Herns Road and Findon Road intersection, Epping. 193

6.2         Community Services.. 207

Nil Reports.. 207

6.3         City Transport and Presentation.. 209

6.3.1       LOCAL AREA TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT (LATM) 20 - MILL PARK.. 209

6.3.2       Response to Petition regarding street trees in Wildfire and Isabelle Courts, Mill Park.. 231

6.4         Corporate Services.. 243

6.4.1       Unconfirmed Minutes of Audit & RIsk Committee Meeting   243

6.5         Partnerships & Engagement.. 277

6.5.1       Community Development Grants Program 2017-2018 Round One   277

6.5.2       City of Whittlesea Participation and Engagement Policy and Framework.. 287

6.5.3       Assemblies of Council Report - 27 June 2017. 303

6.6         Executive Services.. 307

Nil Reports.. 307

7.            Notices of Motion.. 309

7.1           LIVE STREAMING OF COUNCIL MEETINGS.. 309

8.            Questions to Officers.. 311

9.            Urgent BusineSS.. 311

10.         Reports from Delegates Appointed BY Council TO Other Bodies.. 311

11.         Questions to CouncillorS.. 311

12.         Confidential Business.. 313

12.1       Planning and Major Projects.. 313

12.1.1    EXTENSION AND RENOVATION WORKS AT JANEFIELD COMMUNITY CENTRE, BUNDOORA CONTRACT 2017-44 - TENDER EVALUATION REPORT. 313

12.1.2    DESIGN SERVICES FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF MILL PARK LEISURE CENTRE CONTRACT 2016-6 - CONTRACT VARIATION REPORT. 313

12.1.3    CONSTRUCTION OF THE YAN YEAN TENNIS CLUB PAVILION AND ASSOCIATED WORKS (STAGE 1) - CONTRACT NO. 2016-214 - TENDER EVALUATION REPORT. 314

12.2       Community Services.. 314

Nil Reports.. 314

12.3       City Transport and Presentation.. 315

12.3.1    Provision of Cleaning Services - Contract No. SR111210 - Contract Extension.. 315

12.3.2    Irrinet System Service and Support - Contract 2014-30 - Contract Extension.. 315

12.3.3    Provision of Concrete Maintenance Works Contract No 2016-186 - Tender Evaluation.. 316

12.3.4    2016-62 Provision of Mechanical Services Maintenance Tender Evaluation.. 316

12.3.5    Hanson Landfill Services Agreement 1986 (Amended) Provision of Tip Vouchers - Contract Variation.. 317

12.4       Corporate Services.. 317

12.4.1    Provision of Bill Payment Services Contract 2017-13 Tender Evaluation.. 317

12.4.2    Panel Contract Expenditure Distribution.. 318

12.5       Partnerships & Engagement.. 318

Nil Reports.. 318

12.6       Executive Services.. 319

12.6.1    MEETINGS OF THE ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 8 MAY TO 22 MAY 2017. 319

12.6.2    MEETINGS OF THE ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 22 MAY TO 16 JUNE 2017. 319

13.         Closure.. 320

 

Note:

At Council’s discretion, the meeting may be closed in accordance with Section 89 of the Local Government Act 1989. The provision which is likely to be relied upon to enable closure is set out in each item. These reports are not available for public distribution.

 

Question Time:

During the meeting, Council will answer questions from residents and ratepayers.  Questions should be submitted in writing before the start of the meeting unless this unreasonably prevents or hinders you from participating. A Question Time form can be downloaded from Council’s website and copies of the form are available at the meeting.

Council is committed to ensuring that all residents and ratepayers of the municipality may contribute to Council’s democratic process and therefore, if you have special requirements, please telephone the Governance Team prior to any Council Meeting on 9217 2294

 

Large Attachments:

Where large attachments form part of the Report, due to the size of the attachments – a copy has not been provided in the Agenda document

Copies of these attachments are available for inspection by the public at the following locations:

a)      Council offices at 25 Ferres Boulevard, South Morang; and

b)      Whittlesea City Council’s internet site – www.whittlesea.vic.gov.au

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

1.         Opening

1.1       MEETING OPENING AND PRAYER

The Acting Chief Executive Officer will open the meeting with the reading of the prayers:

 

Almighty God, we humbly beseech thee, to vouchsafe thy blessing upon this council.  Direct and prosper its deliberations to the advancement of thy glory and the true welfare of the people of the Whittlesea City Council.

 

Our father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name, Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that trespass against us; and lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil, For thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory, for ever and ever.

 

Amen

 

1.2       ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF TRADITIONAL OWNERS STATEMENT

The Mayor will read the following Acknowledgement of Traditional Owners Statement.

 

On behalf of the Whittlesea City Council I recognise the rich Aboriginal heritage of this country and acknowledge the Wurundjeri Willum Clan as the traditional owners of this place.

 

1.3       Present

2.         Apologies

3.         Declarations of Interest

4.         Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meeting

Ordinary Meeting of Council held  30 May 2017; and

Ordinary Adjourned Meeting of Council held 6 June 2017.


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

5.         Consideration and Action on Petitions and Joint Letters

5.1       Petitions

5.1.1    Petition - 47 and 53 The Boulevard, Thomastown - Objection to the construction of a four story residential building

File No:                                   716144

 

A petition has been received from 73 residents objecting to the construction of a four story residential building at 47 and 53 The Boulevard, Thomastown.

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to:

1.   Receive the petition from 73 residents objecting to the construction of a four story residential building at 47 and 53 The Boulevard, Thomastown; and

2.   Consider the petition in the Council Report for planning permit application 716144 at a future Council Meeting.

 

 

 

 

 

5.1.2    PETITION - REMOVAL OF EUCALYPTUS TREES ON NATURE STRIP IN ANCONA DRIVE MILL PARK

File No:                                   157941

 

A petition has been received from 29 residents requesting the removal of the eucalyptus trees from the nature strip in Ancona Drive Mill Park.

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to receive the petition from 29 residents requesting the removal of the eucalyptus trees from the nature strip in Ancona Drive Mill Park and request the officers to prepare a report.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

5.2       Joint Letters

Nil Reports   


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

6.         Officers' Reports

6.1       Planning and Major Projects

6.1.1    Cooper Street West Position Paper

File No:                                  166310

Attachments:                        1        Cooper Street West Position Paper

2        Response to Submissions   

Responsible Officer:           Director Planning & Major Projects

Author:                                  Principal Policy Planner   

 

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

The purpose of this report is to seek Council adoption of the Cooper Street West Position Paper.

Cooper Street West is part of the broader Cooper Street Employment Area, which is a regionally and State significant employment precinct. The precinct’s proximity to the Melbourne Wholesale Markets, the Craigieburn Bypass, Epping Metropolitan Activity Centre, Melbourne Airport, Melbourne CBD and surrounding employment land has led to continuing interest in developing land within this significant employment node. The Cooper Street West precinct has yet to be developed due to the constraints related to its history of quarrying and landfill operations, as well as a lack of roads and service infrastructure.  

The purpose of the Position Paper is to establish Council’s position with respect to the future use and development of land in the precinct.  The paper will inform landholders and potential developers of Council’s position and outline the key planning considerations to be addressed for each of the precincts within the Cooper Street West precinct.  Preparation of the Paper has been driven in large by the ongoing landholder interest in development within this precinct and the Cooper Street Employment Area more generally. To this end the Position Paper seeks to address the overarching strategic issues of the Cooper Street West area and to encourage and bring forward employment generating development where appropriate.

The Draft Position Paper was released for public comment in April 2016 for the purposes of seeking feedback on Council’s identified position for future use and development in the precinct.  There was general support for the Position Paper, with minor changes recommended arising from the consultation process.  These changes include the removal of the position that waste and resource recovery industries should only be supported as a medium-term industry in the precinct.  It is recognised that the waste and resource recovery industry is maturing and technological advancements support the location of these in urbanised environments.

Following advice received from the Environment Protection Agency, consultants were engaged to conduct Landfill Gas Risk Assessments on Council’s Closed Landfills in the Precinct.  The report recommendations support the position that land within the Closed Landfill buffer of sub-precinct 4 is generally suitable for development.  The Position Paper has been amended to reference this report and the necessary considerations in responding to Landfill Gas Risk when proposing a development within the Precinct.

It is recommended that Council adopt the Cooper Street West Position Paper as Council’s policy position to guide the future planning and development of the Cooper Street West Precinct.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this report is to seek Council adoption of the Cooper Street West Position Paper. 

This project responds to increasing pressure to establish a clear land use and planning framework for the Cooper Street West Precinct to guide potential future development where appropriate. The Cooper Street West Precinct forms part of the broader Cooper Street Employment Area, which is a key regional and State significant employment node within the City of Whittlesea. 

BACKGROUND

The Cooper Street West Precinct is bound by O’Herns Rd to the north, Craigieburn Bypass (Hume Fwy) to the east, Merri Creek to the west and Cooper St to the south.

The precinct’s proximity to the Melbourne Wholesale Markets, Craigieburn Bypass, Epping Metropolitan Activity Centre, Melbourne Airport, Melbourne CBD and surrounding employment land provide substantial economic and locational advantages supporting the future development of developing this major gateway.

Cooper Street West is the remaining land in the broader Cooper Street Employment Area yet to be developed since the original designation of Cooper Street as an employment area.  The precinct is constrained due to its history of quarrying and landfill operations, as well as a lack of roads and service infrastructure.

To date, the use of the land in the Cooper Street West (CSW) precinct has been driven by the area’s history of extractive industry and the resultant “filling” of holes through their use as landfill sites.  Individual lots are currently at different phases of this “extract and fill” process, with some still operating as quarries while others are at various stages of rehabilitation having been filled with waste (putrescible or solid inert waste) and capped.

The CSW Position Paper highlights the key issues and constraints that need to be addressed to ensure that development of individual land holdings do not compromise the broader Cooper Street West Precinct in the longer term.

COOPER STREET WEST POSITION PAPER

The Cooper Street West Position Paper aims to identify the key constraints and considerations to identify the future planning and development potential for this precinct. 

The Position Paper identifies:

·     The land use opportunities in the Precinct.

·     The economic opportunities in the Precinct.

·     The transport linkages which support the Precinct.

·     The environmental and heritage values of the Precinct.

·     The land use constraints of the Precinct.

The Position Paper has identified four (4) distinct sub-precincts to inform future planning for the Precinct:

·     Precinct 1 is identified as the Merri Creek Marran Baba Parklands and Conservation Land and encompasses land identified for open space and conservation purposes 

·     Precinct 2 is identified as the Animal Welfare Precinct and contains the proposed Council owned Animal Welfare Shelter and vacant Council owned land subject to closed landfill buffers

·     Precinct 3 is identified as the Earth Resources and Waste Recovery Precinct, and includes extractive industries, green waste recycling, and concrete batching

·     Precinct 4 is identified as the Gateway – Emerging Industry precinct which represents the most developable land in the short to medium term

Each sub-precinct includes:

·     A discussion of the key issues affecting the precinct

·     The key recommendations for each precinct

·     The key planning considerations for each precinct

The proximity of the precinct to transport infrastructure and a regionally significant employment precinct, presents significant opportunities for future investment.  Plan Melbourne 2017-2050 has identified that in the past 5 years, demand for new industrial land has been driven in demand by freight, logistics and manufacturing uses, in which Cooper Street West being adjacent to major freight access routes could become highly desirable for these industries.

The Position Paper identifies the following key economic drivers:

·     Proximity to major employment centres, including the Cooper Street Employment Area and forms part of the State Significant Northern Industrial Precinct. This presents an opportunity for co-location and collaboration between businesses in related industries

·     The Melbourne Wholesale Fruit and Vegetable Market presents a unique opportunity for the study area to capitalise on synergies between emerging eco industrial and food technology uses and waste and resource recovery industries 

·     Proximity to the future Beveridge Interstate Freight Terminal. The Freight Terminal will significantly increase the capacity of interstate rail freight transport

·     Emerging uses from surrounding industrial land including the Northern Quarries Investigation Area, north of O’Herns Road

·     Access to major transport infrastructure including the Melbourne-Brisbane Rail Line, the Craigieburn bypass, the Metropolitan Ring Road and the Hume Highway.

However the precinct is constrained by a number of factors, including risks associated with closed landfills, existing earth resources and waste recovery and nationally significant fauna and flora.  The Position Paper identifies the key issues to consider when planning for this precinct and sets the framework for Council consideration. These are discussed in turn below.

Development on Closed Landfills

Three closed landfill sites are located within the Cooper Street West study area all of which are owned by Council.  Post closure, Council still maintains an active role in landfill management, including ongoing monitoring and compliance.

The environmental risks posed by landfill sites continue for a significant period of time after waste acceptance has ceased and the importance of aftercare management to maintain the landfills capping integrity are critical in preventing environmental risks and are regularly monitored by the EPA.

It is possible for closed landfills to be used and developed for other uses but it can require significant site investigations and rehabilitation to ensure latent risks are appropriately managed. 

Closed landfill sites subsequently filled are contaminated and as such have implications for future redevelopment of the land.  Detailed assessments are required to determine the presence of land contamination and whether measures need to be put in place to ensure that future redevelopment of the land addresses any remedial works required.

Landfill Gas Risk Assessment

The Environment Protection Authority guidelines for rehabilitation of landfills: Best Practice Environmental Management – Siting, design operation and rehabilitation of landfills (EPA Publication 788.3 August 2015) provides guidance for Closed Landfills.

To confirm the appropriateness of utilising land in the Cooper Street West Precinct for employment purposes, consultants were engaged to assess the landfill gas risk of Council’s closed landfills (access to the report is available upon request and is available on Council’s website).  The report - Landfill Gas Buffer Assessment 15 and 25 Vearings Rd, 315 O’Herns Rd and 410 Cooper St Epping (V160682GR Report 01.3) (Cardno 2017) concluded that the landfill gas risk assessment found the sites measured (Cooper No.1 – Eastern boundary, Cooper No.2 - Eastern and Northern boundary and Northern Landfill – Northern boundary) to be very low to low risk.  The report concluded that beyond 100m of those property boundaries (within 25 Vearings Rd, 315 O’Herns Rd and 410 Cooper St), no further Landfill Gas Risk Assessments and mitigation measures are required, provided any future development is consistent with the development assumptions contained in their report. 

The report supports Council’s position that future development in Precinct 4 – Gateway-Emerging Industry may be appropriate.  The report has taken a conservative approach to recommending mitigation measures for managing Landfill Gas Risk and these findings support Council’s position, that subject to the necessary measures and assessments, development within Precinct 4 of the Cooper Street West Precinct is suitable for development.

The report concludes that within 100m of the property boundaries of the Cooper Street landfills, applicants must either adopt the full range of landfill gas mitigation measures outlined in the consultant’s report; or undertake a Landfill Gas Risk Assessment on a building or site specific basis (prior to development) to demonstrate that Landfill Gas will not pose a risk (and that mitigation measures are not required).  This indicates that there is potential to develop on land closer to the Closed Landfills subject to further assessments.

Existing Earth Resources and Waste Recovery

The study area has a long history of quarrying and extractive activities; this has altered the physical landscape and facilitated the establishment of significant areas of filled land. This in turn has had an impact on land stability, overland flooding and the alignment of watercourses.  In recent years, the number of extractive industries operating within the study area has reduced considerably.

Over the next 20-30 years it is anticipated that this precinct will transition out of resource extraction activities as the natural resource is depleted. Currently, two active licenses remain in the precinct; however it is difficult to determine how much longer the extractive industries will continue, as licences remain until the resource is depleted which is determined by the rate and extent of extraction.  As such the Position Paper maintains the importance of protecting these existing uses when considering new development applications in the Cooper Street West Precinct. 

The current approach with locating waste and resource recovery industries nearby provides a complimentary use to these industries and reflects the Statewide Waste and Resource Recovery Infrastructure Plan 2013-2043 (SWRRIP) which designates the study area as a resource recovery hub of ‘State importance’. 

Historically waste and resource recovery industries have produced negative off site impacts such as odour and dust which can be difficult to manage and as such are often located within close proximity to industries with existing buffers to sensitive uses.  The buffer requirements for the extractive industries and closed landfills have to some extent provided a separation buffer from these off-site impacts.  The Position Paper recommends that any new development proposal meet the EPA Publication 1518 for Recommended separation distances for industrial residual air emissions to minimise the potential impact of incompatible uses.  Design conditions will also be sought for new development to minimise the possible impacts of the waste and resource recovery industry to a new proposal, thus minimising potential conflict.

There was support in the submissions to continue to locate waste and resource facilities within this precinct in the long term.  Plan Melbourne 2017- 2050 (Direction 6.7) recognises the importance of planning and protecting waste and resource recovery infrastructure.  The waste and resource industry is evolving, including higher technological processing with less off site impacts.  The Position Paper supports this growing industry in Sub-precinct 3 of the Cooper Street West Precinct and identifies the economic benefits in supporting waste and resource recovery operations in this precinct.

Environmental Values and Open Space

The Merri Creek is an iconic and valued Melbourne waterway that flows into the Yarra River. The creek extends along the western boundary of the study area, forming the spine of current and future open space provision within Cooper Street West. Its importance is recognised and the need to protect and preserve the Creek’s ecological values, natural beauty, its flora and fauna and its cultural and historic significance.  The land adjacent to the Merri Creek forms part of Sub-precinct 1 in the Cooper Street West Position Paper and is categorised as Merri Creek Parklands and Conservation Land.

Both State and Local planning policy directions for the Merri Creek seek to ensure the environmental and recreational values are protected and enhanced.  Significantly for the Cooper Street West Precinct, highly valued habitat conservation areas exist in Sub-precinct 1.  A significant portion of land at 605 O’Herns Road is protected under the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy (Conservation Area 34) for identified Growling Grass Frog Habitat.

Normally land covered by the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy (BCS) have some potential for development as part of a Precinct Structure Plan or Development Plan process whereby land identified as a Growling Grass Frog Corridor would be zoned to Rural Conservation Zone with an appropriate Environmental Significance Overlay.  A Land Management Cooperative Agreement would normally be sought as part of a planning permit that sets out an agreement between DELWP and the land owner.  However 605 O’Herns Rd is an anomaly in this process as it is an isolated site and not part of any broader development proposal.  DELWP have advised that they will work with the land owner and Council to implement the BCS for this site, opportunities exist for this site to form part of the broader Merri Creek Marran Baba Parklands.

Council owned land at 490 Cooper Street is identified as future conservation and open space, environmental offsets under the Federal EPBC Act for Growling Grass Frog and Matted Flax-lily and other significant vegetation species has been found within this site, along with protected Aboriginal artefacts.

Key Recommendations in the Cooper Street West Position Paper

The Cooper Street West Position Paper makes a number of recommendations and identifies key planning considerations for each sub-precinct.  Some key recommendations in the Position Paper include:

·     Support for emerging industrial development on suitable land

·     Support the implementation of the Merri Creek Marran Baba Parklands Strategic Management Plan and Biodiversity Conservation Strategy

·     Support the development of the City of Whittlesea’s Animal Welfare Precinct

·     Support waste and resource recovery industries

·     To recognise and manage environmental risks associated with being a former landfill site and within a closed landfill buffer and an active quarry buffer

·     Ensure development of this precinct does not prejudice the planning and development of the broader precinct, particularly in terms of internal road access arrangements

CONSULTATION

The Draft Cooper Street West Position Paper was placed on non-statutory public consultation between 11 April to 6 May 2016.  Letters were sent to landowners, occupiers and stakeholders within and surrounding the precinct.

As a result of the consultation, 11 submissions were received.  Submissions were received from 3 private land holders within the precinct, citing general support and/or corrections/additional information. Submissions were also received from several State agencies with an interest in the precinct, including: Merri Creek Management Committee, Sustainability Victoria, Minerals Development Victoria, VicRoads, Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning and the Environment Protection Authority (EPA). There was general support for the recommendations in the Draft Position Paper.  The submissions table in Attachment 2 summarises the key points of each submission and officer response where appropriate.

External Advice from VicRoads and EPA

As part of the development of the Position Paper, Council officers met with VicRoads and the EPA to seek technical advice on key matters for the precinct, being road access and the extent of landfill gas risks.  VicRoads provided advice regarding future access from Cooper St and O’Herns Road and reviewed a draft of the Position Paper. 

The EPA officers advised that due to the age of the Closed landfills, the BPEM (Best Practice Environmental Management –Siting, design, operation and rehabilitation of landfills (EPA Publications 788.3, August 2015) default buffers of 500 metres could more than likely be reduced and that Council as owners of the landfills should conduct a Landfill Gas Risk Assessment of the Closed Landfills.  Based on this advice consultants were engaged to conduct these investigations (see Attachment 3 – Cardno Report).  The key findings of this report have been outlined in this report.

Following the consultation process a number of changes were made to the Draft Position Paper and these changes are reflected in the Position Paper in Attachment 1, presented to Council for adoption. The key changes are outlined below:

Waste and Resource Recycling

The Draft Position Paper identified Precinct 3 as a waste and recycling hub for the medium term.  However submissions received indicated support for these uses possibly continuing into the longer term.  The precinct is identified as a waste and resource recovery hub and has recently been recognised under the State Planning Policy Framework (Plan Melbourne) as a hub of significance.  The Position Paper has been amended to recognise the significance of this hub for employment and the economic benefits these industries bring; including an acknowledgement that changing technology in this industry with less off-site impacts can bring many benefits to the City of Whittlesea.

Landfill Gas Risk Buffers

Council officers met with the EPA to discuss best practice management of land within Closed landfill buffers, including possible options for land affected by the buffers. 

The EPA officers advised that due to the age of the Closed landfills, the default buffers of 500 metres may not be warranted and that Council as the owners of the closed landfills should consider conducting landfill gas risk assessments.  Based on this advice, external consultants were engaged to undertake investigations of Council’s Closed landfills and to advise on the extent of the buffer required, given their age.

The Landfill Gas Risk Assessment (LFGRA) Report produced by external consultants concluded that the landfill gas risk assessment found the sites measured to be ‘very low’ to ‘low’ risk and that the buffers could be reduced to the key sites that were the subject of the assessment.  The report concluded that beyond 100 metres of the property boundaries of the Cooper St Landfills tested, the results indicated that a LFGRA is not required, nor are any mitigation measures required, providing any future development is consistent with the development assumptions contained in their report.

The report concludes that within 100 metres of the property boundaries of the Cooper Street landfills, applicants must either: adopt the full range of landfill gas mitigation measures outlined in the consultant’s report; or undertake a LFGRA on a building or site specific basis (prior to development) to demonstrate that LFG will not pose a risk (and that mitigation measures are not required).  The Position Paper has been amended to reference the report and its recommendations.

Changes to sub-precinct 4 – Gateway-Emerging Industry

The boundary for Sub-precinct 4 – Gateway – Emerging Industry has been changed to include the land east of Vearings Rd at 335-355 O’Herns Rd.  This change recognises that this land is strategically located and may facilitate internal access arrangements within the broader precinct. It represents a more logical division of the precinct to support the redevelopment of the sub-precinct.

Policy strategy and legislation

State Strategy, Legislation and Guidelines

The following legislation and guidelines support and inform the Position Paper:

State Planning Policy Framework

Clause 9.01    Plan Melbourne

Direction 1.1        Create a city structure that strengthens Melbourne’s competitiveness for jobs and investment.

Direction 1.2        Improve access to jobs across Melbourne and closer to where people live.

Direction 6.7    Reduce waste and improve waste management and resource recovery.

The Plan identifies opportunities for co-location of resource recovery infrastructure with complementary infrastructure, identifying new or expanded waste facilities in the planning system. 

Clause 17.02-1           Industrial land development

The objective is to ensure availability of land for industry and identify land for industrial development in urban growth areas.

Clause 21.10-1           Employment Opportunities

Strategy 1.4         Pursue a greater diversity in economic investment in the municipality by supporting the following: Employment generating industries within the Cooper Street Employment Area (including the Melbourne Wholesale Markets, Cooper Street South-West and Cooper Street West) with an emphasis on the food industry, freight, logistics, office, research and development, high technology, manufacturing and industrial uses.

Strategy 1.11       Encourage the establishment of attractive and activated street addresses to key employment corridors such as Cooper Street, High Street and McDonalds Road.

City of Whittlesea Council Plan

Future Direction 3:      Growing our Economy

Action 3.6                    Council will ensure there is adequately zoned industrial land

Statewide Waste and Resource Recovery Infrastructure Plan 2015-2044

The Statewide Waste and Resource Recovery Infrastructure Plan Victoria 2015-2044 has identified Cooper Street, Epping as a State Significant waste and recovery hub that is well located to service Melbourne as it is located close to major transport routes. The Plan identifies the significance of the hub in accepting organic material, garden organics, mainly from the metropolitan area and being the only construction and demolition hub for northern metropolitan Melbourne. 

Biodiversity Conservation Strategy for Melbourne’s Growth Corridors (2013)

A significant portion of land (605 O’Herns Road) within the precinct is covered by the State Government’s Biodiversity Conservation Strategy (BCS).  The BCS is the overarching strategy for the protection of biodiversity in the growth corridors and protects sites of state and national significance.  The precinct is within Conservation Area 34 which protects the habitat for the Growling Grass Frog (Litoria raniformis) which is listed as vulnerable under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act) and threatened under the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988

Merri Creek Marran Baba Parklands Strategic Management Plan (2013)

The Merri Creek Marran Baba Parklands Strategic Management Plan (2013) was released by Parks Victoria in May 2013. The plan builds upon previous strategic planning exercises undertaken for the parklands including the Merri Creek Parklands Draft Concept Plan (2006) and Merri Creek Strategic Statement (2008).

It outlines the key directions for the future use and management of the Merri Creek parklands over the next 15 years. The management plan provides high level strategic objectives for the future use and development of land parcels within and surrounding the Cooper Street West area. This includes Council owned land at 490 Cooper Street and the Craigieburn Grasslands National Conservation reserve.

The plan is primarily a management tool to administer the state-owned areas of land within the parklands. However, it does also provide some direction around the integration and complementary management of land owned by local government, with specific references to 490 Cooper Street, Epping. 

Local Plans, Policies and Strategies

Cooper Street Precinct Strategy 1996

The Cooper Street Precinct Strategy (1996) established a joint vision for development in and around Cooper Street for the City of Whittlesea and the City of Hume. The strategy identified that Cooper Street is an important arterial road and a major gateway.  For the land south of O’Herns Road, the strategy supports long-term revegetation and open space uses along the Merri Creek, continuation of ongoing extractive industrial and waste disposal uses and an eastward transition to higher-order industrial uses such as manufacturing and assembly.  For the land north of O’Herns Road, the strategy recommends that the land be retained for rural uses.

Municipal Waste Management and Resource Recovery Strategy 2012-2020

The Municipal Waste Management and Resource Recovery Strategy 2012-2020 (MWM&RRS) has been developed to provide strategic direction for the management of waste materials generated within the City of Whittlesea.

The MWM&RRS 2012-2020 seeks to provide a strategic plan that deals with the management of waste and maximise the commodity related opportunities while simultaneously managing the problematic perceptions of waste that may exist within the community.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

FUTURE DIRECTION          Growing our economy

Theme                                   Economic development

Strategic Objective              We have strategies that encourage new business investment

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

Under section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 officers providing advice to Council must disclose any interests, including the type of interest.

The Responsible Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with the relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Conclusion

As Cooper Street West has generated a great deal of interest for its potential as an employment precinct, Council seeks to provide direction through the adoption of the Cooper Street West Position Paper.  However there are a number of issues affecting the precinct including land constraints associated with former quarrying and landfill operations, as well as a lack of roads and service infrastructure.  The Precinct also benefits from highly valued environmental and cultural heritage values which are to be protected as part of any development proposal.

The Position Paper is a way of looking strategically across the entire precinct with the aim of identifying all the key issues setting a strategic direction for land within the CSW area and  identifying what individual landowners need to address when considering the strategic implications of implementing a more detailed planning scheme amendment and planning permit process.

The Paper provides Council with an important first step to set the parameters and Council’s vision/approach for the future direction for development in the precinct, encouraging employment development where appropriate in the precinct.

The CSWPP has been subject to a consultation process and the final version has been amended to take into account feedback received.

It is therefore recommended that Council adopt the Copper Street West Position Paper (2017) at Attachment 1 of this report as Council’s policy position to guide the future planning and development of the Cooper Street West Precinct.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to adopt the Cooper Street West Position Paper (Attachment 1 to this report).

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 



Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                        Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


 


 


 


 

 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

6.1.2    360 McDonalds Road Development Plan

File No:                                  195600

Attachments:                        1        Location Plan

2        Exhibited 360 McDonalds Road Development Plan

3        Draft Plenty Valley Town Centre Structure Plan

4        Housing Diversity Strategy

5        Updated 360 McDonalds Road Development Plan   

Responsible Officer:           Director Planning & Major Projects

Author:                                  Senior Strategic Planner   

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

A draft Development Plan for the property at 360 McDonalds Road, South Morang, has been submitted to Council by Environmental Resources Management Australia (ERM) on behalf of the owner of the property.

The 360 McDonalds Road Development Plan (the Development Plan) aims to facilitate the commercial and residential development of the land, inclusive of open space and retention of River Red Gum trees. The Development Plan provides for the following land uses:

·        Mixed Use development fronting McDonalds Road incorporating commercial and potentially some residential;

·        Residential development comprising a diversity of housing types and sizes including both townhouses and apartments; and,

·        Public open space, providing for the retention of a large number of significant River Red Gums on the site and an open space reserve integrating with the Yan Yean Pipe Track.

The Development Plan was informally exhibited to adjoining properties and external agencies between 6 April 2017 and 11 May 2017. In this period, three non-objecting submissions were received.

The subject land is within the Plenty Valley Town Centre Structure Plan area. A planning scheme amendment is proposed which will shortly go on exhibition which seeks to incorporate the new Structure Plan and associated controls. Until such time as any amendment is approved, proposals need to be assessed under the current controls. To this end, a Development Plan has been prepared in accordance with Development Plan overlay and is consistent with the draft Structure Plan.

The Development Plan also implements Council’s Housing Diversity Strategy by providing for a diversity of higher density housing in an identified ‘urban renewal area’.

The Development Plan responds to key issues including the retention and integration of River Red Gum trees, provision of a mixed use development outcome, the arrangement of a development contribution and the protection of the amenity of future residents from the effects of the rail corridor.

As such it is recommended that the Development Plan be approved by Council, subject to the proposed changes outlined in this report.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this report is to consider the 360 McDonalds Road Development Plan (the Development Plan). The Development Plan is site specific and only affects this property. The purpose of this Development Plan is to provide greater certainty about the future use and development of this parcel of land.

The submitted Development Plan has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan overlay and is consistent with the Draft Plenty Valley Town Centre Structure Plan which is soon to commence formal exhibition as part of the planning scheme amendment process.

SITE CONTEXT AND DESCRIPTION

The Development Plan affects the property at 360 McDonalds Road, South Morang. The subject land is identified in Attachment 1.

The site is approximately 6.5ha in size and is located in the Plenty Valley Town Centre. The site adjoins McDonalds Road to the south, commercial development to the west, the Mernda rail corridor to the north and Yan Yean Pipetrack reserve to the east.

The site is currently used as a go-kart facility and contains a significant number of River Red Gums trees.

KEY FEATURES OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN

The overall layout plan of the Development Plan which was placed on non-statutory exhibition is provided in Attachment 2.  

The subject land is a significant parcel within the Plenty Valley Town Centre and provides opportunities for mixed use development integrated with the River Red gums on the site.

The Development Plan aims to facilitate the commercial and residential development of the land, inclusive of open space and retention of River Red Gum trees. It specifically provides for:

·        Residential development comprising a diversity of housing types and sizes including both townhouses and apartments;

·        Mixed use development fronting McDonalds Road incorporating commercial and potentially some residential;

·        A range of built form outcomes with built form fronting McDonalds Road and heights ranging from 2-6 storeys across the site;

·        Public open space, providing for the retention of a high number of significant River Red Gums on the site and an open space reserve integrating with the Yan Yean Pipe Track;

·        Tree reserves to provide for the retention of significant River Red Gums on the site.

·        Noise attenuation to protect the amenity of future residents from adjoining uses including the rail corridor and loading facilities; and

·        Site access and intersection upgrade from McDonalds Road.

Policy strategy and legislation

Plenty Valley Town Centre Structure Plan and Amendment C204

As indicated above, the subject land is within the Plenty Valley Town Centre and is subject to the draft Plenty Valley Town Centre Structure Plan (the Structure Plan).

Council resolved at its meeting on 21 March 2017 to commence Planning Scheme Amendment C204 to incorporate and implement the Structure Plan into the Whittlesea Planning Scheme. The amendment will also remove existing planning controls from the land, including Development Plan Overlay (Schedule 8).

However, until Amendment C204 is formally approved and gazetted by the Minister for Planning, any development on the site must accord with the existing planning controls. As such, a Development Plan is required to guide development on the land until the Structure Plan is finalised. Notwithstanding, the submitted Development Plan has been prepared consistent with the draft Structure Plan.

The subject site is located in the draft Structure Plan’s “Live and Work Precinct” which aims to balance higher density mixed use development with existing environmental features.

The Live and Work Illustrative Precinct Plan (Attachment 3) identifies the following principles for this site:

·        Sensitively integrate River Red Gums into the residential neighbourhood;

·        Ensure properties positively address adjacent open space; and

·        Ensure the introduction of active ground floor uses to the McDonalds Road street edge.

The Development Plan implements these key principles and other relevant strategies identified in the draft Structure Plan.

Zoning

The subject land is currently zoned Commercial 1 Zone (C1Z). The Development Plan and proposed development is permissible in the C1Z. The Development Plan more closely aligns with the proposed Activity Centre Zone which is proposed to apply to the site through Amendment C204.

Overlays

The subject land is affected by the following overlays:

·        Schedule 8 to the Development Plan Overlay (DPO8) - South Morang Activity Centre Development Plan; and

·        Vegetation Protection Overlay (VPO1).

The submitted Development Plan provides for the requirements in DPO8 and complies with VPO1.

State Planning Policy Framework

The proposed Development Plan is consistent with state planning policies including Plan Melbourne 2017-2050. In particular, the Development Plan implements policy which supports a diversity of housing types at higher densities in an activity centre.

Local Planning Policies and Strategies

The proposed Development Plan considers and implements Councils local planning policies and strategies including:

·        Whittlesea Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS);

·        River Redgum Protection Local Policy;

·        South Morang Activity Centre Policy

·        City of Whittlesea Open Space Strategy; and

·        City of Whittlesea Housing Diversity Strategy.

In particular, the Development Plan implements the Housing Diversity Strategy (Attachment 4) by promoting a diversity of higher density housing in an Urban Renewal area and protecting significant River Red Gums in accordance with Councils local policy.

CONSULTATION

There is no statutory requirement to exhibit the Development Plan. Notwithstanding, non-statutory exhibition of Development Plans provide an important opportunity for affected landholders and referral authorities to raise issues that would ordinarily be identified at a later stage in the approval process. The draft Development Plan was placed on non-statutory public exhibition for a period of one month between 6 April 2017 and 11 May 2017.

The draft Development Plan was sent to adjoining landowners and relevant service authorities. In this period, three submissions were received which are summarised below.

Table 1: Summary of Submissions

Submission Maker

Summary of Submission

Officer Response

AusNet Services

No objection subject to a range of conditions pertinent to a subdivision planning permit application.

Noted. No further changes required.

Public Transport Victoria

No objection. Provided the following advice:

·    The site is considered to be serviced by public transport as it is located approximately 1 kilometre from South Morang Station and within 400 metres of existing bus services along McDonalds Road;

·    It is recommended that prior to a preferred option for the acoustic mitigation measures for the rail line being agreed upon, further analysis and discussions are held with Level Crossing Removal Authority.

·    Appropriate fencing must be provided to ensure that there is no public access to the railway corridor.

Noted. No further changes required.

Department of Environment, Water, Land and Planning (DEWLP)

Provided a number of comments for Council’s consideration including:

·   the offset requirements for the proposed clearing are 0.102 General Biodiversity Equivalent Units with a minimum Strategic Biodiversity Score of 0.080.

·   the Department supports the environmental minimisation process described in the submitted Biodiversity report to retain the highest values and largest trees. Suggests that the retention of additional scattered trees including Tree 87 in the adjoining tree reserve.

·   The Department accepts that no individuals Matted Flax Lily were identified on site.

·   Where possible avoid residential back fences directly abutting reserves.

·   The plan entitled ‘Tree Retention and Removal Plan’ in the Development Plan should be entitled ‘Native vegetation retention plan’

·   The development plan should outline the potential uses of the reserves and ensure that the use is compatible with the purpose of the reserves.

The comments provided are noted and have been considered. The offset requirements are noted and will be addressed as part of the planning permit application for vegetation removal.

It is recommended that the following amendments are made to the submitted Development Plan:

 

·   Identify the retention of Tree 87.

·   Rename Figure 18 ‘Native Vegetation Retention Plan.

·   Provide guidance for rear of dwelling/internal park interface where it cannot be avoided.

·   Identify the use of open space and tree reserves as ‘passive’.

Discussion

The Development Plan responds to a range of site constraints and opportunities in accordance with relevant planning policies. During the assessment of the submitted Development Plan a number of changes were identified which are represented in the updated Development Plan included in Attachment 5. These key issues and changes are detailed below.

Vegetation retention and removal

The site contains a number of River Red Gum trees. The site is affected by Vegetation Protection Overlay Schedule 1 (VPO1) and Council’s River Redgum Protection policy.

The Development Plan shows the retention of 25 medium, large and very large, mature River Red Gum which is 43% of the trees on site. The River Red Gum trees are to be retained with Tree Protections zones (TPZ) provided in accordance with Council’s policy which requires them to be completely outside road reserves. The Development Plan also provides for the protection of ten native trees on the Yan Yean pipetrack reserve overhanging the boundary of the site.

A total of 33 medium to very large, mature River Red Gum trees will be removed to facilitate the development. Five (5) of these trees encroach the rail reserve and are likely to be affected by the Mernda Rail project.

Given, the location of the site in an activity centre, the amount of River Red Gum trees to be retained is considered an acceptable design response and will contribute significantly to the amenity of the future development. Almost one quarter of the site will be dedicated as open space or tree reserves in order to retain the trees. A requirement to retain more trees would effect the viability of development the site and implementing the land use outcome proposed by the draft Structure Plan.

During the course of assessing the Development Plan, the viability of providing the required TPZ for ‘Tree 102’ in Reserve No. 1 (see Attachment 2) became an issue due to its conflict with drainage requirements and its encroachment into the rail corridor. Therefore, it proposed to retain ‘Tree No. 87’ (see Attachment 5) in lieu of Tree 102. This option was assessed by Council officers and considered to be appropriate.

Officer Recommendation

·        Amend the Development Plan to identify the retention of Tree No. 87 in lieu of Tree No. 102.

·        Amend the Development Plan to show all Tree Protection Zones outside road reserves.

Rail corridor interface

The northern boundary of the site abuts the Mernda Rail extension corridor.

While the final rail plans have not been released, it is understood that the railway line in this location is proposed to be constructed on the southern side of the corridor and raised above natural ground level. A shared cycle and maintenance path will be located on the north side of the corridor. Having a better understanding of the railway design and location has meant a revision of the submitted acoustic report and the proposed noise attenuation measures.

As part of preparing the amended acoustic report, Council officers requested that the option to provide an interface road abutting the boundary and providing a greater setback for dwellings to be assessed.

This was not considered to be a suitable option by the acoustic consultant as it would disperse the noise significantly across the site and result in further acoustic treatment of dwellings across the site. In this scenario the amenity of residents would be detrimentally affected by noise which would restrict the ability of residents to use private open space and open windows or doors for ventilation. Further, the interface road would abut an elevated rail which would not provide for an attractive streetscape.

The updated acoustic report recommends the construction of an acoustic wall adjacent to the property boundary approximately five (5) metres in height. This will provide for appropriate treatment of noise for the entire development including properties directly abutting the rail corridor and those further within the development site.

The applicant proposes that the acoustic wall be constructed and incorporated into the built form for the townhouses providing for a more attractive streetscape. The final endorsed Development Plan will be required to include principles for the design of the acoustic wall and for the built form of adjoining dwellings to guarantee the amenity of residents including daylight access to private open space.

Unfortunately, since the rail will be elevated there is no opportunity to provide surveillance of the shared path from the dwellings in the proposed development. It is important that the wall presents well from the rail corridor and this will need to be considered in the design.

Officer Recommendation

·        Amend the Development Plan to incorporate the recommendations of the updated Acoustic Report including the requirements for an acoustic wall, guidelines for the design of the acoustic wall, the design of dwellings abutting the acoustic wall and the visual appearance of the wall from both the site and the rail corridor.

368 McDonalds Road- owned by Melbourne Water

There is a small piece of land which abuts the subject site addressed as 368 McDonalds Road, South Morang shown in Attachment 5. The land is owned by Melbourne Water Corporation, is zoned Commercial 1 Zone and is also covered by Development Plan Overlay Schedule 8.

Given that one of the objectives of the Development Plan Overlay is to ensure integrated planning across parcels of land within separate ownership, it is recommended that this land be incorporated into the Development Plan and identified for ‘mixed use’ purposes. The applicant and Melbourne Water have been consulted and raised no concern with the proposed change as it is not required for their purposes. There is the opportunity to integrate this land into the balance of the Development Plan area.

Officer Recommendation

·        Amend the Development Plan to show the inclusion of 368 McDonalds Road, South Morang in the Development Plan.

·        Amend the Development Plan to identify the land to be used for ‘mixed use’ purposes.

Movement Network

The Development Plan is accompanied by a Traffic Impact Report. The development will be accessed via a new intersection with McDonalds Road which design is subject to the approval of Vic Roads.

The submitted Development Plan showed an ‘interim’ road through the medium density site and Reserve No. 7 (refer to Attachment 2). Concern was raised as to the potential impact of the ‘interim’ road on the public open space reserve and River Red Gum trees. Therefore, it is to be removed from the plan.

The submitted Development Plan also showed a small portion of road at the entry of the site as a public road. Council officers raised concerns with the provision of a public road in this location and the issues of maintenance and management. As such all roads in the proposed integrated development will be private roads.

Officer Recommendation

·        Amend the Development Plan map to remove the ‘interim road’ shown on the Development Plan;

·        Amend the Development Plan to change the designation of Road 1 to a private road.

Yan Yean Pipe Track land

The submitted Development Plan did not accurately show the proposed location of the cycle link within the Yan Yean Pipe Track reserve. This needs to be updated.

Officer Recommendation

·        Amend the Development Plan to identify the proposed cycle link in the Yan Yean Pipetrack reserve.

Higher Density Residential land

The submitted Development Plan did not show a height limit for the land identified for higher density residential in Lot D (shown in orange in Development Plan).

The updated draft Plenty Valley Town Centre Structure Plan identifies the preferred maximum building height for the site as six storeys.

As such, the Development Plan is required to be amended to show this area with a preferred maximum building height of six storeys or 21 metres.

Officer Recommendation

·        Amend the Development Plan to show the land designated for residential is Lot D to have a preferred maximum building height of six (6) storeys (21 metres).

Transmission Line Easement

A small portion of the subject land is affected by the transmission line easement. The submitted Development Plan shows this area as ‘parking’. It is considered that parking might not be the most appropriate use of the land from a visual amenity perspective. The proponent wants to maintain the ability for the land to be used ancillary to the residential development. The land could potentially be used for ancillary and transitional uses such as open space, community garden, pathway and/or storage with landscaping.

The ultimate use of this land is to be determined at planning permit stage however it needs to be suitable for an electricity easement and include low scale landscaping and an appropriate interface/transition with the Yan Yean pipetrack reserve. The area is to be identified on the Development Plan simply as ‘common property’ use noting the need to incorporate landscaping and an interface response.

Officer Recommendation

·        Amend the Development Plan to amend the land identified as ‘parking’ to ‘uses restricted by electricity easement’ incorporating landscaping and an appropriate interface to the Yan Yean pipetrack reserve.

Pedestrian Connections

The submitted Development Plan shows a pedestrian connection link into the property adjoining the subject site’s western boundary (Central South Morang shopping centre). The pedestrian link into this site is supported by Council officers, however its location needed further assessment to ensure a direct and safe connection for pedestrians to the adjoining site. The proponent is currently in discussions with the adjoining property owner and therefore the link is to be shown indicatively on the Development Plan to enable its actual location to be further resolved.

Officer Recommendation

·        Amend the Development Plan to show the location of the pedestrian connection into Central South Morang to the west of the site as indicative subject to further detailed locational assessment.

Futuro House

The site contains a ‘Futuro House’ which is a rare prefabricated fiberglass dwelling unit of circular plan form and distinctive spaceship-like form. The building has been on site for over 25 years. No heritage controls apply to the building or the site.

 

A heritage report considered the building to be of ‘state significance’ however noted that the Futuro House belongs to “a rare class of heritage places where cultural significance is almost entirely (if not completely) imbued in the physical fabric, while broader association with place (ie, its physical location) is secondary or even ultimately irrelevant”.

 

The proponent proposes to relocate the building offsite for restoration. The heritage report states “for the simple fact that it was originally conceived as a structure that could be readily dismantled and relocated, it is not considered to be inappropriate, from a heritage viewpoint, for the building to be moved elsewhere”.

 

It would be ideal if the building was restored and relocated to a place with public presence. It is recommended that Council officers investigate the potential for the building to be included on a heritage register and work with the proponent to ensure that building is restored relocated to a site with public presence.

Officer Recommendation

·    Work with the land owner to ensure the protection, restoration and appropriate relocation of the ‘Futuro House’.

Contamination

A preliminary contamination report was prepared for the owner of the site and provided by the applicant as part of the submission of the Development Plan. The report concludes that the site has potential for some contamination particularly in some imported fill on site. However, the report notes that the clean-up costs are expected to be low and the clean up will be best addressed through the integration of site environmental issues with the site and building design.

It is recommended that guidance is provided in the Development Plan document to ensure that this issue will be properly addressed as part of subsequent permit applications

Officer Recommendation

·        Include a requirement in the Development Plan document to require submission of a Site Environmental Assessment with future planning permit applications.

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS

There is no Development Contributions Planning Overlay (DCPO) currently applying to the land. Planning Scheme Amendment C204 proposes to apply a DCPO to the Plenty Valley Town Centre including the subject site. Given, Council has commenced the process to apply a DCPO; the proponent has agreed to provide an ‘in kind’ contribution to infrastructure identified in the Plenty Valley Town Centre Structure Plan. This will be secured via a legal agreement.

The ‘in kind’ contribution is proposed to include the construction of a shared path between McDonalds Road and the pedestrian/cyclist underpass of the Mernda Rail to be constructed by the Level Crossing Removal Authority (LXRA). The proposed works will also comprise the embellishment of the pipetrack reserve to become a linear public reserve including playground equipment and seating. The works will require the consent of Melbourne Water and Heritage Victoria.

ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC EFFECTS

The Development Plan will have a range of environmental, social and economic effects on the site and the Plenty Valley Town Centre. The development will result in the removal of a number of River Red Gums however will secure the long term protection of 25 large mature River Red Gums with Tree Protection Zones. Many of these will be integrated in a reserve adjoining the Yan Yean Pipetrack reserve creating a large open space reserve which will deliver positive environmental and social benefits.

The Development Plan will deliver a positive social effect by facilitating a diversity of housing in close proximity to public transport and services. The Development Plan will also deliver positive economic effects for the Plenty Valley Town Centre through the development of commercial uses and provision of more residents in proximity to existing retail businesses.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

FUTURE DIRECTION          Places and spaces to connect people

Theme                                   Planning our space

Strategic Objective              Our urban design helps build connection to place and the community

The proposed Development Plan responds to the existing site conditions and proposes a design which provides for connection through provision of diversity of housing, retention of River Red Gums and integration of quality open space reserves. The development will integrate and contribute to the boarder Plenty Valley Town Centre.

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

Under section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 officers providing advice to Council must disclose any interests, including the type of interest.

The Responsible Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with the relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Conclusion

The 360 McDonalds Road Development Plan provides for the residential and commercial development of the subject land whilst providing for the retention of a significant number of River Red Gum trees. The Development Plan has been exhibited and referred externally to relevant agencies and surrounding landowners.

The Development Plan is consistent with the Development Plan Overlay Schedule 8, the draft Plenty Valley Structure Plan and implements the City of Whittlesea’s Housing Diversity Strategy. The Development Plan is also consistent with the other relevant policies and strategies of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

To this end, it is recommended that Council approve the exhibited 360 McDonalds Road Development Plan, subject to an agreement for developer contributions being finalised and the document being updated as discussed in this report and in line with Attachment 5, to:

·        identify the retention of Tree No. 87 in lieu of Tree No. 102.

·        rename Figure 18 ‘Native Vegetation Retention Plan.

·        provide guidance for dealing with a rear of dwelling and internal park interface where it cannot be avoided.

·        identify the use of open space and tree reserves as ‘passive’.

·        show all Tree Protection Zones outside road reserves.

·        incorporate the recommendations of the updated Acoustic Report including the requirements for an acoustic wall, guidelines for the design of the acoustic wall, the design of dwellings abutting the acoustic wall and the visual appearance of the wall from both the site and the rail corridor.

·        show the inclusion of the Melbourne Water property at 368 McDonalds Road, South Morang in the Development Plan and identify the land to be used for ‘mixed use’ purposes.

·        remove the ‘interim road’ shown on the Development Plan.

·        change the designation of Road 1 to a private road.

·        identify the proposed cycle link in the Yan Yean Pipetrack reserve.

·        show the land designated for residential is Lot D to have a preferred maximum building height of six (6) storeys (21 metres).

·        show the location of pedestrian connection into Central South Morang to the west of the site as indicative.

·        amend the land identified as ‘parking’ to ‘uses restricted by electricity easement’ incorporating landscaping and an appropriate interface to the Yan Yean Pipetrack reserve.

·        include a requirement for the submission of a Site Environmental Assessment with future planning permit applications.


 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Approve the 360 McDonalds Road Development Plan in accordance with the plan in Attachment 5, to the provide for the following amendments to the Development Plan document, which:

a)      identify the retention of Tree No. 87 in lieu of Tree No. 102.

b)      rename Figure 18 as ‘Native Vegetation Retention Plan’.

c)      provide guidance for dealing with a rear of dwelling and internal park interface where it cannot be avoided.

d)      identify the use of open space and tree reserves as ‘passive’.

e)      show all Tree Protection Zones outside road reserves.

f)       incorporate the recommendations of the updated Acoustic Report including the requirements for an acoustic wall, guidelines for the design of the acoustic wall, the design of dwellings abutting the acoustic wall and the visual appearance of the wall from both the site and the rail corridor.

g)      show the inclusion of Melbourne Water land at 368 McDonalds Road, South Morang in the Development Plan and identify the land to be used for ‘mixed use’ purposes.

h)      remove the ‘interim road’ shown on the Development Plan.

i)       change the designation of Road 1 to a private road.

j)       identify the proposed cycle link in the Yan Yean Pipetrack reserve.

k)      show the land designated for residential is Lot D to have a preferred maximum building height of six (6) storeys (21 metres).

l)       show the location of pedestrian connection into Central South Morang to the west of the site as indicative.

m)     amend the land identified as ‘parking’ to ‘uses restricted by electricity easement’ incorporating landscaping and an appropriate interface to the Yan Yean Pipetrack reserve.

n)      include a requirement for the submission of a Site Environmental Assessment with future planning permit applications.

2.       Work with the land owner to ensure the protection, restoration and appropriate relocation of the ‘Futuro House’.

3.       Require the land owner to enter into an agreement to provide a contribution to infrastructure in the Plenty Valley Town Centre prior to the commencement of any development on site.

4.       Advise the proponent and submitters of the resolution of 1. above.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

6.1.3    Whittlesea Planning Scheme Amendment C206 - Exhibition Outcomes

File No:                                  195441

Attachments:                        1        Site Locality & Zoning Plan

2        Proposed Clause 7.0 to Schedule 1 of the Comprehensive Development Zone   

Responsible Officer:           Director Planning & Major Projects

Author:                                  Strategic Planner   

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

Whittlesea Planning Scheme Amendment C206 proposes to introduce specific advertising signage requirements for the Mernda Town Centre.

The Mernda Town Centre is currently zoned Comprehensive Development – Schedule 1, which does not specify any provisions for advertising signage. The absence of specific provisions means that the zone automatically defaults to the strictest Category 3 – ‘High Amenity Areas’ controls which are typically applied to residential areas.

The amendment proposes to introduce Category 1 – ‘Commercial Areas’ controls for the Mernda Town Centre to reflect commercial uses which will locate within the Mernda Town Centre. The Category 1 control will not apply to nominated residential areas within the Mernda Town Centre, these areas will remain within Category 3.

The Amendment was reported to Council on 13 December 2016, where Council resolved to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit the Amendment via Section 20(2) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, which was subsequently granted.

Amendments considered under Section 20(2) provide a level of exemption from notice and review requirements, for the purposes of Amendment C206 notification of the Amendment was made to Prescribed Ministers and within the Victorian Government Gazette.

At the conclusion of the exhibition period on 26 May 2017, two submissions supporting the Amendment were received. It is recommended that Council adopt Planning Scheme Amendment C206 and forward to the Minister for Planning for approval.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to discuss the outcomes of the statutory exhibition process for Whittlesea Planning Scheme Amendment C206, including, a summary of submissions received and recommendations to finalise the Amendment.

BACKGROUND

In 2016, Council received an application on behalf of landowners within the Mernda Town Centre to review the advertising signage provisions applying to the site.

As reported to Council on 13 December 2016, the Mernda Town Centre is currently zoned Comprehensive Development – Schedule 1 (see Attachment 1) which does not specify any provisions for advertising signage. In the absence of specific provisions, the zone automatically defaults to the stricter Category 3 – ‘High Amenity Areas’, controls that are typically applied to residential areas.

Category 3 controls prohibit certain types of signage including Panel Signs and Promotion Signs, which are commonly associated with bulky goods and supermarkets, uses which are supported by the Mernda Strategy Plan and Mernda Town Centre Comprehensive Development Plan to locate within the Mernda Town Centre.

In retail and commercial precincts such as the Mernda Town Centre, the provisions of Category 1 – ‘Commercial Areas’ are more commonly applied. The mixed use nature of the Mernda Town Centre means there will be a mix of different land use categories across the precinct. As such, it is important to ensure that appropriate signage controls are applied to each of the land uses within the Mernda Town Centre.

Amendment C206 proposes a procedural change to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, which will insert advertising signage requirements into Schedule 1 of the Comprehensive Development Zone to nominate all land within the Mernda Town Centre for Category 1 provisions, except for land used and developed for residential purposes which will remain Category 3. The signage controls proposed by this Amendment will allow businesses to appropriately promote their services, thus supporting the status of the Mernda Town Centre as a regionally significant mixed use, commercial and residential precinct.

Proposal

Amendment C206 proposes to a new Subclause 7.0 ‘Advertising Signs’ into Schedule 1 of the Comprehensive Development Zone of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

More specifically, Subclause 7.0 will set out that all land within the Mernda Town Centre is in Category 1 – ‘Commercial Areas’, with the exception of land used and developed for residential purposes which will remain in Category 3 – ‘High Amenity Areas’ (see Attachment 2).

NOTIFICATION PROCESS

Given the procedural nature of Amendment C206, Council resolved to request the Minister under the Amendment via Section 20(2) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, at its meeting of 13 December 2016. Amendments considered under Section 20(2) provide a level of exemption and review requirements, for Amendments deemed to be procedural in nature. Notification under Section 20(2) is limited to the prescribed Ministers under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and notice within the Victorian Government. Authorisation to consider Amendment C206 under Section 20(2) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 was granted.

In accordance with Section 20(2), Amendment C206 was placed on exhibition between 11 May 2017 and 26 May 2017, to prescribed Ministers within the Planning & Environment Act 1987. Notice of the amendment was also placed within the Victorian Government Gazette.

At the conclusion of the exhibition period, two submissions were received. Both submissions received were from landowner’s subject of Amendment C206 who support the Amendment. These are summarised in the table below with accompanying officer responses as relevant.


 

SUBMISSIONS

Key Submission Points

Officer Response

Landowner

Tract Consultants on behalf of RCL Group at 1405 Plenty Road, Mernda

Supports the proposed changes to the advertising signage controls applying to the Mernda Town Centre for the following reasons:

·       The signage will support development of the approved Bunnings and other development sites by allowing for appropriate advertising, which will support the economic viability of these businesses and in turn the Mernda Town Centre.

·       The signage controls will better reflect the signage provisions typical within Town Centre environments.

·       The current signage controls hinder the ability to attract interest in developable land.

Noted.

Tract Consultants on behalf of landowners at 1435 Plenty Road, Mernda

Client is owner of a large landholding within the Mernda Town Centre, which has planning approval for a supermarket and other retail premises.

Identifies that the inclusion of the proposed signage controls will allow for appropriately sized advertising signs to compliment the approved development and amenity of the site.

Noted.

CRITICAL DATES

·    October 2004 – Approval of the Mernda Strategy Plan.

·    October 2004 – Approval of the Mernda Town Centre Comprehensive Development Plan.

·    September 2012 – Approval of the Mernda Town Centre Development Plan.

·    December 2012 – Approval of the Mernda Town Centre North West Development Plan.

·    October 2015 – Approval of the Mernda Town Centre South West Development Plan.

·    October 2016 – Approval of the Mernda Town Centre South East Development Plan.

·    December 2016 – Amendment C206 reported to Council requesting Ministerial Authorisation to prepare and exhibit the Amendment.

·    May 2017 – Amendment C206 placed on exhibition.

DISCUSSION

Planning Scheme Amendment C206 has been subject to an exhibition process under Section 20(2) of the Planning & Environment Act 1987. At the conclusion of this period no objecting submissions were received.

The Mernda Town Centre is a strategic hub that has undergone significant detailed strategic planning as identified within the Mernda Strategy Plan and Mernda Town Centre Comprehensive Development Plan, and is nominated as a Major Activity Centre within Plan Melbourne 2017-2050. Furthermore, the Mernda Town Centre is expected to accommodate a range of retail and mixed uses to service the broader Mernda-Doreen growth corridor. With the current absence of any specific signage controls, the controls as they apply to the Mernda Town Centre automatically default to Category 3 – ‘High Amenity Areas’, which do not reflect the strategic vision of the Mernda Town Centre as regional mixed-use precinct.

The inclusion of signage requirements within Schedule 1 of the Comprehensive Development Zone, stating that controls are Category 1 – ‘Commercial Areas’ will ensure that advertising signage including Panel Signs and Promotion Signs, signs commonly associated with bulky goods and supermarkets, which have been promoted for development within the Town Centre, are permissible. This however does not consider the amenity impacts of the intended residential land uses of the Mernda Town Centre.

The inclusion of a hybrid signage requirement that incorporates the needs of both commercial and residential interests within the Mernda Town Centre, is considered appropriate. The wording inserted at Subclause 7.0 of Schedule 1 to the Comprehensive Development Plan, proposes to nominate all land within the Mernda Town Centre under Category 1, to reflect the retail, office and community uses of the precinct, with the exception of land nominated for the use and development of residential purposes.

It is considered that the proposed wording at Clause 7.0 of the Schedule 1 to the Comprehensive Development Zone will not cause any material detriment to any parties affected by the proposal, as it equally balances the competing commercial and residential interests of the Mernda Town Centre.

More importantly the wording reinforces the role of the Mernda Town Centre a regionally significant mixed-use Activity Centre in accordance with the Mernda Strategy Plan, Mernda Town Centre Comprehensive Development Plan, and Plan Melbourne 2017-2050.

Policy strategy and legislation

Amendment C206 reflects the ambitions of the extensive set of Council policies. Several notable Community Plan Strategic Objectives include:

·        Growing our economy – We have strategies that encourage new business investment.

·        Growing our economy – there are a diverse range of local employment opportunities.

Amendment C206 is consistent with the Municipal Strategic Statement and Local Policy Framework. Retail and employment are identified at Clause 21.02-3 under ‘Key Issues’. Amendment C206 addresses these issues, helping the municipality sustain long-term employment within a diversity of sectors through progressively upgrading the appearance of employment centres and increasing the choice and location of land available for employment generating activities.

The Amendment is also consistent with Clause 21.10 – Economic Development of the Local Planning Policy Framework, as it provides appropriate conditions for local businesses and development of increased local employment opportunities for the town centre.

Amendment C206 is consistent with the metropolitan strategy Plan Melbourne 2017-2050 which identifies Mernda as a Major Activity Centre and as such supports the implementation of the State Planning Policy Framework.

In particular it is supported by Clause 17 – Economic Development, as it supports commercial development in new and existing commercial centres, and removes an unnecessary barrier to the effective operation of such businesses, whilst balancing the interests of residential development. The Amendment allows for appropriate signage to be established in a mixed-use Major Activity Centre precinct and adopts a more fitting use of the advertising signage provisions of Clause 52.05.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

FUTURE DIRECTION          Growing our economy

Theme                                   Economic development

Strategic Objective              We have strategies that encourage new business investment

 

The proposed Amendment will provide much needed guidance relating to Advertising Signage within the Town Centre. As such, it is considered that the Amendment will meet the direction of “growing our economy”. The Amendment will support commercial businesses wishing to invest within the Town Centre, whilst simultaneously ensuring that residential land uses within the Town Centre are not compromised with inadequate controls.

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

Under section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 officers providing advice to Council must disclose any interests, including the type of interest.

The Responsible Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with the relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Conclusion

The insertion of tailored Advertising signage requirements within Schedule 1 of the Comprehensive Development Zone, will accurately reflect the intent of the Mernda Town Centre to be a regionally significant mixed-use activity centre, as envisaged within the Mernda Strategy Plan, Mernda Town Centre Comprehensive Development Plan and Plan Melbourne 2017-2050.

Given the technical nature of the Amendment, Amendment C206 has been subject to a limited notification process in accordance with Section 20(2) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Following exhibition no submissions opposing Amendment C206 were received. Therefore, it is recommended that Council resolve to adopt Planning Scheme Amendment C206 as exhibited and forward to the Minister for Planning requesting approval.

More specifically it is recommended that Council resolve to:

·     Adopt Planning Scheme Amendment C206 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

·     Request the Minister for Planning approve Amendment C206 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

·     Advise the proponent and submitters of Council’s resolution regarding the above.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Adopt Planning Scheme Amendment C206 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

2.       Request the Minister for Planning approve Amendment C206 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

3.       Advise the proponent and submitters of Council’s resolution regarding the above.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

6.1.4    Amendment to the Bassetts Road Development Plan

File No:                                  165954

Attachments:                        1        Locality & Zoning Plan

2        Current 2009 Bassetts Road Development Plan 

3        Proposed 2017 Addendum to the Bassetts Road Development Plan

4        Current Land Use and Proposed Land Use Comparison Plan   

Responsible Officer:           Director Planning & Major Projects

Author:                                  Strategic Planner   

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

A request to amend the Bassetts Road Development Plan has been received for the properties 85A Bassetts Road and 150A Eminence Boulevard, Doreen (land located at intersection of Bassetts Road and Eminence Boulevard).

The amendment proposes to nominate a portion of land at the intersection of Bassetts Road and Eminence Boulevard for a “Church”, more specifically opposite to the Catholic Primary School. To allow for this use, an amendment to the Development Plan is required including the resultant changes to the location of residential allotments, open space layout and local road access.

The amended Development Plan was informally exhibited to affected owners and occupiers within the amendment area, adjoining landholdings and relevant stakeholders. One objection was received. Following officer assessment of the proposal it is recommended that the amendment to the Bassetts Road Development Plan is approved by Council, subject to the proposed changes as outlined in the report.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this report is to discuss the request to amend the Bassetts Road Development Plan (BRDP) prepared by SMEC consultants on behalf of the Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne.

The proposal seeks to amend part of the BRDP, approved on 10 February 2009, under Schedule 5 of the Development Plan Overlay.

The proponent submitted Addendum A to the BRDP which includes a revised Development Plan layout for land at 85A Bassetts Road and 150A Eminence Boulevard, for Council consideration in March 2017.

The subject sites incorporate two vacant land parcels located immediately north and west of St Paul the Apostle Catholic Primary School. The current BRDP nominates the subject site for residential developments which are bisected by a large linear open-space pedestrian green link.

The revised Development Plan has been the subject of ongoing discussion and non-statutory exhibition.

This report will discuss the merits of the revised Development Plan in the context of the applicable statutory framework.

BACKGROUND

The BRDP applies to a large area of land bound by the Mitchell’s Run Development Estate to the north, Costa Mushroom Exchange to the west, Bridge Inn Road to the south and the Eminence Estate to the east (see Attachment 1).

The original BRDP builds upon the high level guidance of the Mernda Strategy Plan (MSP) for this area by identifying potential land uses and local road network, and contains an accompanying written report outlining other development requirements (including public open space contributions, development contributions etc). The BRDP was first considered by Council at its meeting on 3 June 2008 where it was resolved to approve the BRDP subject to a number of minor changes and conditions.

The plan and report was subsequently endorsed on 10 February 2009, under the Development Plan Overlay – Schedule 5 (Clause 43.04 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme) (see Attachment 2).

Since the approval of the BRDP, the majority of the BRDP area has been developed in accordance with the Development Plan. The BRDP to date has provided a mix of standard and medium density residential development, two schools (government P-12 and Catholic), two collector roads (Bassetts Road and Eminence Boulevard) and a significant amount of public open space.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Mernda Strategy Plan

The subject land is included within Precinct 2A of the MSP, an Incorporated Plan within the Whittlesea Planning Scheme that guides the future direction of growth within the Mernda-Doreen growth corridor.

The MSP highlights the following key features that are applicable to the subject sites.

·    Provision of a conservation area within the northern section of the precinct to allow for retention and ongoing protection of significant vegetation and serve as public open space;

·    The extension and upgrade of Bassetts Road to a sub-arterial standard, connecting through Mitchell’s Run estate to the north and Bridge Inn Road to the south;

·    A P-12 government school which interfaces with high quality open space and with convenient access to the surrounding road network; and

·    Provision of land for a Community Activity Centre.

The MSP also sets out the applicable development contributions to be satisfied for infrastructure, community and open space projects. All land within the MSP is required to either pay the applicable contribution rate or deliver specific Development Contributions Plan items subject to the agreement. These matters are generally dealt with as conditions of permit at the detailed subdivision stage.

Zoning

The subject land is affected by the General Residential Zone (GRZ) (Clause 32.08), which applies to the entire DP area.

The GRZ aims to provide a diversity of housing types and moderate growth in locations offering good access to services and transport, as well as allowing some education, religious, and community uses to serve the local community.

More recently the State Government introduced height limits for development within the GRZ. The limits have restricted built form to 11 metres or 3 storeys (whichever is lesser), to ensure appropriate developments within this zone.

Overlays

The subject land is covered wholly by four planning scheme overlays, which include:

·    Vegetation Protection Overlay – Schedule 1 (VPO1) (Clause 42.02);

·    Incorporated Plan Overlay – Schedule 1 (IPO1) (Clause 43.03);

·    Development Plan Overlay – Schedule 5 (DPO5) (Clause 43.04); and

·    Development Contributions Plan Overlay – Schedule 2 (DCPO2) (Clause 45.06).

The IPO requires the preparation of a strategic plan that will guide the future use and development of the land, prior to any formal consideration of any subdivision, use or development of the land. Schedule 1 of the IPO relates to the MSP.

The DPO5 applicable to the subject land requires that a Development Plan be prepared and endorsed by Council prior to formal consideration of any subdivision, use or development of the subject landholdings. The Development Plan must be produced in accordance with the provisions of the DPO Schedule 5 and the MSP.

The VPO provisions more specifically aim to preserve and maintain significant native vegetation.

The DCPO sets out the requirements to deliver development contributions in accordance with the MSP.

PROPOSED CHANGES TO BASSETTS ROAD DEVELOPMENT PLAN

The proposed amendment to the BRDP was received in March 2017 (see Attachment 3). The Amendment is in the form of Addendum A to the BRDP (Addendum A) and specifically relates to changes at 85A Bassetts Road and 150A Eminence Boulevard.

The proposed changes include:

·    Nominate land on the north-east corner of the intersection of Bassetts Road and Eminence Boulevard for the use of a ‘Church’;

·    Revise the areas of land nominated for residential development and the layout of open space; and

·    Clarification of the trees to be retained and removed within the amendment area.

Attachment 4 provides a visual comparison of the current land use designation with the proposed land use designation changes for the subject land.

The changes are discussed in detail below.

Proposed ‘Church’ Nomination

The key change that is being proposed as part of Addendum A is the nomination of the north-east corner of the Bassetts Road and Eminence Boulevard intersection, currently identified as ‘Passive Open Space’, for a church.

The current BRDP is very specific about the designation of open space. Any future application for a church would be deemed generally not in accordance with the Development Plan and refused, hence the need for the proposed amendment to the BRDP.

The site has been chosen on the basis that is opposite to a Catholic Primary School (St Paul the Apostle Catholic Primary School). The amendment proposes locating the church to the street frontage of Bassetts Road and Eminence Boulevard. Car parking associated with the church will be located to the rear of the building with access from Eminence Boulevard only. The amendment also proposes the inclusion of a court bowl termination for Ronda Avenue, access from Ronda Avenue to the church will be for emergencies only and not for general car parking purposes

A full planning permit application incorporating detailed design of the church will be undertaken at a future date, in order to satisfy the requirements of the zone and overlays.

Revised Land Use Layout

To accommodate the proposed church, the proponent has prepared a revised land use layout for the remainder of the land at 85A Bassetts Road and 150A Eminence Boulevard.

The proposed location of the church is currently nominated for open space. The proponent has acknowledged the importance of the open space and as such as part of this proposal has ensured no net loss of open space.

To ensure that there is no net loss of open space, some land identified for residential development under the current BRDP is to be nominated for ‘Passive Open Space’. The additional open space has been accommodated via an enlarged open space area immediately west of Bassetts Road. The enlarged provision of open space in this location will ensure the retention of more significant trees within open space, whilst also maintaining the strategic intent of the east-west green link of the BRDP.

The areas nominated for residential development proposed under Addendum A will be located to provide a passive surveillance interface over the open space. It is anticipated that the areas nominated for residential development will accommodate in total approximately 30 lots, of medium and standard density.

In addition to the above, Addendum A provides a series of shared paths within the nominated open space areas. The shared paths will ensure that the open space will function as a pedestrian friendly east-west green link for the broader area as envisaged within the MSP and BRDP.

Removal of Trees

The revised DP layout proposes the removal of sixteen trees. These trees comprise a mix of exotic, Victorian native and indigenous species, with many of these having been planted. The practice for the removal of trees within the BRDP to date has been the consideration of tree removal at the subdivision stage. In keeping with this practice, an arborist report will be required to be submitted with any future planning permit application to determine their suitability for removal. The removal of the trees is discussed in further detail under the ‘Discussion’ section of this report, where a recommendation is made to clarify the number of trees to be removed.

CONSULTATION AND NON-STATUTORY EXHIBITION

Prior to the formal submission of Addendum A to the BRDP in March 2017, there has been extensive officer negotiation with the proponent and relevant Council departments over various iterations of the proposal.

Following these discussions, the DP was placed on non-statutory exhibition over a four week period between 28 April 2017 and 26 May 2017.

Whilst there is no statutory requirement to advertise the BRDP document, in accordance with Council practice, a copy of Addendum A to BRDP was sent to all owners and occupiers of land adjacent to the 85A Bassetts Road and 150A Eminence Boulevard, as well as relevant external authorities for comment as part of the non-statutory process.

At the conclusion of the exhibition period one objection was received from an adjacent landowner.

SUBMISSIONS

The following section details the submissions received and the officer response to them.

Key Submission Points

Officer Response

Agency

SP Ausnet

 

SP Ausnet has no objection to proposed amendment on the whole.

However have provided some conditions for consideration as part of the future subdivision stage.

Noted. The conditions provided will be considered as part of the future subdivision planning process.

Country Fire Authority (CFA)

 

CFA has no objection or comments with regards to the amendment.

Noted.

Stakeholders/Affected Landowners

2 Fulani Court Doreen

Submits the location of a church at the highest point at the intersection of Bassetts Road and Eminence Boulevard, would be imposing and dominate the streetscape.

Built form matters have been outlined in detail later in the report within the ‘Discussion’ section.

Submits that the designated car parking would not be adequate to cater for the numbers of cars. Consideration of more car parking / open space should be considered.

The car parking area as provided within Addendum A is indicative only, with formal consideration of car parking requirements to be undertaken as part of the future planning permit application.

With respect to the delivery of the church, the ultimate size and built form is dependent on a range of factors including importantly – car parking. Any future planning permit application will need to demonstrate compliance

Nonetheless, it is noted that the main hours of use for the church are unlikely to coincide with peak drop-off and pick-up times for the primary school and more significantly the church is unlikely to generate as much traffic as a primary school.

It is considered that if there is an overflow of cars due to significant events, the majority of the overflow parking can be accommodated within the primary school to the south. It is considered that this arrangement can be facilitated by the applicant who is also the proprietor of the primary school, noting that this will be considered as part of the planning permit application.

Requests that the trees for removal be re-considered on the grounds that a number of native and exotic birds will lose their habitat.

Further noting that, all trees should remain for the benefit of the community, as there are not many mature trees left within the area.

Matters relating to the status of the trees at 85A Bassetts Road and 150A Eminence Boulevard have been outlined in detail later within the ‘Discussion’ section.

Raises concerns that that the removal of the trees and vegetation will increase runoff into adjoin properties.

The addition of more impermeable surfaces will cause further pressure on existing drainage to the area and ultimately lead to an increased chance of flooding for lower lying homes.

Tukidale Road is currently nominated for construction under the current approved BRDP. Consideration of drainage associated with the construction of Tukidale Road was undertaken as part of the orginal BRDP application.

As part of the planning permit application process further investigation of drainage infrastructure requirements will be undertaken and this will identify any requirements the applicant may be responsible for to accommodate new residential development in the normal manner.

Officer Recommendation:

No further change required.

Land at 85A Bassetts Road acts as open space for the residential estate west of Bassetts Road, and removal of this open space for residential development will result in a decreased amenity for existing residents.

As noted earlier in the report, to accommodate the church at 150A Eminence Boulevard, a reconfiguration of open space has been required. This reconfiguration of open space has not resulted in any loss to the total quantum or quality of open space to this area as originally approved under the BRDP.

Matters relating to the provision of open space at 85A Bassetts Road and 150A Eminence Boulevard have been outlined in detail later within the ‘Discussion’ section.

The current Development Plan differs from the expectations of residents who understood the area to be occupied by a school and consist of large open spaces.

The purpose of a Development Plan is to identify key land uses and infrastructure requirements at a broad level. This is to give residents and agencies a level of certainty over the type of development likely to be realised.

To date the majority of the BRDP area has been developed in accordance with the strategic document. Some minor variations to road alignments and pocket parks have been made, however there has not been the establishment of land uses which are contrary to the Development Plan.

The original BRDP identified that there was the possibility of a non-denominational school being built on land adjacent to the Bassetts Road and Eminence Boulevard intersection. This has been delivered.

The view has been taken that the proposal differs from the current BRDP. The nomination for a church and location of open space is not generally in accordance with the current provisions of the BRDP and this is why the amendment application to the Development Plan has been made. The exhibition and consideration process being undertaken will now assess the Development Plan amendment proposal on its merits and is discussed in detail in the ‘Discussion’ section below.

DISCUSSION

In essence the proposed amendment to the BRDP (Addendum A) as it relates to land at 85A Bassetts Road and 150A Eminence Boulevard is required to allow for future consideration of a church application at 150A Eminence Boulevard. Addendum A also seeks to reconfigure open space, and revise down the amount of land that is available for residential development to accommodate this change.

In reviewing the merits of this proposal it is important to look at the totality of the changes and their net community benefit outcomes. To this end, Addendum A seeks to look beyond the specific church site to the entire Catholic Archdiocese landholdings in reviewing the design of the balance area. It is noted that while the church will be located in a prominent location, they compensated the reduction of open space with the provision of additional land west of Bassetts Road. Overall, the quantum of open space shown in Addendum A to the BRDP is consistent with the amount provided for within the current BRDP.

Furthermore, the current BRDP does not nominate any trees within the Development Plan area for retention or removal. Approximately 30 trees that were located on future residential land have now been secured wholly within the revised open space proposed under Addendum A.

With regards to the provision of the church, it is considered that Addendum A to the BRDP provides the necessary requirements that the church must meet as part of any future development application process to minimise any amenity impacts on existing and future residential development.

To this end, the Addendum A to the BRDP proposes a greater level of detail for this specific area than the current BRDP which allows for greater clarity and certainty. This has also allowed Council officers to clarify a number of other planning issues for the locality, and the Addendum to BRDP provides more certainty regarding these issues through the proposed development of the land. These issues are outlined below.

Trees/Open Space

The main reason the amendment to the BRDP is required, as noted, is the specificity of the current BRDP showing open space where the church is being proposed. The applicant has taken a broader view and looked at the entire landholding and sought to relocate and balance the open space provision.

The amount of open space lost at 150 A Eminence Boulevard is being reinstated on land at 85A Bassetts Road, land that is currently partly nominated for residential development. This change will result in no net loss of open space for the precinct, but actually reduces the extent of developable residential land. Strategically, the location of open space at 85A Bassetts Road continues to uphold the overarching intent of east-west green link that is identified within the MSP and BRDP.

Furthermore, the relocation of the proposed open space has sought to maximise retention of trees within open space. Addendum A is now locating additional trees within open space than currently proposed under the BRDP. Approximately 30 trees will be retained wholly within public open space as opposed to being removed or incorporated into pockets parks under the current BRDP. These trees are self-sown indigenous trees (mostly River Red Gums) of varying degrees of maturity from juvenile to very mature.

It should be noted, that at the time the current BRDP was approved, the BRDP aimed to retain as many significant trees as possible in conservation reserves, open space, pocket parks and widened road reserves. The BRDP was not nominating any trees for removal or retention, with the requirements of removal and net gain to be considered at the future subdivision stages. This practice has been adopted to date for the development of the area. The location of trees within public open space is seen as a better outcome to guarantee their retention.

The trees nominated for removal at Tukidale Road have been identified to allow for the link to be provided. As land has yet to be subdivided, a formal assessment of the trees has not been undertaken. A formal requirement within Addendum A that notes the applicant requires an arborist report to be prepared and submitted with any subdivision application, shall be included. The report may identify that not all trees may need to be removed, and does not stop Council officers requesting the trees be retained during the planning permit application process if their removal is unnecessary. A footnote shall be included within Addendum A that states to the effect that trees identified for removal can be reviewed as part of the detailed planning permit application process. This practice is consistent with the current practice implemented for the BRDP development area.

For the nominated trees adjacent to the church, these trees are a mix of exotic, Victorian native and indigenous species. The two indigenous trees on the church site are planted River Red Gums and are therefore not afforded planning scheme protection and accordingly may be removed.

In addition to the above, it should be noted that the four easternmost trees identified for removal can potentially be retained given they are entirely located within the open space link (as identified within Addendum A). There is therefore no practical reason for these to be removed and this will be reflected on the Development Plan.

Finally for clarity, it is considered that Addendum A should include a plan that numbers each tree within the Addendum A area. This will provide Council Officers and future developers with certainty regarding the status of the trees on site; in particular this will assist future discussions for the retention of trees not required to be removed for the construction of the church or Tukidale Road.

Officer Recommendation:

·    Include provision within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan that before any permit is granted for the subdivision and development of the land at 85A Bassetts Road and 150A Eminence Boulevard, an arborist report must be submitted to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

·    Include a footnote on the Development Plan within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan that states to the effect that trees identified for removal will be reviewed as part of the detailed planning permit application process.

·    Include provision within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan that any tree nominated for retention must be wholly accommodated within Tree Protections Zone’s to Council Standard and the Tree Protection Zone’s must not encroach on any lot or road reserve boundary.

·    Amend the Development Plan within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan to retain the four easternmost trees nominated for removal within the open space at 150A Eminence Boulevard.

·    Include provision within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan of a plan which numbers and identifies each tree at 85A Bassetts Road and 150A Eminence Boulevard.

Church Built Form/Layout

Historically, it has been a common practice for Places of Worship to establish at high points on the land, to create landmark buildings. The proposal to locate the church at the high point of Bassetts Road and Eminence Boulevard seeks to replicate this practice, and this is supported.

Built form and design details of the church will be considered as part of the future planning permit application process. The church itself is surrounded by roads, open space and car parking, which by its very nature will constrain the amount of land available and sizing of the church. Furthermore, the imposed height restrictions from the GRZ which limit buildings to 11 metres or 3 storeys in height (whichever is lesser), will further constrain the development potential of the church, ensuring that the built form will remain to height and scale that is appropriate for the site.

As for its relationship to the streetscape, there is only one direct built form interface for the church, and this is with the St Paul the Apostle Primary School to the south of Eminence Boulevard. Furthermore, it is considered that with an appropriate interface that responds to the built form of the Primary School, any future church, together with the primary school will foster the development of a mini community hub along Eminence Boulevard that will contribute positively to the amenity and social infrastructure of the area.

The church will also provide an activated frontage to the open space to the north, and this is supported. There are concerns that the boundary alignment with the residential parcel to the north will create a visual impairment for people travelling west. It is considered that the boundary should be smoothed to open up sights lines and create a safe open space area.

Officer Recommendation:

·    Require that the Development Plan within Addendum A be amended to show a continuous boundary between the open space at 150A Eminence Boulevard and the residential land to the north.

Shared Paths

The provision the shared pedestrian paths within Addendum A is supported, as it will provide a positive contribution to the precinct and connectivity to the broader area. The ultimate alignment will be dependent on the detailed design phase and may be subject to change.

The shared paths, whilst indicative, demonstrate a northern crossing point across Bassetts Road where an existing bus stop is located. The plan within Addendum A will need to show an amended crossing location. At the time of delivery the shared path crossing will also require retro fitting of kerb outstands (and related infrastructure) in Bassetts Road. This requirement will be included within Addendum A.

Alternatively if a safe crossing point cannot be identified, the shared path could extend further south to the existing pram crossing adjacent to Eminence Boulevard. This would require an increase in the width of the existing footpath on the eastern side of Bassetts Road by 1 metre, and the removal and replacement of three existing street trees. Provision of this alternative arrangement will need to be included within Addendum A, for further discussion at the planning permit application stage.

Officer Recommendation

·    Include provision within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan that the northern shared path crossing must be relocated and not obstruct the existing bus stop.  The crossing will be required to retro fit the existing kerb stands and related infrastructure within Bassetts Road.

·    Include provision within Addendum A to Bassetts Road Development Plan that if the northern shared path crossing cannot be delivered, then the use of the existing pram crossing at Eminence Boulevard is permissible. This will require the widening of the footpath on the eastern side of Bassetts Road by 1 metre from 1.5m to 2.5m and the removal and replacement of 3 existing street trees.

South-West Housing Site

Addendum A continues to nominate the south-west corner of 85A Bassetts Road (see Attachment 3) for residential development as per the current BRDP. The provision of residential housing in this location is supported as it will provide an opportunity for passive surveillance of the open space and housing adjacent to the St Paul the Apostle Primary School.

The noteworthy difference between the current BRDP and Addendum A relates to access and circulation of the site. Under the current provisions of the BRDP, access to the site can be accommodated from Bassetts Road and a future extension of Eminence Boulevard, whereas Addendum A only provides access from Bassetts Road.

The significance of the fall in topography (particularly where the Eminence Boulevard roundabout is located) is the main reason why the extension of Eminence Boulevard has not been realised as per the BRDP. The proposal under Addendum A is only responding to this circumstance. The implication is that the south-west housing site can only be accessed from Bassetts Road in the form of a shared driveway.

The site in isolation is significantly constrained by the topography and existing infrastructure, including Bassetts Road itself to the south and east, the Eminence Boulevard roundabout, primary school crossings and the shared path to the west. These constraints limit the opportunities to locate the access point to the site, which then restricts the development potential for the site. The access will need to be positioned in a location that responds to the abovementioned constraints. Internally, the shared driveway must provide adequate room for vehicle movements and ingress/egress to all development parcels.

Whilst site specific design issues are considered at the planning permit application stage, to ensure that the site is appropriately subdivided, Addendum A should set some parameters relating to the traffic management and design of the site.

It is the recommendation of Officer’s that a traffic management assessment is prepared in conjunction with any application to subdivide the land at the south west corner of 85A Bassetts Road. This report will have to demonstrate to the satisfaction of Council that the site when developed will not impact upon any existing infrastructure adjacent to the site and will provide safe on site vehicular movements.

With respect to the design of the site, Addendum A shows that the open space to the north of the site and the pedestrian path to west will have frontage. It is considered that this is an appropriate requirement for future development to ensure public safety and an improved amenity for these areas. For clarity, Council Officers will request that this requirement is explicitly stated within Addendum A.

Officer Recommendation:

·    Include provision within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan that before the subdivision and development of any land, a traffic assessment must be undertaken with respect to the access to the proposed residential parcel of land at the south west portion of 85A Bassetts Road, with particular regard to constraints from existing infrastructure, including the provision of appropriate offsets from the school crossing and roundabout, minimising impacts upon existing indented parking, sight lines with respect to the existing typography. The access must also consider the EDCM and Council’s Standard Drawings.

·    Include provision within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan that any development of 85A Bassetts Road must provide activated frontage to any adjoining public open space or where possible use transparent fencing treatments.

CRITICAL DATES

·    June 2008 – BRDP reported to and adopted by Council subject to changes.

·    February 2009 – BRDP formally approved by Council.

·    June 2015 – Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne approach Council regarding the potential to locate a church at the corner of Bassetts Road and Eminence Boulevard.

·    July 2015 – Council advise that an amendment to the BRDP is required to facilitate any proposal for a ‘Church’.

·    October 2016 – A preliminary concept of the BRDP is submitted for consideration.

·    November 2016 – Council officers provide feedback on the initial proposal.

·    March 2017 – A revised proposal is submitted.

·    April/May 2017 – 28 Day Non-Statutory Exhibition Period.

 

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

FUTURE DIRECTION          Places and spaces to connect people

Theme                                   Planning our space

Strategic Objective              Our urban design helps build connection to place and the community

This amendment to the BRDP will enable for the delivery of a church to be facilitated. Residents will be afforded a spiritual centre that is suitably located adjacent to a primary school that will continue to encourage community engagement within the area. It is considered that the plan will meet the direction of creating places and spaces for people to connect, and that the plan has also utilised good urban design in order to create a place which helps the existing and future community to connect with one another and their surrounds.

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

Under section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 officers providing advice to Council must disclose any interests, including the type of interest.

The Responsible Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with the relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Conclusion

The proposed amendment to the Bassetts Road Development Plan has been developed in consultation between Council and the consultants of involved landowners.

The proposal allows for a church to locate at 150A Eminence Boulevard (at the intersection with Bassetts Road) adjacent to an existing primary school. The relationship of the church and primary school will enable the establishment of a mini-community hub that will contribute positively to the amenity of the area.

Further design details relating to the built form of the church, and car parking are considerations for the planning permit application, noting the physical site constraints and that there is the availability of the primary school during off-peak times.

A loss of open space at 150A Eminence Boulevard is required to accommodate the church. The applicant understands the significance of open space and trees and has ensured this is maximised by offsetting the open space lost, with additional open space at 85A Bassetts Road. The additional open space at 85A Bassetts Road will result in the loss of residential developable land, but will also result in an increase in the number significant of trees (approximately 30) being retained within public open space.  These changes provide a greater level of certainty for residents and Council and this is supported.

Accordingly it is recommended that the proposed 2017 Amendment to the Bassetts Road Development Plan be supported subject to the changes as proposed within this report.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.   Approve the proposal to amend the Bassetts Road Development Plan subject to the following changes:

a)   Include provision within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan that before any permit is granted for the subdivision and development of the land at 85A Bassetts Road and 150A Eminence Boulevard, an arborist report must be submitted to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

b)   Include a footnote on the Development Plan within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan that states to the effect that trees identified for removal will be reviewed as part of the detailed planning permit application process.

c)   Include provision within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan that any tree nominated for retention must be wholly accommodated within Tree Protections Zone’s to Council Standard and the Tree Protection Zone’s must not encroach on any lot or road reserve boundary.

d)  Amend the Development Plan within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan to retain the four easternmost trees nominated for removal within the open space at 150A Eminence Boulevard.

e)   Include provision within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan of a plan which numbers and identifies each tree at 85A Bassetts Road and 150A Eminence Boulevard.

f)    Require that the Development Plan within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan be amended to show a continuous boundary between the open space at 150A Eminence Boulevard and the residential land to the north.

g)   Include provision within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan that the northern shared path crossing must be relocated and not obstruct the existing bus stop.  The crossing will be required to retro fit the existing kerb stands and related infrastructure within Bassetts Road.

h)   Include provision within Addendum A to Bassetts Road Development Plan that if the northern shared path crossing cannot be delivered, then the use of the existing pram crossing at Eminence Boulevard is permissible. This will require the widening of the footpath on the eastern side of Bassetts Road by 1 metre from 1.5m to 2.5m and the removal and replacement of 3 existing street trees.

i)    Include provision within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan that before the subdivision and development of any land, a traffic assessment must be undertaken with respect to the access to the proposed residential parcel of land at the south west portion of 85A Bassetts Road, with particular regard to constraints from existing infrastructure, including the provision of appropriate offsets from the school crossing and roundabout, minimising impacts upon existing indented parking, sight lines with respect to the existing typography. The access must also consider the EDCM and Council’s Standard Drawings.

j)    Include provision within Addendum A to the Bassetts Road Development Plan that any development of 85A Bassetts Road must provide activated frontage to any adjoining public open space or where possible use transparent fencing treatments.

2.   Advise the proponent and submitters of the above.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                        Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

6.1.5    Authorisation for a Planning Scheme Amendment to the Heritage Overlay

File No:                                  195307

Attachments:                        1        300 Mc Donalds Road, South Morang curtilage plan

2        250 O’Herns Road, Epping curtilage Plan

3        105 Hunters Road, Mernda curtilage Plan

4        1190 Donnybrook Road, Donnybrook curtilage plan

5        260 Craigieburn Road, Wollert curtilage plan

6        395 Epping Road, Wollert curtilage plan

7        10A Sir John Terrace, Mernda curtilage plan

8        1485 Plenty Road,Mernda curtilage plan 

9        Mayfield Heritage Precinct   

Responsible Officer:           Director Planning & Major Projects

Author:                                  Strategic Policy Planner   

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

This report is requesting Council approval to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to formally prepare and exhibit a Planning Scheme Amendment to apply and amend controls on sites of local heritage significance. Specifically it is proposed to apply the Heritage Overlay to six additional places identified as of local heritage significance, one heritage precinct known as the “Mayfield Heritage Precinct”, and to amend the Heritage Overlay curtilage for two sites already covered by the Heritage Overlay.

The sites proposed to be included as part of this amendment are:

New application of Heritage Overlay

·    300 McDonalds Road, South Morang- Former South Morang Station Masters House.

·    250 O’Herns Road, Epping – Myee (Dwelling).

·    105 Hunters Road, Mernda- Sea View Park (Stone cottage remnants and surrounds).

·    1190 Donnybrook Road, Donnybrook - St Martins (Stone cottage and surrounds).

·    260 Craigieburn Road, Wollert - Wattle Park (Dry stone walls and surrounds).

·    395 Epping Road, Wollert – Inverlochie (Stone cottage and surrounds).

Amend the current Heritage Overlay Curtilage

·    10A Sir John Terrace (formally known as 65A Cravens Road) - Black Braes Farm (Dwelling and agricultural outbuilding)

·    1485 Plenty Road, Mernda - Preston Hall (Blue stone dwelling and surrounds).

New Application of Heritage Precinct

Mayfield Precinct - 1321, 1325 and 1345 Plenty Road, Mernda (Amalgamated existing Heritage Overlay).

Subject to Council approval, Council officers will submit the authorisation request and draft amendment documentation to the Minister for planning to commence the formal amendment process, including exhibition. 

BACKGROUND

There are currently 161 individual sites afforded Planning Scheme protection under the HO (Heritage Overlay) under the Whittlesea Planning Scheme. This represents a culmination of significant work undertaken by the City of Whittlesea to identify, assess, and protect places of local heritage significance across the City of Whittlesea.

The strategic basis to identify, assess, and protect places of local heritage significance has been guided through two key heritage studies that include the:

•           Whittlesea Heritage Study (Meredith Gould Architects, 1991); and

•           Whittlesea Heritage Study (Context Pty Ltd., 2009-2011; reviewed in 2014).

Most recently in May 2015 Council adopted Planning Scheme Amendment C153 which resulted in the protection of a large number of the City of Whittlesea’s heritage sites, essentially adding 88 new places to the HO schedule.

Under the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the City of Whittlesea as Planning Authority, has a statutory obligation “to conserve and enhance those buildings, areas or other which are of …historical or otherwise special cultural values” (section 4(b)). To this end the City must undertake local heritage studies to identify places of interest and appropriately apply the HO to places identified as having Local (or higher) significance. .

This amendment is the next step in the on-going incremental identification, assessment and protection of significant heritage places within the City of Whittlesea. The sites proposed as part of this amendment were initially “flagged” as potentially warranting heritage protection and/or requiring further investigation on their heritage significance, through the advancement/refinement of strategic Development Plans, Precinct Structure plans and the development applications within the site and surrounds.

As part of Council’s ongoing commitment to the conservation of its local heritage, Heritage Consultant, Ray Tonkin was commissioned in May 2017 to investigate the heritage significance of a number of these “flagged” sites and to ascertain any merit for their inclusion as part of the HO. The heritage citation reports for each of the proposed sites provide the strategic justification for application of the HO including the extent of heritage curtilage area that forms the basis of this amendment.

SUMMARY OF HERITAGE OVERLAY (Clause 43.01) PROVISIONS

This amendment seeks application of the HO (Clause 43.01 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme) to six new sites that have been identified as having local heritage significance, one heritage precinct and to amend the adopted curtilage for two sites currently covered by the HO.

Application of the HO will provide protection under Clause 43.01 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme. Clause 43.01 (Heritage Overlay) is a local planning control applied through the Whittlesea Planning Scheme. The purpose of applying the HO is to enable Council to ensure that any proposals for listed sites do not adversely or irreversibly alter a place’s heritage value. Standard planning permit requirements are set out in Clause 43.01 (Heritage Overlay) of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme for all places to which the Heritage Overlay applies. This generally requires a permit to:

•           Demolish or remove a building, including part of a building;

•           Construct a building, including part of a building;

•           Externally alter a building;

•           Construct or display a sign;

•           Subdivide or consolidate land; or

•           Other specific planning controls as identified in the Schedule.

The extent of the area affected by the HO is generally shown on the Planning Scheme map for each place. This is commonly referred to as the ‘curtilage’. The Statement of Significance acts as a reference for each heritage place through identification of the site’s contributing features. Whilst the Statement of Significance doesn’t form part of the Planning Scheme it is used as a reference to inform the Planning Scheme Amendment process as well as a guide for future applications to be assessed against the heritage criteria identified for a site.    

The Schedule to Clause 43.01 (Heritage Overlay) formally identifies site-specific information for each place as a unique line item, including:

·    The address and description of the heritage place.

·    Whether it is also State significant and listed on the Victorian Heritage Register or whether it is an Aboriginal heritage place.

·    The specific planning controls that may apply to ensure the integrity of the heritage features. These include external paint, internal alteration and tree controls.

·    Identifies whether uses that are otherwise prohibited in the underlying zone may be permitted to support the adaptive re-use of the heritage place.

It is important to note that the HO does not:

·    Prohibit development.

·    Require land owners to restore, update or maintain their properties.

·    Require a planning permit for routine maintenance or repairs that do no change the appearance of a heritage place.

·    Allow public access to private properties.

PROPOSAL

The proposed amendment seeks to apply:

·        The HO to six new individual places across the municipality that have been identified as locally significant places. These will be inserted as new line items in the Schedule to Clause 43.01 (Heritage Overlay), with new boundaries identified on the Whittlesea Planning Scheme maps.

·    A new Precinct in the HO to be known as the Mayfield Precinct which encompasses three sites 1321,1325 &1345 Plenty Road, Mernda, that are currently individually covered by the HO.

·    Modify the curtilage of two sites currently covered by the Heritage Overlay HO14 known as Black Braes Farm and HO68 known as Preston Hall. It is proposed to reduce the boundary of the HO curtilage as recommended in the Heritage Assessment reports.

Specific details of the above sites are provided in the following section.

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED NEW SITES TO THE HERITAGE OVERLAY

The sites proposed to be included as part of this Planning Scheme Amendment including the relevant background information is summarised as follows:

300 McDonalds Road, South Morang - Former South Morang Station Masters House.

·    This amendment is seeking application of a new HO for this site.

·    The statement of significance was prepared by Context as part of the City of Whittlesea Heritage Study, September 2015. This former railway station site including the station Masters House is identified as having historic and architectural importance. In particular the Station masters house which is described as a relative in-tact example of a Victorian timber dwelling. 

·    The site was initially included as part of Planning Scheme Amendment C153 for inclusion as part of the HO. Following the statutory exhibition C153 in October 2013 a submission was received by Public Transport Victoria (PTV). The submission requested that Council defer consideration of the site as part of C153 as the site is within the area earmarked for the Mernda Rail extension, and the design detail was at early stages.

·    Council considered PTV’s request, and at the Council meeting in May 2014 resolved to remove the site from that amendment on the basis that the requirements of Mernda Railway were yet to be finalised.

·    At the time negotiations between PTV and Council officers reached an agreement on the potential proposed curtilage essentially removing the embankment area and placing the HO on the Station Masters House only.  By virtue of the updated curtilage plan, PTV withdrew its submission in April 2014 (See Attachment 1).

·    Now that the rail extension project has advanced it is considered appropriate to proceed with application of the HO on the basis of the agreed curtilage plan to ensure HO planning scheme protection of the Station Master House.

·    The statement of significance will be updated noting the embankment is a non-contributory element. This change will be reflected in documentation prior to the amendment adoption. 

·    This site is currently in an area earmarked for the Mernda Rail extension. At this stage of the design detail of the Rail extension the heritage site has been incorporated in the Mernda Rail design.

250 O’Herns Road, Epping – Myee (Dwelling erected 1917)

·    This amendment will apply a new HO for this site.

·    The Victorian weatherboard dwelling located on site has been identified as being of historical and architectural significance to the City of Whittlesea in a heritage assessment undertaken by heritage consultant, Ray Tonkin in October 2016. The dwelling originally constructed in 1917 is significant as a remnant of early twentieth century farming activity in the Wollert district (See Attachment 2 – 250 O’Herns Road, Epping curtilage plan). 

·    The site was the subject of a recent demolition request under Section 29A of the Building Act. Whilst Council officers have suspended the demolition request to provide a temporary hold, a request has been made to the Minister for Planning for an Interim Protection Order as a short term measure to provide statutory protection until such time as permanent HO consideration as proposed through this amendment is achieved.

·    Council Officers are currently awaiting a response from the Minister of Planning on the Interim Protection Order request.

105 Hunters Road, Mernda- Sea View Park (Stone Cottage and Surrounds)

·    This amendment will apply a new HO for this site.

·    The site is owned by Council, and is within the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland Reserve.

·    The Heritage assessment identified the granite stone cottage remnants and cypress trees to be of archaeological and aesthetic significance to the City of Whittlesea, as well as the long standing occupation of this land with the Popple family. The Heritage Citation report recommended the HO be applied to the site and provided a possible HO curtilage plan (See Attachment 3).

·    It is proposed to proceed to application of the HO on the basis of the recommendations of the Heritage Citation report and the significance of the site as a remnant of early settlement in the Mernda district.

1190 Donnybrook Road, Donnybrook - St Martins (Blue Stone Cottage and Surrounds)

·    This amendment will apply a new HO for this site.

·    The site has been identified as part of the Shenstone Precinct Structure Plan (PSP),  background Heritage Assessment despite not being within the PSP boundary

·    A detailed heritage citation for the site was subsequently prepared and it identified the blue stone cottage, drystone wall and remnant non-indigenous vegetation as significant and the whole site of archaeological importance. The report recommended the HO be applied to the site and provided a possible HO curtilage plan (See Attachment 4).

·    It is proposed to proceed to application of the HO on the basis of the recommendations of the Heritage Citation report and significance of the site as an example of an early homestead and dairying complex.

260 Craigieburn Road, Wollert - Wattle Park (Dry stone walls and surrounds)

·    This amendment will apply a new HO for this site.

·    The site is located within the Wollert PSP, and earmarked in a location designated for a sports reserve.

·    The Heritage Citation report identified the drystone walled yards and the associated orchard along with the archaeological remnants of the earlier farm as significant heritage features on the site. The Heritage Citation report recommended the HO be applied to the site and provided a possible HO curtilage plan (See Attachment 5).

·    It is proposed to proceed to application of the HO on the basis of the recommendations of the Heritage Citation report and the identified historic and archaeological significance of site to the City of Whittlesea.

395 Epping Road, Wollert – Inverlochie (Stone cottage and surrounds)

·    This amendment will apply a new HO for this site.

·    The site is located within the Wollert PSP, the significance of the heritage site has been identified on the PSP and it is earmarked as a key place making opportunity.

·    The Heritage Citation for the site identified the basalt constructed cottage, remnant underground tank, drystone walls, circular cattle yard and remnant vegetation associated with the farm as significant. The report recommended the HO be applied to the site and provided a possible HO curtilage plan (See Attachment 6).

·    It is proposed to proceed to application of the HO on the basis of the recommendations of the Heritage Citation report and the significance of the site as an early farm complex.

10A Sir John Terrace (formally known as 65A Cravens Road) - Black Braes Farm (Dwelling and agricultural outbuilding) 

·    This amendment seeks to amend the approved HO14 curtilage for the site at Black Braes farm (formally known as 65A Cravens Road) to enable the HO boundary to reflect the approved subdivision layout for the Settlers Hill Estate, within which the site now sits.

·    The initial statement of significance prepared by Meredith Gould 1991 identified the site as one of the most substantial of the Separation era buildings to survive .The HO14 applicable for the site identifies the farm house, cow and wells including the former dairy and various sheds as significant.

·    Under Subdivision Permit 711758, for the Settlers Hill Estate (which encompasses Black Braes farm) the applicant was required to submit a Conservation Management Plan (CMP) that specially addressed the extent of a revised heritage place which will form the basis of an amended HO.

·    The CMP was prepared by Bryce Raworth in March 2016. The CMP outlined the significant contributory structures within the HO curtilage and presented an amended site plan curtilage around the farm complex (See Attachment 7).

·    Council Officers forwarded the CMP to a heritage consultant for advice specifically the amended curtilage plan. Confirmation was received that the revised curtilage will present a positive outcome from a heritage perspective and will ensure future development is sympathetic to the heritage buildings on the site and reflects the surrounding subdivision layout.

·    This Planning Scheme Amendment is considered the next and final step in formalising the extent of the HO14 applicable for the site.

1485 Plenty Road, Mernda - Preston Hall (Blue Stone dwelling and surrounds)

·    This amendment seeks to amend the approved HO68 curtilage.

·    The initial statement of significance prepared by Meredith Gould, 1991 identified the Blue stone dwelling and dry stone walls as a significant feature of the site accordingly the approved HO68 incorporates these into the approved curtilage plan.

·    This site is in Council ownership and is located within the area designated in the Mernda Strategy Plan as regional open space. Currently the curtilage applies to an extensive area reflecting the former tittle boundary. Noting the future of the site as an active regional recreational reserve and the current Masterplan for the site a review was commissioned to assess whether the current curtilage plan is appropriate.

·    The updated heritage citation details the heritage importance of the blue stone dwelling however in particular highlighted that “Preston Hall is aesthetically significant for siting away from and above Plenty Road where it is a significant element in an otherwise open landscape setting.“ 

·    In summary an updated curtilage plan was recommended that reduced the overall extent of the curtilage to the north and south however ensured the significant view line from Plenty Road was maintained (See Attachment 8).

·    This amendment seeks to amend the current curtilage in accordance with the updated heritage citation.

Mayfield Precinct – 1321, 1325, 1345 Plenty Road, Mernda (Amalgamating existing HO’s)

This amendment seeks to apply a new precinct HO to three properties currently covered by individual HO’s to encompass the Mayfield Precinct (See Attachment 9). The properties include:

Ø Presbyterian Church and stables 1345 Plenty, Road – HO18,

Ø State School 488 and schoolmasters residence 1325 Plenty Road – HO16,

Ø The Poplars – 1321 Plenty Road – HO85.

·    It is considered that implementing the Mayfield Precinct will acknowledge the broader visual connection and relationship between the significant buildings and will reinforce the historical connection of the three sites.

·    The Mayfield Precinct is supported through the Mayfield Heritage Precinct Citation report prepared by Context, March 2012.

·    The application of the precinct through this amendment will encourage a contextual approach to any new use or development proposed individually and across the heritage sites. As well as consideration of the visual relationship between the significant buildings

WHITTLESEA SHOWGROUNDS - 30 YEA ROAD, WHITTLESEA

The Whittlesea Showgrounds site was initially included as one of the sites to be scoped and further investigated for its potential for inclusion as part of the HO through this Amendment. The Whittlesea showgrounds originally formed part of Amendment C153 which applied the HO to 88 places of local heritage significance and was gazetted in May 2015.

The site however was taken out subject to further assessment to determine whether it warranted protection under the HO. Accordingly as part of the background investigation for this Amendment a heritage consultant (Ray Tonkin) was commissioned by Council to undertake a heritage assessment to consider the heritage significance and merits for application of the HO for the site.

In summary the heritage assessment concluded that none of the buildings on the showground’s site are considered to be of any great heritage significance as a number of them have undergone extensive renovation in recent years. It was noted however that the Whittlesea showgrounds are considered of great social significance as a long standing place of public assembly and agricultural exhibition. It was therefore considered that the application of HO was not the appropriate tool to apply for the site.

As a result of this further investigation on the heritage significance of the site it is proposed that no HO to be applied to this site.

PROPOSED PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT PROCESS

It is proposed that the amendment would proceed as per the standard exhibition process set out in the Planning and Environment Act. This process will be initiated through the resolution at this Council meeting where Council approval is sought to request authorisation from the Minister for Planning to exhibit the amendment.

Subject to Council’s approval, Council officers will submit the authorisation request and draft amendment documentation to the Minister for Planning. Subject to the Minister’s authorisation, Council officers will commence the exhibition process.

Consultation/Exhibition Process

It is proposed that the amendment will be exhibited for an eight week period to allow sufficient time for affected property owners to fully consider the proposals and discuss their concerns directly with Council officers. Any submissions must be received by the date identified in the correspondence. The exhibition process will include:

·    A letter notifying the owner of the proposed Planning Scheme Amendment and identifying how they may participate in and make a submission through the exhibition process, if they choose to do so. This will identify the dates and locations of proposed information sessions where they can discuss any issues directly with Council officers. It will also identify critical dates for making a submission as required.

·    The property’s heritage report citation, prepared by a qualified heritage consultant, which identifies the heritage context, significance and contributing features that warrant Planning Scheme (Heritage Overlay) protection.

·    A map identifying the extent of the proposed HO and the specific planning controls that are proposed for the property.

During the exhibition period:

·    Affected property owners or other interested residents may obtain further information or share their views with Council officers via telephone or by visiting Council Offices.

·    In the event that a complex situation arises with respect to a particular property, Council officers may offer a subsequent one-to-one meeting with the affected owner(s).

Following the end of the exhibition period any submission received will be considered prior to the matter being reported to Council for decision.

CRITICAL DATES

If authorisation from the Minister for Planning is granted, it is likely that the exhibition of the Amendment will commence in August 2017 for 8 weeks.

Council officers will report to Council on the results of the exhibition process.

If submissions are received and remain unresolved, then Council Officers will request a Planning Panel Hearing be established.

Financal implications

Where required, Council may utilise its existing funding to engage an independent heritage adviser to provide individual consultations with affected property owners during the exhibition period.

The usual Panel Hearing costs will be applicable should it be required as part of the Planning Scheme Amendment process.

Policy strategy and legislation

Relating to State legislation, strategies or policies:

·    Under the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the City of Whittlesea, as Planning Authority, must give effect to the objectives of planning in Victoria, including: “to conserve and enhance those buildings, areas or other places which are of…historical or otherwise special cultural value” (section 4(b)). To this end, the City must undertake local heritage studies to identify places of interest and appropriately apply the Heritage Overlay to places identified as having Local (or higher) significance. The application of the Heritage Overlay is the only statutory mechanism for conserving locally significant heritage places.

·    Under the Heritage Act 1995, a place considered to have State (or higher) – significance may be listed on the Victorian Heritage Register, and a permit must be obtained from Heritage Victoria to carry out specified works or activities. The Planning Scheme (Heritage Overlay) should identify State (or higher) significant places in this regard.

·    Under the Victorian Planning Provisions, Clause 15.03-1 (Heritage conservation) sets out the State Planning Policy that must be applied through all local Planning Schemes. This compels Local Governments to “Identify, assess and document places of natural and cultural heritage as a basis for their inclusion in the planning scheme.”

Relating to Local legislation and adopted strategies, plans and policies:

·    Clause 21.08 (Built Environment and Heritage) of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme identifies the Local Planning Policy objective “To increase the level of protection for and opportunities for incorporation of the City’s European and Aboriginal heritage.

·    Clause 22.04 (Heritage Conservation Policy) of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme identifies the Local Planning Policy objective is “To identify, protect and maintain the integrity and character of Whittlesea’s heritage places”.

·    The implementation of the Green Wedge Management Plan 2011-2021 (adopted 2011) short-term actions identified in the Corporate Plan as a 2012/13 priority for the Planning and Major Projects directorate. These include action P.26: “Following the heritage study undertaken during 2009/10, implement and apply a Heritage Overlay to all significant places not protected. Any proposed amendment to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme will provide additional opportunity for public submission.”

·    Council also endorsed the findings and recommendations of the Planning Scheme Review 2013, including the recommendation for Planning Scheme improvement for Planning Overlay provisions (Table 9): “Implement the findings of the Whittlesea Heritage Study (2011).

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

FUTURE DIRECTION          Places and spaces to connect people

Theme                                   Planning our space

Strategic Objective              Our urban design helps build connection to place and the community

The proposed Planning Scheme Amendment is consistent in meeting the objectives set out in the Community Plan and the Council Plan, particularly the Council Plan goal 4.4 “Council will work towards strengthening and implementing planning tools to build connections” This will be achieved through this Planning Scheme Amendment through linking places and the community through the recognition, appreciation and protection of places identified as local heritage significance throughout the Municipality. 

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

Under section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 officers providing advice to Council must disclose any interests, including the type of interest.

The Responsible Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with the relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Conclusion

The proposed Planning Scheme Amendment supports Council’s recognised commitment to protecting its local heritage through its ongoing implementation of sites identified as significant to the HO as well as its statutory obligation. The need for this amendment arises from Council’s responsibility as set out in the Planning and Environment Act 1987. This proposed amendment seeks to:

·    Apply the HO to six new places, and one heritage precinct (Mayfield Heritage Precinct) that have been identified as locally significant based on the finding of heritage citation reports. These sites will be inserted as new line items in the Schedule to Clause 43.01 (Heritage Overlay), with new boundaries identified on the Whittlesea Planning Scheme maps.

·    Modify the existing heritage curtilage of two sites currently covered by the HO, HO14 known as Black Braes farm and HO68 known as Preston Hall. It is proposed to reduce the boundaries of the HO curtilage as recommended in the Heritage Citation reports for each site.

It is therefore recommended that Council resolve to seek authorisation from the Minister for planning to formally prepare and exhibit a Heritage Planning Scheme Amendment to implement the above.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.   Request the Minister for Planning to authorise the preparation and exhibition of a Planning Scheme Amendment to apply the Heritage Overlay to six sites, one Heritage Precinct to be known as the “Mayfield” Precinct and amend the curtilage of two sites currently covered by the Heritage Overlay HO14 and HO68 as recommended in the relevant heritage citation reports and as shown per Attachments 1 to 9 of this report.

2.   Set a Panel Hearing date, with the agreement of Planning Panels Victoria, before notice of the amendment is given under section 19 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, as part of the standard process. This date may subsequently be cancelled if no Panel is required.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

6.1.6    280 Bridge Inn Road, Mernda- Proposed Planning Scheme Amendment C203

File No:                                  194152

Attachments:                        1        Locality Plan 

2        Winery and Vinyard Location

3        Proposal Components

4        Zoning Map   

Responsible Officer:           Director Planning & Major Projects

Author:                                  Senior Strategic Planner   

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

The landowner of 280 Bridge Inn Road, Mernda has lodged a request for a Planning Scheme Amendment to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme in order to facilitate the use and development of their site for the purposes of a Vineyard and Residential Estate.

The Amendment seeks to:

·    Rezone part of 280 Bridge Inn Road, Mernda, from a Farming Zone (FZ) to a General Residential Zone (GRZ1);

·    Delete the Environmental Significance Overlay (ESO1 and ESO5) from part of the site;

·    Apply a Development Plan Overlay (DPO) consistent with DPO Schedule 27  to the land proposed to be rezoning to GRZ1;

·    Apply  a Vegetation Protection Overlay (VPO1) to the land proposed to be rezoning to GRZ1;

·    Introduce a site specific control at Clause 52.03- Specific Sites and Exclusions, and an Incorporated Document at Clause 81.01- Incorporated Documents to allow the subdivision of the land into three lots and the use and development of one of the lots with an area of approximately 30.0 hectares for a vineyard, winery and function centre and an associated liquor license.

The Planning Scheme Amendment is required in order to facilitate both the subdivision of the site, the use and development of the subject area, and the rezoning of the area of land inside the Urban Growth Boundary to General Residential Zone 1.

The proposal is unique in that it includes the subdivision and development of land which is located outside of the Urban Growth Boundary. As the minimum allowable lot size under the Green Wedge Zone is 80 hectares, a Planning Scheme Amendment is required in order to vary the minimum lot size in order to facilitate the proposed use and development of the site.

As the subject land is located within the Green Wedge Zone, the proposed Planning Scheme Amendment, if supported by Council and the Minister for Planning, will need to be approved by State Parliament.

The amendment is generally supported on the basis that the proposal is one which will facilitate the transfer of approximately 64.1 hectares of Quarry Hills Regional Parkland into Council ownership. It will also provide for the introduction of a Vineyard and associated uses onto the site which will increase agricultural and economic development opportunities on the property.

It is recommended that Council seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit the Planning Scheme Amendment.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this report is to discuss a proposed Planning Scheme Amendment for the land located at 280 Bridge Inn Road, Mernda.

The subject site is located on the southern side of Bridge Inn Road, and bound by Bindts Road along its western boundary and existing residential development to the east. (Attachment 1). The Darebin Creek runs centrally through the property and currently defines the suburb boundary between Mernda and Wollert. 

The total site area is approximately 109.1 Hectares. Approximately 15 hectares of the land is located within the Urban Growth Boundary, and 94.1 hectares located outside of the Urban Growth Boundary.

Existing uses surrounding the site vary from residential development to the east within the Fairview Estate, quarrying activities and landfill to the north-west, and farming uses directly to the north of the site.

The site is currently affected by the following zones and overlays:

·    Green Wedge Zone (GWZ)

·    Farming 1 Zone (FZ) (land located inside the Urban Growth Boundary)

·    Environmental Significance Overlay- Schedule 1(ESO1)

·    Environmental Significance Overlay- Schedule 5 (ESO5)

·    Rural Floodway Overlay (RFO)

PROPOSAL

The landowner of 280 Bridge Inn Road, Mernda has lodged a request for a Planning Scheme Amendment in order to facilitate the use and development of their site for the purposes of a Vineyard, and residential estate. Specifically, the proposed Amendment C203 seeks to:

·    Rezone part of 280 Bridge Inn Road, Mernda from a Farming Zone (FZ) to a General Residential Zone (GRZ1);

·    Delete the Environmental Significance Overlay (ESO1 and ESO5) from part of the site;

·    Apply a Development Plan Overlay (DPO) consistent with DPO Schedule 27 to the land rezoned GRZ1;

·    Apply  a Vegetation Protection Overlay (VPO1) to the land rezoned GRZ1;

·    Introduce a site specific control at Clause 52.03- Specific Sites and Exclusions, and an Incorporated Document at Clause 81.01- Incorporated Documents to allow the subdivision of the land into three lots and the use and development of the lot with an area of approximately 30.0 hectares for a vineyard, winery and function centre with an associated liquor license.

·    No changes to the location of the Urban Growth Boundary are proposed. 

Attachment 2 shows the proposed location of the use and development on the northern boundary of the subject with frontage to Bridge Inn Road.

In terms of a land split, it is noted that the proposal can be viewed as three distinct precincts, including:

·    64.1 hectares transferred to Council for the purposes of the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland;

·    15 hectares of the site within the Urban Growth Boundary to be rezoned to enable residential development; and

·    30 hectares for the winery development outside of the Urban Growth Boundary. 

 The vineyard component of the application includes:

·    Vineyard

·    Wine production

·    A cellar

·    Café/restaurant

·    Visitor Parking

A total of approximately 94.1 hectares are affected by a Green Wedge Zone and are located outside of the Urban Growth Boundary. The Planning Scheme Amendment seeks to introduce a site specific control to this land, in order to allow for the subdivision (less than the minimum lot size allowable under the zone), development and use of the site, the Planning Scheme Amendment will need to be ratified by Parliament. 

DISCUSSION

The subject site is located within the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland Interest Area, and in 2010, as part of Planning Scheme Amendment VC65 was partially brought into the Urban Growth Boundary in order to facilitate the creation of the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland. The portion of land that was brought into the Urban Growth Boundary was rezoned to a Farming Zone.

As previously noted the proposal is comprised of three distinct parts (Attachment 3), which, if supported, will facilitate the subdivision, use and development on the subject site. These components are now discussed. 

The proposed Planning Scheme Amendment C203 is required in order to subdivide the site into three parts to create the three distinct precincts as identified earlier in this report.

The subject property is located within both a Green Wedge Zone (GWZ) and the Farming Zone (FZ) (Attachment 4) which both require that subdivided lots are no smaller than 80 Hectares in size. In order to allow for the subdivision, the proposed Amendment includes the introduction of a Site Specific and Incorporated Plan control which varies the requirement for a minimum lot size of 80 Hectares for land located within the Green Wedge Zone in order to allow for the creation of three lots.

It is considered that this is the most appropriate way in which to progress the proposal should it be supported by Council and Parliament.

The Quarry Hills Regional Parkland

The proposal is based on the standard implementation of the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland Strategy, with the balance of land to be set aside for the parkland, and land inside the Urban Growth Boundary rezoned for residential development.

A total of 64.1 hectares will be transferred into Council ownership for the purposes of the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland, with the property making up one of the final sections of the western side of the parkland to be transferred to Council.

It is noted that the property is also one which includes a portion of the Darebin Creek within it and this will provide residents with the opportunity to access the creek and the path network which will be progressively developed through the implementation of the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland Masterplan, and the Quarry Hills Precinct Structure Plan located further to the south.

Along with providing residents of the Mernda West area with access to a path network, the inclusion of the property will provide a link into the western side of the future parkland which, when fully assembled, will provide an open space network extending from Bridge Inn Road, Mernda, to Findon Road in the south.

Proposed Use and Development of the Balance Land

Vineyard and Winery

As previously noted, the proposal seeks to establish, on the balance of land located outside of the Urban Growth Boundary:

·    Vineyard

·    Wine production

·    A cellar

·    Café/restaurant

·    Visitor Parking

Attachment 2 provides an indicative layout plan for the site, showing the location of the bulk of the built form, and the location of the vine paddocks. It is considered that while further detailed work will be required once a planning permit is applied for on the site, the interface with the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland and the residential development to the east of the site is appropriate. It is considered that the proposal will ultimately provide for a good transition from residential development, into the broader parkland.

Importantly, the proposed use is in keeping with the strategic intent of both the Green Wedge zone and the City of Whittlesea Green Wedge Management Plan which seek to protect and promote opportunities for agricultural business and tourism within Council’s non-urban areas. 

Noting this however, should Council, and Parliamentary support the proposal as it stands, the landowner will initiate a three part subdivision, in order to maintain the area proposed for the vineyard, in their private ownership. This will result in a private title containing the vineyard sitting inside the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland interest area within the Green Wedge Zone which has the potential to allow for the introduction of uses that are incompatible with the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland being introduced to the site, should for whatever reason, the vineyard not be developed/advanced.

While it could be argued that should the winery not proceed, any future alternative use proposal could be assessed against the Green Wedge Zone controls applicable at the time, it is important to protect the value and strategic importance of the Parkland to avoid any unintended consequences through ensuring controls/agreements are focused on the winery proposal. 

It is noted that the current proposal includes an Incorporated Document which provides very specific planning controls for the use of the site as a “winery”, which will go some way to ensuring that the land will be used for the purpose intended as part of the proposed amendment.

In order to provide greater certainty and protection for the parkland, a draft Section 173 Agreement has been prepared which includes a restriction on the kinds of uses which can be considered for the site. The type of uses that this agreement looks to prohibit include broiler farms, intensive animal husbandry, petrol station, convenience restaurant, manufacturing sales, materials recycling, refuse disposal, and timber production.

The proponent has viewed the list and considers that the list is one which will allow for innovation and a range of uses on the site, while ensuring that uses which could compromise the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland are restricted on the site.

It is important to note that should the proposal be supported by Council and the Minister for Planning, the proponent will be required to apply for a planning permit for the use and development of the Winery.

Residential Development

Land which is located within the Urban Growth Boundary will need to be rezoned for residential purposes through the proposed Amendment C203. The proposed rezoning will apply a General Residential Zone to the site, and apply a proposed Development Plan Overlay (DPO).

The content of the proposed DPO will be consistent with the remainder of properties within Mernda West precinct and the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland interest area that are subject to the Development Plan Overlay Schedule 27 (DPO27). This includes the requirement to enter into an agreement to provide contributions for local infrastructure and a contribution to the equivalent to that required under the Growth Areas Infrastructure Contribution legislation.

Should Council and Parliament support the proposed Amendment C203, the proponent will be required to prepare a Development Plan for the area, demonstrating a range of lot sizes and dwelling types, along with pedestrian and cycle paths, local open space, the retention of River Red Gums, and road layout which connects into the surrounding road network.

Following the preparation and approval of the Development Plan, the proponent will be required to apply for a planning permit to subdivide the land for the purposes of residential development. Any application to develop the land will be required to be generally in accordance with the Development Plan.  

The Amendment Process- Land Outside of the Urban Growth Boundary

As previously noted, the proposal seeks to create a three lot subdivision in order to facilitate the use and development of the winery, the creation of a lot which will ultimately be developed for residential purposes, and the subdivision of the land required for the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland.

The minimum subdivision size for this site is currently 80 hectares in the Whittlesea Planning Scheme. Because the proposal seeks to create a separate title (approximately 30 hectares) for the winery below the minimum allowable under the zone (80 hectares) outside the Urban Growth Boundary, ratification by State Parliament is required. 

Proposals needing parliamentary ratification are not common. Whilst it is unclear whether this would be treated as a ‘procedural’ matter by the State, the potential for this not to be approved and the implications of this have been factored into the consideration of the proposal. To this end, it is considered that the approach proposed has mitigated this potential through the preparation of Section 173 Agreement which only allows for the Agreement to be acted upon should the proposed Amendment C203 be supported by both Council and the Parliament.

Hanson Quarry and Landfill

The proposed winery, vineyard and associated uses are located within proximity to the adjacent Hanson Quarry and Landfill which is expected to have a lifespan in excess of 40 years.  It is noted that the proposed winery, vineyard and associated uses would be located partially within the notional 500 metre buffer associated with the Quarry. The proposal will be subject of prevailing winds from the north and west and impacts could include odour, noise and dust.

The proponent has provided supporting documentation which has shown that there will not be any adverse impacts associated with the Quarry and Landfill. As the use and development will be located partially inside the 500m buffer, any future planning permit application for the development of a winery will need to be referred externally to the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources.

Parkland Boundary

The boundary of the proposed winery facility still requires further fine-tuning.  Whilst they are considered matters of detail it is important that they are resolved at an appropriate point in the process. Issues include, the appropriate “public” setback/interface with the Darebin Creek having regard to the topography of this location, the overarching environmental significance of the Darebin Creek from a habitat link and public access perspective.

The proposal also traverses the saddle between two high points on the site which would require detailed landscape assessment to ensure a sensitive interaction between the parkland and the winery. Similarly, the location and treatment of the existing homestead and the interface with the proposed off road trail in this location would also need careful consideration.

Further, while it is acknowledged that Bridge Inn Road represents a significant barrier, it will be important to ensure that the north-south and east-west linkages of the parkland interest area are not compromised and taken into account in the determining the layout and ultimate design of the proposed winery and vineyard.

It is considered that the final width of the habitat link and the setback from the Darebin Creek can be dealt with through the preparation of the amendment should Council be supportive of the proposal.

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS

Whilst there is no Development Contributions Plan Overlay affecting the site, the standard Section 173 Agreement entered into for the purposes of transferring land within the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland, facilitates the rezoning of the land, and provides for a local development contribution. In addition, the agreement also requires a Growth Area Infrastructure Contribution equivalent payment.

NOTIFICATION

Should authorisation to prepare the amendment be granted by the Minister for Planning, the proposed Planning Scheme Amendment C203 will be required to undergo a standard exhibition process, including a 28 day notification period to potentially affected landowners, prescribed Ministers and State Referral Authorities.

referral

The proposal has been referred internally to relevant Council departments. No major issues were raised in relation to the proposed use or development of the site.

Policy strategy and legislation

The proposed Planning Scheme Amendment will provide for the orderly future planning for the use and development of the subject sites.

It is considered that the proposal addresses the policy objectives of Clause 12- Environmental and Landscape Objectives, and Clause 17- Economic Development of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme. The proposal will ultimately allow for the creation of a use and development which is appropriate and in keeping with the vision and intention of the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland, while also facilitating and increase in tourism to the area and the expansion of the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland and the protection of this important landscape feature.

Having regard to the residential development that will be facilitated through the proposed Planning Scheme Amendment, it is considered that the proposal meets the objectives of Clause 11- Settlement, Clause 21.04- Settlement and Clause 21.09- Housing as it will allow for an increase in a well located and diverse housing stock.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

FUTURE DIRECTION          Places and spaces to connect people

Theme                                   Planning our space

Strategic Objective              Our urban design helps build connection to place and the community

The proposal will provide for an extension to abutting/adjacent residential development which is located within close proximity of the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland. Residents of the future residential portion of the site will be afforded with direct access to this open space asset, along with convenient access to local facilities and retail offerings. As such, it is considered that the proposal will meet the direction of creating places and spaces for people to connect, and that the plan has also utilised the principles of good urban design in order to create a place which helps the existing and future community to connect with each other and their surrounds.

Further, the proposal will also provide for the creation of a use and development which will provide a point of interest and a meeting place for the local and surrounding community, allowing for greater social interactions.

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

Under section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 officers providing advice to Council must disclose any interests, including the type of interest.

The Responsible Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with the relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Conclusion

The request to amend the Whittlesea Planning Scheme in line with the proposed Amendment C203 is considered to be one which will provide economic, social and environmental benefit to the municipality.

It is considered that the proposal before Council is unique and has merit both in the context of expanding the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland, and introducing an appropriate use and development into the parkland interface, while also allowing for a minor increase in residential development.

The proposal is considered to be in line with both State and Local planning policy as it will provide for economic growth, the expansion of the Quarry Hills Regional Parkland, and will facilitate the provision of further residential development.

A Section 173 Agreement has been substantially advanced which includes details relating to the transfer of land to Council, a list of prohibitive uses, and the contribution requirements for Council and State infrastructure. This Agreement is predicated on the Planning Scheme Amendment commencing and will only be enacted if the Amendment is approved.

It is therefore recommended that Authorisation be sought from the Minister for Planning for the preparation and exhibition of this proposed amendment.   

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit an amendment to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme to:

a)      Rezone part of 280 Bridge Inn Road, Mernda from a Farming Zone (FZ) to a General Residential Zone (GRZ1);

b)      Delete the Environmental Significance Overlay (ESO1 and ESO5) from part of the site;

c)      Apply a Development Plan Overlay (DPO) consistent with DPO Schedule 27 to the land proposed to be rezoned to GRZ1;

d)      Apply  a Vegetation Protection Overlay (VPO1) to the land rezoned GRZ1;

e)      Introduce a site specific control at Clause 52.03- Specific Sites and Exclusions, and an Incorporated Document at Clause 81.01- Incorporated Documents to allow the subdivision of the land into three lots and the use and development of the lot with an area of approximately 30.0 hectares for a vineyard, winery and function centre with an associated liquor license.

2.       Advise the affected stakeholders of the above and any decisions of the Minister of Planning.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                        Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                        Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                        Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                        Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

6.1.7    Removal of Native Vegetation Associated with the proposed signalisation of the High Street, Epping Road, O'Herns Road and Findon Road intersection, Epping.

File No:                                  716695

Attachments:                        1        Locality Maps

2        Intersection Design

3        Photographs   

Responsible Officer:           Director Planning & Major Projects

Author:                                  Planning Officer   

APPLICANT:                         VicRoads      

COUNCIL POLICY:              22.10     River Redgum Protection Policy

ZONING:                               Road Zone Category 2 and General Residential Zone

OVERLAY:                            Development Contributions Plan Overlay

REFERRAL:                          Nil

ADVERTISING                      Not required

RECOMMENDATION:         That Council approve the application

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

An application has been lodged by VicRoads to remove native vegetation to facilitate signalisation and associated roadworks at the High Street, Epping Road, O’Herns Road and Findon Road intersection in Epping. The roadworks are urgently required to improve connectivity to Epping North and the broader northern growth corridor, to improve road safety and ensure residents have better access to employment areas and other services in and around Epping Central.  The intersection works form the first stage of a broader project to upgrade O’Herns Road including completion of the interchange with the Hume Freeway. VicRoads have indicated that construction is to commence in the next few months.   The works are to be completed with State and Federal funding.

The application proposal is for the removal of a number of scattered large River Red Gums within the Findon and Epping Road reserves in proximity the intersection works and the removal of a further patch of approximately 17 predominantly smaller River Red Gums currently located in the O’Herns Road central median.            

Although planning provisions strongly encourage the retention of native vegetation and indigenous River Red Gums, the removal of the trees is necessary to accommodate critical infrastructure to service the city’s growing population.  Engineering and design options to retain the trees are not considered feasible, as they would result in the project being unviable and would therefore pose unacceptable safety risks to road users.

This report recommends that a planning permit be issued for the removal of the native vegetation.  Conditions will ensure that there is an appropriate offset to compensate for the losses.

SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

The subject land (see Attachment 1) currently accommodates the unsignalised intersection of High Street, Epping Road, O’Herns Road and Findon Road – all of which comprise existing and proposed arterial roads.  The intersection currently contains an inadequate roundabout which experiences significant congestion for a large portion of the day.

Land to northwest of the intersection comprises the Epping CFA Station and residential development (Lyndarum Estate).  Land to the northeast comprises more established standard and low density residential allotments.  Land to the southeast contains established standard density residential dwellings.  Land to the southwest comprises the historic Epping Cemetery.  The proposed intersection works will be contained within road reserves and will not impact on these adjacent and surrounding areas.

Proposal

The application proposal is for the removal of three scattered large River Red Gums within the Findon and Epping Road reserves in proximity the proposed intersection works and a further patch of predominately smaller River Red Gums currently located in the O’Herns Road central median (containing approximately 17 trees).  The application is required to be considered by Council as a number of the trees have a diameter of greater than 50cm.

The proposed intersection design in shown in Attachment 2.

A summary of the trees to be removed is provided below:

Tree No.

Tree species

Trunk Diameter

Comment

15

River Red Gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis)

1.9m

Tree in good condition

16

As above

0.9m

As above

17

As above

0.55m

As above

1-14 and 18-20

As above

Varies – Average diameter of these trees is 0.34m

Comprises a native vegetation patch (Plains Grassy Woodland) comprising 17 smaller trees.  All trees in good condition

Tree No. 15 comprises a very large River Red Gum currently located within the road reservation north of the intersection.  This area will need to be developed for southbound lanes and the loss is therefore unavoidable.  Although the land parcel on which this tree is located has previously been set aside for road purposes as part of an earlier subdivision, it was not vested at that time with the road authority (VicRoads).  It remains in the ownership of the original subdivider and is currently described as Lot 1 TP84189 (No. 2) Findon Road, Epping.  VicRoads are in the process of having this land vested under its control for road purposes.  The land will also need to be rezoned from residential to a road zone at a future date.  VicRoads has notified the current owner of the land regarding the application proposal.

Tree No. 16 comprises a large River Red Gum located within the front setback of a privately owned residential allotment at 16 Findon Road. A small part of the canopy of the tree and a significant portion of the root zone associated with this tree extends into the Findon Road reserve (existing nature strip).  Although the tree in not in close proximity to the intersection, the root zone of the tree will be impacted by roadworks associated with an upgrade of the eastbound (northern) carriageway and shared path.  These works will impact more than 10 per cent of the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) associated with the tree.  Under the State Governments native vegetation provisions this impact is deemed as a loss for which a native vegetation offset is required.  However VicRoads has advised that it is intended that the tree be retained for amenity purposes through appropriate sensitive design and aboricultural supervision during the construction phase.  No impacts are proposed to the canopy of the tree.  Conditions of permit will provide for this outcome.

Tree No. 17 comprised a mid-sized River Red Gum which has established within a swale drain within the existing road reserve.  As part of the intersection upgrade works this tree will need to be removed to make way for a new carriageway works.

The remaining trees proposed for removal form a single patch of native vegetation (Plains Grassy Woodland) comprising 17 younger trees.  The trees previously formed part of the original O’Herns Road nature strip but were then retained within a central median as part of the development of the Lyndarum Estate as an interim measure.  VicRoads has confirmed that it will not be possible to retain the trees in the context of ultimate intersection design. 

Existing trees within the road reserve adjacent to the Epping Cemetery and further trees within the CFA land adjacent to Epping Road are not proposed for removal.  Other previously planted non-indigenous trees within the intersection environs will require removal, however a planning permit is not required for these works.

Public Notification

Advertising of the application was not required as officers have formed the view that no persons would be materially affected by the removal of the vegetation.  The works in proximity to the Tree No. 16 on 16 Findon Road will allow the tree to be retained notwithstanding some disturbance of the Tree Protection Zone.  In relation to Tree No. 15, VicRoads has notified the current landowner in relation to the proposal.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

A planning permit is required for the removal of the trees and the native vegetation pursuant to Clause 52.17 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.  While this provision sets out exemptions from the need to obtain a planning permit for the removal of native vegetation in order to maintain an existing road, VicRoads has determined in this instance that the subject trees and native vegetation will require removal as part of proposed new road works.  An exemption provision is therefore not available.

The State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF) (Clause 12.01) set out provisions for the protection of biodiversity and native vegetation management with an emphasis on avoiding and minimising losses.  Where losses are unavoidable offsets are required to contribute to biodiversity gains elsewhere.  Other SPPF provisions emphasise the need to improve roads in developing outer suburban areas to cater for car, bicycle and public transport – with an emphasis on providing safe and efficient transport corridors.

Local Planning Policy Framework provisions also require that Council recognise the importance of River Red Gums in providing character and identity to urban areas.  Clause 22.10 (River Red Gum Protection Policy) states that tree removal should be limited to only those trees independently assessed as presenting a danger to people and property (which has been demonstrated for the trees in question in the context of the proposed roadworks).

The subject land is included in a General Residential and Road Zone Category 2 (RDZ2).  Council is required to have regard to the views of the relevant road authority (VicRoads) and consider the impact of proposals on the operation of the road and public safety.

Under Clause 52.17 of the Planning Scheme (native vegetation), Council is required to consider the steps that have been taken to minimise impacts and losses.  For the current proposal, Council can be satisfied that there are no viable alternatives to retain the trees.  The works required for the project cannot be deviated around the subject vegetation without significant impacts on road function and safety. 

VicRoads is committed to providing an offset for the loss of the vegetation under conditions of permit. Further conditions will ensure that the removed trees are utilised for habitat and other practical purposes where feasible.

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

Under section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 officers providing advice to Council must disclose any interests, including the type of interest.

The Responsible Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with the relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Conclusion

The removal of native vegetation is required to facilitate the urgent and needed construction of road infrastructure at the High Street, Epping Road, O'Herns Road and Findon Road intersection, Epping. The loss of vegetation has been assessed as unavoidable under the provisions of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme. Accordingly, it is recommended that a planning permit be issued to VicRoads, including conditions for offsets to compensate for the unavoidable losses.

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to approve Planning Application No. 716695 and issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for the removal of native vegetation (three scattered River Red Gums and one remnant patch of Plains Grassy Woodlands) within the existing O’Herns Road and Findon Road reservations and on other land proposed for road purposes (2 Findon Road), Epping, in accordance with the endorsed plans and subject to the following conditions:

1.       Prior to the commencement of works, three copies of amended plans (at an appropriate scale) must be submitted to the Responsible Authority.  The amended plans must show all trees nominated for removal.  The plan must include a notation that Tree No. 16 is to be subject to a native vegetation offset but retained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

2.       Prior to any works affecting the Tree Protection Zone associated with Tree No. 16, an arborist report and associated plans must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority.  The report and plans must demonstrate how disturbance will be minimised and measures to protect the tree both during and after construction.

3.       In order to offset the removal of native vegetation approved as part of this permit (including Tree No.16), the permit holder must provide a native vegetation offset prior to the removal or disturbance of the native vegetation.  The offset must be in accordance with the Permitted Clearing of Native Vegetation – Biodiversity assessment guidelines and the Native Vegetation Gain Scoring Manual. The offset must contribute a gain of the required general biodiversity equivalence units, be located within the boundary of the Whittlesea municipality or the Port Phillip and Westernport Catchment Management Authority area, and have a strategic score of at least 80 per cent of the strategic biodiversity score of the native vegetation approved for removal. Before the native vegetation is removed, evidence that an offset has been secured must be provided to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

4.       The permit holder must ensure that the removal of trees authorised under this permit is carried out in a safe manner to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and VicRoads.

5.       No native vegetation, other than that shown on the endorsed plan, shall be destroyed, felled, lopped, ring barked or uprooted, without the consent of the Responsible Authority.

6.       Prior to removal of the trees authorised under this permit, the trees must be inspected by a suitably qualified and experienced zoologist to determine the presence of animals living or nesting in the tree. Should any native animals be detected, reasonable steps must be taken to capture and relocate such animals as recommended by the zoologist.

7.       Each tree nominated for removal must be suitably marked prior to the commencement of any works and an inspection arranged with an appropriate Council or VicRoads officer to verify that the trees marked accord with this permit.

8.       The permit holder must locate all services either above or below ground prior to the commencement of any works.

9.       Stumps and any surface roots are to be ground down below ground level. Ground and chipped material to a depth of 50mm is to be removed from site at the direction of the project manager and the area thereafter reinstated.

10.     All stumps not removed immediately after removal of the tree are to be paint marked with a suitable bright yellow reflective marking paint.

11.     All stumps must be removed within 14 days of removal of the tree.

12.     After the trees have been felled, the trees must be protected from firewood harvesting via temporary fencing and signage to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and VicRoads until such time as the trees have been relocated for habitat or mulched.

13.     Wherever possible and appropriate, the removed trees should be relocated and placed within nearby conservation areas for habitat purposes or reused in open space as urban art, park furniture and/or other uses determined appropriate by the Responsible Authority or VicRoads.

14.     All timber greater than 300mm in diameter that cannot be reused as habitat, furniture or another use determined as appropriate by the Responsible Authority must be hammer milled and shredded for reuse as mulch in nearby areas.

15.     At the completion of the works, the applicant is to arrange for an appropriate Council officer to inspect the site to ensure compliance with the planning permit.

16.     The permit for native vegetation removal expires if it is not commenced and completed within two years after the issue of the permit. Before the permit expires or within six months afterwards, the permit holder may ask the responsible authority for an extension of time. The Responsible Authority may extend the time within which the native vegetation removal may be started or completed.


 

 

 



Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


 


 


 


 


 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

6.2       Community Services

Nil Reports


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

6.3       City Transport and Presentation

6.3.1    LOCAL AREA TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT (LATM) 20 - MILL PARK

File No:                                  SU/194852

Attachments:                        1        Traffic Data

2        Proposed Traffic Management Plan

3        Examples of proposed traffic calming devices

4        Community Consultation Results Summary

5        Proposed Staged Delivery   

Responsible Officer:           Acting Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Traffic Engineer   

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

This report details the Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) 20 study in Mill Park and presents a Draft Traffic Management Plan (TMP) for Council endorsement.

The proposed plan has undergone a detailed community consultation process, and has received a good level of community and LATM working group support.  One road safety treatment (proposed roundabout at Betula Avenue and Belmont Way) which received elevated resident concern was subjected to a more rigorous technical assessment by applying a cost-benefit analysis, combined with a road safety audit that confirmed the roundabout as providing a positive long term benefit to the community.

The Draft Traffic Management Plan’s proposed solutions are expected to result in significant reductions in vehicle speeds, enhanced road safety, improved lane discipline at intersections, thereby improving the overall residential amenity and liveability of the neighbourhood.  The report concludes with the Draft TMP being presented for adoption with a staged delivery over three financial years.

introduction

The purpose of the Local Area Traffic Management program is to review and improve road safety, local traffic movement and pedestrian connectivity within a specific LATM area.  To ensure consistency in the development of LATM schemes, in 1996 Council adopted an LATM Priority Program for the selection of LATM study areas.  This program is based upon an evaluation and ranking of casualty road crashes, traffic speed and volume data for individual roads and resident concerns (over a preceding five year period) within the assigned LATM area.  All data is updated and tabulated annually to determine the LATM rankings for future delivery within Council’s four year New Works program. 

The study area that is being considered (named LATM 20) is bounded by Childs Road (to the north), McKimmies Road (south), Betula Avenue (east), and the E6 Road reservation (west), as indicated in Attachment 1.  The area was ranked the highest LATM priority when assessed in 2014/15, due to poor crash history, higher than desirable traffic speeds and the number of concerns raised by residents.

Background

Council at its meetings of 28 February 2017 and 21 March 2017 considered a report outlining a Draft Traffic Management Plan (TMP) for LATM 20 in Mill Park (Attachment 1).

Council resolved to defer this item and seek the following for further consideration;

1.   Greater community consultation

2.   A plan on staged implementation; and

3.   To close the loop with the LATM reference group and an opportunity to thank them.

A final meeting with the LATM 20 Working Group was held on 24 May 2017 where the group members were presented with a summary of the community consultation results and the specifics of each proposed traffic treatment within the draft TMP.  The working group participants were also commended on their participation and contribution into the development of the proposed TMP for the area.

Discussion

Scope of Study Area

The study area is limited to the local road and footpath network in the area bounded by Childs Road, McKimmies Road, Betula Avenue, and the E6 Road reservation.  As Betula Avenue is a local collector road, it was included in the study area; however Childs Road and McKimmies Road were excluded due to them being major arterial roads.

Road Network and Neighbourhood Conditions

The road network within the LATM area is generally curvilinear in nature consisting of mainly local streets, cul-de-sacs and courts.  Whilst the curvilinear nature of some collector roads within the study area does limit through access / connections, there is still an unwanted situation of “rat-running” occurring on Betula Avenue, Cuthbert Drive, Garden Grove Drive and Roycroft Avenue due to the current overcapacity placed on the Childs Road / Plenty Road intersection.  This situation results in an increase in the carrying capacity of these thoroughfares, causing localised nuisances and a diminished road safety environment.

Collector roads such as Roycroft Avenue and Garden Grove Drive typically have 2 x 3.0m wide traffic lanes and 2 x 1.8m wide parking lanes, other streets have a road pavement approximately 7.2m in width.

Traffic management treatments in the form of roundabouts, traffic islands, road cushions/humps have already been installed in a number of streets, including; Appletree Drive, Crampton Crescent, Cuthbert Drive, Grenda Drive, Garden Grove Drive (between Betula Avenue and Roycroft Avenue) and Jasmine Drive (between Norwood Drive and Roycroft Avenue), in previous years.  This was installed on a reactive basis to address road safety and traffic operational concerns in those individual streets.

The land uses within the LATM 20 area is predominantly residential in nature with the exception of the Findon Recreation Reserve and the Findon Primary School.  The area contains approximately 2,400 residential properties.

Public Transport

The 564 bus operates along Garden Grove Drive (between McKimmies Road and Roycroft Avenue) and Roycroft Avenue; the 382 bus operates along Betula Avenue.

Road Safety

Vic Roads casualty crash database CrashStats indicates that from 2011 to 2016, nine casualty crashes were recorded in the study area, with six crashes on Betula Avenue (four at the Roycroft Avenue intersection, and two at the Belmont Way intersection), two crashes in Roycroft Avenue (one at the Konrads Crescent intersection, and one between Chestnut Road and Protea Court), and one crash in Konrads Crescent.

Traffic Data & Conditions

Traffic surveys have been undertaken on local streets and collector roads over many years.  The results of the most recent and relevant are summarised in Attachment 1, and indicate that whilst traffic speeds and volumes are “generally acceptable” in most streets, they are unacceptable in several streets.  In this case, “generally acceptable” is considered to be where the 85th percentile traffic speeds (the speed at which 85% of the traffic is travelling at, or below) do not exceed the speed limit; “unacceptable” is where 85th percentile traffic speeds are well in excess of the speed limit.  In LATM 20, Roycroft Avenue, Garden Grove Drive and Mimosa Road have “unacceptable” excessive speeds.

It is worthwhile noting that the current traffic conditions on Konrads Crescent are acceptable (although there is one reported serious injury accident), and it was determined by the working group that it is likely that traffic speeds and volumes would increase in the street following the installation of traffic calming measures on Roycroft Avenue.

The survey results indicate that traffic volumes on local roads in the area range from less than 100 vehicles per day (vpd) in some cul-de-sacs and local streets, to approximately 4,000 vpd in Roycroft Avenue, 6,300 vpd in Garden Grove Drive (just north of McKimmies Road) and 10,500 vpd in Betula Avenue (near Belmont Way).  These elevated traffic volumes support the perception that “rat-running” is occurring on these collector roads.

While the lane width and parking arrangements in these heavily used streets can adequately cater for traffic volumes in excess of these figures, the recorded accidents, increased traffic volumes and speeding vehicles are all contributing towards many of the resident’s amenity concerns that are discussed in the following section. 

Resident Concerns

Council’s Customer Request Management (CRM) records database indicates that the number of residents who have contacted Council averaged 11 times per year through 2009 to 2014, and 5 times per year through 2015 to 2016.  This recent decline is likely to be partly due to the opportunity residents have had to provide feedback in the LATM community consultant process (579 responses were received).

Throughout the community consultation process the key concerns raised were:

·        Poor driver behaviour at the Garden Grove Drive / Roycroft Avenue intersection.

·        Hoon driver behaviour in a number of streets and locations. 

·        Some drivers are negotiating the roundabouts at the Garden Grove Drive / Mimosa Road, Roycroft Avenue, Sycamore Street, and the Roycroft Avenue / Cuthbert Drive intersections, too fast and often mount the flat central islands and kerbs.

·        Current and future traffic conditions in Konrads Crescent.

·        Poor bus stop locations and safety in Garden Grove Drive north of McKimmies Road.

·        Lack of sufficient, quality pedestrian and bicycle links.

·        Traffic congestion at the Childs Road / Cuthbert Drive intersection.

Road Safety and residential amenity interventions

Council as the responsible local road authority has the ability to install traffic management and traffic calming measures to address the concerns raised by local residents regarding road safety and other residential amenity concerns.  Where possible, opportunities were taken to implement streetscape improvements, such as the inclusion of footpath pedestrian links and crossings, integrated within the traffic management and traffic calming measures proposed.

Based on the traffic volumes, speeds and accident records in the area, some form of intervention is considered necessary to mitigate the current conditions and the future risk of injury to road users.  Where road safety improvements can be achieved, the proposed Traffic Management Plan will result in improved local amenity and ongoing net-community benefit for all residents.

Community Consultation

A thorough community consultation process was undertaken that involved; two LATM area wide mail outs (to approximately 3,000 owners and / or occupiers of properties in the study area), questionnaires with reply paid envelopes, a public meeting, a series of LATM working group meetings and the ongoing opportunity for residents to provide valued input via the City of Whittlesea’s website, social media and at other public events during the investigation period.

Community Meetings

In October 2015, a letter was circulated to approximately 3,000 property owners and occupiers in LATM 20, advising that an LATM study was to be conducted, and inviting residents to attend a public meeting.  The public meeting was also promoted through the local newspaper and on social media.  Community members that were not able to attend the meeting were also afforded an opportunity to provide feedback / input via the Council’s Community Voice website and on social media.

The public meeting was held at the Findon Primary School (within the LATM area) on
11 November 2015.  This was attended by 25 residents, South East Ward Councillors and Council Officers.

At the meeting, community representatives were invited to form a Working Group (with Councillors and Officers) to investigate concerns, consider available traffic management options and develop a preliminary TMP.  The Working Group met on three occasions and this resulted in a Draft TMP being prepared.

As the investigations progressed, it became apparent to the Working Group that a number of minor “quick win” improvements could be implemented immediately.

These were:

·        Bus stop upgrades in Garden Grove Drive.

·        Duplicate STOP signs and advance warning signs at the Garden Grove Drive / Roycroft Avenue intersection to improve visibility and safety.

·        Upgrade of existing gravel or sub-standard 1.5m wide concrete footpaths to 2.5m concrete shared (pedestrian and cyclist) paths.

·        “Keep Clear” pavement line marking at the Childs Road / Cuthbert Drive intersection.

These initial upgrades were immediately actioned and completed in 2016.

Consultation on the Draft Traffic Management Plan

After the three working group meetings concluded, the input received from the working group process resulted in a Draft TMP being developed and then circulated to all property owners and occupiers within the area, in August 2016.  The draft TMP included a questionnaire and a reply paid envelope so that comments could be received by Council in relation to the content of the Draft TMP.  The overall response rate received from the LATM 20 area was 18%, with a response rate from owners and occupiers of the directly affected properties in close proximity to a proposed traffic calming device of 28%.

To improve response rates, Council officers telephoned and then visited (door knocked) owners or occupiers who had not responded to solicit a response.  A copy of the questionnaire and a note to call Council officers was left if residents were not at home.  This additional approach resulted in boosting the overall response rate to 21%, but more importantly the response rate from the directly affected property owners and occupiers increased to 45%.

Community feedback on the Draft TMP resulted in an average of 80% (see Attachment 4) of respondents indicating their support for the range of traffic management devices proposed.  

The results of the community consultation process and Draft TMP were presented at a Final LATM 20 Working Group meeting that was held on 24 May 2017.

Bus Company Consultation

Dysons Bus Services were consulted and have advised that they would prefer not to have any additional traffic calming devices on its bus routes, however if traffic management is to be installed, the proposed road cushions would be tolerated, subject to careful design when installed close to a bus stop.

Dysons have indicated their support for the indented bus bays in Garden Grove Drive.

Emergency Service Consultation

The Metropolitan Fire Brigade (MFB) indicated that:

·        Raised pavements are not preferred in local streets and other traffic management options should be investigated.  However, in the event that other traffic management options are not available, raised pavements should be installed in the least intrusive manner.

Ambulance Victoria has advised that:

·        It does not have any policy regarding traffic management devices, in particular raised pavements.

·        The paramedics are advised to choose a route without, or with less raised pavements, if there is a choice.

·        It supports any traffic management system that helps to slow motorists, reduces crashes or the impact of crashes and improves road safety.

Draft Traffic Management Plan

The Draft Traffic Management Plan (TMP), Attachment 2, was prepared with the general agreement of the Working Party and following consultation with the community, it involves a range of traffic management devices that aim to enhance the safety and operation of the local road network, address residents’ concerns, and provides an opportunity to improve the local streetscapes and residential amenity of the neighbourhood. The following sections outline the Draft Traffic Management Plan and the traffic treatments proposed in each location.

Betula Avenue

Road safety and traffic operational concerns have been raised by residents and confirmed by the Working Group, as well as results received in the community consultation phase of the study, with specific requests for new or modified roundabouts.  Based on the community feedback combined with the technical assessment, i.e. crash data (six accidents), speed (85th percentile speed is 55km/h) and traffic volumes (10,500 vpd) being unacceptable the following treatments are suggested:

·        A new roundabout at the intersection of Belmont Way.

·        A new roundabout at the intersection of Garden Grove Drive.

·        A modified roundabout at Roycroft Avenue (modification involves replacing the fully mountable outer perimeter of the roundabout central island with a bus friendly semi-mountable perimeter).

Garden Grove Drive

Concerns regarding safety and unacceptable speeds along Garden Grove Drive have been expressed by the Working Group and in the community consultation phase.  Survey data substantiated these concerns, identifying that traffic speeds are unacceptable in the 500m section between McKimmies Road and Roycroft Avenue intersection with an 85th percentile speed of 56 km/h and one recorded accident that occurred at the intersection with McKimmies Road.

The following treatments are suggested:

·        3 x Road Cushions.

·        Roundabout to be modified at Mimosa Road.

Roycroft Avenue

Roycroft Avenue is 2.2km in length.  Concerns regarding safety and unacceptable speeds have been expressed by the Working Group and in the community consultation survey data phase.  Crash and survey data substantiated these concerns, identifying that the road traffic speeds are unacceptable with an 85th percentile speed of 54 km/h and 3 recorded crashes along the road. 

The following treatments are suggested:

·        13 x sets of Road Cushions.

·        Roundabout to be modified at Sycamore Street.

·        Roundabout to be modified at Crampton Crescent.

·        Roundabout to be modified at Cuthbert Drive.

·        Raised intersection pavement at the approach to Garden Grove intersection.

The roundabout modifications at Betula Avenue, Garden Grove Drive and Roycroft Avenue comprise replacing the fully mountable (flat) outer perimeter of the roundabout central island with a bus friendly semi-mountable raised kerb perimeter.

Mimosa Road

Concerns regarding safety and unacceptable speeds have been expressed by the Working Group and in the community consultation survey data phase.  Traffic survey data substantiated these concerns, identifying that traffic speeds are unacceptable at an 85th percentile speed of 54 km/h.  No casualty crashes were recorded along Mimosa Road. 

The following treatments are suggested:

·        1 x Raised Pavement

·        1 x Raised Pedestrian Crossing

·        1 x Raised Intersection with a pedestrian crossing included

Konrads Crescent

There is a likelihood traffic speeds and volumes will increase if traffic calming measures are installed on Roycroft Avenue, with one crash already occurring in Konrads Crescent.  The following treatments are suggested to be implemented to ensure speeds are kept at a low level and no further incidents/accidents are expected in the street:

·        4 x Raised Pavements

Off-road path connections

·        Between Citrus Court and Konrads Crescent (completed).

·        Between Henricks Court and Roycroft Avenue (completed).

·        Between Kardella Close and Winter Close (completed).

·        Between Freeman Crescent, Devitt Court and Childs Road (2017/18)

·        Easement link between Transmission Line Path and Tonelli Crescent (2020/21)

In addition to the above, all existing T-intersections currently without Stop or Give Way line-marking will be line-marked to further enhance delineation and the visibility at the intersection.

The suite of devices in the proposed TMP is expected to result in a significant reduction in traffic speeds, accidents, improved lane discipline at intersections, thereby enhancing road safety, and generally improving residential amenity and liveability of the neighbourhood.

Examples of devices proposed can be seen in Attachment 3.

 

Discussion on Resident Concerns

Resident feedback through the detailed community consultation process has been reviewed in detail, and has resulted in the modification of a number of proposed treatments.

Further details on the residents’ concerns and officers’ response to the concerns are summarised in the section below.

Betula Avenue / Belmont Drive Roundabout

Seven properties were identified as being directly affected by the proposal and a consultation letter was circulated to these owners and occupiers. Four residents raised concerns. There have been two recorded serious injury accidents at this intersection in the past 5 years, one occurred in 2015 and other more recently in 2016.

Resident Comments / Concerns

Technical Response

Loss of parking

Three on-street parking spaces would be lost, however, each property has at least two off-street parking spaces, with some properties having four off-street spaces. On-street parking is available in close proximity to adjacent residences to cater for this minor loss in on-street parking.

Reduced nature strip width

The modified roundabout design maintains and in some places increases nature strip widths.

Concerns with entering and exiting properties

The roundabout will reduce traffic speed, calm traffic, separate traffic and result in enhanced safety for all traffic travelling along or turning into or out of adjacent properties. It is proposed that an additional concrete hard stand turn around area be included so that residents do not have to back out directly into the roundabout and can drive out in a forward direction.

Reduced visibility at property access

An independent Road Safety Audit has been conducted on the roundabout design which recommends that an existing large street tree is a potential obstruction and should be considered to be removed in the final design to ensure improved visibility at each property access point is improved. Other improvements to further enhance the safety at this intersection include improved kerb and footpath alignment at the roundabout. As mentioned, a hard stand turnaround area to assist with safe vehicle egress has been included.

There are too many roundabouts in Betula Avenue.

The number and the distances between existing and proposed roundabouts accord with Federal and State Engineering Guidelines and Standards, stating that a spacing of 120m-250m for collector road environment is recommended.

The net-community benefit has been evaluated for the provision of this roundabout by applying Austroads Traffic Impact Estimation Tool for Small Intersection Projects.  This tool delivers a Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) that quantifies major benefits and costs to the community, such as:

·    Initial capital investment;

·    Ongoing annual maintenance costs;

·    Reduction in crash costs; and

·    Reduction in road user costs.

The BCR received for this roundabout indicates a very high direct benefit for the community of $16.87 to every $1 invested.  The BCR demonstrates that the roundabout will enhance safety of all road users by reducing traffic speed and improving traffic movements, and will ultimately result in a reduction in serious accident costs to the community by $327,445 in the first year and $3,707,872 over the roundabouts 20 year design life.  Based on the results received, it is considered that the proposed roundabouts overall net-community benefit outweighs any minor inconveniences (stated above) to the directly affected residents.

Betula Avenue / Garden Grove Drive Roundabout

Seven properties were identified as being directly affected by the proposal and a consultation letter was circulated to these owners and occupiers. Two residents raised concerns.

Resident Comments / Concerns

Technical Response

Increased noise due to the reduced distance between the traffic and the house

The distance between traffic and the house remains the same. Lower speed due to the roundabout will result in lower noise levels in most cases.

Don’t want the change

There was no reason specified to support their objection and the overall benefit to the community due to improved road safety outweighs this objection.

Road Cushions/Raised Pavement Proposal

47 properties were identified in Garden Grove Drive, Konrads Crescent, Mimosa Road and Roycroft Avenue as being directly affected by the proposal and a consultation letter was circulated to these owners and occupiers.  Six residents raised concerns.

Resident Comments / Concerns

Technical Response

The increased number of road cushions along Roycroft Avenue and the impact on the residents’ health.

·   To be effective the proposed road cushions are spaced at 80m to 120m which accords with Federal and State Engineering Guidelines.

·   The design (height, width, length and ramp grade) accords with Federal and State Engineering Guides and Standards.

·   If drivers negotiate the road cushions at an appropriate low speed, there should be no reason for the cushions to have an adverse impact on residents’ 

·   The benefits of the road cushions in terms of safer roads and restoration of residential amenity to the broader community outweighs any minor inconveniences.

·   The proposed road cushions will be constructed of asphalt.  A previous noise assessment study for a different location noted that asphalt road cushions performed better than rubber road cushions both for ambient noise levels and noise events and were within the required decibel values of sound for residential areas. 

Loss of parking

Parking over a road cushion/ raised pavement is permitted.

Restricted property access

Road cushions or raised pavements will be placed appropriately and will not restrict access.

Impact on the property value

There is no evidence that the property value is affected by installation of traffic management devices.

Financial Implications

It is estimated that $995,000 of works will be required to implement the proposed LATM 20 Traffic Management Plan.  The majority of the works will be funded through the New Works Program and it is proposed to be implemented in a staged process over the next three years that will align with Council’s existing budget allocations (see Attachment 5 for the staged program proposal).

The proposed modification of Betula Avenue and Roycroft Avenue Roundabout has been successful throughout the Federal Black Spots Application Program receiving $185,000. These funds will be allocated for delivery in the 2017/18 Financial Year.

Policy strategy and legislation

The LATM investigation accords with Council’s Community Plan (CP) and Road Safety Strategy 2004 (RSS), in particular:

·        Engage and consult with our community, stakeholders and customers in a meaningful way.

·        Deliver road safety improvement projects to the satisfaction of authorities and residents. 

·        RSS – Action Plans 2 (relating to community consultation on road safety matters), 4 (pedestrian safety), 7 (children and road safety), 8 (older persons and road safety) and 9 (speed management).

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

FUTURE DIRECTION          Health and Wellbeing

Theme                                   Safety

Strategic Objective              Our built form incorporates safety design

The TMP will result in a reduction in vehicle speeds, clearer definition of intersection priorities, improvements to existing devices and improved traffic conditions at a number of pedestrian crossing locations, a reduction in the number of motor vehicle crashes in the LATM area and an opportunity for streetscape improvements to be implemented.

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

Under section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 officers providing advice to Council must disclose any interests, including the type of interest.

The Responsible Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with the relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Conclusion

A comprehensive technical assessment and community consultation process has been conducted for the LATM 20 area and has resulted in a Draft Local Area Traffic Management Plan being prepared in consultation with a community working group. 

The community consultation process results have indicated a good level of community support for the Draft Traffic Management Plan with an average of 80% of all respondents supporting the traffic management devices proposed for the area.

A more rigorous technical assessment by applying a cost-benefit analysis, combined with a road safety audit was applied to one road safety treatment (proposed roundabout at Betula Avenue and Belmont Way) which had received elevated resident concern.  The results of the assessment confirmed that the roundabout would provide a positive long term benefit to the community.

The plans, if adopted for a staged implementation over the next three financial years, is expected to result in a significant reduction in accidents, traffic speeds, enhanced road safety, improved lane discipline at intersections and generally improve the amenity and liveability of the neighbourhood for residents living in the LATM 20 area of Mill Park.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.    Adopt the proposed Traffic Management Plan (TMP) for LATM 20, to be staged over three financial years, by implementing the following devices:

       In 2017/18:

a)         Betula Avenue

·     Roundabout to be modified at Roycroft Avenue (Black Spot Program funding).

b)         Garden Grove Drive

·     3 x Road Cushions.

·     Roundabout to be modified at Mimosa Road

c)         Roycroft Avenue

·     13 x Road Cushions

·     Roundabout to be modified at Sycamore Street

·     Roundabout to be modified at Crampton Crescent

·     Roundabout to be modified at Cuthbert Drive

·     Raised intersection treatment at the approach of Garden Grove Drive.

d)         Mimosa Road

·     1 x Raised pavement

·     1 x Raised pedestrian crossing

·     1 x Raised intersection with a pedestrian crossing

e)         Off road path connections

·     Between Freeman Crescent, Devitt Court and Childs Road Easement link

       In 2018/19:

f)          Betula Avenue

·     New roundabout at Belmont Way.

       In 2019/20:

g)         Betula Avenue

·     New roundabout at Garden Grove Drive.

h)         Konrads Crescent

·     4 x Raised pavements

2.       Advise the Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) 20 community of Council’s decision on the matter.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                        Tuesday 27 June 2017

 



Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                        Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

6.3.2    Response to Petition regarding street trees in Wildfire and Isabelle Courts, Mill Park

File No:                                  133320

Attachments:                        1        Location Map

2        Pictures of Wildife and Isabelle Crts Mill Park   

Responsible Officer:           Acting Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Arborist   

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

This report is in response to a petition tabled at the Council meeting held on 7 February 2017.  The Petition raises concerns regarding the street trees in Wildfire and Isabelle Courts, Mill Park and seeks removal of the existing street trees and replacement with a more suitable species. 15 Residents from Wildfire Court and Isabelle Court, Mill Park have signed the petition asking that the existing trees be removed and replaced. The petition letter discusses that the trees dropping debris, in particular gum nuts in large quantities and the risks of these to residents and to Australia Post employees delivering the mail.

The petition also expresses concern regarding the tree species chosen for the court and asks for clarification from Council, as to why health is the only criteria referred to for removal of trees. The letter requests the “removal and replacement of these trees with a species which is suitable for the purpose. That purpose being the greening and beautification of our courts with trees carefully selected, and in consultation with us the residents”.

In response to the petition, Council’s arborist inspected the street trees in both streets on 23 February 2017.  As part of Council’s normal proactive cyclic street tree maintenance schedule the trees in both courts were inspected and pruning works undertaken in May 2017.

Council’s arborist again inspected the trees within these two streets on 30 May 2017 following the implementation of the pruning works.  All trees in both streets were found to be in good health and with sound structures.

The residents request to remove and replace the existing street trees in Wildfire and Isabelle Courts has been assessed in accordance with Council’s Street Tree Management Plan (2016) and Environmental Sustainability Strategy and is not supported for the following reasons:

·        The trees are of sound structure and in good health;

·        The trees are not causing any infrastructure damage and minimal repairs have been undertaken over a protracted period of time;

·        All trees drop debris consisting of bark, leaves fruit flowers etc.

·        The debris on footpaths in this court was not on average through multiple visits by Council’s Arborist observed to be excessive; and

·        Red Box eucalypts are listed as a suitable street tree species in Council’s current street tree species planting list.

Introduction

At the Council meeting on 7 February 2017, a petition was tabled from 15 residents from Wildfire and Isabelle Courts, Mill Park raising concerns regarding:

·        Excessive volume of gum nuts these large mature trees produce and drop continuously over the footpath and street, particularly in front of 6 Wildfire Court;

·        Residents and visitors having nearly fallen over as a result of the excessive tree debris underfoot;

·        Potential risk to elderly, people in wheelchairs, and children on bicycles from the excessive tree debris;

·        Cars constantly smothered by the debris from the trees, even when they are parked in driveways;

·        Australia Post has left improvement cards in letter box at no 6 and 7 Wildfire Court Mill Park asking for footpath to be swept; and

·        Council’s negligence in choosing these trees to plant in these streets.

Council resolved to receive the petition and that a report be prepared in response in accordance with Council’s Street Tree Management Plan.

Background

One attachment to the petition confirms the regular and continuing effort of the owner of 6 Wildfire Court in sweeping and clearing the footpath of dropped gumnuts from nature strip trees.  This attachment is signed by 10 residents of Wildfire Court representing seven of the eight properties within Wildfire Court.

The second attached to the petition is signed by owners who state they experience the problem of nature strip trees dropping gum nuts which pose a safety hazard on their footpath and street and who support removal and replanting.  This section of the petition is signed by 15 residents, 11 from all eight properties within Wildfire Court and four residents from four of the eight properties within Isabelle Court.

The covering letter for the petition is signed by the resident a 6 Wildfire Court, Mill Park.

Council’s Customer Service System records complaints about the street tree outside 6 Wildfire Court from 2008 to January 2017.

Both Wildfire Court and Isabelle Court extend west from Blossom Park Drive in The Blossom Park Estate, Mill Park. Both courts are dead end streets with no through access to other streets.  Both courts only contain a small number of properties (7 and 8). 

This estate is one of the original estates of the Mill Park development area.  Wildfire Court was planted by the developer in 1996 with Red Box eucalypts (E.  polyanthemos). Of the 10 trees originally planted, six remain. Three trees have been replaced and one site remains vacant at present resulting in nine trees in total currently within this court. The replanted trees are mixed species. Isabelle Court was planted by the developer in 1996 with Red Box eucalypts (E. polyanthemos). Of the nine trees originally planted five trees remain.

The choice of street tree for the developer to plant within these two streets was approved by Council officers consistent with approved planting lists at the time.

Red Box eucalypts are a small to medium-sized tree, native to south eastern Australia. The main feature of the tree is the heart shaped juvenile leaves and grey bark.  Flower buds appear in groups of 3 to 7 and have small conical caps. The tree has white flowers which appear between September and January (early spring to mid-summer), followed by pear-shaped fruits which are 4 to 7 mm long and 3 to 6 mm wide.  The fruit from the tree, or buds, would be typically dropped during autumn.

The annual flowering process attracts native birds including lorikeets, galahs, sulphur crested cockatoos and others.  The activity of these birds in the trees causes the premature and more concentrated release of debris including leaves, small twigs and fruit nuts.

Council implements a proactive street tree cyclic maintenance program that ensures that Council managed street trees are inspected and pruned if required at least once every two years. The street trees in Wildfire and Isabelle Courts were last inspected as part of Council’s proactive street tree inspection and works program in May 2017.   Minor pruning works were undertaken on approximately half of the trees located within the two courts.

In response to this petition, Council’s arborist inspected the trees in both streets on 23 February 2017.  Council’s arborist again inspected the trees within these two streets on 30 May 2017 following the implementation of the pruning works. 

All trees in both streets were found to be in good health and with sound structures. Attachment two provides photographs of Wildfire and Isabelle Courts.

Residential streets in the municipality are swept generally on a 6 to 8 week cycle. Selected collector roads that contain significant avenues of mature / large trees receive supplementary street sweeping on an as needs basis, during periods of excess debris drop.  These periods vary depending on both the species of tree and local climatic conditions. 

Council endorsed a new Street tree Management Plan (STMP) in August 2016.  One of the actions identified in the new STMP is to investigate increasing street sweeping frequency where tree debris is excessive due to species type.  Options for increasing street sweeping frequency are currently being investigated and will be considered as part of the preparation of the 2018/19 Council budget.

Under Council’s current footpath sweeping program, strip shopping centres and associated walkways are swept regularly.  Residential footpaths across the municipality are not proactively swept under Council’s current program. 

The draft STMP Implementation Plan proposes that modifications be made to Council’s webpage to better communicate how Council deals with debris from trees on footpaths and roads. 

Under Council’s Local Law, residents are responsible for the maintenance of their nature strip. While Council’s maintenance crews provide a reactive service for the collection of major branch material that may be shed from street trees, the management, of minor debris and leaf material that lands on nature strips, remains the responsibility of abutting property owners.

Red Box eucalypts are still listed as an appropriate species for use as a street tree in Council’s Street Tree Management Plan (2106). This species is a local native and does not drop more volume of debris than any other average eucalypts species.

Neither Wildfire or Isabelle Court are included in Council’s new 10 year Street Tree Renewal Program list.

Discussion:

The petition requests the removal of all street trees in Wildfire and Isabelle Courts and replacement with a more suitable species. As part of the investigation of the issues raised in the petition, Council’s arborist observed the concentration of tree debris in front of the boundary fence at No 6 Wildfire Court to be primarily caused by wind eddies, which is a natural phenomenon sometimes exacerbated by the arrangement of structures in a given location.

Council’s arborist observed an excessive build-up of tree debris in front of this wall on only one occasion back in February. Since then the site was observed to be clean on each occasion Council’s arborist has visited. 

Council’s Street Tree Management Plan (STMP), provides a set of criteria for consideration relating to requests for the removal of existing street trees. Under these guidelines trees will be considered for removal if one or more of the following criteria are met:

·        The tree is dead or in severe decline or poses a very high risk potential that cannot be corrected by pruning, transplanting or other contemporary treatments.

·        The tree severely interferes with a neighbouring tree to the extent that neither tree can develop to its full potential.

·        The aesthetic values of the tree or tree group are so low that the site is visually enhanced by the removal of the tree or tree group.

·        The tree is found to be contributing to damage to public or private property and no other viable means are available to rectify the situation.

·        The tree or tree group is infected with an epidemic insect or disease, or is recognised as an environmental woody weed species.

·        The tree or group of trees is included in Council’s street tree renewal program.

The inspection undertaken by Council’s arborist did not identify any issues consistent with the guidelines detailed within the STMP that could justify either the removal of individual trees or the avenues as a whole within the two courts that are the subject of this petition.

The residents request to remove and replace the existing street trees in Wildfire and Isabelle Courts has been assessed in accordance with Council’s STMP and Environmental Sustainability Strategy and is not supported for the following reasons:

·        The trees are of sound structure and in good health;

·        The trees are not causing any infrastructure damage and minimal repairs have been undertaken over a protracted period of time;

·        All trees drop debris consisting of bark, leaves fruit flowers etc.

·        The debris on footpaths in this court was not on average through multiple visits by Council’s Arborist observed to be excessive; and

·        The debris accumulating in front of No 6 Wildfire Court appears to be the result of wind eddies in the end of the court, which are not something which can be controlled.

·        Red Box eucalypts are listed as a suitable street tree species in Council’s current street tree species planting list.

Consultation

No external consultation has been undertaken in preparing this report.  Council officers have had a couple of telephone conversations with the Head Petitioner.

Critical Dates

There are no critical dates for this proposal

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications of this proposal.

Policy strategy and legislation

The assessment of the petition is consistent with Council’s Environmental Sustainability Strategy (2013) and Street Tree Management Plan (2016).

The assessment of the petition is also consistent with:

Future Direction 4:  Our open spaces are accessible and respond to local needs.

Future Direction 6:  We are an environmentally sustainable City

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

FUTURE DIRECTION          Places and spaces to connect people

Theme                                   Open space

Strategic Objective              We have open spaces that are welcoming and safe for public gathering

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

Under section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 officers providing advice to Council must disclose any interests, including the type of interest.

The Responsible Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with the relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Conclusion

A Petition from 15 residents in Wildfire and Isabelle Courts was tabled at the Council Meeting held on 7 February 2017. The Petition raises concerns regarding the street trees in Wildfire and Isabelle Courts, Mill Park, particularly excessive debris being dropping by the trees.  The petition requests removal of the existing street trees within both courts and replacement with a more suitable species.

The petition to remove and replace the street trees has been assessed in the context of Council’s Street Tree Management Plan and Environmental Sustainability Strategy. No justification exists for the removal of the trees based on the criteria established within these documents.  Further to this, inspections of the trees located within each Court by Council’s arborist did not identify any negative health or structural related issues with any of the trees.

Therefore, the request in the petition to remove the existing street trees within Wildfire and Isabelle Courts is not supported.  It is recommended that Council write to all petitioners advising them of Council’s decision and include information on the assessment of the issues raised in the petition.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Not remove nor replace the street trees in Wildfire Court and Isabelle Court, Mill Park; and

2.       Write to all petitioners advising them of Council’s decision and include the information of the assessment of the issues raised in the petition.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


 


 


 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

6.4       Corporate Services

6.4.1    Unconfirmed Minutes of Audit & RIsk Committee Meeting

File No:                                  160616

Attachments:                        1        Unconfirmed Minutes of Audit & Risk Committee Meeting 25 May 2017

2        Strategic Internal Audit Plan 2017/18 to 2019/20   

Responsible Officer:           Director Corporate Services

Author:                                  Internal Compliance Officer   

Report

Summary

As part of Council’s Audit & Risk Committee Charter, minutes of meetings are to be presented to Council after each Audit & Risk Committee meeting.

Background

The Audit & Risk Committee is an independent advisory committee of Council and its role is to report to Council and provide appropriate advice and recommendations on matters presented to it.  It acts in this capacity by monitoring, reviewing and advising on issues within its scope of responsibility and assisting Council’s governance obligations to its community.

The Audit & Risk Committee considered a number of reports at its meeting held on 25 May 2017, as well as confirming minutes from the previous meeting held on 2 March 2017.

Main agenda items included:

·    Audit & Risk Committee Work Plan

·    Financial Performance Report for Period Ended 31 March 2017

·    Risk Management Report

·    Business Continuity Management Framework Update

·    Internal Audit:

Internal Audit Status Report

Internal Audit Reviews:  External Complaints Management and Building Maintenance Prioritisation

Outstanding Action items Report from Previous Internal Audits

Strategic Internal Audit Plan

·    External Audit:

Interim Management Letter – Year Ending 30 June 2017

·    Internal Compliance Reviews

·    Purchase Card Policy Review

·    Update on Significant Legal Matters

·    External Agency Examinations

Annual Internal Audit Plan 2017/18

As part of the presentation on the Strategic Internal Audit Plan 2017/18 to 2019/20, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) also presented the Annual Internal Audit Plan 2017/18.  The Committee approved the annual plan and recommended it be provided to Council for noting. The Committee also requested Council consider adding at least one additional audit to the plan. The Annual Internal Audit Plan 2017/18 is attached with the minutes.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

Future Direction         Good Governance

Theme                          Resource Management

Strategic Objective     Council is financially sustainable for the long term

The establishment of the Audit & Risk Committee and the reports it receives are reflective of Council’s commitment to the implementation of good governance principles. The Committee provides advice to Council to assist with fulfilling its oversight responsibilities for the financial and non-financial reporting process, internal controls, the audit process, risk management and Council’s process for monitoring compliance with legislation and regulations and the Code of Conduct.

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

Under section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 officers providing advice to Council must disclose any interests, including the type of interest.

The Responsible Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with the relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

CONCLUSION

That Council note the minutes of the Audit & Risk Committee meetings attached to the report.

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to note the unconfirmed minutes of the Audit & Risk Committee meeting held on 25 May 2017 and the Annual Internal Audit Plan 2017/18.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                        Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

6.5       Partnerships & Engagement

6.5.1    Community Development Grants Program 2017-2018 Round One

File No:                                  188043

Attachments:                        1        Community Development Grants Program 2017-2018 Round One - Schedule of Recommendations   

Responsible Officer:           Acting Director Partnership and Engagement

Author:                                  Community Development Grants Officer   

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

Council’s Community Development Grants Program (CDGP) provides financial support for community initiatives that build people’s skills and engage them within their local community. This report provides the list of recommended projects for Round One of the CDGP for Council’s consideration.

Background

The goals of the CDGP are to:

1.   Build people’s skills and knowledge

2.   Create opportunities for community participation and outcomes

3.   Address locally identified priorities

The maximum grant available for a project is $5,000. The CDGP Round One grant submissions period was from 27 February 2017 to 10 April 2017. Round Two will be undertaken between 21 August 2017 and 10 October 2017. The CDGP 2017 - 2018 has a total funding pool of $140,000 to be distributed between two rounds.

Overview of Submissions Received for the CDGP 2017 – 2018 Round One  

·     The CDGP 2017-2018 Round One received 46 submissions with a total of $194,081.31 in funding requested.

·     19 applications were received from groups who have not applied to the CDGP before.

·     The overall total value of projects submitted was $786,241.91.

·     The total estimated value of volunteer contributions towards project submissions was $348,846.60

Assessment Process

The CDGP assessment process was run in accordance with Council’s Grants Policy and Grants Administration Guidelines. Each organisation and project has been assessed against the criteria set in the CDGP guidelines and the provision of all mandatory documentation submitted. 

The three stage assessment process involved an initial eligibility review, two independent assessments by Council Officers, and a Management Panel assessment for final funding recommendations. 

Project Applications

Below is a financial summary of the Schedule of Recommendations (Attachment 1) for the CDGP 2017-2018 Round One totalling $81,072.32.

 

No. of Apps

Total cost of volunteer hours

Total cost of project

Amount requested

Amount Recommended

Recommended (including part funding)

19

$100,790.20

$293,277.55

$82,072.35

$81,072.35

Not recommended

27

$248,056.40

$492,964.36

$112,008.96

$0.00

Total

46

$348,846.60

$786,241.91

$194,081.31

$81,072.35

Proposal

Community Development Grants 2017 – 2018 Round One

That Council give consideration to the recommended list of applications under the CDGP 2016 – 2017 Round One. This funding provides valuable funding to community based organisations to undertake a broad range of initiatives which engage with and benefit local communities and groups.

Consultation

Contact with the Community Development Grants Officer was a condition of applying for the CDGP to ensure accuracy and clarify any unclear items with applicants.

The Schedule of Recommendations has been developed in consultation with Council Officers and the Management Panel. 

Councillors were presented with the draft Schedule of Recommendations for discussion at Council Forum on 23 May 2017 and their feedback has been considered.

Financial Implications

The 2017 - 2018 CDGP budget allocation is $140,000 to be distributed between two rounds. The Schedule of Recommendations for the CDGP 2017 - 2018 Round One totals $81,072.35.

Policy strategy and legislation

The CDGP 2017 - 2018 Round One has been assessed and administered in accordance with Council’s Grants Policy, adopted on 5 August 2014.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

FUTURE DIRECTION          Inclusive & Engaged Community

Theme                                   Community spirit

Strategic Objective              We encourage the development of community spirit

The provision of the Community Development Grants Program is consistent with Future Direction 1 of the Community Plan, Inclusive and Engaged Community. In particular, Strategic Outcome 1.4 states that “people have the skills, knowledge and opportunities to engage and participate in community life” - Council’s Community Development Grants program facilitates this outcome.

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

Under section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 officers providing advice to Council must disclose any interests, including the type of interest.

The Responsible Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with the relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Conclusion

Council’s Community Development Grants Program allocations, totalling $81,072.35 for 2017-2018 Round One, provide a contribution towards the provision of a wide range of projects and initiatives led by and benefitting the local community. The CDGP leverages and builds on the existing skills and capacity of community based organisations, providing an excellent ‘return on investment’ for Council.

Unsuccessful applicants will be offered support to resubmit applications for Round Two.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to approve the allocation of Community Development Grants Program 2017-2018 Round One as detailed in Attachment 1 of this report.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                        Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                        Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                        Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                        Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                        Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                        Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

6.5.2    City of Whittlesea Participation and Engagement Policy and Framework

File No:                                  .

Attachments:                        1        Participation and Engagement Policy

2        Participation and Engagement Framework   

Responsible Officer:           Acting Director Partnership and Engagement

Author:                                  Acting Manager Community Building and Planning   

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

Driven by a new requirement in the Local Government Performance Reporting Framework (LGPRF), it has become imperative for the City of Whittlesea to review its existing Participation and Engagement Framework (previously known as Council’s Consultation and Engagement Framework) and establish a Participation and Engagement Policy. Over the past eight months, Council’s Research Team has undertaken a review of the existing Framework, involving engagement with staff, Councillors and a small sample of community representatives to seek input into the development of the future Policy and Framework.

Attached to this report is the proposed future Participation and Engagement Policy for the City of Whittlesea as well as the Framework that will support the implementation of the Policy. Council endorsement of the new Participation and Engagement Policy and Framework is sought. The City of Whittlesea currently lacks a Policy in this area and needs to have one endorsed by 30 June 2017 as per legislative requirements. Implementation of the Policy and Framework will occur from July 2017, will be led by Council’s Research team and managed within existing resourcing and budget,. However, as the Policy and Framework will impact the work of almost everyone across Council in some capacity, it is important that Councillors, alongside Council’s Corporate Leadership Team, play a role in championing and supporting Council’s participation and engagement practices.

Background

Community participation and engagement (previously referred to as ‘consultation and engagement’ within Council) is the practice of government providing community members with opportunities to influence decisions which affect them. Council’s existing ‘Consultation and Engagement Framework’ was endorsed by Council and implemented in 2012. Over the past eight months, Council’s Research Team has undertaken a review of the existing Framework, involving engagement and input from a diverse range of stakeholders (refer to consultation section below). Incorporating an evidence-based ‘best practice’ approach that is guided by industry authorities has been a priority in revising our Framework and developing our new Participation and Engagement Policy.

The development of Council’s Policy and Framework has also needed to be conscious of the current Local Government Act Review and recently released Victorian Auditor-General recommendations on Public Participation and Community Engagement: Local Government Sector (May 2017). These reviews are steering Councils towards increasing opportunities for members of the community to make meaningful contributions to decision-making and for Councils to be able to demonstrate not only that they have a Policy in place but how this informs better practice public participation activities within community. There is also a need to align the future Participation and Engagement Policy and Framework with Council’s endorsed community building approach as outlined in the Community Building Policy. The City of Whittlesea currently lacks a Participation and Engagement Policy and needs to have one endorsed by 30 June 2017 as per legislative requirements.

Proposal

Adopting a Participation and Engagement Policy and an updated Participation and Engagement Framework will enable Council to meet its regulatory obligations and support the achievement of ensuring community has adequate input to Council decisions.

Attachment 1 is the proposed Participation and Engagement Policy for the City of Whittlesea.

Attachment 2 refers to the Framework that has been developed to support the implementation of the Policy across the organisation. It should be noted that the intent is for the Framework to be further developed over time as the processes and tools underpinning practice are refined.

Once endorsed, the implementation will be guided by internal sponsors and champions in accordance with the high level implementation plan below.

Implementation Plan

Action

Responsibility

Timeframe

Communications to all stakeholders

Participation and Engagement Advisor

July 2017

Identify champions & sponsors for the rollout of the Participation & Engagement framework.

Participation and Engagement Advisor

September 2017

Develop more detailed actions for rollout of Participation and Engagement Framework

Develop guidelines for setting appropriate IAP2 level of engagement.

Participation and Engagement Advisor


Communications team

September 2017

Revise P&E training program and roll-out targeted training to stakeholders

Participation and Engagement Advisor

From October 2017 onwards

Develop guidelines for working with external consultants

Participation and Engagement Advisor

December 2017

Revise online staff and community engagement portals

Participation and Engagement Advisor

Information Services Department

Phase 1: July 2017

Phase 2: Early 2018

Establish an Engagement Practitioners Network for staff

Participation and Engagement Advisor

October 2017

Finalise a community network (list) identifying community contacts for engagement

Community Building & Planning Department

July 2017 (ongoing updates)

Consultation

A desktop review was undertaken to incorporate an evidence-based ‘best practice’ approach for the new Participation and Engagement Policy and Framework.

Between October 2016 and March 2017, an internal reference group guided an engagement process as outlined below:

•     Approximately 150 individuals participated in one or more of the consultations.

•     23 consultations were held – ten departmental meetings, one CLT workshop, seven 1:1 interviews with ELT members and five community group discussions.

•     An online survey of Councillors was undertaken with follow up one-on-one conversations with Councillors upon request.

•     More than 500 responses were collected and collated.

•     Councillors were presented a draft policy and draft framework and their feedback has been incorporated.

Critical Dates

There is a regulatory requirement for Victorian Councils to have a Policy in place by 30 June 2017.

Financial Implications

Ongoing coordination of the implementation of the Policy and the Framework will be managed by the Community Building and Planning Department within existing resources. Resourcing of specific participation and engagement activities will be managed by the responsible departments within their resources.

Policy strategy and legislation

It is a legislative requirement, through the LGPRF that all Councils have a Participation and Engagement Policy in place by 30 June 2017. The Local Government Act (1989) is currently under review. The proposed amendments to the act will place increased emphasis on the transparency, responsiveness and collaborative capacity of councils to engage the community in their decision-making processes.

The Victorian Auditor-General’s Office (VAGO) now audits councils on their participation and engagement performance and has issued a report aiming to improve participation and engagement processes across all councils. Importantly, the proposed Policy and Framework for Council addresses the recommendations made by VAGO.

The proposed Policy and Framework is consistent with the principles identified in Council’s Community Building Policy and Strategy and will support achievement of Council’s community building vision.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

FUTURE DIRECTION          Inclusive & Engaged Community

Theme                                   Participation & decision making

Strategic Objective              People are involved in issues that affect them

The proposed Policy and Framework affirms Council’s commitment to open, accountable and responsive decision making, informed by effective engagement with the community. The draft Policy complies with legislative requirements and aligns with Council’s endorsed community building approach as outlined in the Community Building Strategy. The Policy and associated Framework will be a key tool to guide how Council brings community voices into Council decision-making processes, thereby enhancing a community building approach to all of our work.

Continuous improvement in the way we involve our community in the decision-making process should help to foster a stronger sense of community, strengthen relationships and lead to development of shared priorities between Council and community. This will assist Council to appropriately provide, facilitate and advocate in a way that better meets the desires and needs of our diverse community.

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

Under section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 officers providing advice to Council must disclose any interests, including the type of interest.

The Responsible Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with the relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

Conclusion

The adoption of the Participation and Engagement Policy and an updated Framework will make The City of Whittlesea compliant with legislative and regulatory requirements and support the achievement of enhanced community participation and engagement in Council’s decisions.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Endorse the attached City of Whittlesea Participation and Engagement Policy.

2.       Endorse the attached revised City of Whittlesea Participation and Engagement Framework (previously known as Council’s Consultation and Engagement Framework), noting that the elements included in the Framework will be further developed over time.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                 Tuesday 27 June 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

6.5.3    Assemblies of Council Report - 27 June 2017

File No:                                  188199   

Responsible Officer:           Acting Director Partnership and Engagement

Author:                                  Governance Officer   

Report

Summary

To report to Council the records of Assemblies of Councillors in accordance with Section 80A(2) of the Local Government Act.

Background

The Local Government Act 1989 requires records of Assemblies of Councillors to be reported to an ordinary Council meeting and recorded in the minutes of that meeting.

A meeting is an assembly of Councillors if it considers matters that are likely to be the subject of a Council decision or the exercise of a Council delegation and the meeting is:

·    A planned or scheduled meeting that includes at least half the Councillors and a member of Council staff; or

·    An advisory committee of Council where one or more Councillors are present.

A record must be kept of an assembly of Councillors which lists the Councillors and members of Council staff attending, the matters discussed, disclosures of conflict of interest and whether a Councillor left the meeting after making a disclosure.

Proposal

Assemblies of Councillors records not previously reported to Council are detailed in the following table:-

Assembly Details

Councillor attendees

Officer attendees

Matters discussed

Whittlesea Reconciliation Group Meeting

27 April 2017

Cr Kirkham

(Mayor)

Cr Kelly
(Deputy Mayor)

TLACD

ALC

MACDO

1.     WRG Budget report.

2.     ALO Report: Annual Program.

3.     Appointment of new Trainee.

4.     Internal Reconciliation Advisory Group established.

5.     Mayor and CEO Forum to be held 4 May at Bubup Wilam.

6.     In principle Whittlesea Local Aboriginal Network (LAN) will contribute towards the Aboriginal Gathering Place feasibility study.

7.     Update on New projects Change the Date’ and Aboriginal Community Festival community consultations with consultancy service Social Compass.

8.     Stretch RAP 2017 – 2020 Forum report back.

9.     Municipal Boundary Signage recommendation by group endorsing the Black, Red and Yellow artwork, and inclusion of the Wominjeka and Traditional Land of the Wurundjeri Willum clan by the majority of members.

10.  The need to discuss the Aboriginal Planned Activity Group (PAG) at the next meeting.

11.  Need to report back on the Wurundjeri Land Council Meeting.

Nil disclosures

Whittlesea Reconciliation Group Meeting

18 May 2017

Cr Kirkham

(Mayor)

Cr Kelly
(Deputy Mayor)

TLACD

ALC

CCD-EPO

1.    Discussion with Aboriginal Access Officer regarding Cultural Safety Plan for the Planned Activity Group.

2.    Previous Minutes of 23 November 2016 meeting accepted.

3.    Professor Ann Mitchell presented a project proposal regarding the Lalor Secondary College Bush Tucker Garden Project with Ian Hunter.

4.    Budget Report was tabled.

5.    ALO Report was tabled.

6.    Koori Barbecue de-brief.

7.    The workplan for the ‘Change the date/Australia Day’ project was presented to the group.

8.    Aboriginal cultural awareness training.

9.    Announced by the Mayor that Council will contribute to support Bubup Wilam.

Nil disclosures

The table below represents an Index of Officer titles:

Initials

Title of Officer

Initials

Title of Officer

TLACD

Team Leader Aboriginal and Cultural Diversity – Ben Waterhouse

ALC

Aboriginal Liaison Coordinator – Donna Wright

MACDO

Metro Access Community Development Officer – Kevin Hall

AAO

Aboriginal Access Officer – Shontia Saluja

CCD-EPO

CCD Events Project Officer – Roland Fraval

 

 

Consultation

Consultation has taken place with internal Council Officer representatives of each of the meetings and committees that qualify as an Assembly of Councillors.

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications as a result of this report.

Policy Strategy and Legislation

Section 3C(2)(g) of the Local Government Act 1989 provides that one of Council’s facilitating objectives is to have regard to ensuring transparency and accountability in Council decision making.

Accordingly, section 80A of the Local Government Act 1989 requires that the Chief Executive Officer must ensure that the written record of an assembly of Councillors is, as soon as practicable:-

    (a)        reported at an ordinary meeting of the Council; and

    (b)        incorporated in the minutes of that Council meeting.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

Future Direction         Good Governance

Theme                          Continuous improvement

Strategic Objective     Best practice models of operation are adopted by Council

Council Goal               Council adopts best practice models of operation

The provision of this report is in line with the Future Direction 7 – Good Governance of Council’s Community Plan by ensuring Council adopts best practice models of operation.

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

Under section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 officers providing advice to Council must disclose any interests, including the type of interest.

The Responsible Officer reviewing this report, having made enquiries with relevant members of staff, reports that no disclosable interests have been raised in relation to this report.

CONCLUSION

That Council note the record of the Assemblies of Councillors meetings in the table set out in the report.

Recommendation

THAT Council note the record of the Assemblies of Councillors meetings in the table set out in the report.

 

  


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

6.6       Executive Services

Nil Reports 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

7.         Notices of Motion

7.1       LIVE STREAMING OF COUNCIL MEETINGS

Councillor Emilia Sterjova of North Ward has given notice that it is her intention to move the following Motion at the Ordinary Meeting of Council to be held on Tuesday 27 June 2017 at 6:30pm:

 

MOtion

THAT Council resolve to, in the context of good governance and active community participation, prepare a report to Council as soon as practicable on the options and effectiveness of Live Streaming of Ordinary Council Meetings. 

The report to include initial and ongoing costs, the different options already being used by other local governments in Victoria.  In particular, the ability for technology to provide greater access to the community by removing geographic barriers that may prevent our community’s participation and create greater transparency of Council decision making.

 

  


 

8.         Questions to Officers

9.         Urgent BusineSS

10.       Reports from Delegates Appointed BY Council TO Other Bodies

11.       Questions to CouncillorS

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

12.       Confidential Business

12.1     Planning and Major Projects

12.1.1  EXTENSION AND RENOVATION WORKS AT JANEFIELD COMMUNITY CENTRE, BUNDOORA CONTRACT 2017-44 - TENDER EVALUATION REPORT

File No:                                  195645

Responsible Officer:           Director Planning & Major Projects

Author:                                  Senior Contracts Executive

Report

It is proposed that the following item be considered in closed session.

Recommendation

 

 

THAT Council resolve to close the meeting to members of the public for the purpose of considering details relating to the following, in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989:

 

(d)       contractual matters

12.1.2  DESIGN SERVICES FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF MILL PARK LEISURE CENTRE CONTRACT 2016-6 - CONTRACT VARIATION REPORT

File No:                                  194933

Responsible Officer:           Director Planning & Major Projects

Author:                                  Senior Contracts Executive

Report

It is proposed that the following item be considered in closed session.

Recommendation

 

 

THAT Council resolve to close the meeting to members of the public for the purpose of considering details relating to the following, in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989:

 

(d)       contractual matters


 

12.1.3  CONSTRUCTION OF THE YAN YEAN TENNIS CLUB PAVILION AND ASSOCIATED WORKS (STAGE 1) - CONTRACT NO. 2016-214 - TENDER EVALUATION REPORT

File No:                                  195395

Responsible Officer:           Manager Major Projects

Author:                                  Senior Project Manager Infrastructure Projects

Report

It is proposed that the following item be considered in closed session.

Recommendation

 

 

THAT Council resolve to close the meeting to members of the public for the purpose of considering details relating to the following, in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989:

 

(d)       contractual matters

  

12.2     Community Services

Nil Reports


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                    Tuesday 27 June 2017

 

12.3     City Transport and Presentation

12.3.1  Provision of Cleaning Services - Contract No. SR111210 - Contract Extension

File No:                                  SR111210

Responsible Officer:           Acting Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Facilities Management Unit Manager

Report

It is proposed that the following item be considered in closed session.

Recommendation

 

 

THAT Council resolve to close the meeting to members of the public for the purpose of considering details relating to the following, in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989:

 

(d)       contractual matters

 

12.3.2  Irrinet System Service and Support - Contract 2014-30 - Contract Extension

File No:                                  193120

Responsible Officer:           Acting Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Parks Maintenance Supervisor

Report

It is proposed that the following item be considered in closed session.

Recommendation

 

 

THAT Council resolve to close the meeting to members of the public for the purpose of considering details relating to the following, in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989:

 

(d)       contractual matters

 

12.3.3  Provision of Concrete Maintenance Works Contract No 2016-186 - Tender Evaluation

File No:                                  2016-18

Responsible Officer:           Acting Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Acting Manager City Presentation

Report

It is proposed that the following item be considered in closed session.

Recommendation

 

 

THAT Council resolve to close the meeting to members of the public for the purpose of considering details relating to the following, in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989:

 

(d)       contractual matters

 

12.3.4  2016-62 Provision of Mechanical Services Maintenance Tender Evaluation

File No:                                  2016-62

Responsible Officer:           Acting Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Facilities Management Unit Manager

Report

It is proposed that the following item be considered in closed session.

Recommendation

 

 

THAT Council resolve to close the meeting to members of the public for the purpose of considering details relating to the following, in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989:

 

(d)       contractual matters

 


12.3.5  Hanson Landfill Services Agreement 1986 (Amended) Provision of Tip Vouchers - Contract Variation

File No:                                  140605

Responsible Officer:           Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Acting Director City Transport & Presentation

Report

It is proposed that the following item be considered in closed session.

Recommendation

 

 

THAT Council resolve to close the meeting to members of the public for the purpose of considering details relating to the following, in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989:

 

(d)       contractual matters

 

12.4     Corporate Services

12.4.1  Provision of Bill Payment Services Contract 2017-13 Tender Evaluation

File No:                                  2017-13

Responsible Officer:           Director Corporate Services

Author:                                  Team Leader Revenue Services

Report

It is proposed that the following item be considered in closed session.

Recommendation

 

 

THAT Council resolve to close the meeting to members of the public for the purpose of considering details relating to the following, in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989:

 

(d)       contractual matters

 


12.4.2  Panel Contract Expenditure Distribution

File No:                                  171650

Responsible Officer:           Director Corporate Services

Author:                                  Team Leader Procurement

Report

It is proposed that the following item be considered in closed session.

Recommendation

 

 

THAT Council resolve to close the meeting to members of the public for the purpose of considering details relating to the following, in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989:

 

(d)       contractual matters

  

12.5     Partnerships & Engagement

Nil Reports


 

12.6     Executive Services

12.6.1  MEETINGS OF THE ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 8 MAY TO 21 MAY 2017

File No:                                  800650

Responsible Officer:           Acting Chief Executive Officer

Author:                                  Executive Assistant to Acting Chief Executive Officer

Report

It is proposed that the following item be considered in closed session.

Recommendation

 

 

THAT Council resolve to close the meeting to members of the public for the purpose of considering details relating to the following, in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989:

 

(h)       Any other matter which the Council or special committee considers would prejudice the Council or any person

 

12.6.2  MEETINGS OF THE ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 22 MAY TO 16 JUNE 2017

File No:                                  800650

Responsible Officer:           Acting Chief Executive Officer

Author:                                  Executive Assistant to Acting Chief Executive Officer

Report

It is proposed that the following item be considered in closed session.

Recommendation

 

 

THAT Council resolve to close the meeting to members of the public for the purpose of considering details relating to the following, in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989:

 

(h)       Any other matter which the Council or special committee considers would prejudice the Council or any person

  


 

 

13.       Closure