Logo_Primary_BlackWhite%20(JPG)

Agenda

 

OF Ordinary
COUNCIL MEETING

HELD ON

Tuesday 29 August 2017

AT 6.30PM

summons

 

You are advised that a Meeting of Council has been called by the Chief Executive Officer on Tuesday, 29 August 2017 in Council Chamber, 25 Ferres Boulevard, South Morang at 6.30PM for the transaction of the following business.

 

S OVERLAND

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                Tuesday 29 August 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 29 August 2017

 

 

 

SENIOR OFFICERS

 

 

SIMON OVERLAND                          CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

RUSSELL HOPKINS                         DIRECTOR COMMUNITY SERVICES

STEVE O’BRIEN                                DIRECTOR PLANNING AND MAJOR PROJECTS

NICK MANN                                       DIRECTOR CITY TRANSPORT & PRESENTATION

HELEN SUI                                        DIRECTOR CORPORATE SERVICES

LIANA THOMPSON                          DIRECTOR PARTNERSHIPS & ENGAGEMENT

MICHAEL TONTA                              MANAGER GOVERNANCE

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                               Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

 

ORDER OF BUSINESS

 

The Chief Executive Officer submits the following business:

1.            Opening.. 11

1.1         MEETING OPENING AND PRAYER.. 11

1.2         ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF TRADITIONAL OWNERS STATEMENT.. 11

1.3         Present.. 11

2.            Apologies.. 11

3.            Declarations of Interest.. 11

4.            Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meeting.. 11

5.            questions to councillors, Petitions and Joint Letters.. 11

5.1         questions to councillors.. 11

5.2         Petitions.. 11

Nil Reports.. 11

5.2         Joint Letters.. 11

Nil Reports.. 11

6.            Officers' Reports.. 13

6.1         Planning and Major Projects.. 13

6.1.1       Amendment C127: Integrated Water Cycle Management (IWCM) Local Planning Policy.. 13

6.1.2       Cooper St West Position Paper - Addendum Report. 29

6.1.3       425 High Street, Lalor - Amendment. 99

6.2         Community Services.. 137

Nil Reports.. 137

6.3         City Transport and Presentation.. 139

6.3.1       ROAD MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE.. 139

6.3.2       Petition Response to request for street tree removal in Ancona Drive, Mill Park.. 193

6.3.3       Station Street:  Parking and Traffic Management. 203

6.4         Corporate Services.. 211

6.4.1       Review of Procurement Policy.. 211

6.4.2       Committee of Council Recommendation - Lease – Yarra Plenty Regional Library Service – Staff Accommodation.. 233

6.4.3       Certification of 2016-17 Financial Statements and Unconfirmed Minutes of Audit & Risk Committee Meeting.. 237

6.5         Partnerships & Engagement.. 311

6.5.1       Economic Development Strategy.. 311

6.5.2       Participation and Engagement: Approval of Projects proposing the use of external consultants (Quarter 1) 335

6.5.3       Councillor attendance at Interstate Conferences 2017  363

6.5.4       Assemblies of Councillors Report - 29 August 2017. 365

6.6         Executive Services.. 369

Nil Reports.. 369

7.            Notices of Motion.. 371

7.1           NOTICE OF MOTION NO 829 - RESCHEDULING OF SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING TO ELECT THE MAYOR AND DEPUTY MAYOR.. 371

8.            Questions to Officers.. 371

9.            Urgent BusineSS.. 371

10.         Reports from Delegates Appointed BY Council TO Other Bodies.. 371

11.         Questions to CouncillorS will be considered at item 5.1. 371

12.         Confidential Business.. 373

12.1       Planning and Major Projects.. 373

12.1.1    SUPPLY AND INSTALLATION OF SOLAR PV AT VARIOUS COUNCIL BUILDINGS CONTRACT NO. 2017-74 - TENDER EVALUATION REPORT  373

12.1.2    UPGRADE AND EXTENSION OF RGC COOK RESERVE PAVILION CONTRACT 2015-108 - CONTRACT VARIATION REPORT. 375

12.1.3    Proposed development of 127B Gillwell Road, Lalor - Council position.. 377

12.1.4    DETAILED DESIGN OF THE MAIN ST RESERVE PAVILION REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT 2017-80 - TENDER EVALUATION REPORT  379

12.2       Community Services.. 381

12.2.1    Marquee and Equipment hire for Council Events 2013-13 A&B Extension of Contract. 381

12.3       City Transport and Presentation.. 383

12.3.1    Road and Drainage Construction - Queenscliff Road Thomastown - Contract No 2016-151 - Contract Variation   383

12.3.2    Construction of Concrete Deck Overlay and Associated Works.. 385

12.3.3    Maintenance Services to Automatic Doors- Contract No. 2017-47 - Tender Evaluation.. 387

12.4       Corporate Services.. 389

12.4.1    Microsoft Enterprise Licensing Agreement. 389

12.5       Partnerships & Engagement.. 391

Nil Reports.. 391

12.6       Executive Services.. 393

12.6.1    MEETINGS OF THE ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 19 June TO 18 August 2017. 393

13.         Closure.. 395

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

 

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 29 August 2017

 

1.         Opening

1.1       MEETING OPENING AND PRAYER

The 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

            It is noted that a leave of absence has already been granted to:

           

Cr Butler until 25 October 2017; and

Cr Cox until 25 September 2017.

3.         Declarations of Interest

4.         Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meeting

Ordinary Meeting of Council held 8 August 2017

5.         questions to councillors, Petitions and Joint Letters

5.1       questions to councillors

5.2       Petitions

Nil Reports

5.2       Joint Letters

Nil Reports   


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

6.         Officers' Reports

6.1       Planning and Major Projects

6.1.1    Amendment C127: Integrated Water Cycle Management (IWCM) Local Planning Policy

File No:                                  192690

Attachments:                        1        Draft IWCM local planning policy   

Responsible Officer:           Team Leader Strategic Planning Policy

Author:                                  Senior Planning Policy Officer   

 

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

The purpose of this report is to consider proposed Amendment C127 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme and specifically to seek Council’s approval to request that the Minister for Planning authorise Council to prepare and exhibit the amendment.

Proposed Amendment C127 seeks to introduce an Integrated Water Cycle Management (IWCM) Local Planning Policy at Clause 22.03 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

The project was commenced to fulfil key actions contained within Council’s Stormwater Management Plan (2012-2017), in addition to meeting sustainable water management actions outlined in Council’s Environmental Sustainability Strategy (2012-2022) and Green Wedge Management Plan (2011-2021). The project has been made possible through funding received from Melbourne Water’s Living Rivers program.

The primary aim of the policy is to improve sustainable water management in the City of Whittlesea through the planning and development process. The policy proposes to apply to land within the Urban Growth boundary and seeks to:

·    Fill the existing gaps in the planning framework, which currently does not require new buildings, works, as well as commercial and industrial subdivision to meet industry accepted best practice stormwater treatment or consider potable water alternatives. 

·    Strengthen integrated water outcomes for all subdivisions and provide further guidance around the implementation of existing Clause 56.07 (Integrated Water Management) for residential subdivision in the Planning Scheme to better align with Council objectives.

·    Address the cumulative impact of stormwater pollutants from increasing urban development and consolidation, which has resulted in critically poor river health conditions and aquatic ecosystems in the City of Whittlesea.

·    Deliver a net community benefit through improvements to environmental conditions, liveability, and water security.

Twelve other Councils already have similar local planning policies in place that address stormwater issues.

A local planning policy only applies in instances when a planning permit application is already required by the Planning Scheme. To support the proposed amendment, two background documents have been prepared: the Strategic Rationale and Implementation Guide. It is proposed that these documents will support the exhibition of the Amendment.

It is recommended that Council resolve to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit proposed Amendment C127 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

INTRODUCTION

Council officers have developed a new Integrated Water Cycle Management (IWCM) local planning policy (Attachment 1) that is proposed to be introduced into Clause 22.03 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme via Amendment C127.

This report provides the background to the development of the policy, a summary of the policy’s content and application, and a discussion of key matters regarding implementation. The report seeks approval to request that the Minister for Planning authorise Council to prepare and exhibit proposed Amendment C127.

BACKGROUND

The policy is aligned with key strategic directions for water management outlined in the following Council adopted plans/strategies:

·    The City of Whittlesea Stormwater Management Plan (2012-2017)

·    The City of Whittlesea Environmental Sustainability Strategy (2012-2022)

·    The City of Whittlesea Green Wedge Management Plan (2011-2021)

Specifically, the IWCM local policy will assist Council in meeting the following principles and actions outlined in the City of Whittlesea Stormwater Management Plan (2012-2017):

·    Principle WP1: Urban development maintains predevelopment quality and quantity runoff characteristics where possible, minimising the direct connection of impervious surfaces to a drainage network. Where this is not feasible, stormwater is treated to Victorian best practice standards. 

·    Principle WP2: Council applies Integrated Water Management principles by considering stormwater management in parallel with demand for water and available supply of other water classes, such as wastewater and potable water, making use of opportunities for fit-for-purpose reuse where possible.

·    Action W2: Integrate considerations of stormwater treatment, capture, reuse and alternative water supply as per principles WP1 and WP2 into internal land use planning processes, such as the preparation of Local Structure Plans, and in contributions to external land use planning processes, such as the development of Framework and Precinct Structure Plans (PSP).

·    Action W6: Pursue amendments to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme and/or implement additional planning permit requirements to achieve best practice in stormwater management (as per Principle WP1) via water sensitive urban design (WSUD) techniques in specific development contexts.

The policy also represents a proactive response to Council’s obligations under the Waters of Victoria: State Environmental Protection Policies (SEPP) and follows other local Councils that have introduced stormwater management and WSUD local planning policies in recent years.

The new IWCM local planning policy seeks to improve sustainable water management in various planning and development settings. The policy provides a clear pathway to assist applicants in meeting best practice standards for stormwater onsite.

Additionally, the policy contains objectives around the implementation of IWCM in the development process. Integrated water cycle management considers all aspects of the water cycle and, specifically, considers the use of potable water alternatives such as rainwater and stormwater to supply non-potable water for purposes such as laundry and watering gardens assisting in overall reduction in drinking water consumption.

The IWCM policy and practice project has been made possible through funding received from Melbourne Water’s Living Rivers program that seeks to build capacity within local governments to plan for, and deliver, stormwater and river health improvements. Council officers have been working closely with Melbourne Water throughout the course of the project and will endeavour to share the results of the project with other grant recipient Councils and growth area municipalities.

 

WHAT IS INTEGRATED WATER CYCLE MANAGEMENT (IWCM)

Integrated Water Cycle Management (IWCM) is an approach to urban planning and water management that utilises all available water resources including rainwater, stormwater and wastewater in ways that best deliver liveable, sustainable and productive communities. The goal of IWCM is to optimise all areas within the water cycle to satisfy human and environmental objectives (CSIRO, 1999).

A subset of IWCM is Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD), however it only relates to stormwater treatment and works to improve stormwater quality, flow rates and acts on flood mitigation. IWCM on the other hand considers all elements of the water cycle – stormwater, potable water, and wastewater.

The major drivers for undertaking IWCM at the City of Whittlesea include:

·    Planning for climate and potential water scarcity;

·    Planning for population growth and demands on potable water supply;

·    Managing waterway decline; and

·    Reducing water supply cost.

As a designated growth area the City of Whittlesea must plan for and deliver new communities and infrastructure. Utilising the water cycle is a key way to deliver enhanced liveability outcomes through new developments, such as: reintroducing water into the landscape, increasing green open space and canopy cover, creating recreational links, and reducing the urban heat island effect. Water security concerns were identified during the last Victorian drought including the community impact of active open space areas not being able to be used due to water restrictions. The policy will be a small step towards addressing the City of Whittlesea’s vulnerabilities to future climate shocks and stresses.

EXISTING MECHANISMS IN MANAGING WATER ISSUES IN DEVELOPMENT

There are a range of mechanisms used in Victoria to manage water issues in urban development and they are outlined below.

Melbourne Water Drainage Schemes

A drainage scheme is a catchment-based drainage strategy outlining the functional designs of the relevant proposed regional infrastructure required to service urban growth. They have been generally applied to all of Council’s Structure Plan areas. These include conceptual designs for works such as pipelines, overland flow paths, retarding basins, wetlands, floodways and other drainage and water quality treatment measures. Melbourne Water manages the implementation of drainage schemes generally by recouping the infrastructure costs through financial contributions paid by developers or direct in-lieu provision of works.

The drainage scheme is the mechanism that facilitates financial contributions paid when development occurs. All developable properties in greenfield pay a drainage contribution on the basis of the development size and the development at time of subdivision. Contributions include a hydraulic component which funds flood protection works, and a water quality component which funds water quality treatment works. Generally most scheme works are constructed by developers, who are then reimbursed from the contributions received in the scheme. The schemes provide regional infrastructure to service the broader scheme area based on density and potential water flows contained within the respective drainage strategy.


 

Whittlesea Planning Scheme – Clause 56.07 Integrated Water Management (Rescode)

State Planning Provision Clause 56.07 sets out the IWCM requirements that must be met in residential subdivision in an urban area. Clause 56.07 requires the provision of drinking water, waste water systems and urban stormwater management systems to all lots created in a subdivision. Specifically, it requires that all residential subdivisions to meet the performance objectives within the Urban Stormwater Best Practice Environmental Management guidelines (BPEM) to protect downstream receiving waters. The BPEM Guidelines sets targets for total nitrogen, total phosphorous, suspended solids, litter and flow in stormwater. The BPEM Guidelines are an industry accepted tool used to assess the impact that a development will have on stormwater quality and quantity. It also requires the provision of reused and recycled water systems where a site is in one of the areas where the water authority requires a dual water reticulation system.

The provisions do not apply to commercial and industrial subdivisions, or buildings and works applications.

Melbourne Water’s Stormwater Offset Contribution

Stormwater offset contributions are paid by developers to reduce the impacts of stormwater pollution from urban developments. Also known as a payment-in-lieu system, it is a financial contribution paid by residential developers to Melbourne Water for necessary stormwater management works to be undertaken offsite in another location, if they don’t meet their stormwater objectives set out in Clause 56.07 discussed above. These works ‘offset’ stormwater impacts not treated within the development.  Primarily for areas outside of drainage schemes, stormwater offset contributions are accepted only with consent from the respective Council.

Unfortunately in established areas, due to the difficulties in acquiring land for the offsite infrastructure, it is not unusual that the payments collected are often used to fund regional assets in a different catchment or municipality from where the development occurs.  In this context the proposed policy is seeking on-site IWCM infrastructure which will effectively minimise these offset contributions and minimise the additional burden on the stormwater catchment caused by intensification of an urban area.

Development Contribution Plan Overlay (DCPO)

A DCPO schedule in the Planning Scheme gives effect to a development contribution plan (DCP), which specifies payments to be made or in-kind works, facilities or services to be provided by developers towards the supply of infrastructure required to meet the future needs of the community. Whittlesea Planning Scheme currently has 13 DCPO schedules, including DCPO Schedule 3 which was specifically established to fund dedicated drainage infrastructure projects across the established areas.  Currently areas affected by DCPO3 pay a levy based on total site area in residential development, or on additional impervious floor area for non-residential development. This money is then used to implement drainage projects within these areas. The aim is to provide a contribution to the cost and upgrade of existing underground piped drainage infrastructure impacted by intensification of developments. 

LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES

To date, 12 Melbourne metropolitan Councils have elected to introduce a local planning policy to manage water cycle matters. They have some form of policies related to IWCM or WSUD in place:

·    Seven of these Councils, including Bayside, Moonee Valley, Port Phillip, Stonnington, Yarra, Monash, and Melbourne City Council, have adopted a WSUD based, Local Planning Policy;

·    A IWCM based local planning policy has been introduced by the City of Hume for industrial subdivisions, using the BPEM Guidelines as a performance standard;

·    Monash and four other Councils including Darebin, Manningham, Moreland, and Whitehorse have each put in place a local policy on Environmental Sustainable Development which includes an IWCM component.

Such local planning policies are different from the other mechanisms discussed above, in that:

·    the policies do not impose a levy;

·    the policies are applied to various levels of development, including buildings and works, and not restricted to residential subdivision only;

·    the policies recognised the cumulative, regional impact of development within each site, and focus on an onsite solution; and

·    some of the policies seek to facilitate and provide guidance on water recycling and reuse.

These other Council’s policies have been used as a basis for the development of the proposed local policy proposed as part of Amendment C127, as they reflect a model that is familiar to the development industry and is considered current best practice.

PROPOSED DRAFT PLANNING POLICY

Why do we need an IWCM Local Policy

The draft IWCM local planning policy is informed by extensive scoping and research activities undertaken by project officers.

While there is high level reference in the State Planning Policy Framework of the Planning Scheme on IWCM elements, the main guidance to decision making by Council is limited to Clause 56.07 Integrated Water Management which refers to the Urban Stormwater Best Practice Environmental Management guidelines (BPEM). These provisions only relate to residential subdivision.

The proposed policy is required to fill the policy gap that currently exists, in that Council is unable to consider IWCM matters in permit applications for “buildings and works”, such as multi-unit developments. In relation to subdivision, the policy will apply to industrial and commercial subdivisions which are not currently considered by Clause 56.07 relating to residential subdivision. It is important to note that the policy does not duplicate the existing State provisions but rather provide policy guidance where guidance is absent or inadequate within the scheme.

The following issues have been identified as part of this IWCM project: 

·    Continual intensification of development within the established areas will put increasing pressure on existing drainage infrastructure that are difficult to address offsite due to lack of additional open space to establish regional infrastructure to cater for it.

·    Concerns about the health of the waterways, particularly in relation to contamination from industrial development and urban intensification;

·    Demand for potable water will continue to increase due to development pressure, while wastewater will increase significantly without being captured and reused.

·    Lost opportunities to deal with the entire water cycle using an integrated whole of water cycle management approach.

·    Policy guidance on IWCM among the State and Council documents has not been translated into tools to assist in decision making in the Planning Scheme.

·    Clause 56.07 Integrated Water Management does not adequately address stormwater issues in the City of Whittlesea;

·    No planning provisions that enable Council to address stormwater in non-subdivision applications, or for non-residential development (e.g. Industrial and commercial developments);

·    Lost opportunities to better encourage reduction of wastewater and use of potable water, especially in large scale subdivision.

A Baseline Data report was developed to provide evidence of the impact on river health in the City of Whittlesea. It highlighted the following issues:

·    Potable water consumption is currently high and pressure will increase without proportional increase of supply in the foreseeable future;

·    Stormwater and wastewater is being underutilised;

·    Industrial areas have a direct and measurable link to poor stormwater and river health;

·    The municipality’s four major watercourses are rated as “poor” to “very poor” in urbanised areas and are in critical conditions.

This data is corroborated in Council’s Stormwater Management Plan and underscores the urgent need for intervention to ensure that new development is meeting best practice in stormwater runoff and flow mitigation.

A Recommendation Report and draft local planning policy were subsequently prepared to address the issues identified. The proposed draft local policy will:

·    Improve stormwater performance for developments that are not currently subject to the performance based targets specified in the BPEM Guidelines, such as commercial and industrial subdivisions, as well as buildings and works (e.g. multi-unit development).

·    Specify standard tools used by the industry for assessment, and deem-to-comply solutions to minimise design and financial burden on developers in small-to-medium scale development.

·    Build capacity in climate adaptation and water security, by promoting consideration of these issues by permit applicants through the planning process, in particular to consider the provision of potable water alternatives and harvesting and reuse schemes, especially in subdivision in the growth areas.

·    Emulate existing and adopted, best-practice decision-making tools employed by other Councils.

These issues are reflected in the Strategic Rationale document, which will accompany the exhibition of the proposed local policy. 

Expert Peer Review and Implementation Tools

An expert planning peer review of the draft IWCM policy was undertaken by specialist consultants, which made the following key recommendations below:

·    Ensure that the City of Whittlesea draft IWCM policy is in line with other stormwater local planning policies already adopted by other Metropolitan Melbourne Councils, in particular the Moonee Valley stormwater policy that has most recently been tested at a Planning Panel Hearing. This allows for consistency with other policies and ensures that the City of Whittlesea is in line with current best practice and accepted policy approaches.

·    Policy triggers to be aligned with all new buildings and works requiring a permit to ensure an equitable and effective policy application.

·    Include a list of specific permit conditions to ensure ongoing maintenance and greater detail around handover testing for those assets that will come into Council ownership. 

Generally all recommendations including those listed above have been reflected in the draft policy.

DISCUSSION

Summary of policy elements

The Clause 22.03 policy has been developed in accordance with the State Government planning practice note Writing a Local Planning Policy (PPN08), and in consultation with DELWP. The policy outlines a policy basis, objectives, specific policy provisions, application requirements, decision guidelines and reference documents.

To date, 12 other Melbourne metropolitan Councils already have some form of policies related to IWCM or WSUD in place, reflecting the best practice adopted across Victoria.

The policy basis outlines the City of Whittlesea local context and the need for the policy, including the impacts of rapid urbanisation on stormwater quality and quantity, the declining health of receiving waterways, and the demands being placed on potable water supply through population growth.  

The policy objectives include the Urban Stormwater Best Practice Environmental Management (BPEM) Guidelines (CSIRO) The BPEM Guidelines are the key performance standard applied in the policy and applicants must show how they meet these best practice standards.

Specific policy statements provide the following guidance:

·    Require applicants to provide for the achievement of the best practice performance objectives;

·    Require all applications to demonstrate an IWCM response which considers how potable water consumption and stormwater runoff may be minimised;

·    Encourage the use of measures to prevent litter being carried off-site in stormwater flows;

·    A list of proposed preferred IWCM treatment types;

·    Guideline on how the policy will apply in conjunction with Clause 56.07 (Integrated Water Management) provisions for residential subdivisions.

Decision guidelines are included to demonstrate how Council will give specific consideration to a particular issue or fact, and provide further information on how Council will exercise its discretion when considering an application.

How and where does the policy apply

The policy identifies a vision and set of objectives for the approach to IWCM in the City of Whittlesea in line with the general trend for IWCM in Victoria;

The policy will apply to planning permit applications for the following types of development within the Urban Growth Boundary:

·    Most new buildings and works, including multi-unit developments;

·    Extensions to existing buildings that are 50 square metres in floor area or greater;

·    Most residential, commercial, and industrial subdivisions that are not currently covered in Clause 56.07 under the State provisions in the Planning Scheme.

It is important to note the following:

·    The policy exempts some types of development, such as outbuilding normal to a dwelling.

·    The proposed local policy does not trigger a requirement for planning permit in its own right, but will guide decision making only where a planning permit is required, to ensure consideration of IWCM matters.

·    The policy does not affect single dwelling construction where no permit is required, which includes dwellings on lots over 300m2 in most residential zones or dwellings in the Urban Growth Zone subject to the Small Lot Housing Code.

·    As a local planning policy, if an application has no direct impact on IWCM, officers will have the discretion to not consider or apply the policy in decision making.

 

How will applications be assessed

Permit applications which ‘trigger’ the policy should submit an IWCM Response, to be assessed against the decision guidelines in the policy as part of the decision making process. The IWCM Response will explain how the proposal has considered and dealt with the water management matters.

To assist applicants and also decision making by Council, consultants were engaged to develop a suite of tools to aid in the implementation of the local policies which include:

·    IWCM Response Guideline

·    Case studies

·    Example IWCM Response

·    Deemed to Comply Rainwater Tank and Raingarden Sizes

These tools have been incorporated into the Implementation Guide to support the Amendment process, and to be used by officers and applicants to assist in application and assessment.

It is noted that the policy has been drafted so as not to outline all possible development scenarios and corresponding IWCM responses, to give the flexibility required in different development contexts.

Where a permit application for subdivision in a growth area has already provided an IWCM solution that considers the future development scenario and the specific site constraints and opportunities, future planning permit applications for buildings and works in the subdivision (e.g. single dwelling) will not be expected to provide further IWCM measures. This will need to be detailed in an IWCM Response which states that these measures are already in place, and it will be considered by officers. In the established areas, buildings and works that increase impervious surface are usually approved prior to subdivision, therefore the specific IWCM solution is expected to be developed at the planning permit stage for the buildings and works.

PROCESS AND PRACTICE IMPROVEMENTS

In addition to developing the policy, the project also identified a number of process and practice matters that relate to internal communications and referral processes, high level strategic planning approaches, and external agency communications amongst other matters. Further training for Council engineers and planners, as well as feedback to be gathered following the implementation of the policy, will help to address any outstanding implementation issues and provide feedback on continual improvement needed to meet Council’s objectives in regard to IWCM. It is noted that several departments across Council will have carriage of these actions and be responsible for their ongoing implementation. 


 

PRACTICAL IMPLICATION OF THE POLICY

In practice, for most new residential developments, there will be no or minimal impact to building cost associated with the site-based IWCM measures, as the mandatory 6-star energy saving standard in the building regulations already requires either a solar water booster or a rainwater tank.

The local policy will better equip new developments within established areas with site-based IWCM measures (e.g. rainwater tank or raingarden) for occupants, and provide stronger policy support to implement water harvesting and recycling opportunities in growth areas subdivisions.

The Implementation Guide has outlined case studies that demonstrate some of the capital costs associated with IWCM measures which will progressively be recouped through cheaper water bills, over the lifecycle of the assets (e.g. rainwater tank and/or raingarden).

CRITICAL DATES

If Authorisation from the Minister for Planning is granted, it is likely that the exhibition of the Amendment will commence in October 2017 for a period of four weeks.

Officers will report to Council on the results of the exhibition process, and if no submissions are received a recommendation will be made to Council to approve the Amendment. If submissions are received and remain unresolved, then Council officers will request that a Planning Panel Hearing be established.

CONSULTATION

Informal external consultation was undertaken to inform the development of this policy. These agencies include:

·    Melbourne Water – river health and development group

·    DELWP

·    Former Office of Living Victoria (OLV)

·    Merri Creek Management Committee (MCMC) and Darebin Creek Management Committee (DCMC)

Melbourne water has expressed support for this policy.

Internal consultation was also undertaken with multiple Council departments. Involved in this project, including: Strategic Planning and Design, Sustainability Planning, City Presentation, Development Assessment, Parks and Open Space, Development Engineering, and Environmental Operations.

A final review of the policy was conducted by City Design and Presentation. The relevant departments including Development Engineering and City Design and Transport are very supportive of the policy.

Policy strategy and legislation

The development of the policy is supported by the following:

State Planning Policy Framework

The following sections of the State Planning Policy Framework support and inform the Amendment:

·    Clause 14.02-1 Catchment Planning and Management which seeks to assist the protection and, where possible, restoration of catchment, waterways, water bodies, groundwater, and marine environment.

·    Clause 14.02-2 Water Quality which seeks to protect water quality.

·    Clause 56.07 Integrated Water Management is contained with the residential subdivision Clause 56 of the Victoria Planning Provisions. Clause 56.07 requires all new residential subdivisions to meet current BPEM objectives through the design and management of stormwater systems. Clause 56.07 replies to residential subdivision only.

State Strategy, Legislation and Guidelines

The following legislation and guidelines support and inform the Amendment:

·    State Environment Protection Policy (SEPP) is a statutory policy under Section 16 of the Environment Protection Act 1970.

·    Water for Victoria is a recent strategic water plan developed the State Government that recognises the impact of population growth, climate change, and reducing water storage to the Victorian community.

·    Urban Stormwater Best Practice Environmental Management Guidelines (CSIRO, 1999)

Local Plans, Policies and Strategies

·    City of Whittlesea Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) (2012-2017) The SWMP outlines a program of action to mitigate the threats posed by urban stormwater runoff to the City’s waterways.

·    The City of Whittlesea Environmental Sustainability Strategy (2012-2022) (ESS)

The ESS sets overarching policy directions and approaches to environmental sustainability across seven priority areas: water, land, climate change, biodiversity, urban development and the built environment, waste management and resource recovery, and change strategies. The proposed IWCM policy Amendment C127 fulfils the Policy Direction W1 in the ESS to utilise and strengthen the relevant planning tools and policy mechanisms to conserve water resources and protect local waterways and catchment.

·    The City of Whittlesea Green Wedge Management Plan (2011-2021) (GWMP)

The GWMP identifies a vision and recommends actions for the sustainable use of Whittlesea’s rural land, and recognizes that the rural land supports various land uses and activities. The document provides specific direction in relation to water to ensure protection for watercourses through appropriate land management and planning scheme action, utilising WSUD, and maintaining partnerships that will assist in improving stream health and water quality.

·    Whittlesea Planning Scheme         

The Whittlesea Planning Scheme recognises the need for best practice environmental management of waterways via the following clauses in the Municipal Strategic Statement. At this time, there are no local planning policies that specify how these objectives are to be met, or explicitly consider stormwater management. The proposed IWCM policy will fill this gap.

Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.05 (Environmental and Landscape Values).

Rescode for Residential Subdivision Clause 56.07-04 Integrated Water Management / Urban Run-off Management)

 


 

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

COUNCIL PRIORITY:          Planning and Infrastructure

Future Direction                   Places and spaces to connect people

Theme                                   Planning our space

Strategic Objective              Urban design helps build our connection to place, the natural environment and the community

 

The proposed Amendment C127 fulfils the strategic objective by referencing and implementing the Environmental Sustainability Strategy. The Environmental Sustainability Strategy directs Council officers to utilise and strengthen the relevant planning tools and policy mechanisms to conserve water resources and protect local waterways and catchment.

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 IWCM policy represents a proactive response to meet Council’s obligations under the State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs), and to address an issue that has been earmarked in the following Council strategic policies/strategies since 2011:

·    The City of Whittlesea Stormwater Management Plan (2012-2017)

·    The City of Whittlesea Environmental Sustainability Strategy (2012-2022)

·    The City of Whittlesea Green Wedge Management Plan (2011-2021); and

The IWCM policy is important for City of Whittlesea because the significant amount of development that currently takes place in both established and growth areas which will/can have a cumulative impact on stormwater pollutants and consequently on the already stressed aquatic ecosystems, as well as the amenity and liveability values of local waterways and Port Phillip Bay.

The delivery of the IWCM policy will lead to a number of benefits to the whole community. Firstly, environmental, infrastructure and amenity benefits will be achieved through reduced runoff being discharged into local waterways. Potential damage to public and private assets will also be reduced through flood mitigation. The costs in implementing the WSUD or IWCM assets through the planning process will be partially offset by the savings to landowners and the community in lower water bills. Planning permit applicants will also benefit from greater guidance and consistency in assessing planning application, as well as from the policy ensuring that stormwater, potable water and wastewater are considered in the early stages of a project. 

The IWCM policy provides an invaluable pathway for the City of Whittlesea to improve the Planning Scheme that currently contains limited tools to enable stormwater improvements and potable water alternatives in new developments. It will assist in future proofing the municipality against an uncertain climate future, in addition to improving liveability for current and future residents.  

The policy has undergone a process of consultation with internal stakeholders and relevant external departments. To ensure best practice in the drafting of the policy and adequate guidance for applicants, the draft policy has been peer reviewed and an Implementation Guide prepared.

It is recommended that Council resolve to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit the Amendment, and to proceed with the public exhibition.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Obtain Authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit Amendment C127 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme;

2.       Prepare and exhibit a Planning Scheme Amendment if Authorisation is provided by the Minister for Planning.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

6.1.2    Cooper St West Position Paper - Addendum Report

File No:                                  166310

Attachments:                        1        Attachment 1 -Schedule of Changes to Cooper Street West Position Paper (June 2017)

2        Attachment 2 - Site Locality Plan - Sites Monitored

3        Attachment 3 - Amended Cooper Street West Position Paper (August 2017)   

Responsible Officer:           Manager Strategic Planning & Design

Author:                                  Principal Policy Planner   

 

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

The purpose of this report is to respond to Council’s resolution of 27 June 2017.

The Cooper Street West Position Paper was presented and adopted by Council on 27 June 2017.  At this meeting, the resolution also formally requested Council officers undertake further reporting to ensure that a reduction from the 500 metre default buffer (for identified sites under certain development conditions) does not pose any risk to Council.

This report provides further details as to how landfill buffers affect the Cooper Street Precinct, the distances and encroachment measures and the recommendations made by an independent consultant on landfill gas buffers for selected sites in the Cooper Street West Precinct. The report details how the closed landfill gas buffer recommendations will be managed and implemented through the Cooper Street West Position Paper.

In addition, this report outlines how airborne (odour and dust) buffers are applied throughout the precinct and how these are managed in the Cooper Street West Position Paper.  To reflect the importance of the waste and resource recovery industry to the Precinct and the continued support for these industries, this report recommends changes to the adopted Cooper Street West Position Paper (June 2017) to include additional references to the relevant EPA Publications for airborne buffers for the purposes of further strengthening Council’s position in relation to waste and resource recovery uses.

INTRODUCTION

This report responds to Council’s resolution on the 27 June 2017 seeking further reporting on the implications of reducing the default buffers applied to Closed Landfills that trigger a land fill gas risk assessment under EPA 788.2. (Environmental Management (Siting, Design, Operation and Rehabilitation of Landfills). It outlines how the Closed landfill buffers are applied, the recommendations of the Cardno report and the recommended implementation of the report to manage risk to Council, as outlined in the Cooper Street West Position Paper.

This report also outlines the requirements for airborne buffers which provides a separation distance from sensitive uses and thus supports a number of the existing industries within the precinct.  This report recommends changes to the Cooper Street West Position Paper (June 2017) to include greater guidance for managing airborne buffers and existing/future waste and resource facilities (see Attachment 1 for Schedule of Changes).


 

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the Cooper Street West Position Paper was to establish Council’s position with respect to the future use and development of land in the precinct.  The Cooper Street area is west of the Craigieburn Bypass.  The Cooper Street West area is bounded by O’Herns Rd to the north, Hume Freeway to the east, Cooper St to the south and the Merri Creek to the west. 

Cooper Street is the remaining land in the broader Cooper Street Employment Area yet to be planned.  The precinct is important as the demand for employment land within the precinct is creating more interest and demand in Cooper Street West.  Due to the Precinct’s complex history, including quarrying and landfilling, a Position Paper was prepared to provide greater certainty for landowners and potential developers.  The paper informs landholders and potential developers of Council’s position and outlines the key planning considerations to be addressed. This strategic work is also designed to contribute to Council’s target of one job per household.

The Position Paper was developed in consultation with a number of state agencies, including the Environment Protection Authority, VicRoads and Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning.

The Draft Position Paper was released for public comment in April 2016 where there was general support, with only minor changes arising from the consultation process.  A key change related to maintaining support for waste and resource recovery industries to continue in their current/location within the Precinct into the long term, recognising that technological advancements in this area support the location of these industries in urbanised environments. Further changes were made in response to recommendations made by Cardno Pty Ltd who conducted a Landfill Gas Buffer Assessment in relation to Council’s Closed landfills following advice received from the Environment Protection Authority. 

It is important to note that the Position Paper is not a statutory document; all planning proposals are required to be assessed under the Planning and Environment Act and other relevant legislation.  The Position Paper simply outlines some of the matters that Council will be taking into account when considering the merits of a rezoning request or development application.  In this context it is also worth noting that all waste and resource recovery uses (either existing or future uses) must comply with relevant environmental legislation to minimise off-site odour, dust or noise impacts on sensitive uses. 

DISCUSSION

At the Council meeting of the 27 June 2017, the Cooper Street West Position Paper was presented and adopted by Council.  There was discussion at the Council meeting around the implications of supporting a reduction in the default 500 metres closed landfill buffer to three properties within the precinct that were subject to a landfill gas risk assessment conducted by Cardno Pty Ltd.  Council resolved at this meeting, to request Council officers “undertake a further report to ensure that a reduction from the 500 metre buffer does not pose any risk to Council.”  This is discussed in further detail in the following section.

There are two types of buffers – Closed landfill buffers and buffers for odour and dust emissions.  These buffers exist to reduce the risk to human health however they have different legislative requirements and they apply differently (ie. to ‘buildings and structures or ‘sensitive uses’).  Each of these is explained separately below.

a)         Closed Landfill Buffer

Landfill buffers apply to both active and closed landfills.  Areas of former landfill that have ceased operation are subject to “closed landfill” buffers which apply to 3 closed landfills (2 putrescible and 1 solid inert) to any “building or structure”, including industrial development and sensitive uses.  These buffers address the potential risk of subsurface landfill gas migration.  The key risks to sites adjoining closed landfills include: gas migration, leachate entering the ground water and land instability, and to a lesser extent odour. 

The EPA Closed Landfill Guidelines (December 2012) identify that it takes approximately 30 years for landfills to decompose.  Given the age of Council’s landfills which have been closed between 13-26 years, EPA advised that Council, as owners of the closed landfills, should consider conducting landfill gas risk assessments to determine the level of landfill gas risk on surrounding properties.

It is important to note that ‘closed landfill’ buffers are different to the buffers that apply to ‘active landfills’ where the main environmental risk is odour.  The active landfill buffers apply to minimise the impact of landfills on sensitive uses.     

Closed Landfill buffer distances and encroachment

The EPA guidelines advise that any proposed developments and any works within the recommended closed landfill buffer is considered a potential safety risk by potentially providing preferential pathways for landfill gas migration, or providing an environment where landfill gases can accumulate to dangerous levels.  These risks can remain for at least 30 years post-closure.  The default landfill buffer is 500 metres from the landfill or the edge of the property.

Where the proposed development or planning scheme amendment would have the effect of allowing any development, buildings or works to encroach into the default closed landfill buffer area or increases the extent of development within the already encroached buffer area, EPA recommends that the planning or responsible authority require an environmental audit be conducted under Section 53V of the Environment Protection Act. A 53V audit can be avoided if other relevant information is provided.  The purpose of the 53V audit is to assess the risk of harm to the proposed development posed by the potential offsite migration of landfill gas and amenity impacts resulting from the closed landfill.

The EPA advised that depending on the age and nature of the closed Landfills, the default buffers which are applied to all closed landfills could be unnecessarily onerous for surrounding land holders.  Council, as the owners of the landfills, should consider conducting a landfill gas buffer assessment to determine whether the default buffers can be reduced if the landfill gas risk is low.

Based on the advice of the EPA, Council engaged Cardno Pty Ltd to prepare a Landfill Gas Buffer Assessment for the closed landfills within Cooper Street West Precinct.  The methodology conducted by Cardno in preparing the report has been reviewed and endorsed by the EPA.

Cardno Report Recommendations

The following properties are affected by the default buffers of closed landfills: 15 and 25 Vearings Rd, 315 O’Herns Rd, 410 Cooper St, 260 O’Herns Rd, 330 O’Herns Rd, 605 O’Herns Rd and 490 Cooper St.

However, only the following sites were monitored as these were determined to be the least constrained and most likely to be redeveloped: 410 Cooper St, 315 O’Herns Rd, 25 Vearings Rd.  (see Attachment 2 – Site Locality Plan _Sites Monitored). The following sites affected by buffers but were not monitored for the following reasons: 490 Cooper St – Ecological Values, Council owned land earmarked for Open Space, 605 O’Herns Rd – High Ecological Values, 375 O’Herns Rd – Active Quarry Operations, 330 O’Herns Rd – Environmental Offsets.

Landfill gas bores were drilled within 100 metres of Cooper Street Landfill boundaries (eastern boundary of 480 Cooper St, eastern and northern boundaries of 335-355 O’Herns Rd and northern boundary of 490 Cooper St Epping) to assess the potential for Land Fill Gas (LFG) to be present at these locations and whether the buffer distance could be reduced from the default 500m.  Twelve bores were installed on 3 sites with 3 LFG monitoring events conducted on each LFG bore.  The report summarised that whilst there is some LFG present on the 3 sites within 100m of the boundaries of the Cooper Street Landfills, it is at low concentrations, and does not appear to be under considerable driving pressure that would result in any significant LFG migration.

The Report (Landfill Gas Buffer Assessment 15 and 25 Vearings Rd, 315 O’Herns Rd and 410 Cooper St Epping V160682G Report 01.3) found that that the three sites monitored to be very low to low risk. 

The Report recommended that based on the LFG monitoring results the default closed landfill buffer could be reduced from 500m to 100m for the following sites: 315 O’Herns Rd, 410 Cooper Street, 15 and 25 Vearings Rd Epping.

The Report recommends:          

-     beyond 100m of the property boundaries of the Cooper St Landfills (at 410 Cooper St, 315 O’Herns Rd and 25 Vearings Rd) – no further LFG assessments, LFGRA and no mitigation measures are required (subject to a number of development assumptions) as discussed below.

-     within 100m of the property boundaries of the Cooper St Landfills (at 410 Cooper St, 315 O’Herns Rd and 25 Vearings Rd) – further LFG assessments and LFGRA are required on a building or site specific basis (prior to development) to show that LFG will not pose a risk (and that mitigation measures are not required) or LFG mitigation measures are required to be provided as recommended in The Report.

The Report is based on a number of assumptions including:

-     the building types are commercial or industrial type buildings and structures as defined in the Report.  It is also assumed that the proposed buildings and structures are unlikely to include any basements or underground car parks.

-     The Report recommendations only relate to proposals for development of land for employment purposes and not for “sensitive” uses. The building type expected to be constructed at the 3 sites are either commercial or industrial type buildings or structures. 

-     If a proposal does not reflect the development assumptions of The Report, then further assessment works will be required by a suitably qualified environmental professional to assess the potential risk from LFG and required mitigation measures.

-     The Report recommendation only relates to the 3 sites monitored, any proposed development proposed on other sites within the 500m buffer of the Cooper St Landfills should include a LFGRA as a precursor to any formal proposal for development/rezoning.

Implementation of closed landfill gas buffer recommendation

Noting the above, the Cooper Street West Position Paper provides a number of recommendations in relation to development within a landfill buffer and the management of any risk to Council in reducing the closed landfill buffer that triggers a landfill gas risk assessment.

To manage any risk to Council, the Cooper Street West Position Paper included the following recommendations for any proposed development within a closed landfill buffer:

·   Ensure that any new development proposal meets the requirements identified in the Best Practice Environmental Management – Siting, design, operation and rehabilitation of landfills (EPA Publication 788.3 August 2015).

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

·   Preliminary environmental site assessments are required prior to the development of employment uses.  Preliminary environmental site assessments of land near landfills are required to determine whether there is potential contamination.  Proposals will be required to propose mitigation of any risks identified and whether an environmental audit is required.

·   Support appropriate development and uses, subject to satisfying the environmental risks and buffers associated with a closed landfill.

·   A Landfill Gas Risk Assessment conducted at 315 O’Herns Rd and 410 Cooper St has identified that there is very low to low gas risk.  The report - Landfill Gas Buffer Assessment 15 and 25 Vearings Rd, 315 O’Herns Rd and 410 Cooper St Epping V160682G Report 01.3 (Cardno, 2017) identifies that for certain developments beyond 100m of the property boundaries of the Cooper Street Landfills (east of 335 O’Herns Rd for sub-precinct 4), no further Landfill Gas Risk Assessment and no mitigation measures are required subject to meeting the recommendations of the report.

·   Any proposed development within 15 and 25 Vearings Road and 315 O’Herns Rd and 410 Cooper St should review the recommendations and data in the Landfill Gas Buffer Assessment 15 and 25 Vearings Rd, 315 O’Herns Rd and 410 Cooper St Epping (V160682GR Report 01.3, Cardno 2017) and engage a suitably qualified expert in Landfill Gas Risk Assessment to determine whether the proposal meets the recommendations for Council consideration.

·   Development proposals should utilise the report - Landfill Gas Buffer Assessment 15 and 25 Vearings Rd, 315 O’Herns Rd and 410 Cooper St Epping (V160682GReport 01.3 (Cardno,2017) for data and recommendations in managing landfill gas risk in the precinct.

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 Report - Landfill Gas Buffer Assessment 15 and 25 Vearings Rd, 315 O’Herns Rd and 410 Cooper St Epping V160682GReport 01.3 (Cardno, 2017).; 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).

These recommendations will ensure that adequate consideration is given to the management of landfill gas risk at the rezoning/development stage.  To provide further surety to Council, the Position Paper could be amended to specify that “technical studies to support rezoning applications prior to authorisation may be required”.

b)         Odour and Dust Buffers for Waste and Resource Recovery Uses

In addition to the Closed landfill buffers discussed above, which primarily relate to landfill gas risk, there are also odours and dust buffers.  The EPA (under EPA Publication 1518) identifies these as “separation distance” buffers to “sensitive uses” which relate to off-site residual odour and dust emissions from industry.  These are outlined in EPA Publication 1518, Recommended Separation Distances for Industrial Residual Air Emissions (EPA Victoria 2015) which aims to:

·   protect human health and wellbeing, local amenity and aesthetic enjoyment

·   protect existing industry from encroachment by sensitive uses

·   prevent land adjacent to industry from being underutilised.

Other regulations and guidance relevant to the consideration of land use separation / buffers include:

·   State Environment Protection Policy (Air Quality Management)

·   State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Noise form Commerce, Industry and Trade) No.N-1

·   The Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008 provides protection from nuisance, including from emissions that are or liable to be dangerous to health or offensive.

The guidelines have been developed to recognise that even with good pollution control technology and practice, there may still be unintended emissions which need to be anticipated and allowed for.  However under the State Environment Protection Policy (Air Quality Management), it is the responsibility of the operator to ensure that off-site impacts from normal, day to day operations are contained within their property, while the recommended separation distances only exist to ensure that unintended or accidental emissions have sufficient distance to dissipate so as not to adversely impact on sensitive uses.

Unlike the closed landfill buffer which apply to all “buildings and structures” to manage landfill gas risks, these other buffers apply to “sensitive uses” to manage off-site amenity impacts and to prevent encroachment of sensitive uses.

A sensitive land use is defined by the EPA as ”Any land uses which require a particular focus on protecting the beneficial uses of the air environment relating to human health and wellbeing, local amenity and aesthetic enjoyment, for example residential premises, child care centres, pre-schools, primary schools, education centres or informal outdoor recreation sites.”

The Whittlesea Planning Scheme also contains “threshold distances” in Clause 52.10 of the Planning Scheme which seeks to ensure that certain industries are designed and located a suitable distance from a “sensitive use” so as not to cause offence or unacceptable risk. The threshold distances generally apply to odour, dust, noise and vibration.

The Cooper Street Position Paper does not seek to vary any of the above separation or threshold distances or remove regulations, policies or guidance relevant to the consideration of land use separation for environmental protection.

Role of green waste facilities and other resource recovery facilities

The Cooper Street West Position Paper provides support for waste resource recovery facilities.  It is recognised that over time, the industry will move towards higher technological processing and be contained ‘in-vessel’ rather than ‘open window’ operations, which will significantly reduce the potential for off-site impacts.

As described above, there are a range of different buffers that apply for different purposes.  Historically green waste facilitates have tended to locate in/near landfills (closed or active) to take advantage of the buffers that apply to landfills to minimise the risk of sensitive uses encroaching on them.

Reducing the Closed landfill buffer (for landfill gas risk) will not result in any sensitive uses being developed closer to these green waste facilities.  On the contrary, the Cooper Street West Position Paper reinforces the precinct’s suitability for future employment/enterprise purposes.  The Position Paper supports the continuing use for waste/resource recovery.  All industries including waste resource recovery industries need to comply with relevant EPA requirements and adopt best practice to minimise off-site impacts.

The Position Paper does not recommend the deviation from any other buffers or separation distances to “sensitive uses”.  Both the Planning and Environment Act and the Whittlesea Planning Scheme require consideration of the environmental impact of proposals on human health, including consideration of EPA’s recommended minimum separation distances. This requirement will still apply and Council will have an opportunity to consider these issues as part of any future rezoning or development application.

Further, the Cooper Street West Position Paper recognises the importance of protecting the existing waste and resource recovery uses in the Cooper Street West area by identifying the following:

·   Recognise the adjoining waste and resource recovery precinct to the west and possible incompatible developments.

·   To recognise the impacts of existing uses on any new developments, including the risk of gas migration, noise, odour and dust emissions.

·   To refer to The Designing, constructing and operating composting facilities EPA Publication 1588 when considering potential changes to land use near the existing composting facility.

·   New development should be designed to mitigate the potential offsite impacts of nearby waste and resource recovery operations.

These recommendations seek to provide consideration of waste resource recovery uses, including green waste facilities.  This can be strengthened further by including/amending the adopted Position Paper to include the following additional recommendations:

·   Support existing and new waste and resource recovery uses in this precinct to support the status of the sub-precinct as being a waste and resource recovery hub of state significance.

·   Amend reference to The Designing, constructing and operating composting facilities EPA Publication 1588 to apply to any existing composting facility/facilities.

·   Support new development in accordance with Recommended Separation Distances for Industrial Residual Air Emissions EPA Publication 1518.

·   New development should be designed to mitigate the potential offsite impacts of nearby waste and resource recovery operations.

·   For Precinct 4 recognise the adjoining waste and resource recovery precinct to the west and possible incompatible developments.

Risk to Council

The Cooper Street West Position Paper outlines the planning considerations for the Precinct, including information which may assist an applicant proposing a development.  The Position Paper is not a statutory document and does not override any statutory controls or other relevant regulations.

As outlined earlier, The Report (Cardno) site investigations found the landfill gas risk levels at the sites monitored to be very low to low risk and recommended that the landfill buffer could be reduced from 500m to 100m (for the monitored sites) subject to meeting the development assumptions in the report.  The report also makes recommendations about how development applications within the 100m should be managed, including further landfill gas assessments.

The Position Paper recommends the engagement of a suitably qualified professional to provide the necessary expertise to advise on the suitability of any development proposal against the information provided in The Report (Cardno). The Position Paper recommends an independent assessment and the Cardno report provides baseline data which will inform further assessments for future applicants.

In terms of the implications for existing uses and in particular the existing green waste facilities within the nominated Earth Resources and Waste Recovery sub-precinct, the Position Paper does not recommend any changes to the recommended EPA separation distances, rather it provides greater support in continuing these operations.  The necessary separation distances will be considered as part of any new development proposal as is required under the relevant legislation.

The Position Paper has been further updated to clarify the application of The Report and the application of EPA separation distances (see Attachment 3 for Amended Cooper Street West Position Paper (August 2017).


 

Minor Administrative Changes to Position Paper

It is also proposed to amend the adopted Position Paper to address some minor administrative matters.  In particular, to ensure ease of reference and ensure all of the recommendations listed under each sub-precinct are included in the Summary of Recommendations in Chapter 10 of the Position Paper.

referral

This report has been prepared for information only and no additional consultation was required.

Policy strategy and legislation

EPA Publication 788.2 Siting, Design, Operation and Rehabilitation of Landfills (EPA Victoria 2014)

EPA Publication 1518, Recommended Separation Distances for Industrial Residual Air Emissions (EPA Victoria 2015)

EPA Publication 1495, Separation distances for large composting facilities EPA Victoria, (EPA Victoria 2012)

EPA Publication 1588, Designing, constructing and operating composting facilities (EPA Victoria 2015)

Planning and Environment Act

State Environment Protection Policy (Air Quality Management)

State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Noise form Commerce, Industry and Trade) No.N-1

The Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008

 

 

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

COUNCIL PRIORITY           Organisational Sustainability

Future Direction                   Good governance

Theme                                   Growth and change

Strategic Objective              The changing demographics and needs of our municipality are monitored to provide, facilitate and/or advocate for appropriate services and infrastructure

 

This report demonstrates good governance by responding to concerns regarding possible risk to Council.

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 Cooper Street West Position Paper has been developed to provide guidance for landholders and interested parties on Council’s position in relation to developing within the Precinct.  It is not a statutory document which overrides other statutes, as such all planning applications will be assessed according to the requirements of the Planning and Environment Act and Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

 

The Cooper Street West Position Paper recognises the complexity in assessing landfill gas risk and provides detailed recommendations regarding appropriate measures.  The Position Paper recommends that any proposed development within a Closed Landfill buffer include an assessment by a suitably qualified Landfill Gas Risk professional. For sites monitored in the Landfill Gas Buffer Assessment 15 and 25 Vearings Rd, 315 O’Herns Rd and 410 Cooper St Epping V160682GReport 01.3 (Cardno, 2017), the Position Paper still recommends that any proposed development include an assessment by a suitably qualified landfill gas risk profession to identify whether the proposal meets the recommendations of the Report.

This recommendation will ensure any risk to Council in reducing the default Closed landfill buffer is managed appropriately.  The Cooper Street West Position Paper also recognises the value of the waste resource recovery industry to the municipality and highlights its continuing use into the future.  To further strengthen Council’s Position in relation the aforementioned issues, the Position Paper has been amended to:

·   Include reference to EPA Publication 1518 and 1588 where appropriate,

·   Ensure recommendations made for each sub-precinct are reflected in the Summary of Recommendations under Chapter 10 (Conclusions) of the Amended Position Paper (August 2017)

·   Ensure all recommendations made in the Summary of Recommendations under Chapter 10 (Conclusions) are reflected under the relevant sub-precinct recommendations for ease of reference.

·   Include a new recommendation which advises that technical studies may be required to support rezoning applications.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Amend the Cooper Street West Position Paper, adopted by Council on 27 June 2017, to include the schedule of changes in Attachment 1.

 

2.       Adopt Amended Cooper Street West Position Paper (August 2017)

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

6.1.3    425 High Street, Lalor - Amendment

File No:                                  711834

Attachments:                        1        Locality Maps

2        Development Plans   

Responsible Officer:           Manager Development Assessment

Author:                                  Planning Officer   

 

APPLICANT:                         Whiteman Property & Accounting P/L

COUNCIL POLICY:              Local Planning Policy Framework and MSS

ZONING:                               Residential Growth Zone

OVERLAY:                            Development Contributions Plan Overlay – Schedule 3

REFERRAL:                          VicRoads (External)

                                                Engineering (Internal)

                                                Urban Design (Internal)

OBJECTIONS:                      Eighteen (18)

RECOMMENDATION:         Approve an amendment to an existing Planning Permit

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

The applicant proposes to continue and modify the approved development on the site, increasing the number of dwellings from 35 to 44, increasing the number of double storey dwellings from single storey and providing some triple storey dwellings.  Vehicular access will be maintained from both High Street and Duncan Road.

Advertising of the amended proposal resulted in eighteen (18) objections being received.  The grounds of objection relate to overdevelopment; traffic congestion and lack of car parking; overlooking, loss of privacy and overshadowing; loss of property values; safety concerns; increase in noise (particularly during construction); limited landscaping; dwelling height; and inappropriate bin storage location.

The proposal demonstrates a satisfactory level of compliance with the provisions of Clause 55 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, subject to appropriate conditions being included in any amended permit that is issued.

The Housing Diversity Strategy (HDS) nominates this site as being within the Neighbourhood Renewal Change Area.  The proposal complies with the preferred density and design principles of this Change Area and underlying zone and is considered to be an acceptable medium density development in an appropriate location as nominated by the HDS. 

On the basis of the Clause 55 assessment and the proposal’s consistency with the HDS, it is recommended that Council approve the application.

SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

The subject site is located on the western side of High Street, Lalor, approximately 35m south of its intersection with Kingsway Drive. The site is relatively flat, irregular in shape with a 30.4m frontage to High Street, a maximum depth of 150.7m along the northern boundary and a total site area of 7,278m2. The site also has a 7.6m frontage to Duncan Road at the most southern portion of the site.

The site has been cleared of vegetation including a cluster of canopy trees located adjacent to the High Street frontage (eastern boundary) and the tree located adjacent the Duncan Road frontage. Construction works for the dwellings shown on the endorsed plans as ‘Row 5’ and ‘Row 6’ have also commenced (approved dwelling nos. 26-35).

Vehicle access to the site is provided via a crossover connecting the site to a service road off High Street. The service road is a one-way road which is over 300m in length that runs parallel to High Street beginning at its intersection with Robert Street and ending just south of the intersection between High Street and Kingsway Drive. The service road is also accessible from Duncan Road. There is currently no vehicle access to the site provided from the Duncan Road frontage.

The site is located within an established residential area of Lalor which is characterised by a combination of single and double storey brick veneer dwellings with concrete tiled pitched roofing built in the 1960s and 1970s.

There are ten properties adjoining the site’s northern boundary that contain either single or double storey detached dwellings with hipped concrete-tiled roofs which front Kingsway Drive.  To the west (rear) of the site contains five properties with detached, single storey dwellings and hipped-tiled roofs which front Frank Street.

The south-western portion of the site adjoins three properties containing detached, single storey dwellings fronting Duncan Road. The majority of these properties also contain outbuildings located within their rear yards and abutting the shared boundary with the subject site.

The southern boundary also abuts an infill development containing twenty dwellings with flat roofs which are addressed as 421 High Street, Lalor.

The subject site is located in proximity to the following sites, services and infrastructure:

• Lalor Child Care Centre – 70m south

• Lalor Railway Station – 80m east

• Bus Route No. 556 (Epping Plaza SC- Northland SC) – 300m south

• Bus Route No. 566 (Lalor – Northland) – 300m south

• Merriang Special Developmental School – 420m south-west

• Lalor Sports Centre – 500m eastPeter Lalor Vocational College – 500m south-west

• Peter Lalor Vocational College – 500m south-west

• Lalor Shopping Centre precinct (Neighbourhood Activity Centre) – 800m south-east

• Lalor Primary School – 1km east

• Epping Central Activity Centre – 1.2km north

• Lalor Secondary School - 1.3km east

restrictions and easements

The site is legally known as Lot 2 on Plan of Subdivision PS120035.

A review of the certificate of title shows that the site is not affected by any restrictive covenants precluding Council from approving a multi-dwelling development of the site.

A 2.44m wide drainage and sewerage easement traverses a small portion of the site near the south-western corner of the site. No permanent buildings are proposed to be constructed over the easement.

Proposal

It is now proposed to construct 44 dwellings (an increase of 9 dwellings on the original approval) at 425 High Street, Lalor.  The revised proposal incorporates a similar overall building footprint as the original approval even though nine additional dwellings are proposed to be constructed on the site.

No changes are proposed for the dwellings shown as Units 26-35 on the endorsed plans, which are now shown as Units 36-45 as part of this application as they are already under construction.

·    The amended development comprises of 10 single storey dwellings, 30 double storey dwellings and 4 triple storey dwellings as well as the construction of internal accessways, shared bin storage facilities, on-site visitor car parking spaces and planting of landscape treatments.

·    The total floor area of the dwellings will range from 85m2 to 187m2.

·    There are 2 dwellings containing 1 bedroom, 35 dwellings containing 2 bedrooms, 6 dwellings containing 3 bedrooms and 1 dwelling containing 4 bedrooms.

·    Each dwelling will be provided with either a single width or double width car space within a garage depending on the number of bedrooms contained within.

·    Eight on-site visitor car spaces have been provided throughout the site.

·    The proposed double and triple storey dwellings will incorporate a more contemporary design that are constructed from a combination of materials including brickwork, render, and cladding with varying roof formations.

·    Unit 1 and Unit 2 will front the High Street service road and are setback 6.1m from the eastern boundary.

·    Each dwelling will have a floor to ceiling height of 2550mm at both ground and upper level.

·    The existing vehicle crossover located in the north-west corner of the site will be reinstated and a new 5.0m wide heavy duty vehicle crossover constructed to Council’s requirements is proposed to be located centrally along the site’s eastern boundary.

·    The is no proposed amendments to the crossover and accessway which provides vehicle access to the site from Duncan Road.

·    A private waste collection service will be provided to collect the garbage and recycling bins from within the property on a weekly basis.

·    The single storey dwellings classified as Units 36-45 are currently under construction in accordance with the endorsed plans. There are only minor modifications to the internal layout of the bathroom and laundry areas with no change to the building footprint or external appearance of these dwellings.

Details of the proposed development are outlined in the following table.


 

 

Dwelling No.

Scale

Setbacks

Maximum Height

Private Open Space

Number of Bedrooms

1

Double Storey

Ground Level:

6.1m front (east), 2.8m side (north).

 

First Floor Level:

6.6m front (east),

3.0m side (north).

7.0m

40m² (all secluded

private open space) +

front yard.

3

2

Double Storey

Ground Level:

6.1m front (east),

1.0m side (south).

First Floor Level:

7.1m front (east),

1.8m side (south).

7.6m

12m2 balcony + front

yard and service yard.

3

3

Double Storey

Ground Level:

2.8m side (north).

First Floor Level:

3.0m side (north).

7.2m

40m² (all secluded private

open space)

3

4

Double Storey

Ground Level:

1.0m side (south).

First Floor Level:

4.1m side (south).

7.5m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

5

Double Storey

Ground Level:

2.8m side (north).

First Floor Level:

3.0m side (north).

7.2m

40m² (all secluded private

open space)

3

6

Double Storey

Ground Level:

1.0m side (south).

First Floor Level:

4.1m side (south).

7.5m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

7

Double Storey

Ground Level:

4.1m side (north).

First Floor Level:

4.3m side (north).

7.5m

40m² (all secluded private

open space)

2

8

Double Storey

Ground Level:

1.0m side (south).

First Floor Level:

4.1m side (south).

7.5m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

9

Double Storey

Ground Level:

4.1m side (north).

First Floor Level:

4.3m side (north).

6.5m

40m² (all secluded private

open space)

2

10

Double Storey

Ground Level:

1.0m side (south).

First Floor Level:

4.1m side (south).

7.5m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

11

Double Storey

Ground Level:

4.1m side (north).

First Floor Level:

4.3m side (north).

7.4m

40m² (all secluded private

open space)

2

12

Double Storey

Ground Level:

1.7m side (south).

First Floor Level:

4.0m side (south).

7.4m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

13

Double Storey

Ground Level:

4.1m side (north).

First Floor Level:

4.3m side (north).

6.3m

40m² (all secluded private

open space)

2

14

Double Storey

Ground Level:

1.7m side (south).

First Floor Level:

4.0m side (south).

7.3m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

15

Double Storey

Ground Level:

4.1m side (north).

First Floor Level:

4.3m side (north).

7.3m

40m² (all secluded private

open space)

2

16

Double Storey

Ground Level:

1.7m side (south).

First Floor Level:

4.0m side (south).

7.3m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

17

Double Storey

Ground Level:

4.1m side (north).

First Floor Level:

4.3m side (north).

6.5m

40m² (all secluded private

open space)

2

18

Double Storey

Ground Level:

1.7m side (south).

First Floor Level:

4.0m side (south).

7.3m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

19

Double Storey

Ground Level:

3.0m side (north).

First Floor Level:

3.0m side (north).

6.4m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

20

Double Storey

Ground Level:

1.7m side (south).

First Floor Level:

4.0m side (south).

7.3m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

4

21

Double Storey

Ground Level:

3.0m side (north).

First Floor Level:

3.0m side (north).

6.5m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

22

Double Storey

N/A

6.4m

10m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

23

Double Storey

Ground Level:

3.0m side (north).

First Floor Level:

3.0m side (north).

6.4m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

24

Triple Storey

N/A

8.9m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

25

Double Storey

Ground Level:

3.0m side (north).

First Floor Level:

3.0m side (north).

6.5m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

26

Triple Storey

N/A

8.8m

10m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

27

Double Storey

Ground Level:

3.0m side (north).

First Floor Level:

3.0m side (north).

6.4m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

28

Triple Storey

N/A

8.9m

10m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

29

Double Storey

Ground Level:

3.0m side (north).

First Floor Level:

3.0m side (north).

6.4m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

30

Triple Storey

Second Floor Level:

8.8m rear (west).

9.1m

10m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

31

Double Storey

Ground Level:

3.0m side (north).

First Floor Level:

3.0m side (north).

6.4m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

32

Double Storey

Ground Level:

2.6m rear (west).

First Floor Level:

3.4m rear (west).

6.4m

10m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

33

Double Storey

Ground Level:

3.0m side (north).

First Floor Level:

3.0m side (north).

6.4m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

34

No Unit 34 Proposed as part of this application.

35

Double Storey

Ground Level:

3.0m side (north).

First Floor Level:

3.0m side (north).

6.4m

9m2 balcony + service

yard.

2

36

(endorsed

as Unit

34)

Single Storey

Ground Level:

4.9m side (south).

5.1m

41m2 (all secluded private

open space)

3

37

(endorsed

as Unit

35)

Single Storey

N/A

5.2m

40m² (all secluded private

open space)

3

38

(endorsed

as Unit

32)

Single Storey

Ground Level:

4.9m side (south).

4.6m

36m² (all secluded private

open space)

1

39

(endorsed

as Unit

33)

Single Storey

N/A

4.6m

26m² (all secluded private

open space)

1

40

(endorsed

as Unit

30)

Single Storey

Ground Level:

4.9m side (south).

4.8m

44m² (all secluded private

open space)

2

41

(endorsed

as Unit

31)

Single Storey

N/A

4.9m

39m² (all secluded private

open space)

2

42

(endorsed

as Unit

28)

Single Storey

Ground Level:

4.9m side (south).

4.7m

44m² (all secluded private

open space)

2

43

(endorsed

as Unit

29)

Single Storey

N/A

4.7m

39m² (all secluded private

open space)

2

44

(endorsed

as Unit

26)

Single Storey

Ground Level:

4.9m side (south).

900mm rear (west)

4.6m

50m² (all secluded private

open space)

2

45

(endorsed

as Unit

27)

Single Storey

Ground Level:

900mm rear (west)

4.8m

53m² (all secluded private

open space)

2

Public Notification

Advertising of the application has resulted in eighteen (18) objections being received to the amended proposal.  The grounds of objection can be summarised as follows:

1.       Overdevelopment of the land

2.       Neighbourhood character/bulk

3.       Overshadowing

4.       Removal of vegetation.

5.       Increase in noise

6.       Not notified by Council  of original application

7.       Reduced property value

8.       Proximity of built form to boundary

9.       Fence damage

10.     Overlooking/privacy

11.     Additional traffic implications

12.     Amendment increasing density is unacceptable.

13.     Waste collection issues

14.     Not enough visitor car spaces

PLANNING ZONING

Clause 32.07 – Residential Growth Zone

The subject site is now located within the Residential Growth Zone – Schedule 1 (RGZ1) under the provisions of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, formally the Residential 1 Zone. The purpose of the RGZ1 is as follows:

·    To provide housing at increased densities in buildings up to and including four storey buildings.

·    To encourage a diversity of housing types in locations offering good access to services and transport including activities areas.

·    To encourage a scale of development that provides a transition between areas of more intensive use and development and areas of restricted housing growth.

Clause 32.07-4 states that a permit is required to construct two or more dwellings on a lot within the RGZ1. A development must meet the requirements of Clause 55.

Clause 32.07-8 states that the maximum building height (noting that the site is relatively flat) should not exceed 13.5m.

HOUSING DIVERSITY STRATEGY

The Housing Diversity Strategy (HDS) provides a strategic framework for future residential development in the established areas of the municipality for the next 20 years. It aims to guide the future location and diversity of housing stock and identifies areas of housing growth and change, including areas where future housing growth should and should not be encouraged. In general, it aims to encourage higher residential densities and a diversity of housing types and sizes into areas within convenient walking distance to public transport and activity centres.

 

The HDS is a reference document in the Whittlesea Planning Scheme and an assessment against it is provided under Standard B2 of the Clause 55 assessment.

 

The subject site is located within a Neighbourhood Renewal Area in the HDS where Strategy 4.2 at Clause 21.09-4 specifically encourages medium and higher density housing in Neighbourhood Renewal Areas that is appropriate in a neighbourhood context.

 

The housing capacity assessment process undertaken as part of the preparation of the HDS supported the designation of this area for medium and higher density housing because of its close proximity to the Lalor Train Station and other services and facilities.

ASSESSMENT AGAINST CLAUSE 55 OF THE WHITTLESEA PLANNING SCHEME

The following table provides details on whether the proposal complies with the requirements of Clause 55 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.  Under these provisions a development:

·    Must meet all of the objectives

·    Should meet all of the standards

If Council is satisfied that an application for an alternative design solution meets the objective, the alternative design solution may be considered.

 

 

ü - Compliance
× -  Non compliance

Objectives

Standards

Comments

B1

Neighbourhood Character

P

P

Any development needs to incorporate a design that respects the existing neighbourhood character or contributes to a preferred neighbourhood character.

 

The site has been identified as a Neighbourhood Renewal Change Area within the HDS.  The housing capacity assessment process undertaken as part of the preparation of the HDS supports this area for medium and high density housing because of its close proximity to the Lalor train station and other services and facilities.

 

This locality will accommodate similar densities of residential development in the future.  The proposal provides for a satisfactory response to the preferred density and design principles of this Change Area

 

The existing character largely defined by an ageing dwelling stock is already starting to see change through newer infill developments.  This change brings with it an emerging new character resulting in a variety of built forms and materials used, which is not uncommon for the area.  The proposed development responds to the emerging character through a contemporary design maintaining single storey dwellings with pitched roofs to Duncan Road and more contemporary double storey dwellings to High Street.

 

There are some existing double storey dwellings with pitched roofs adjacent to the site, however the area is currently dominated more broadly by single storey built forms.

 

On balance, the proposal provides an appropriate response to the emerging and existing character of the area, reflective of the sites context on a main road adjacent to a train station.

B2

Residential Policy

P

P

The subject site is located within the Neighbourhood Renewal Change Area within the HDS.  This Change Area encourages medium and higher density housing, including townhouses, multi-units, small scale apartments, shop-top housing and mixed use development.  This Change Area encourages a range of medium building heights that allow street enclosure along main streets; building heights that allow for all levels to achieve passive surveillance. 

 

The HDS reflects core planning principles found within both the State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks that seek to increase densities and provide diversity of housing close to activity centres, public transport and other services.

 

This Change Area also recommends reduced front setbacks to encourage activation of the street, whilst still allowing sufficient space for low level landscaping; a medium to higher site coverage to facilitate a balance between increased densities and landscape opportunities; usable private open space, balconies and communal shared spaces; and landscaping to complement medium to higher density built form.  The proposed development is consistent with the preferred density and key design principles outlined in the HDS.

B3

Dwelling Diversity

P

P

A range of dwelling sizes are proposed ranging from single to triple storey, floor area, open space location and size, as well as bedrooms which range from 1 to 4.

B4

Infrastructure

P

P

 

B5

Integration with the street

P

P

 

B6

Street setback

P

P

The objective for this standard seeks to ensure that the setbacks of buildings from a street respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and make efficient use of the site.  The nearest dwelling fronting High Street is that at 419 which is currently setback 6.1m.  The amended plans propose a setback to dwellings 1 & 2 to High Street of between 6.09m and 6.47m generally meeting and exceeding the minimum required setback.

 

The HDS encourages reduced front setbacks within Neighbourhood Renewal Change Areas to encourage activation of the street, whilst still allowing sufficient space for low level landscaping.

It is considered that the proposed development is consistent with this key design principle, and accordingly, is consistent with the objective detailed above.

B7

Building height

P

P

All dwelling heights (proposed at less than 9m at the highest point) are compliant with those defined within the Residential Growth Zone which allows up to 13.5m.

B8

Site coverage

P

P

Site coverage is proposed at less than 50% which is well below the maximum of 60%.

B9

Permeability

P

P

Site permeability is at 31% which is well above the minimum 20% requirement.

B10

Energy efficiency

P

P

 

B11

Open space

N/A

N/A

Only applicable if public or communal open space is to be provided on site or adjacent to the development

B12

Safety

P

P

 

B13

Landscaping

P

P

 

B14

Access

P

P

 

B15

Parking location

P

Condition

Some of the re-designed dwellings contain a habitable room window that are only setback 1.0m from the accessway without having a raised sill height of 1.4m above the accessway.

 

This is considered to be an appropriate outcome as the residents will be protected from vehicular noise within development. There is only one room of each dwelling that may be affected by vehicles driving along the accessway, any possible detriment will be limited. There is also landscaping opportunities within the 1.0m setback that could assist in reducing vehicle noise.

 

The accessway is wider adjacent garages meaning that vehicles will not stop in front of the windows if there is traffic along the accessway.  Finally, there are other window design measures that could be implemented (i.e. double glazed windows) to supress vehicle noise which will be required as a condition of any permit issued.

B17

Side and rear setbacks

P

P

All ground-floor walls and upper-floor walls of the re-designed dwellings comply with the minimum setback requirements as prescribed by this Standard. It is noted that a portion of the west-facing walls of Unit 44 and 45 is within 1.0m of the rear (western boundary). However, this was approved as part of the orignal permit application and is shown on the previous endorsed plans (refer to Units 26 and 27 on the endorsed plans dated 10 May 2016). These dwellings are currently under construction in accordance with the current endorsed plans.

B18

Walls on boundaries

P

P

 

B19

Daylight to existing windows

P

P

 

B20

North-facing windows

P

P

 

B21

Overshadowing open space

P

P

The shadow diagrams submitted as part of this amended permit application demonstrate that the north-facing private secluded areas of the dwellings located at 421 High Street, Lalor will not experience additional overshadowing as a result of the proposed double storey dwellings located within the subject site.

 

It is noted that the proposed development may cast additional shadows on the adjoining properties to the west (8, 10, 12 and 14 Frank Street Lalor) between the hours of 9am and 12pm. However, the amount of overshadowing complies with the limitations set by this Standard.

B22

Overlooking

P

P

All habitable room windows, balconies, and terraces have been located and designed to avoid direct views into the secluded private open space of an existing dwelling within a horizontal distance of 9.0m through appropriate screening techniques.

 

Whilst the proposal complies with this standard, it is noted that views and perceived views from stairwells are evident creating concern and overlooking to neighbouring residents.  It is recommended that a condition be included on any permit that is issued requiring screening/obscuring to be shown on revised plans for all these windows to address objector concerns.

B23

Internal views

P

P

 

B24

Noise impacts

P

P

 

B25

Accessibility

P

P

 

B26

Dwelling entry

P

P

 

B27

Daylight to new windows

P

P

 

B28

Private open space

P

P

The private open space areas for each of the re-designed dwellings are either provided as first floor balconies or as rear yards on ground level. For dwellings where the private open space is provided at ground level in the rear yards, an area of 25m2 with a minimum dimension of at least 4.0m is provided for each dwelling as part of the total 40m2 area (see proposed Units 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 and 17).

 

For dwellings that have first floor balconies, an area of 9m2 or 10m2 has been provided with the minimum width of 1.6m and convenient access from the main living room. These balconies are considered to be appropriate spaces due to their size and dimensions (i.e. large enough to fit an outdoor living set) and their north-facing orientation as well as being screened to prevent overlooking. It should be noted that these dwellings also have an additional space of approximately 10m2 as dedicated service yards / court yards on ground level at the rear of the dwelling.

 

It is noted that for Units 38, 39, 41 and 43, an area of 40m2 has not been provided. However, these dwellings are currently under construction in accordance with the plans endorsed by Council on 10 May 2016 which allowed a reduction of the standard for these Units.  It is also noted that they all achieve at least an area of 25m2 with a minimum width of 3m of secluded private open space and are all one bedroom dwellings.

B29

Solar access to open space

P

P

 

B30

Storage

P

P

 

B31

Design detail

P

P

 

B32

Front fences

P

P

 

B33

Common property

P

P

 

B34

Site services

P

P

 

CAR PARKING 

Clause 52.06 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme prescribes the rate and design standards for car parking spaces required on site. More specifically, Clause 52.06-5 requires one car parking space to be provided for each dwelling containing one or two bedrooms and two car parking spaces to be provided for each dwelling containing more than two bedrooms. The following table summarises the car parking requirement for the proposed development.

Dwelling No.

No. of bedrooms

Car spaces required

Car spaces provided

Complies

1

3

2

2

Yes

2

3

2

2

Yes

3

3

2

2

Yes

4

2

1

1

Yes

5

3

2

2

Yes

6

2

1

1

Yes

7

2

1

1

Yes

8

2

1

1

Yes

9

2

1

1

Yes

10

2

1

1

Yes

11

2

1

1

Yes

12

2

1

1

Yes

13

2

1

1

Yes

14

2

1

1

Yes

15

2

1

1

Yes

16

2

1

1

Yes

17

2

1

1

Yes

18

2

1

1

Yes

19

2

1

1

Yes

20

4

2

2

Yes

21

2

1

1

Yes

22

2

1

1

Yes

23

2

1

1

Yes

24

2

1

1

Yes

25

2

1

1

Yes

26

2

1

1

Yes

27

2

1

1

Yes

28

2

1

1

Yes

29

2

1

1

Yes

30

2

1

1

Yes

31

2

1

1

Yes

32

2

1

1

Yes

33

2

1

1

Yes

35

2

1

1

Yes

36

3

2

2

Yes

37

3

2

2

Yes

38

1

1

1

Yes

39

1

1

1

Yes

40

2

1

1

Yes

41

2

1

1

Yes

42

2

1

1

Yes

43

2

1

1

Yes

44

2

1

1

Yes

45

2

1

1

Yes

 

Garages should be at least 6.0m long and 3.5m wide for a single space and 5.5m wide for a double space (measured inside the garage or carport).  An open car space should be at least 4.9m long and 2.6m wide.  The proposal complies with these requirements.

Clause 52.06-5 also requires one on-site visitor car space for every five dwellings within a development. There are eight visitor spaces provided as part of the revised development proposal which complies with the requirement for 44 dwellings (noting that there is no dwelling 34).  These are located throughout the site including one between dwellings 5 and 7, one adjacent to dwelling 20, four adjacent to dwelling 22, one adjacent to dwelling 36 and one along the vehicle accessway connecting to Duncan Road.

Each garage has the internal dimensions of either 6.0m x 3.5m for a single space or 6.0m x 5.5m for a double space. These spaces are also free of any protrusions and are compliant with the design guidelines stipulated at Clause 52.06-8. The internal accessway has sufficient turning room to allow vehicles to enter and exit the site in a forwards direction.

LAND ADJACENT TO A ROAD ZONE, CATEGORY 1

The purpose of this provision is to ensure appropriate access to identified roads and to ensure appropriate subdivision of land adjacent to identified roads. High Street and its associated service road is nominated as a Category 1 Road.

A permit is required to create or alter access to a road in a Road Zone, Category 1. In accordance with this provision, an application to create or alter access to a road in a Road Zone, Category 1 must be referred to the Roads Corporation (VicRoads) under Section 55 of the Act.

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN OVERLAY (SCHEDULE 3)

The Drainage Contribution Fee was paid on 15 January 2016 in accordance with Condition 1 of the Permit.  As the contribution rates relate to site area as opposed to the number of dwellings and as there is no change to site area, no further contribution is required.

Comments on Grounds of Objection

1.         Overdevelopment of the land

The subject site is located within the Residential Growth Zone and is designated as a change area in the HDS.  The Change Area encourages medium and higher density housing, including townhouses, multi-units, small scale apartments, shop-top housing and mixed use development. As such the proposal is considered appropriate. 

2.         Neighbourhood character/bulk

The site is identified as a Neighbourhood Renewal Change Area within the HDS, promoting higher densities with new development to create an emerging new character.  The housing capacity assessment process undertaken as part of the preparation of the HDS supports this area for medium and high density housing because of its close proximity to the Lalor train station and other services and facilities. Further to that, the sites proximity to services lends itself to higher density developments.

3.         Overshadowing

The shadow diagrams submitted as part of this amended permit application demonstrate that the north-facing private secluded areas of adjoining dwellings will not experience additional overshadowing as a result of the proposed double storey dwellings located within the subject site. It is further noted that as the triple storey dwellings are located within the site, they will not overshadow any adjoin properties.

4.         Removal of vegetation.

Vegetation removal was considered as part of the original planning permit and has since been removed.  No additional vegetation is proposed for removal as part of the amendment request.

5.         Increase in noise

Whilst additional noise is inevitable as a result of a higher density development, the noise generated from the site will be that of a residential context not a commercial site and is therefore considered that noise impacts will not detrimentally affect the adjoining sites.

Any noise generated during construction will be enforced by the Building Permit and EPA requirements to Residential Noise.

6.         Not notified by Council of original application

The original application was advertised by Council by way of sending notices to adjoining owners and occupiers and placing a sign towards the High Street and Duncan Road frontages of the site. The advertising was undertaken between the dates of 14 October 2009 and 2 November 2009. Two objections were received by Council.

7.         Reduced property value

This is not a valid planning consideration.

8.         Proximity of built form to boundary

The proposed built form, previously approved as well as the amendments proposed meet the side and rear setback requirements of ResCode. Whilst this is a departure of the site current layout, it is consistent with the expected typology of development allowable in the Residential Growth Zone and the HDS.

9.       Fence damage

This is not a planning consideration, and any fencing matters will be required to be resolved in accordance with the Fences Act 1968.                   

10.     Overlooking/privacy   

All dwellings comply with the overlooking requirements of ResCode. That being said, a condition will be placed on any amended permit issued that will require windows to stair wells at first floor level be screened to 1.7m above finished floor level.

11.       Additional traffic implications

The proposal has been considered by VicRoads as the Determining Authority. VicRoads has no objection to the proposal.

12.       Amendment increasing density is unacceptable.

An amendment to a permit can be made under Section 72 of the P&E Act where changes to plans are significant. Therefore, this amendment can be considered.


 

13.       Waste collection issues

The existing permit in place requires that a waste management plan is endorsed and that waste collection be conducted by a private waste collector. Any amended permit to issue will require this plan be updated to reflect the changes made.

15.     Not enough visitor car spaces

The proposal complies in full with the visitor car parking requirements set out in Clause 52.06 (Car Parking) of the WPS which requires 1 visitor space per 5 (or part thereof) dwellings. As such, the eight visitor spaces to the 44 proposed dwellings are consistent with the requirements of the WPS.

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 application for an amendment to the permit has been assessed against the Whittlesea Planning Scheme including the State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks and in particular the objectives and standards of Clause 52.06, Clause 55 and the HDS.  The proposal has strong policy support for increased densities and diversity in such close proximity to the Lalor train station.  It is considered that the proposal is consistent with the preferred neighbourhood character outcomes set out in the HDS and accordingly approval of the application is recommended.

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to approve an amendment to Planning Application No. 711834 and issue an amended Planning Permit for a multi-dwelling development comprising the construction for 44 dwellings and alteration of access to road in a road zone, with the following changes made to the permit:

1.       The Permit preamble amended as follows:

THE CONSTRUCTION OF 44 DWELLINGS AND THE REMOVAL OF NATIVE VEGETATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ENDORSED PLANS.

2.       Amend condition 2 to include the following:

New part (d) ‘All second floor windows adjacent to property boundaries to the north and west must be screened or obscured (including stairwell windows) to a height of 1.7m above floor level.

New part (e) ‘A notation on the plan indicating that that all ground level windows facing internal accessways are double glazed unless meeting the required sill heights and setbacks in accordance with standard B15 of Clause 55.03-10.

3.       Amend condition 4 as follows:

Prior to the occupation of any dwellings hereby approved, the owner of the subject land must prepare an updated Refuse and Recycling Management Plan in accordance with the amended development detailing how the management of refuse and recycling material will be carried out within the site.

In the preparation of such a management plan, specific attention will be made to the following items:

a)      how the collection of refuse and recycling material will be managed;

b)      what will be the frequency for the removal of such refuse and recycling material;

c)      how it is intended to control the emission of odour caused by such refuse and recycling material when it is being stored within the site;

d)      the on-site collection of garbage, recyclable and green waste to be undertaken by a private contractor appointed by the respective Body Corporate for the subject site;

e)      where such refuse and recycling shall be stored within the site;

f)       all garbage and recyclable waste collection to occur on site from the collection area nominated for each dwelling;

g)      no garbage or recycling bins to be placed on the High Street or Duncan Road reservation at any time.

4.       Amend condition 7 as follows:

Before the development continues, three copies of an amended detailed landscape plan generally in accordance with the endorsed plan but modified in accordance with the amended layout and design, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and show all proposed landscaping, the location of all new planting, a schedule of plant species and height at maturity, and a maintenance schedule. Species selection is to be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Any proposed trees must be at an advanced stage of growth when planted.

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

6.2       Community Services

Nil Reports


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

6.3       City Transport and Presentation

6.3.1    ROAD MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE

File No:                                  160513

Attachments:                        1        Draft Road Management Plan

2        Municipal Association of Victoria Review   

Responsible Officer:           Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Unit Leader Infrastructure Projects   

 

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

Council is required to update its Road Management Plan in accordance with the Road Management Act 2004. The current Road Management Plan dated 28 May 2013 (the Plan) is due for amendment. The proposed draft Road Management Plan has been amended to:

·    Consolidate the pathway hierarchy;

·    Update and expand on the performance standards;

·    Update and expand the definitions of terms; and

·    Schedule the next review period.

This report seeks Council endorsement of the draft Road Management Plan and initiation of the public advertisement process.

Notice of intention to amend the Road Management Plan will be advertised in the following publications:

·    The Government Gazette on Thursday 7 September 2017;

·    The Age on Tuesday 5 September 2017; and

·    The Whittlesea Leader on Tuesday 5 September 2017.

Submissions on the draft Plan from interested parties will be received over a 28 day period from the date the notice is published. A panel of Councillors is required to consider any written submissions in relation to the draft Road Management Plan and make recommendations to Council on any such submissions, prior to final adoption by Council.

Background

The Road Management Act 2004 (the Act) has established a statutory framework for the management of public roads. The Act applies to road authorities including the City of Whittlesea. The Road Management Plan (the Plan) is made in accordance with the Act and its purpose is:

(a)  To establish a management system for the road management functions of a road authority which is based on policy and operational objectives and available resources; and

(b)  To set the relevant standard in relation to the discharge of duties in the performance of those road management functions.

The Road Management Plan sets the inspection and maintenance frequency for local roads and identifies when Council is required to undertake repairs to address faults in the footpath and road networks. The maintenance of a safe road and footpath network and availability of resources are the primary considerations for setting the hazard and defect intervention levels.

The current version of the Road Management Plan is dated 28 May 2013. An internal review process has been undertaken, with key changes identified in this report. All councils are required by the Act to place their Road Management Plan on public exhibition for feedback, and advertise in a number of local newspapers.

DRAFT PLAN

The draft Road Management Plan (Attachment 1) has been prepared in accordance with guidance provided in the Code of Practice for Road Management Plans. Its contents are arranged in 6 sections and 1 appendix as detailed below:

·    Introduction

Outlines the purpose, key stakeholders, duty of road users, and how it relates with the Community Plan and Asset Management Policy.

 

·    Road Asset Description

Provides descriptions of the types of road infrastructure.

 

·    Road Infrastructure Hierarchy

Provides hierarchy classification of road infrastructure relevant to setting performance standards.

 

·    Performance Standards

Specifies the performance standards to ‘inspect, maintain and repair’ public roads. This is a core part of the Plan which defines the timeliness of Council tasks. This section is often considered in any civil liability claims against Council relating to road or footpath conditions.

 

·    Management System

Outlines the current management system and what is required to be established to help discharge Council’s duty to ‘inspect, maintain and repair’ public roads.

 

·    Review of Road Management Plan.

Schedules the next review.

 

·    Appendix 1 Definitions

Lists words with a technical or ambiguous meaning.

KEY CHANGES

In comparison to the current version adopted by Council on 17 September 2013, the key changes in the draft Plan are:

1.   A reduction in Pathway Hierarchy classifications from three to two

The current pathway hierarchy consists of three categories ranging from one (Very High Pedestrian Service Level) to three (Moderate to Very Low Pedestrian Service Level); however upon consultation with abutting municipalities, the number of hierarchy categories has been condensed to two, and thus align with regional standards.

 

Rationale for the change: In regards to the practical implications of this amendment, all footpaths will continue to be inspected frequently and reported on every two years. Category One paths, such as around shopping precincts, commercial areas and public transport interchanges, will be repaired within two working days, with the balance of paths repaired within five working days. This is in accordance with existing practices.

 

2.   Update the performance standards (Section four of the draft Plan) having due regard for available Council resources and experience gained in the operation of the current Plan

 

Rationale for the change: The draft Plan formalises Council’s risk mitigation strategy in relation to the management of road and road-related infrastructure. Under the Act, the inspection and treatment response times must be deemed reasonably practical, and have been amended in the draft Plan to reflect more closely Council’s ability to meet those standards, considering its available resources.

 

In regards to practical implications of this amendment, there would be no observable difference in the level of service provided to the community, as the update aligns the draft Plan with current resource allocations and response times currently achieved.

 

3.   Update the definitions (Appendix 1 of the draft Plan) having regard to amendments to Acts and Legislation

 

Words and terms can have varying meanings depending on the context; therefore terms that either can be misinterpreted of have a ‘technical’ meaning are clearly defined in Appendix 1.

 

4.   Schedule the next review to be carried out between August 2020 and June 2021

 

The draft Plan dictates that the next Road Management Plan review must commence by 1 August 2020 and be completed by 30 June 2021, unless otherwise directed by the relevant Road Minister or directed by the Council and CEO.

The Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) has conducted a thorough review of the draft Road Management Plan. A summary of their recommendations and officers’ responses are contained in Attachment 2.

CONSULTATION

A public notice advising of the draft Plan is required to be placed in a daily circulating newspaper and the Government Gazette calling for submissions over a 28 day period from the date of advertisement.

It is proposed to advertise the amendment in:

·    The Government Gazette on Thursday 7 September 2017;

·    The Age on Tuesday 5 September 2017; and

·    The Whittlesea Leader on Tuesday 5 September 2017.

Submissions will be considered and the draft Plan amended where appropriate. The draft Plan will then be presented to Council for adoption following consideration of any submissions received.

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications outside of current road management and maintenance budgets, as inspection, maintenance and repair levels set within the draft Plan align with current resourcing.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

COUNCIL PRIORITY           Organisational Sustainability

Future Direction                   Good governance

Theme                                   Growth and change

Strategic Objective              The changing demographics and needs of our municipality are monitored to provide, facilitate and/or advocate for appropriate services and infrastructure

The review of the Plan accords with the Shaping Our Future Council Plan 2017-21, in particular:

·    Organisational Sustainability

Council works sharper and smarter to ensure value for money and continually improves to support our growing and changing municipality.

 

·    Roads, Access and Public Transport

People can access and use public transport and road networks effectively in accessing jobs, services and recreational activities.

 

·    Community Safety

Our neighbourhoods and towns are safe and have proactive programs that support and build a safe 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 current Road Management Plan has been reviewed, updated and is in draft form to be publicly advertised inviting submissions over a 28 day period before Council can consider the adoption of the Plan.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Endorse the draft Road Management Plan for the purposes of allowing consultation in accordance with Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 (as amended).

2.       Advertise Council’s intention to amend its Road Management Plan (revision 30 June 2017) in the Government Gazette, The Age and the Whittlesea Leader.

3.       Establish a Committee of Council comprising Cr………………….., Cr………………….., and Cr………………….. to consider any written submissions in relation to the draft Road Management Plan and make recommendations to Council on any such submissions.

4.       Provide copies of the draft Road Management Plan available for inspection at the following locations:

a)      Council Offices at 25 Ferres Boulevard, South Morang.

b)      Council Offices at 5/1 Danaher Drive, South Morang.

c)      Council Offices at Westfield Plenty Valley Shopping Centre.

d)      Council Depot at 68-96 Houston Street, Epping.

e)      Libraries at –

i)       May Road, Lalor;

ii)      Main Street, Thomastown;

iii)     Plenty Road, Mill Park

iv)     Laurel Street, Whittlesea; and

v)      The Mobile Library.

f)       Whittlesea City Council website – www.whittlesea.vic.gov.au.

g)      Whittlesea Community Connections, Shop 111, Epping Plaza Shopping Centre.

h)      Edge Youth Services, Shop MM1 Westfield Plenty Valley Shopping Centre.

5.       Seek written public submissions on the draft Road Management Plan during the period from Tuesday 5 September 2017 to 12 noon on Tuesday 3 October 2017.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

6.3.2    Petition Response to request for street tree removal in Ancona Drive, Mill Park

File No:                                  143551

Attachments:                        1        Attachment 1 - Locality Map

2        Attachement 2 - street scape before and after photos   

Responsible Officer:           Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Arborist   

 

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

At the Council meeting on 27 June 2017, Council resolved to receive and note the petition from 28 residents representing 22 of the 61 properties requesting removal of all existing street trees in Ancona Drive, Mill Park and replacement with a more suitable species and requested that a report be prepared. The petition expressed concern regarding the mess from debris from the trees, damage they cause to footpaths and branches dropping.  Council officers have investigated the issues raised in the petition and inspected the street trees in Ancona Drive.  This report has been prepared in response to the petition.

An assessment of all the street trees in Ancona Drive has been undertaken by Council’s arborist.  This assessment found that all the existing street trees display good structure and healthy canopies.

The residents request to remove and replace the existing street trees in Ancona Court has been assessed in accordance with Council’s Street Tree Management Plan (2016) (STMP) and Environmental Sustainability Strategy and is not supported for the following reasons:

·    The trees are of sound structure and in good health;

·    Infrastructure damage is minimal and well within accepted levels and required repairs  have been undertaken as required;

·    All trees drop litter consisting of bark, leaves fruit flowers etc. The litter on footpaths in Ancona Drive was not on average through multiple visits observed to be excessive; and

·    The litter accumulating under some larger trees is part of the natural shedding process of trees, which is not something the City of Whittlesea has control over.

Background

At the Council meeting on 7 February 2017, Council received a petition from 28 residents representing 22 of the 61 properties in Ancona Drive, Mill Park. Council resolved to receive the petition and requested that a report be prepared in response.

The petition requests that the existing ‘Red Gum Trees’ be cut down and that a more suitable variety be planted instead.  The petition includes the following concerns regarding the existing street trees:

·    Residents didn’t want these trees planted originally but they were planted anyway;

·    Debris from the trees clogging up gutters, bark peeling and creating a mess;

·    Risk of branches from the trees dropping and damaging cars and are a danger to people;

·    Tree causing concrete in driveways and footpath to crack; and

·    Other plants not growing because of the leaves from the street trees.

Ancona Drive extends north east from University Drive and completes a loop back to itself  (refer attachment 1, Locality Map).  There are a total of 61 properties in Ancona Drive Mill Park.

Ancona Drive is part of the Rivergum Estate Stages 21 and 22. These stages of the Mill Park Estates were completed in 2001. The trees chosen for Ancona Drive were two eucalyptus E.mannifera (Brittle Gum) and E. scoparia (Willow Gum). These street tree species were endorsed by Council at the time as part of the approval of the landscape plans for this subdivision.  These species were on the approved street tree planting list at the time.

These two eucalypt species are on Council’s current street tree planting list endorsed as part of Council’s new Street Tree Management Plan 2016.

Ancona Drive currently contains 54 street trees. The vast majority of trees in the street are Willow or Brittle gums (Eucalyptus scoparia and mannifera) with a small number of other mixed species in irregular positions throughout the drive. The age of the trees is predominantly 17 years old with some trees younger. The average height of the street trees is just over 10m providing a strong streetscape character of upright spreading crowns with predominantly white trunks (refer to Attachment 2).

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 Ancona Drive were last inspected as part of Council’s proactive street tree inspection and works program in May / June 2017.  As a result of this program, minor maintenance pruning was undertaken on approximately half of the street trees within Ancona Drive. No significant visible structural defects were identified in any of the street trees in Ancona Drive.

In addition to this program, all the trees in Ancona Drive were inspected by Council’s Arborist on 8 June 2017, following the cyclic program and again on 18 July 2017. No major structural faults were observed in any of the trees and pruning was undertaken to a high standard.

The street was found to meet Council’s benchmark clearances for Street Trees as required by Council’s STMP (Street Tree Management Plan) and Road Management Plan (RMP).

There is a history of resident concern about street trees in Ancona Drive since it was developed in 2001.

As Council officers were aware there was a history of some residents being concerned about the street trees in Ancona Drive, all properties were sent a letter in May 2016 regarding the preparation of Council’s new Street Tree Management Plan.  This letter included an invitation to view the draft Plan, attend face to face consultation sessions and provide feedback on the draft Plan.

In response to the concern raised in the petition regarding concrete cracking, Council’s records indicated that only three addresses have complained about concrete cracking due to trees. Council responds to these complaints on a case by case basis.

In relation to the concern expressed in the petition regarding debris from the street trees in Ancona Drive, Council’s arborist observed the concentration of tree litter at the bottom of the natural hill around No 10 to be primarily due to accumulated litter being transported by natural runoff water, but also the more closed in landscape profile of the street due to the larger size of trees and side fences of No12 Ancona Drive and No 14 Ward Street.

All trees drop debris consisting of bark, leaves fruit flowers etc.  Residential streets in the municipality are swept by Council generally on a 6 to 8 week cycle in line with the Street Tree Management Plan. Selected 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.  Increased sweeping regimes are being developed for Ancona Drive to address leaf litter with frequency expected on a five (5) week cycle.

In addition, Council’s drainage infrastructure is regularly inspected and cleaned as necessary. Council has no recorded blocked drains within Ancona Drive in the last 15 years.

In relation to the petition concern regarding branches dropping off the street trees in Ancona Drive, the only registered instance of a tree losing branches relates to a tree that was removed in February 2017 after being recognised as a structurally unsuitable individual tree.

In relation to the concern in the petition about trees damaging cars, Council’s records show that there are two reports registered related to trees and cars. Council’s Risk Management Team reports one registered claim for damage relating to leaves blocking private house gutters.

The renewal of the street trees within Ancona Drive is not part of the current 10 Year Street Tree Renewal Program endorsed by Council.

Attachment 2 shows the existing street trees within Ancona Drive, what the street would look like with the street trees removed and what it would look like with trees replanted. If the existing trees are removed and replaced, it will take at least 5 to 7 years to see a noticeable visual impact from the new street trees.  The trees make a strong contribution to streetscape character.

The removal of all of the street trees in Ancona Drive would result in a significant increase in the urban heat island effect in this locality by increasing temperature

Discussion

Council has received a petition from 28 residents representing 22 of the 61 properties within Ancona Drive, Mill Park.  This petition raises concerns with the existing street trees and requests their removal and replacement with a more appropriate species.

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.

In addition, Council’s Street Tree Management Plan (STMP) (page 42) states that:

“Council will investigate all tree management options before recommending tree removal and consider the contribution each tree makes to neighbourhood character as well as wildlife habitat when making all tree management and tree removal decisions. Street trees provide considerable benefit to the community by way of improved amenity and reduction in the Urban Heat Island Effect, therefore Council will not support individual requests to have trees removed, or subjected to additional pruning, in order to:

·    Reduce or eliminate leaf litter or tree debris;

·    Improve primate amenity.’

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 Ancona Drive 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;

·    Infrastructure damage is minimal and well within accepted levels and required repairs  have been undertaken as required;

·    All trees drop litter consisting of bark, leaves fruit flowers etc. The litter on footpaths in Ancona Drive was not on average through multiple visits observed to be excessive;

·    The litter accumulating under some larger trees is part of the natural shedding process of trees, which is not something the City of Whittlesea has control over;

·    The eucalypt species located in Ancona Drive are listed as a suitable street tree species in Council’s current street tree species planting list; and

·    The removal of the street trees would be contrary to Council’s Street Tree Management Plan and Environmental Sustainability Strategy.

Consultation

No external consultation has been undertaken in preparing this report.

As discussed above only 22 of the 61 properties within Ancona Drive have signed this petition.  In accordance with Councils new Participation and Engagement Policy and Framework one option available to Council is to survey all residents and properties within Ancona Drive before making a decision in relation to this petition.

Critical Dates

There are no critical dates.

Financial Implications

Council’s arborist has undertaken an assessment of the financial value of the street trees in Ancona Drive using the modified Burnley tree valuation method.  This method is endorsed in Council’s Fees and Charges Schedule and Council’s Street Tree Management Plan (page 42).  This valuation method is an industry wide accepted method of calculating the amenity value, ecosystem and habitat corridor role and contribution to reducing the urban heat island effect of the tree.

This valuation does not include the cost of establishing and proactive maintenance of these trees as part of Council’s street tree management program.

The financial implications of removing the existing street trees within Ancona Drive and replacing them are:

·    Value of existing street tree removed: $643,005.21.

·    Removal of all trees and stumps in Ancona Drive: $43,429.46.

·    Planting Ancona Drive with new trees would cost $27,950.

Therefore, the total cost to remove all trees and replant this street is estimated at $714,385.

Policy strategy and legislation

The proposal is consistent with Council’s Environmental Sustainability Strategy (2013) and Street Tree Management Plan (2016) and Natural and Built Shade Policy (2016).

The proposal is 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

Council Strategy                  Planning and Infrastructure

Future Direction                   Places and spaces to connect people

Theme                                   Planning our space

Strategic Objective              We have neighbourhoods defined by attractive, well connected streets and public spaces

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 28 Residents representing 22 properties of the 61 properties in Ancona Drive, Mill Park was tabled at the 27 June 2017 Council Meeting. The petition requested the removal of all the ‘Red Gum trees’ in Ancona Drive and replacement with a more suitable native or other species.

Council’s arborists inspected all trees in the street on 8 June 2017 and 18 July and found all trees to have sound structures and canopies in good health. The street was found to meet Council’s benchmark clearances for Street Trees as required by Council’s STMP (Street Tree Management Plan) and Road Management Plan (RMP).

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 in Ancona Drive 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 Ancona Drive 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 or replace the street trees in Ancona Drive Mill Park;

2.       Note that increased sweeping regimes will be undertaken at Ancona Drive to address leaf litter; and

3.       Write to all residents and owners of properties within Ancona Drive advising them of Council’s decision and include information on the assessment of the issues raised in the petition.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

6.3.3    Station Street:  Parking and Traffic Management

File No:                                  104544

Attachments:                        1        Road Safety Improvements

2        Petitioners' Photographs   

Responsible Officer:           Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Traffic Engineer   

 

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

This report discusses a petition tabled at the Council meeting held on 18 July 2017, requesting Council to install 4 hour parking restrictions, and speed humps in Station Street, between Paschke Crescent and Anderson Street, Lalor.

 

The request for speed humps in Station Street between Paschke Crescent and Anderson Street has been addressed following a successful Black Length Funding application for traffic calming to be included along the entire length of Station Street.

The report concludes that there has been no change in street conditions from the position Council adopted on 28 February 2017, to warrant a change to parking conditions to 4 hour parking, due to the close proximity to the train station and the broader community benefit of providing access to public transport.

BACKGROUND

September 2016

A petition signed by 26 residents from eight residential properties was tabled at the Council meeting on 20 September 2016, requesting Council to install 4 hour parking restrictions, a 40km/h speed limit and speed humps in Station Street, Lalor.

 

In response, at the Council meeting on 28 February 2017, Council considered a report that concluded:

·    Parking surveys and observations confirmed residents’ concerns about commuters parking all day in Station Street.

·    There was a moderate level of support for 4 hour parking.  This was because of the 14 residents who were sent a circular letter, six (43%) supported 4P restrictions, two (14%) did not support the restrictions and six (43%) did not respond.

·    Public transport and access to public transport services is one of the most important issues for the Whittlesea community and any disincentive for commuters in accessing these important services will erode the liveability of the municipality. 

1.                 Given that this section of Station Street abuts Lalor Railway Station, parking restrictions in this location were not considered appropriate. 

·    Traffic conditions in this section of Station Street did not justify the installation of speed cushions as a stand-alone treatment in an isolated section of the street, or a 40km/h speed limit.

As a result, Council resolved to:

1.  Not Install 4 hour parking restrictions ‘4P, 8am to 6pm (Monday to Friday) on the east side of Station Street between Anderson Street and Paschke Crescent;

2.  Not install speed treatment devices or a 40km/h speed limit in Station Street between Paschke Crescent and Anderson Street in isolation as part of a localised approach to this section of road.

3.  Advise the residents of Station Street between Anderson Street and Paschke Crescent on Council’s decision on this matter.

July 2017

A petition containing 101 signatures was tabled at the Council meeting on 18 July 2017, requesting Council to install 4 hour (4P) parking restrictions, and speed humps in Station Street, Lalor between Anderson Street and Paschke Crescent.

DISCUSSION

Current Petition

The current petition includes 24 signatures from seven of the 14 properties in Station Street, between Paschke Crescent and Anderson Street (the investigation area), signatures of 39 residents from other Whittlesea suburbs, 10 from persons of localities such as New Gisborne, Pascoe Vale, Reservoir, Sunbury and Vermont, as well as 16 from persons who did not include an address.

The petition is substantially the same as the previous petition, however it does include an additional concern, as summarised in the following extract:

Reversing out of the driveway is dangerous as all the cars parked do not allow for a clear visual exit from the driveway for those living on Station Street between Paschke Crescent and Anderson Street.  The parked cars block the view.

Parking and Traffic Conditions

 

Parking conditions were investigated in early 2017.  Site visits and observations occurred on mornings, throughout the day and afternoons, on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays, by Council officers since receipt of the current petition indicate that vehicles are parked all day in this section of Station Street.  Officers observed drivers of these vehicles walking to and from the Lalor Railway Station and concluded that the parked vehicles belong to commuters.

 

The petitioners concerns of vehicles parked too close to driveways and vehicle crossings or on footpaths or nature strips were not observed at these times.

 

Traffic condition (speeds and volumes) have not changed since this matter was previously investigated.

 

Road Safety

 

The previous report indicated that Station Street, south of Paschke Crescent, ie. south of the investigation area, has a poor safety record and that an application had been submitted by Council officers to VicRoads for Accident Black Length Funding. 

The submission proposed a range of traffic calming devices (in this case, road cushions due to it being a nominated bus route) along Station Street, inclusive of the investigation area.  

 

Advice has been received from VicRoads that the submission was successful.  Details regarding the scope of the project for the investigation area, are included in Attachment 1.

 

It is anticipated that the raised cushions in this section of Station Street will be installed in early 2018 following completion of detailed designs and consultation with directly affected residents.

 

Parking

 

The current petition includes photographs (Attachment 2) of an incident of inappropriate parking on Station Street.  The photographs show a large 4WD illegally parked on the nature strip adjacent to the head petitioner’s (both petitions) house, and supports the petitioners concerns that sight distance for drivers exiting the driveways is restricted.

 

Parking on the nature strip is not permitted and is subject to local laws.

 

However, completely unrestricted views of traffic will not be provided if parking on the nature strip ceases.  This is because in situations where vehicles park parallel to the kerb, sight distance for drivers may be intermittently interrupted as drivers exit a driveway.  This is similar to most kerbside parking throughout the municipality, particularly in areas of high parking demand around schools, shopping centres and other streets around railway stations.

 

Existing line-marking of parking bays along this section of Station Street are off-set sufficiently from driveways.

 

Financial Implications

 

In the event that it is determined that 4P parking restrictions are necessary, it is estimated that $800 will be needed to install the appropriate signs which can be accommodated within the existing operational budget.

 

Policy strategy and legislation

 

City of Whittlesea, Municipal Road Safety Strategy, 2004: Action Plan 3. Ensure that a safer road environment is developed and maintained.

City of Whittlesea, Integrated Transport Strategy, 2014: Action RF 2.2. Manage local roads to improve amenity and safety for users.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

COUNCIL PRIORITY           Roads, Access and Public Transport

Future Direction                   Accessibility in, out and around our City

Theme                                   Transport

Strategic Objective              The road network responds to our needs in accessing jobs, services and recreational activities

 

The management of on-street parking and vehicle speeds are critical components of an accessible road network that is accepted by the 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

There have been no changes in parking conditions since the previous petition was assessed that would warrant a different conclusion to be reached on this matter ie. 4 hour parking restrictions are not appropriate or recommended.  Local Laws presence in patrolling this area will ensure parking complies with the road rules and resident access points are not blocked allowing people to leave their property safely.

 

Speed humps will be installed along the entire length of Station Street as part of a successful Accident Black Length funding application.  These will reduce speeds in the street and as a result, improve road safety.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Not Install 4 hour parking restrictions on the east side of Station Street, between Anderson Street and Paschke Crescent;

2.       Note that speed cushions will be installed as part of the successful application for Accident Black Length funding for traffic calming works on Station Street, between Paschke Crescent and Anderson Street.

3.       Ensure that parking in Station Street, between Paschke Crescent and Anderson Street, is closely monitored over the next 6 months.

4.       To advise the residents of Station Street, between Paschke Crescent and Anderson Street, of Council’s decision on this matter.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

6.4       Corporate Services

6.4.1    Review of Procurement Policy

File No:                                  171651

Attachments:                        1        Revised 2017 Procurement Policy Version 7   

Responsible Officer:           Director Corporate Services

Author:                                  Team Leader Procurement   

 

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

The 2016/2017 review of Council’s Procurement Policy was completed in mid-June 2017.  A range of improvements are proposed which generally fall into three broad categories:

·    Amendments to grammar, references and linkages

·    Changes to the Procurement Thresholds and Competition section

·    Updates relating to sustainability

The primary benefits of the amended policy are that it will enable improved engagement of local businesses and further advancement of sustainable and strategic procurement initiatives.

Background

Council’s Procurement Policy was initially adopted by Council in November 2009.  Section 186A(7) of the Local Government Act 1989 states that “At least once in each financial year, a Council must review the current procurement policy and may, in accordance with this section, amend the procurement policy.”

The Policy is publicly available via Council’s website.  Councillors and all Council staff involved with procurement activity were invited to make submissions for assessment in the review.  The feedback received and available options were carefully considered.

The aim is to develop a more sustainable and efficient strategic procurement framework - continually improving our ability to achieve best value and support of the local economy.  In reviewing the policy some key opportunities were identified that will significantly contribute to these desirable outcomes.

Proposal

The following amendments to the policy are proposed:

1.    Amendments to grammar, references and linkages

Numerous minor amendments have been made throughout the Policy to correct minor semantic and grammatical errors and to improve readability. 

Changes were made to the definitions to clarify references to the organisation and the elected Council as well as to define ‘Local Business’.  Some references were updated to reflect recent structural changes (e.g. the new Corporate Accountability & Performance Department).  The Key Linkages at the end of the document were also updated.

2.    Changes to Procurement Thresholds and Competition section

One current Council initiative is the development of a local business database to maximise engagement of local businesses and small/medium enterprises (SMEs).  This will be a vital resource that Council’s staff will use to identify potentially suitable contractors and suppliers located within the Whittlesea municipality.  This could potentially become a publicly accessible resource that supports economic development in our region.

The supporting infrastructure is currently being tested.  The online portal is designed to enable self-registration and uploading of general business information.  Over 6,500 registered local businesses have been identified via the Australian Business Register.  When the database is activated these businesses will be contacted to encourage their participation.

The Procurement Policy can help maximise the success of this initiative by mandating internal use of the local business database.  The Policy can also provide more flexibility to remove barriers to local businesses and SMEs by streamlining the process for providing quotes valued below $50,000.

The main changes proposed to section 2.3 (Procurement Thresholds and Competition) are:

·    A new requirement to request at least one quotation from a local business whenever practicable

·    A requirement for three quotes for all procurements valued from $15,000 (including GST)

·    Approval to engage suppliers of works, goods and services valued at less than $50,000 by direct purchase order (Note: an abridged quotation process and monitoring system are being developed to ensure appropriate standards of probity are maintained).

The key threshold changes are summarised in the table below.

 

Current

Proposed

Single quote

Below $10,000

Below $15,000

*requirement to source quote from local supplier whenever practicable.

Three quotes – purchase order terms

Not available

From $15,000 to less than $50,000

*requirement to source quote from local supplier whenever practicable.

Three quotes  - tender process

From $10,000 to public tender threshold

From $50,000 to public tender threshold

*requirement to source quote from local supplier whenever practicable.

Public tender

No change (in accordance with section 186 of Local Government Act).

From $150,000 (goods and services) From $200,000 (works)

Another current procurement initiative is the development of a strategic procurement development plan which details a wide range of actions within 38 separate categories.  Timely achievement of those actions is dependent on redirection of resources – this is enabled by internal efficiencies arising from the above amendments.

In the plan, under the category of ‘Procurement measures and reporting’, the planned actions include identification of reporting requirements for key stakeholders.  As the Mayor and Councillors have requested information regarding on time and on budget delivery, an additional Key Performance Indicator of “Extent of contracts delivered on time and on budgethas also been included at section 4.2 (Performance Indicators).

3.    Updates relating to sustainability

Section 3.4 (Environmental Sustainability) has been substantially re-written to reflect the terminology and general approach detailed in a new international standard (ISO 20400:2017) which provides guidance on sustainable procurement. 

The new section 3.4 is now titled ‘Sustainable Procurement’ and it details economic, social and environmental sustainability principles.  It also provides direction on development and evaluation of tenders to achieve positive outcomes.

Most significantly it is proposed to introduce up to a 5% preference for any business that demonstrates desirable sustainability practices and outcomes.  Note that this is in addition to the 5% preference already allocated to local businesses.

Two additional actions are included in section 3.4.2 (Economic Sustainability):

·     To look for opportunities to simplify our documentation and to identify local businesses that have the potential to supply.

·     To conduct annual presentations to assist local businesses with becoming suppliers and tendering for Council’s contracts.

Once Council adopt the Procurement Policy, Officers will update the Procurement Procedures and Guidelines accordingly to ensure consistency across these documents.

Consultation

Consultation with Councillors and Council staff commenced on 10 March 2017 and continued until late May.  The proposed amendments were presented at Council Forum on 3 August 2017.

Critical Dates

The annual review was completed in June 2017 in accordance with the requirements of section 186A(7) of the Local Government Act 1989.

Financial Implications

The efficient and effective procurement of goods and services is an outcome of good governance and effective financial management.  It ensures that public funds are used in a proper manner and that best value is achieved.

Policy strategy and legislation

It is a requirement under the Local Government Performance Reporting Framework that Council reports on whether or not the mandatory annual review of the Procurement Policy was conducted.  Council has met this requirement.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

COUNCIL PRIORITY           Organisational Sustainability

Future Direction                   Good governance

Theme                                   Continuous improvement

Strategic Objective              Our Council explores and adopts best practice models

 

The policy supports the following Future Directions articulated in the Council Plan:

·    Growing Our Economy - by supporting local business;

·    Living Sustainably - by setting sustainability standards, and

·    Good Governance - by adopting best practice models of operation that enable the achievement of value for money.

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

This comprehensive review involved significant consultation and consideration of a wide range of factors including best value, risk management, economic development, efficiency and strategic direction.  It was determined the proposed amendments to the Procurement Policy are an appropriate and effective way to:

·    Improve engagement of local businesses and SMEs

·    Enable further  advancement of strategic procurement initiatives

·    Ensure the policy remains relevant, comprehensive, accurate and informative.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to adopt the revised 2017 Procurement Policy (Version 7) as attached.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

6.4.2    Committee of Council Recommendation - Lease – Yarra Plenty Regional Library Service – Staff Accommodation

File No:                                  162306

Attachments:                        1        Site Plan   

Responsible Officer:           Director Corporate Services

Author:                                  Senior Property Officer   

 

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

To report on the recommendations presented by the Committee of Council regarding the proposed lease with Yarra Plenty Regional Library Service (‘YPRLS’), for the exclusive use of part of the ‘PRACC North office space’) located at 35A Ferres Boulevard, South Morang (see Attachment 1 – Site Plan).

The proposal will ensure that the YPRLS will continue to use part of the PRACC North office space for the purposes of providing back office accommodation to support regional libraries operating in the Cities of Whittlesea and Banyule and the Shire of Nillumbik.

Background

Council, at its meeting held on 18 July 2017, formally resolved to invite public submissions in relation to the proposed lease with the Yarra Plenty Regional Library Service (‘YPRLS’), for the exclusive use of part of Council’s PRACC North office space.

Under the terms and conditions of the lease, YPRLS would occupy the premises (235m2) for the purposes of providing back office accommodation to support regional libraries operating in the Cities of Whittlesea and Banyule and the Shire of Nillumbik.

The premises will be made exclusively available to YPRLS for a period of one year with a provision of a further one year term.  A commencement date rental of $85,000 per annum (plus GST) will be charged to YPRLS.

Proposal

To seek Council’s approval on the proposed lease in consideration of the public submissions received (none) and findings of the Elected Committee of Council (no requirement to meet).

COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL

A Committee of Council, comprising of Cr Alessi, Cr Desiato, Cr Kelly and Cr Lalios, was appointed to consider any written submissions received in response to Council’s public notice advertised in the Whittlesea Leader newspaper on Tuesday 25 July 2017.

No submissions were received at the close of the advertising period (23 August 2017, 12 noon).  A memo was sent to the Committee of Council on Wednesday 23 August 2017, advising that no public submissions were received and the Committee of Council hearing would not be required.

Financial Implications

Following discussions with YPRLS, Council’s Manager Property, Rates & Valuations has agreed that the annual rental of $85,000 per annum (plus GST) be applied for the initial term secured under lease.  Rent will continue to be charged in advance and on a monthly basis.  

Policy strategy and legislation

Council have sought public submissions on the proposed lease under Section 190 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989.  Submissions were invited for a period no less than 28 days and referred on to an appointed Committee of Council for consideration.  The Committee of Council has been advised that no submissions were received.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

COUNCIL PRIORITY           Jobs and Investment

Future Direction                   Growing our economy

Theme                                   Economic development

Strategic Objective              Our local, industrial and regional business communities are supported to thrive in our City

 

The proposal seeks to extend the tenancy granted to YPRLS and ensure that the provision of back office accommodation to support regional libraries operating in the Cities of Whittlesea and Banyule and the Shire of Nillumbik, is maintained without interruption.

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

It is recommended that a new lease be granted to YPRLS to enable operations to continue.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Note that public submissions on the proposed lease with the Yarra Plenty Regional Library Service were invited in accordance with Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 and that no submissions were received at the close of the public submission period.

2.       Enter into a lease with Yarra Plenty Regional Library Service for the exclusive use of part of Council’s Plenty Ranges Arts and Convention Centre (known as ‘PRACC North office space’) located at 35A Ferres Boulevard, South Morang, under the following terms and conditions –

a)      The Tenant will be granted a lease for a period of one year with a provision for a one year further term.

b)      The Tenant will pay a commencement date rental of $85,000 per annum (plus GST).

3.       Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate all other terms and conditions, including the signing of the lease.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

6.4.3    Certification of 2016-17 Financial Statements and Unconfirmed Minutes of Audit & Risk Committee Meeting

File No:                                  N/A

Attachments:                        1        Draft Financial Statements 2016/17

2        Draft Performance Statement 2016/17

3        Unconfirmed Minutes of Audit & Risk Committee Meeting Held on 24 August 2017   

Responsible Officer:           Director Corporate Services

Author:                                  Manager Finance & Assets   

 

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

Council is required to produce audited Annual Financial Statements and a Performance Statement pursuant to the requirements and process outlined in the Local Government Act 1989 and the Local Government (Planning and Reporting) Regulations 2014.

 

The Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement for the year ended 30 June 2017 are required to be submitted to the Auditor-General by 30 September 2017.

Introduction

This report seeks Council approval for adoption in principle of the City of Whittlesea Annual Financial Statements (Attachment 1) and Performance Statement (Attachment 2) for the year ended 30 June 2017 and authorisation of two Councillors to sign the certifications included in the Reports.

As required under Council’s Audit and Risk Committee Charter, this report also presents the Unconfirmed Minutes of the Audit and Risk Committee meeting held on 24 August 2017 (Attachment 3).

Background

The Financial Statements and Performance Statement are required to be certified by Council’s Chief Executive Officer, Principal Accounting Officer and two Councillors on behalf of Council prior to Council’s auditor signing the audit certifications.

The draft Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement for 2016/2017 are firstly presented to Council’s Audit and Risk Committee for review and recommendation for adoption by Council.  The review focuses on:

·    Accounting policies and practices, including any changes to accounting policies and practices

·    Compliance with accounting standards and other reporting requirements

·    Significant adjustments to the financial report (if any) arising from the audit process

·    Significant variances from prior years.

 

aUDIT and RISK cOMMITTEE MEETING 24 AugUst 2017

The Audit and Risk Committee discussed and reviewed the Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement with a representative of Council’s external auditor, Phil Delahunty (RSD).

The Committee recommended a number of minor amendments which have been incorporated, and are reflected in the attached Draft Financial Statements and Performance Statement.  The Committee also had a number of queries in relation to Reserves.

It is noted that a number of changes were included in this year’s Statements as a result of changes with the Accounting Standards.

The Committee noted that the Management Letter was yet to be received and were advised by Council’s external auditor that he believed that any issued raised in the Management Letter would be rated ‘low’.

The Committee further recommended that the two Councillors on the Audit and Risk Committee be authorised to sign the Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement.

Comprehensive result

The Comprehensive Income Statement includes an amount after the total surplus (deficit) that represents the net revaluation increase of all property and infrastructure assets.  Therefore, the total comprehensive result for 2016/2017 is $160.012M.

Council measures its underlying operational result to assist in the determination of whether it is operating in a sustainable fashion or not.  The underlying result is an important indicator of Council's long-term financial sustainability.  Whilst an underlying deficit in one financial year is not significant, the continued recording of deficits over a sustained period from Council's operations gradually erodes the net assets of Council.

The underlying result from operations excludes a number of transactions which are either 'non-recurring' or not operational in nature.  These items are frequently unpredictable and typically can change from one year to the next.  The best examples of these items are assets (roads, footpaths, drains, land reserves, etc) that are given to Council by developers once a new subdivision is completed.  There are also other accounting adjustments for 'found assets' (when assets that have not been previously recognised by Council are identified), 'lost assets' (when existing assets are written off) or when existing assets are revalued.

The aim of an underlying result is to determine whether Council's operational costs/income result is a surplus or deficit outcome.  In this way, Council can, in long-term financial planning, aim for an outcome where pure operational outcomes assist Council in achieving a sustainable organisation.

The table below shows the underlying operational result for the year ended 30 June 2017.

Comprehensive Result from Standard Comprehensive Income Statement

$160.012M

Less Other Comprehensive Income:

 

Asset revaluation increment (decrement)

53,086M

Net result for the year from Comprehensive Income Statement

$106.926M

Less Non-operating Income and Expenditure

 

Grants – capital

14.063M

Contributions - capital

2.069M

Contributions – cash (developer contributions)

11.156M

Contributions - Non-monetary assets

53.323M

Found assets

5.774M

Underlying surplus (deficit)

$20.541M

While showing a total comprehensive result of $160.012M, the table above shows that the City of Whittlesea’s underlying operating result for 2016/2017 is a surplus of $20.541M.  This amount includes the Commonwealth Government Grants Commission grant instalment of $6.9M relating to 2017/2018 which was received in advance in 2016/2017.

Financial sustainability indicators

The Victorian Auditor-General’s Office publishes Council’s result against a range of indicators used to assist in measuring performance and financial sustainability.  The estimated result of the 2016/2017 indicators are presented in the table below.

 

RATIO

16/17

COMMENTS

Net Result

(Net result / total revenue)

36.69%

Green

This ratio measures Council’s ability to fund operations and asset renewal.  Operating deficits cannot be sustained in the long term.

A less than -10% (deficit) is deemed high risk (red) and a positive result is desirable (green).

 

Liquidity

(Current assets / current liabilities)

4.90

Green

This ratio measures Council’s ability to pay existing liabilities in the next 12 months.

A result of less that 0.75 is deemed as high risk (red) and a result higher than 1 is desirable (green).

 

Internal financing

(Net operating cash flows / net capital expenditure)

111%

Green

This ratio measures Council’s ability to replace assets using cash generated from operations.

A result of less than 75% is deemed as high risk (red) and a result higher than 100% is desirable (green).

 

Indebtedness

(non-current liabilities / own-sourced revenue)

21.9%

Green

This ratio measures Council’s ability to cover its non-current liabilities with its own sourced revenue.

A result of more than 60% is deemed as high risk (red) and a result lower than 40% is desirable (green).

 

Capital replacement (Cash outflows for property, plant and equipment / Depreciation)

2.25

Green

Comparison of the rate of spending on infrastructure with its depreciation.

A result lower than 1 is deemed high risk (red) and a result higher than 1.5 is desirable (green).

 

Renewal gap

Renewal and upgrade expenditure / depreciation)

1.04

Green

 

Comparison of the rate of spending on existing assets through renewing, restoring and replacing existing assets with depreciation.

A ratio lower that 0.5 is deemed high risk (red) and a result higher than 1 is desirable (green).

 

Overall assessment for long-term financial sustainability

 

Green

The City of Whittlesea remains low risk (green) for its long term financial sustainability.

Proposal

It is proposed that Council:

1.   Note the Minutes of the Audit and Risk Committee Meeting held on 24 August 2017.

2.   Approve in principle the Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement for the year ended 30 June 2017.

3.   Authorise the Principal Accounting Officer to make minor amendments to the Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement for the year ended 30 June 2017 to meet the Victorian Auditor General’s (VAGO) requirements.

4.   Authorise the Audit & Risk Committee Councillor representatives, Cr Kirkham and Cr Kozmevski to sign-off on the Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement for the year ended 30 June 2017.

5.   Authorise the Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer to sign-off on the Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement for the year ended 30 June 2017.

6.   Authorise the final audited Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement for the year ended 30 June 2017 to be forwarded to the Minister for Local Government as part of the Annual Report by 30 September 2017.

7.   Note the Audit & Risk Committee’s appreciation expressed to the staff involved in the preparation of the Draft Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement and congratulate Management on the quality of the statements provided.  In particular, that thanks be provided to the Acting Team Leader Financial Accounting.

8.   Over the next 12 months Council review its liabilities (if any) in relation to Tip rehabilitation and the purpose of the Tip Reserve.

Consultation

Consultation has been conducted with the relevant Council departments and external service providers as necessary through the course of the audit.

Critical Dates

Council is required to submit its audited financial statements to the Minister for Local Government by 30 September each year.

Financial Implications

The cost of the annual audit by VAGO is included within Council’s annual budget.

Policy strategy and legislation

Local Government Act 1989 section 131 and the Local Government (Planning and Reporting) Regulations 2014.

 

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

Council Priority                    Organisational Sustainability

Future Direction                   Good governance

Theme                                   Resource management

Strategic Objective              Our Council strives to achieve long term financial sustainability

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 Unconfirmed Minutes of the Audit and Risk Committee meeting held on 24 August 2017, (Attachment 3) are presented for information.

The Financial Statements and Performance Statement have been reviewed by the Audit and Risk Committee and Council’s external auditor at the Audit and Risk Committee meeting held on 24 August 2017 with no audit qualification or high risk issues identified.

Two Councillors are required to sign the certification of the Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement once clearance is obtained from the Victorian Auditor-General and after the Principal Accounting Officer has signed his certification.  In accordance with usual practice, it is proposed that the Councillors on the Audit and Risk Committee be authorised to sign the certification on behalf of Council after the necessary clearance has been obtained. 

In the event that there may be some late changes made to the Annual Financial Statements or Performance Statement, it is also proposed that the approval given to the Councillors be extended to enable them to sign the certification after the necessary changes have been made.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Note the Minutes of the Audit and Risk Committee Meeting held on 24 August 2017.

2.       Approve in principle the Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement for the year ended 30 June 2017.

3.       Authorise the Principal Accounting Officer to make minor amendments to the Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement for the year ended 30 June 2017 to meet the Victorian Auditor General’s (VAGO) requirements.

4.       Authorise Audit & Risk Committee Councillor representatives, Cr Kirkham and Cr Kozmevski to sign-off on the Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement for the year ended 30 June 2017.

5.       Authorise the Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer to sign-off on the Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement for the year ended 30 June 2017.

6.       Authorise the final audited Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement for the year ended 30 June 2017 to be forwarded to the Minister for Local Government as part of the Annual Report by 30 September 2017.

7.       Note the Audit & Risk Committee’s appreciation expressed to the staff involved in the preparation of the Draft Annual Financial Statements and Performance Statement and congratulate Management on the quality of the statements provided.  In particular, that thanks be provided to the Acting Team Leader Financial Accounting;

8.       Over the next 12 months Council review its liabilities (if any) in relation to Tip rehabilitation and the purpose of the Tip Reserve.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

6.5       Partnerships & Engagement

6.5.1    Economic Development Strategy "Growing Our Economy Together"

File No:                                  N/A

Attachments:                        1        Economic Development Strategy   

Responsible Officer:           Manager Community Building & Planning

Author:                                  Manager Advocacy, Communications & Economic Development   

 

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

This report seeks endorsement of the City of Whittlesea’s Economic Development Strategy (Attachment 1). The Economic Development Strategy outlines a clear direction to drive Council’s economic development activity. The strategy has been developed following internal and external consultation.

The strategy outlines a clear vision – to attract 10,000 new jobs in the City of Whittlesea over five years - achieved by working within a framework of 20 goals underpinned by five key directions. 

Background

The Economic Development Strategy has been prepared to provide a framework to guide the development of a diverse range of jobs in a strong local economy.

 

Council is committed to supporting business and industry to start, grow and prosper. Council is well-placed to drive local economic development through relationships with community, local businesses and key stakeholders. Critically important to driving local economic development is taking a coordinated approach across Council and engagement with the broader community – including business, investors and policy makers – to work together to achieve economic growth. Building strong collaborative partnerships is a key focus of the strategy.

 

Economic development is strongly linked to community development and helps to foster strong, resilient and connected communities. In acknowledgement of this, Council’s Community Building Principles will underpin this strategy and guide activities and actions.

This strategy aims to provide a clear strategic direction to assist growth and investment to ensure the local economy reaches its potential.

Proposal

The major focus of the Economic Development Strategy is to sustain and grow local jobs for our existing and growing community. The strategy establishes the following vision enabling a clear measure of success:

To attract 10,000 new jobs in the City of Whittlesea over the next five years.

This vision provides clarity of purpose for Council’s economic development activity, reinforcing that everything we do is about helping to sustain and grow local jobs.

To achieve this vision, the strategy has established 20 goals underpinned by the following five Key Directions:

 

1.         Strive to build a healthy, prosperous and resilient community.

2.         Foster an environment that encourages the development of a vibrant local economy.

3.         Capitalise on the city’s human, natural and built resources to maximise local         employment.

4.         Promote the municipality as an attractive destination to invest in, work, visit and enjoy.

5.         Collaborate with community, business and government to deliver resources and opportunities.

 

The established goals aim to achieve a range of economic benefits including:

·    Supporting existing businesses with the right programs, events and networking opportunities.

·    Increasing the number of local businesses supplying goods and services to Council.

·    Implementing a priority application process for developments that trigger jobs and investment.

·    Actively pursuing investment attraction.

·    Establishing a risk based approach to compliance and enforcement.

·    Protecting rural land and enabling a prosperous and prominent agribusiness sector.

·    Collaborating with regional partners on a regional investment attraction strategy.

·    Positioning the City of Whittlesea and Melbourne’s north as a nationally significant food hub.

 

A detailed action plan will support our vision and goals and will be an ongoing, adaptable and evolving work plan. However, the vision and goals will remain constant and the agreed strategic direction.

 

Critical to the success of this strategy is working in partnership with key stakeholders.  This strategy will embed strong collaboration with regional partners including NORTH Link, Melbourne’s Northern Councils and the State Government Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources.

Consultation

To inform the preparation of the strategy, consultation and engagement sessions were conducted with internal and external stakeholders. Internal stakeholders included Managers, Team Leaders and Coordinators. Local business owners, investors, the State Government and industry associations represented external stakeholders. The outcomes of the consultation sessions provided fundamental information in forming the key objectives of the strategy.

Key themes that arose from consultation:

·    Businesses want to feel connected and supported by Council

·    Opportunities to work collaboratively on industry wide projects

·    Access to information is imperative

·    Support for home based businesses

·    Support industry and labour force in adapting to change

·    Our community want to support the local economy

This feedback has helped shaped the goals outlined in the strategy.

 

An initial planning session was held with Councillors at a workshop forum in early 2016. The draft strategy was presented to Councillors at Forum on Tuesday 13 June 2017. Feedback from councillors has been incorporated into the final draft, which was circulated to Councillors for a final review via memo on Monday 24 July 2017.

Representatives from the State Government northern regional economic development team based in Bundoora, NORTH Link representatives and a number of northern councils have reviewed the strategy and provided positive endorsement.

Critical Dates

This strategy sets the vision of attracting 10,000 new jobs to the City of Whittlesea over five years. A progress report against this strategy will be included in the City of Whittlesea Annual Report to the community every year. 

Financial Implications

It is expected that this strategy will be implemented within existing resources.  Any actions that require additional funding may be sourced through State and Federal funding opportunities, financial partnership with internal departments, successful Financial Resource Request (FRR) submissions or private funding (sponsorship).

Policy strategy and legislation

The Economic Development Strategy is clearly aligned to priorities set out in the Community Plan and the Council Plan 2017-21.

Community Plan
The Community Plan outlines the long term aspirations of our community. The Community Plan guides key directions and priorities and is underpinned by seven Future Directions, one of which is ‘Growing our Economy,’ which has the following strategic objectives:

·    We have access to local employment opportunities

·    New business and investment are attracted to our city

·    Our local, industrial and regional business communities are supported to thrive in our city

·    Our rural land  and natural resources provide sustainable economic development opportunities

·    Our social enterprise and business initiatives are supported

·    Initiatives that develop workforce training and skill development are encouraged and supported.

Council Plan 2017-21
The Council Plan 2017-21 outlines what the elected Council aims to achieve over its four-year term. Seven priority areas have been identified, each with a stated goal and key strategies. ‘Jobs and Investment’ is identified as a priority area:

Goal:                           We grow our economy by attracting jobs and investment

Key strategies:          Attract one local job per house built in the municipality

Support young people, women, recently arrived and culturally and linguistically diverse residents to access jobs

The Economic Development Strategy has been developed with strong alignment to the Community and Council Plans, with the goals and strategic directions providing a clear link to these overarching policy setting frameworks.

 

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

COUNCIL PRIORITY           Jobs and Investment

Future Direction                   Growing our economy

Theme                                   Employment

Strategic Objective              New business and investment are attracted to our City

 

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 Economic Development Strategy establishes five key directions to pursue and achieve a strong economy with diverse jobs and increased local investment.

This strategy will link with other key strategic documents to ensure a coordinated approach to growing our economy, for example Thomastown Industrial and Community Building and Planning Strategies.

The strategy will underpin the structure, work and collaboration of Council’s economic development activity.

Economic development supports Council’s vision of creating self-sustaining communities together.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Adopt the Economic Development Strategy.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

6.5.2    Participation and Engagement: Approval of Projects proposing the use of external consultants (Quarter 1)

File No:                                  .

Attachments:                        1        Attachment 1: Guidelines for the use of External Consultants for Participation and Engagement Projects

2        Attachment 2: List of projects seeking Council approval

3        Attachment 3: List of projects NOT seeking Council approval   

Responsible Officer:           Director Partnerships & Engagement 

Author:                                  Team Leader Research   

 

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

At the Council meeting on 27 June 2017, Council resolved that approval from Council must be sought for the use of external consultants for participation and engagement activities across the organisation over a twelve month trial period. An internal process and set of guidelines have been established to collate the required information to enable Council to make informed decisions on a case by case basis. A report will be provided every quarter containing all participation and engagement projects proposing to involve consultants over the proceeding months. This information will be used by Council to consider whether a project can proceed with the intention to use external consultants.

 

Two tables are attached with information for consideration:

1.   A list of projects seeking approval for the use of external consultants for their participation and engagement activities. This specifies the department leading the project and includes the approximate cost of the consultant, level of engagement and reasons why the use of an external consultant is imperative to the project

2.   For clarity and transparency, a table listing current or upcoming projects using external consultants for participation and engagement activities where contracts were in place prior to the resolution on 27 June 2017. 

 

This is the first quarterly report provided to Council in response to the Council resolution. A decision from Council is sought in relation to approval to proceed with engaging external consultants for each of the proposed projects listed in Attachment 2.

Background

The City of Whittlesea’s Participation and Engagement Policy and Framework were adopted by Council on 27 June 2017. At the Council meeting, Council resolved that:

“Council will not use external consultants for community engagement, unless approval is sought from Council on a twelve month trial basis, and a report be provided three months in advance seeking approval of expenditure for a future period.”

A set of guidelines have been developed to implement the Council resolution and ensure Councillors are provided with the necessary information required to make a fully informed decision on the proposal to use consultants for each project. The guidelines specify the context for when approval for use of external consultants applies, noting that the resolution applies only to use of external consultants contracted to undertake internal or community-based participation and engagement activities on behalf, or in support of the City of Whittlesea. It does not apply to the use of consultants for other purposes. The guidelines and process are outlined in Attachment 1 and retrospectively apply from 27 June 2017 to 30 June 2018.

Proposal

As per the Council resolution, Project Managers and their respective Departments are seeking approval on their intended use of external consultants for participation and engagement activities over the next 6 months. Attachment 2 is a table comprised of all relevant information for Councillors to make a decision regarding approval of the use of external consultants. The information has been collated by the Partnerships and Engagement directorate, via Council’s Participation and Engagement Advisor, and includes for each project:

·    The project name

·    Department undertaking the engagement

·    Reasons for intended use of external consultants

·    Proposed level of engagement (as per the IAP2 spectrum)

·    Estimated value of the consultants for the engagement component

·    Proposed activities to be undertaken by the external consultants

·    A risk rating calculated by multiplying the impact by the viability (of NOT using external consultants)

·    A written rationale for this risk rating.

For clarity and transparency, Attachment 3 lists current or upcoming participation and engagement activities for projects which include the use of an external consultant. These departments are not seeking approval for use of external consultants as the projects were underway and the consultants engaged prior to 27 June 2017.

Consultation

The guidelines for this new process of seeking Council approval for the use of external consultants for participation and engagement activities (refer to Attachment 1) were developed with input from key staff across the organisation and were approved by the Executive Leadership Team in July 2017. The information contained in Attachments 2 and 3 are based on discussions and input provided by relevant Project Managers and Department Managers from across the organisation, in discussion with Council’s Participation and Engagement Advisor.

Critical Dates

The approximate timing of each quarterly report seeking Council approval for proposed participation and engagement activities seeking to use external consultants is as follows:

·    29 August 2017: First Quarter Report provided to Council

·    Mid November 2017: Second Quarter Report provided to Council

·    Late February 2018: Third Quarter Report provided to Council

·    Mid May 2018: Fourth Quarter Report provided to Council

 

In June / July 2018, an evaluation of the process will be undertaken and discussion had with Council to determine if this process will be extended beyond the initial 12 month trial period.

Financial Implications

The use of external consultants for participation and engagement activities can have financial implications for the organisation. It is important to consider the costs, benefits and risks if the organisation does or does not engage external consultants and chooses to use internal resources to undertake the proposed community engagement activities. When determining the appropriateness and financial implications of using external consultants for the proposed projects, the following factors should be considered:

·    Scope and complexity of the proposed activities

·    Timeframes to undertake the activities

·    Staffing (capacity and capability to undertake all elements of the project to the required high standard)

·    Reputation / perception of community

·    Community connection with the organisation and project

·    Ownership and sharing of intellectual property and data.

Policy strategy and legislation

It is a legislative requirement through the Local Government Performance Reporting Framework (LGPRF) that all Councils have a Participation and Engagement Policy. Consistent with the legislation, the intent of the City of Whittlesea’s Policy and Framework is to increase the emphasis on the good practice, transparency, responsiveness and collaborative capacity of councils to engage the community in their decision-making processes. As per the Council resolution from 27 June 2017, the City of Whittlesea’s Participation and Engagement Framework specifies that approval from Council must be sought for the use of external consultants for participation and engagement activities.

 

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

FUTURE DIRECTION          Organisational Sustainability

FUTURE DIRECTION          Inclusive and engaged community

Theme                                   Community voice

Strategic Objective              Our voice is reflected through inclusive Council decision making processes 

 

The Participation and Engagement Policy and Framework, and the guidelines for engaging with external consultants, affirms Council’s commitment to open, accountable and responsive decision making, informed by effective engagement with the community. It will also help to ensure the organisation is most effectively and efficiently using our resources to maximise our efforts to involve the community in our decision-making processes.

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

This report seeks Council approval for use of external consultants for the proposed participation and engagement activities specified in Attachment 2. It is the first time Council will be considering approval for such activities and the process is now in place for a twelve month trial period until 30 June 2018. Project Managers will be notified of the Council decision for each project prior to any external consultants being engaged to commence on the respective projects.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Approve the use of external consultants for each participation and engagement project as detailed below:

·     Whittlesea Disability Network – Terms of Reference Review

·     Epping Soccer Stadium Feasibility Study

·     City of Whittlesea Recreation Strategy

·     Tennis Facility Feasibility – Doreen

·     Sycamore Reserve Master Plan

·     Epping Recreation Reserve Master Plan

·     Epping Central DCP Implementation High Street Revitalisation

·     Mill Park Recreation Reserve Master Plan and All Abilities Playspace

·     Communications Research

·     Special Rate renewal process for Bundoora Square and Thomastown Shopping Centres

·     Public Toilet Amenity Plan – 2017/2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                             Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

 


List of projects proposing to use external consultants

 

Project Name

Approximate timeframes

Department

Reason(s) for using external consultants

IAP2
Level(s) of engagement

Estimated  cost of external consultants

Activities external consultants will undertake

Risk rating (as per table below)

Rationale for risk rating

1. Whittlesea Disability Network (WDN) Terms of Reference review

2nd Qtr of 2017/18

Community Wellbeing Department

As part of consultation for the Disability Action Plan 2017-21, WDN members have requested an independent consultant review the WDN terms of reference as this will: 

·   Ensure the consultation is carried out independently of Council

·   Enable Council to be seen as equal to everyone else in the network and not having our own agenda

·   Strengthen the quality of the research

·    Strengthen the future direction of WDN and give Council a better opportunity to consult with the community around issues relating to people with disabilities.

Inform, Consult, Involve and Collaborate

$3,000

Faciltate the discussion and consultation with WDN.

Produce a report with recommendations. 

12 (Important)

An independent consultant is required otherwise Council could be accused of directing the outcome of the consultation.

 

Two topics in the proposed review include:

 -  conflict of interest

- the scenario of council having a policy direction that is different to that of the network.

2. Epping Soccer Stadium Feasibility Study

Late 2017

Leisure & Community Facilities Department

An impartial facilitator and independent consultant are required as there are lots of sensitivities amongst stakeholders around the outcomes of the Epping Soccer Stadium Feasibility Study. 

In order for the final report to be accepted by stakeholders it is recommended that an impartial facilitator conduct the required meetings and workshops and an independent consultant develops the final report.

Inform

Consult

Involve

$4,000

Meetings/workshop with:

· 11 local soccer clubs

· Professional Soccer clubs

· Football Federation Victoria

· Other interested parties

· Internal stakeholders.

12 (Important)

The project is highly sensitive and contentious amongst stakeholders and it is essential that the consultations and report are conducted independently of Council if the findings are to be accepted.

3. City of Whittlesea Recreation Strategy

Early 2018 – January-March

Leisure & Community Facilities Department

To develop a recreation strategy Council needs to undertake a significant level of community consultation and engagement that is beyond the capacity of Council staff. 

Council has received a $30,000 grant from Sport and Recreation Victoria (SRV) to complete this study; the original application required stakeholder engagement by an external consultant.

Inform Consult

Involve Collaborate

$25,000

 

The community engagement activities have not been finalised but they are expected to include online surveys, a Facebook page, pop up sessions, meetings and workshops etc.

16 (Crucial)

The $30,000 SRV grant will cover the cost of  external consultant carrying out the significant community consultation and engagement that is required to develop the City of Whittlesea Recreation Strategy.

4. Tennis Facility Feasibility  – Doreen

October/ November 2017

Leisure & Community Facilities Department

 

 

Consultants need to be involved in the consultation to adequately develop the feasibility study.

Inform Consult

$5,000

 

· Online survey of local residents

· Pop up engagement sessions

· Meetings with Whittlesea tennis clubs

· Meeting with Tennis Victoria

9 (Important)

Reaching all stakeholders required to make a fair decision inclusive of community input.

5. Sycamore Reserve Master Plan

Early 2018

Leisure & Community Facilities Department

 

 

The Sycamore Reserve Master Plan is a significant and potentially contentious project as there are a diverse and large number of stakeholders that are very interested in the outcome.

 

An independent external consultant is needed to carry out the extensive consultation that is required and manage the expectations of the diverse stakeholder groups.

Inform

Consult

$6,000

· Mail drop of local residents

· Meetings with resident clubs

· Meetings with internal stakeholders

12 (Important)

External consultants would help secure maximum community input into developing the master plan. 

6. Epping Recreation Reserve Master Plan

October to December 2017

Parks and Open Space Department

Consultants with specialist skills are required to:

·    Maximise interest and meaningfully engage a range of resident, community and club stakeholders in accordance with IAP2.  This includes: conducting tailored activities to maximise resident and community interest in a complex project and establishing and maintaining stakeholders expectations

·      Undertake complex data collection, analysis and reporting.

·    This is also the most effective use of Council resources as officers are responsible for project management but they don’t have the capacity to carry out the range and amount of engagement activities that meaningful consultation will require, nor do they have the specialist skills required to undertake the complex analysis and reporting that is required.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Inform Consult

Involve

$10,000

·  2 x on site pop up sessions

·  2 x onsite school idea workshops

·  2x key internal and external stakeholder meetings

·  2x sporting club consultation

·  Design of flyer and onsite signage

·  Letterbox drop to approx. 1500-2000 residents

·  Online & hardcopy survey

·  Detailed Community Engagement Report

12 (Important)

There are a large number of key site stakeholders such as the football club, cricket club, Epping cemetery, tennis club etc.

There is a lack of internal resources to adequately perform the consultation required for each of the key stakeholders.

The site and overall project is large and needs to be undertaken in a continuous fashion rather than a bite size approach over the course of 12 months.

7.  Epping Central DCP Implementation High Street Revitalisation

December 2017 to February 2018 TBC

Parks and Open Space Department / Partnerships and Engagement Directorate

Consultants with specialist skills are required to:

·    Maximise interest and meaningfully engage a range of resident, community and club stakeholders in accordance with IAP2.  This includes: conducting tailored activities to maximise resident and community interest in a complex site and establishing and maintaining stakeholders expectations

·      Undertake complex data collection, analysis and reporting

·    This is also the most effective use of Council resources as officers are responsible for project management but they do not have the capacity to carry out the range and amount of engagement activities that meaningful consultation will require.  Nor do they have the specialist skills required to undertake the complex analysis and reporting that is required.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Inform Consult

Involve

$7,000 to $10,000

· 1x on site pop up sessions with community and traders

· 2x Key Internal and external stakeholder meetings

· Design of flyer and onsite signage

· Detailed Community Engagement Report

 

9 (Important)

The complex nature of the site requires the skills of a qualified and experienced external consultant. Failure to undertake this process properly could impact the success of delivering the right outcome for the community.

8. Mill Park Recreation Reserve Master Plan and All Abilities Playspace

Subject to Growing Suburbs Fund application, December 2017 to January 2018

Parks and Open Space Department

Consultants with specialist skills are required to:

·    Maximise interest and meaningfully engage a range of resident, community and club stakeholders in accordance with IAP2.  This includes: conducting tailored activities to maximise resident and community interest in a complex site and establishing and maintaining stakeholders expectations

·    Undertake complex data collection, analysis and reporting.

·      This is also the most effective use of Council resources as officers are responsible for project management but they do not have the capacity to carry out the range and amount of engagement activities that meaningful consultation will require.  Nor do they have the specialist skills required to undertake the complex analysis and reporting that is required.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Inform

Consult

$8,000 to $10,000

· 1 x pop up session at Mill Park Leisure

· 1x pop up session at Mill Park Stables Shopping Centre

· Targeted consultation with Council’s disability advisory group and other relevant external stakeholders

· 2x school workshops

· 1x Key Internal stakeholder meeting

· Design of flyer and onsite signage

· Letterbox drop to approx. 1,500-2,000 residents

· Online & hardcopy survey

· Detailed Community Engagement Report

12 (Important)

A detailed community participation and engagement report is required in order to obtain significant grant funding opportunities. 

Participation, engagement and consultation must be succinct and continuous.

9. Communications Research 

 

September – November 2017

 

Advocacy, Communications and Economic Development Department

·      This research will involve a telephone interview of approximately 1,000 residents. It will test how and what  information our community wants to receive from Council and the preferred channels they wish to use to engage Council.  This evidence-based research is critical to meaningfully informing Council’s next communications strategy.

·      This work was undertaken three years ago by a specialist market research company who undertook a telephone survey of 1,000 residents. The methodology requires market segmentation of target audiences and suburbs along with after hours and weekend calls to be made. This is specialist research that may also involve focus groups and requires a skill set, resourcing and technical capacity not available with internal resources.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Inform

Consult

$40,000

· Telephone survey

 

· Focus groups

 

· Analysis and report of data and findings

16 (Crucial)

We do not have the expertise to conduct the level of market research required and will not be able to gain the level of insight required to inform an evidence based communications strategy.

10. Special Rate renewal process for Bundoora Square and Thomastown Shopping Centres

 

September – December 2017

 

Advocacy, Communications and Economic Development Department

·    A consultant is required to undertake a survey with traders to determine the level of support for a special rate renewal.  It can be a time consuming process to obtain the mininum 90 per cent response rate and can involve numerous visits/engagements with business owners.

·    A consultant also provides an independent perspective of analysis and draws upon an accurate and unbias reflection from the traders.

·    Findings from the survey will provide the basis for the business plan objectives.

Inform

Consult

Involve

$10,000 - $12,000

· Encourage traders to complete the survey (minimum 90% survey per Centre completion)

· Profile the Centre – retail mix – gaps

· Measure the effectiveness of past marketing activities and development initiatives and suggest improvements

· Undertake a SWOT analysis of the Centre

· Measure the level of support to renew the levy

· Measure the effectiveness of communication between traders and the Association

16 (Crucial)

Previous rate renewals have engaged a third party to carry out the survey process. This ensures the questions are answered with an unbiased opinion and produce an accurate and true reflection of the special rate renewal program.

11. Public Toilet Amenity Plan – 2017/18

Timing subject to funding from the Disability Action Plan budget

Major Projects Department

A consultant is required to investigate the current provisions, determine community demand and requirements, and develop an improvement plan.

If the consultant is not used, then an additional resource of approx. 0.3 EFT will be required for a period of approximately two months.

Inform

Consult

$5,000 (part of a broader scope of approx. $30,000+)

· Audit current facilities

 

· Assess community demand

 

· Consult with key stakeholders (i.e. traders associations, etc)

 

· Prepare project information for Council website

 

·  Develop improvement plan.

16 (Crucial)

Consultation with traders associations and key stakeholders is usually done in conjunction with the consultant. Their presence and engagement with the stakeholders is essential for them to properly understand the issues rather than have them relayed second hand by a Council officer.  It will also avoid iterations. 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                    Tuesday 29 August 2017

 


List of projects using external consultants that are already underway (NOT seeking Council approval)

 

Project Name

Approximate project timeframes

Department

Reason(s) for using external consultants

IAP2
Level(s) of engagement

Estimated  cost of external consultants

Activities external consultants will undertake

Risk rating (as per table below)

Reason for not seeking approval

North Metro Council’s ‘Responding to Aged Care Reform’ – CHSP Project

Late 2017 – early 2018

Aged & Disability Department

Joint messaging by the seven councils to increase community awareness of Aged Care Reform.

A second component will be to use an arm’s length process (consultant) to assess people’s attitudes to the reforms and possible impacts of reform across the seven municipalities of the North.

This is a multi-party project where use of external consultants is crucial. Council does not have the capability, capacity or mandate to do it alone.

Inform

Consult

Minor part of a $130,000 project

·   Developing key messages

·   Developing and administering an attitude survey

20 (Significant)

 

Prior contract in place.

Quarry Hills Landscape Master Plan

August / September 2017

Parks and Open Space Department

Specialist skills to engage with a large variety of community stakeholders in accordance with IAP2.

Specialist skills in complex data collection, analysis and reporting.

Tailored activities to maximise resident and community interest in a complex site and new project.

Most effective use of Council Officer resources.

Able to establish and maintain community expectation.

Council departments could project manage the project but have indicated that they do not have the capacity to implement all of the activities and undertake complex analysis and reporting.

Consult

$10,000

Community consultation on draft Master Plan:

•  Pop up consultation session in Mernda Village

•  Online survey

•  2 Pop up consultation events

•  3x Key stakeholder meeting

•  Design of flyer and onsite signage

•  Online & hardcopy survey

•  Detailed Community Engagement Report

12 (Important)

Prior engagement already undertaken

Whittlesea Public Gardens Master Plan

March – November 2017

Parks and Open Space Department

Specialist skills to engage with children (of various ages) and teachers in a school environment – in accordance with IAP2.

Specialist skills in data collection, analysis and reporting.

Tailored activities to maximise resident and community interest in a complex site and project which has not received landscape renewal for a long period.

Most effective use of Council Officer resources.

Able to establish and maintain community expectation.

Council departments could project manage the project but have indicated that they do not have the capacity to implement all of the activities and undertake complex analysis and reporting.

Involve

$7,000*

 

*included in lead consultant fee

Community consultation on draft Master Plan:

• Pop up consultation session in Mernda Village

•  Online survey

•  3x Key stakeholder meeting

•  Design of flyer and onsite signage

•  Online & hardcopy survey

•  Detailed Community Engagement Report

12 (Important)

 

 

Prior engagement already undertaken

Huskisson Reserve Master Plan

March to November 2017

Parks and Open Space Department

Specialist skills to engage with children (of various ages) and teachers in a school environment – in accordance with IAP2.

Specialist skills in data collection, analysis and reporting.

Tailored activities to maximise resident and community interest in a complex site and project which has not received landscape renewal for a long period.

Most effective use of Council Officer resources.

Able to establish and maintain community expectation.

Council departments could project manage the project but have indicated that they do not have the capacity to implement all of the activities and undertake complex analysis and reporting.

Consult

$9,000

Community consultation on draft Master Plan:

• Pop up consultation session at Lalor Hub

• Online survey

• 3x Key stakeholder meeting

• Design of flyer and onsite signage

• Online & hardcopy survey

•  Detailed Community Engagement

12 (Important)

Prior engagement already undertaken

Eden Park Bushfire Mitigation Plan

August – October 2017

Sustainability Planning Department

These matters are highly sensitive and the use of an experienced and highly skilled facilitator with experience in bushfire and conservation issues, who is also independent of Council, is critical to ensure positive workshop outcomes.

Consult

$2,500

·    Facilitate two workshops

9 (Important)

Contract already well underway. External consultant formed part of grant proposal.  No Council funds being spent on consultant.

Aboriginal Gathering Place Feasibility Study

Aug 2017 - Feb 2018

Community Cultural Development Department

This project requires a specialist skill set and unique understanding of the local Aboriginal community. Currently the Aboriginal unit does not have the staffing resources to undertake this project internally.

Collaborate

$35,000

·    A completed feasibility study Report

25 (Crucial)

Project already underway and consultation has commenced.

If this work was completed without an Aboriginal owned stakeholder there would be significant implications within the local Aboriginal community and negatively affect Council’s ability to deliver it’s RAP.

CEO and Mayor Aboriginal Community Conversations

CEO meetings reoccur every year in April and September 

Community Cultural Development Department

These ongoing sessions require a specialist Aboriginal facilitator and a level of neutrality that Council Officers cannot provide.  

 

Involve

$3,000

·  To facilitate the sessions (two annually) and produce an outcomes report.

15 (Very important)

An external and neutral facilitator is needed to ensure these sessions are objective and stay on track. The viability of doing this internally is very low.

These sessions are focused more on relationship building and information gathering and are not seeking community input for a decision.

OHS Culture Audit

July – August 2017

Corporate Accountability and Performance Department

OHS Specialist required

Inform, Consult, Involve

$25,000

·  ~40 1:1 interviews with Mayor, Councillors, ELT, Managers, Health & Safety Reps and team leaders

·  Co-facilitation of People Strategy wellbeing workshop

·  Report on OHS culture & governance arrangements

(9) Important

Undertaken via contract/tender process prior to Council decision being made.  Internal engagement only.

Mernda Town Centre Human Services Needs Analysis

July – November 2017

Community Building and Planning Department

 

Expertise in the field of consulting with and surveying relevant health and human service sector professionals from the community services; local government and state sector levels.

Expertise in analysing policy and data relevant to the human services sector.

 

Involve

$50k

·   Research and analysis of the human services sector Federal and State Government policy context

·   Demographic analysis at a Municipal and Mernda Town Centre level

·   Identification of partnerships and collaborative practice in human service provision

·   Consultations with Human Services agencies to determine service needs for the municipality in general and the Mernda Town Centre

·   Consultations with the State Government health sector to identify synergies/ collaborative planning opportunities

15 (Very important)

Tender was finalised prior to 27 June and the consultation will be conducted with internal Council staff and external stakeholders including human service and state government agencies.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

6.5.3    Councillor attendance at Interstate Conferences 2017

File No:                                   

Responsible Officer:           Acting Director Partnerships and Engagement

Author:                                  Governance Officer   

 

Report

EXECUTIVE Summary

To approve the attendance of interested Councillors at the Australian Housing & Urban Research Institute (AHURI) National Housing Conference 2017 in Sydney from 29 November 2017 to 1 December 2017.

Background

Council approval is required for any interstate or overseas travel by Councillors.

Historically it has been the practice to provide the details for each Conference via a Council report seeking Council resolution to authorise attendance of interested Councillors. 

Proposal

To ensure a Council resolution to authorise attendance of interested Councillors to an interstate conference is done in a timely manner, it is proposed for Council to authorise attendance at a number of upcoming conferences for which dates are confirmed.

The benefit of the advance approval is that Council can take advantage of early bird conference registration incentives should they be available and it also provides an opportunity for forward planning of learning and development opportunities throughout the year.

Critical Dates

The following table lists an upcoming interstate Conference which Councillors have previously attended and/or expressed an interest in attending:

Conference

Registration Fee per person

Australian Housing & Urban Research Institute (AHURI) – National Housing Conference 2017 in Sydney from 29 November 2017 to 1 December 2017

The National Housing Conference 2017 program has been designed to be broad in scope ... from homelessness, through social and affordable housing and on into the housing market, land supply, land use planning and city deals.

12 August 2017 onwards – $1,520

Financial Implications

The cost of attending the Conference is the registration fee listed above plus airfare, accommodation and other associated costs. 

The cost is included in the budget for Councillor training and development.

Policy strategy and legislation

Council approval is required for any interstate or overseas travel by Councillors.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

Future direction                   Organisational Sustainability

Future Direction                   Good governance

Theme                                   Community  centred operations

Strategic Objective              We build shared visions of how local communities work with Council

Councillor attendance at conferences will better equip Councillors in advocating on behalf of the 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

That Council authorise interested Councillors to attend the interstate Conference listed in this report.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.         Authorise interested Councillors to attend the Australian Housing & Urban Research Institute (AHURI) – National Housing Conference 2017 in Sydney from 29 November 2017 to 1 December 2017.

2.         Endorse the process that interested Councillors advise the Office of the Chief Executive Officer as soon as possible of their attendance at the above Conference.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                Tuesday 29 August 2017

 

6.5.4    Assemblies of Councillors Report - 29 August 2017

File No:                                  188199   

Responsible Officer:           Acting Director Partnerships 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

CEO Employment Matters Advisory Committee Meeting

19 April 2017

Cr Kirkham

(Mayor)

Cr Lalios

Cr Monteleone

CEO-A

1.     CEO Recruitment; and

2.     CEO KPIs.

Nil disclosures

Municipal Emergency Management Planning Committee

2 May 2017

Cr Butler

 

MERO & EXO

D/MRM

REMC

D/MFPO

ERO

SEMO

1.      Reconciliation Statement;

2.     Conflict of Interest;

3.     Minutes of previous meeting;

4.     Matters arising from previous meeting:

a)    Schedule CERA Review;

b)    Illegal Dumping Exercise;

c)     Determine if dump sites have Council permits;

d)    Convene a meeting with Planning, Building, Enforcement and Hume Council; and

e)    Add Illegal dumping as a standing agenda item.

5.     Correspondence;

6.     Municipal Reports:

a)    EXO Report and

b)    MFPO Report.

7.     Agency Report:

a)    SES; and

b)    DHHS.

8.     Community Sub-Committee;

9.     New and Emerging Risks;

10.  MEMP Review; and

11.  Other Business.

1.     Nil disclosures

CEO Employment Matters Advisory Committee Meeting

 

Cr Kirkham

(Mayor)

Cr Lalios

Cr Monteleone

Nil

The Advisory Committee held meetings on 9 May, 7 June, 16 June, 27 June, 1 July, 3 July, 6 July, 8 July and 12 July.

 

To discuss the CEO Recruitment.

Nil disclosures

Council Forum

25 July 2017

Cr Kirkham

(Mayor)

Cr Kelly
(Deputy Mayor)

Cr Desiato

Cr Cox

Cr Kozmevski Cr Lalios

Cr Monteleone

Cr Alessi

DCS

DCRS

DCTP

DPE-A

DPMP

MADS

TLAT

MCW

MG

1.     Presentation by the Chief Municipal Inspector – Local Government Investigators & Compliance Inspectorate (LGICI);

2.     Aged Care Reform – Strategic Outcome Statements;

3.     Presentation of the Draft Disability Action Plan 2012-21;

4.     Adjourned Council Meeting – 25 July 2017; and

5.     Forward Plan – Review of items schedule for upcoming ELT, Forum and Council Meetings.

Nil disclosures

 

Council Forum

1 August 2017

Cr Kirkham

(Mayor)

Cr Kelly
(Deputy Mayor)

Cr Alessi

Cr Desiato

Cr Cox

Cr Kozmevski Cr Lalios

Cr Monteleone

Cr Pavlidis

Cr Sterjova

CEO-A

DCS

DCRS

DCTP

DPMP

MG

TLG-A

MDA

1.     Councillor Resources, Facilities Policy and Guidelines;

2.     Review of Council Delegations;

3.     2018 Meeting Cycle; and

4.     Feedback on Community Council Meeting.

Nil disclosures

The table below represents an Index of Officer titles:

Initials

Title of Officer

Initials

Title of Officer

CEO-A

Acting Chief Executive Officer – Liana Thompson

REMC

Resilience and Emergency Management Coordinator – Andrew Tierney

DCS

Director Community Services – Russell Hopkins

D/MFPO

Deputy Municipal Fire Prevention Officer – David Foster

DCRS

Director Corporate Services – Helen Sui

ERO

Emergency Resilience Officer – Peter Duncombe

DCTP & MERO & EXO

Director City Transport & Presentation & Municipal Emergency Resource Officer & Executive Officer – Nick Mann

SEMO

Senior Emergency Management Officer – Judith Cooke

DPE-A

Acting Director Partnerships and Engagement – Belgin Besim

MG

Manager Governance – Michael Tonta

DPMP

Director Planning & Major Projects – Steve O’Brien

TLG-A

Acting Team Leader – Lence Mitrovski

D/MRM

Municipal Recovery Manager - Neville Kurth

MADS

Manager Aged and Disability Services - Steve Ward

TLAT

Team Leader Access Team – Stephen Bell

MCW

Manager Community Wellbeing - Neville Kurth

MDA

Manager Development Assessment – Julian Edwards