Logo_Primary_BlackWhite%20(JPG)

Agenda

 

OF Ordinary
COUNCIL MEETING

HELD ON

Tuesday 3 April 2018

AT 6.30pm

summons

 

You are advised that a Meeting of Council has been called by the Chief Executive Officer on Tuesday, 3 April 2018 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 3 April 2018

 

 

 

COUNCILLORS

 

KRIS PAVLIDIS                               MAYOR, SOUTH WEST WARD

LAWRIE COX                                   SOUTH WEST WARD

STEVAN KOZMEVSKI                   SOUTH WEST WARD

CAZ MONTELEONE                       SOUTH WEST WARD

EMILIA LISA STERJOVA               DEPUTY MAYOR, NORTH WARD

TOM JOSEPH                                  NORTH WARD

RICKY KIRKHAM                            NORTH WARD

SAM ALESSI                                    SOUTH EAST WARD

ALAHNA DESIATO                         SOUTH EAST WARD

NORM KELLY                                  SOUTH EAST WARD

MARY LALIOS                                 SOUTH EAST WARD


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

 

 

SENIOR OFFICERS

 

 

SIMON OVERLAND                          CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

NEVILLE KURTH                               ACTING 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 3 April 2018

 

 

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.. 13

5.1       questions to councillors.. 13

5.2       Petitions.. 13

5.2.1     Petition - Request to remove Gum Trees Jubilee Crescent Mill Park.. 13

5.3       Joint Letters.. 13

Nil Reports.. 13

6.         Officers' Reports.. 15

6.1       Planning and Major Projects.. 15

6.1.1     Thomastown Industrial Area Plan - Council Adoption.. 15

6.1.2     328 - 338 McKimmies Road, Mill Park - Application for development of 110 dwellings and removal of native vegetation. 119

6.1.3     46 Cookes Road, Doreen and Cookes Road Road Reserve - Amendment to Planning Permit No. 714335 (Amended) to Allow the Removal of Native Vegetation (River Red Gums) 147

6.1.4     1480 Plenty Road, Mernda - Demolition of a heritage building (Graffs House remains) within land affected by Heritage Overlay.. 165

6.1.5     23-25 Nickson Street, Bundoora - Amendment to Planning Permit No. 715748. 187

6.1.6     Planning Scheme Amendment C200 - Stage Two Implementation of the Housing Diversity Strategy.. 215

6.1.7     357 Childs road, mill park - construction of three dwellings and alteration of access to a road in a Road Zone, Category 1  235

6.2       Community Services.. 257

6.2.1     City of Whittlesea Soccer Strategy.. 257

6.3       City Transport and Presentation.. 279

6.3.1     Contract 2017-207 - Design of Mill Park All Abilities Play Space - Tender Evaluation.. 279

6.3.2     Road Safety and Parking Management for Thomastown West Kindergarten and Childcare Centre.. 283

6.3.3     E6 COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES.. 303

6.4       Corporate Services.. 321

6.4.1     Contract No 2017-197 - Internal Audit Services.. 321

6.4.2     44W Embling Drive South Morang - Hope Youth accommodation - Lease.. 325

6.4.3     Unconfirmed Minutes of Audit & Risk Committee Meeting   357

6.5       Partnerships & Engagement.. 369

6.5.1     ASSEMBLIES OF COUNCILLOR REPORT - 3 APRIL 2018. 369

6.5.2     Food Hotel China - Plenty Food Group trade delegation outcomes.. 375

6.5.3     Review of Procedural Matters Local Law 2018. 379

6.5.4     CEO Financial Delegations.. 381

6.5.5     Options and Effectiveness of Live Streaming of Ordinary Council Meetings.. 383

6.6       Executive Services.. 385

6.6.1     Chief Executive Officers Matters Advisory Committee - Terms of Reference.. 385

7.         Notices of Motion.. 387

            A Notice of Motion was received in accordance with the Procedural Matters Local Law following distribution of this agenda. Please refer to Late Item Agenda for details.

8.         Questions to Officers.. 387

9.         Urgent BusineSS.. 387

10.       Reports from Delegates Appointed BY Council TO Other Bodies.. 387

11.       Questions to CouncillorS will be considered at 5.1. 387

12.       Confidential Business.. 389

12.1     Planning and Major Projects.. 389

Nil Reports.. 389

12.2     Community Services.. 391

Nil Reports.. 391

12.3     City Transport and Presentation.. 393

12.3.1   Contract Number SR070814 – Part B Receipt and Sorting of Recycled Materials - Contract Variation.. 393

12.4     Corporate Services.. 395

Nil Reports.. 395

12.5     Partnerships & Engagement.. 397

Nil Reports.. 397

12.6     Executive Services.. 399

12.6.1   MEETINGS OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 23 February 2018 to 23 March 2018. 399

12.6.2   APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT MEMBER OF CEO EMPLOYMENT MATTERS ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT. 401

13.       Closure.. 401

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

 

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 subject to the provisions set out in the Procedural Matters Local Law.  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 in the Council Chamber prior to the start of 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 a 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 3 April 2018

 

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

3.         Declarations of Interest

4.         Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meeting

Ordinary Meeting of Council held 6 March 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

5.         questions to councillors, Petitions and Joint Letters

5.1       questions to councillors

5.2       Petitions

5.2.1    Petition - Request to remove Gum Trees Jubilee Crescent Mill Park

File No:                                   .

 

Petition received from 13 residents requesting Council remove the gum trees on Jubilee Crescent, Mill Park.

 

MOtion

THAT Council resolve to receive the petition from 13 residents requesting Council remove the gum trees on Jubilee Crescent, Mill Park and a report be prepared.

 

 

5.3       Joint Letters

Nil Reports   


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

6.         Officers' Reports

6.1       Planning and Major Projects

6.1.1    Thomastown Industrial Area Plan - Council Adoption

File No:                                  190305

Attachments:                        1        Context Map

2        Thomastown Industrial Area Plan (March 2018)

3        Consultation Report (February 2018)   

Responsible Officer:           Director Planning & Major Projects

Author:                                  Strategic Planner   

 

Report

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

THAT Council resolve to adopt the Thomastown Industrial Area Plan (March 2018).

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    The Thomastown Industrial Area Plan has been prepared to develop a framework to guide development of the Thomastown Industrial Area for the next 20 years.

 

·    The Plan sets out the land use and development vision for the Thomastown Industrial Area.

·    The Plan outlines actions that will enhance the functionality and appearance of the area, encourage investment and support the ongoing availability of local jobs. 

·    The Plan is a forward strategy with the principal role of guiding future development, providing a plan for infrastructure upgrades to support the ongoing viability of the area and sets out initiatives to improve and raise the profile of the area.

·    Implementation of the Plan will promote economic investment within the locality which will support employment opportunities and enhance local resident’s ability to access jobs close to where they live.

·    The Thomastown Industrial Area Plan is not a statutory document and will not be incorporated into the Planning Scheme. Rather it is a guiding advisory document that identifies actions and advocacy projects that are to be implemented by a variety of Departments within Council.


 

introduction

The Thomastown Industrial Area is an existing employment area bounded by the Metropolitan Ring Road to the south (see Attachment 1).  The boundaries include Mahoneys Road to the west and Settlement Road to the east. The study area also includes some smaller pockets of land to the north including Trawalla Avenue, Dalton Road North (includes Meridian Park) and McKimmies Road (the land behind Dyson’s Bus Depot).

 

The area is well established with a majority of development occurring between the 1970’s to the 1990’s with some more recent development Dalton Road. The Thomastown Industrial Area has a strong manufacturing sector that is the highest employment precinct in the City of Whittlesea.

 

This Plan was developed to provide a long term vision for the area to ensure it maintains its status as an important employment precinct and continues to be attractive for investment and provide local jobs for communities.   It will be used to provide future direction and actions to deliver upgrades to the area.

 

This Council report will discuss the rationale behind the Thomastown Industrial Area Plan and the three stages of consultation that informed the Plan. The report will also provide an overview of the Plan and its implementation.

Background

The Thomastown Industrial Area is a major economic generator for the municipality and the northern region.  Businesses in the area benefit from convenient access to major transport infrastructure, a local catchment of workers, and co-location with complementary manufacturers, catchment-based industries, major wholesalers and distributors. 

 

Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement and the State Government’s Metropolitan Planning Strategy, Plan Melbourne, recognise the importance and significance of the area in providing business and employment opportunities. Changes in the economic environment have seen pressure to use parts of the land for other uses including residential/mixed use through rezoning requests. To date, the precinct has developed with little policy to guide appropriate development, which in some areas, has resulted in poor outcomes. 

 

From consultation with relevant stakeholders it is clear that the area is a desirable economic hub, however, in order for the area to remain competitive some improvements need to be made.  In this context it was determined that preparing a plan for the Thomastown Industrial Area was necessary to guide the future development of this precinct.  In preparing the Plan, and ensuring that the strategies and actions are underpinned by robust evidence and expert advice, the following steps were undertaken:

§ Background research and review: This included extensive background research, preparation of an Urban Design Review and production of an Economic and Market Analysis Report. Targeted consultation with businesses and key stakeholders was also undertaken.

§ Issues and opportunities assessment: This step identified a range of issues and opportunities to be explored with key stakeholders and formed the basis for further investigations.

§ Preparation of draft Plan: The final step involved bringing together the information from background research and investigations and expert technical reports contained in the Transport Recommendations and Feasibility Studies. This stage included stakeholder advice and input to develop a vision, a range of strategies and principles for development.

 

As outlined above, the Thomastown Industrial Area Plan has undergone an extensive consultation and preparation process. This process has ensured that the Plan is robust and meets the requirements of local employers. The Plan sets out a vision to ensure that the industrial area continues to play an important role in providing jobs for the local community and is attractive for future investment. The implementation framework prepared, sets out how the Plan will be achieved through statutory mechanisms, economic development initiatives and infrastructure upgrades and projects. It also includes delivery mechanisms in terms of timing, prioritisation and responsibility and how it will be monitored.

 

the Thomastown Industrial area Plan

Overview

The Thomastown Industrial Area Plan sets out the land use and development vision for Thomastown Industrial Area for the next 20 years. The Plan is a forward strategy with the principle role of guiding future development, providing a plan for infrastructure upgrades to support the ongoing viability of the area and sets out initiatives to improve and raise the profile of the area (see Attachment 2).

It is important to note that the Plan is not a statutory document and will not be incorporated into the Planning Scheme.  Rather it is a guiding document that identifies actions that are to be implemented by a variety of Departments within Council.

Structure

In summary, the Plan is structured as follows:

§ Strategic context - outlines the policy context, key drivers and strategic strengths of the area.

§ Strategy aims and vision - sets out what the Plan seeks to achieve and provides a vision statement about what the area will look and feel like in 2035.

§ Strategic directions - outlines the objectives and strategies for identity and economic development; land use and development; transport, access and infrastructure; and environment and sustainability.

§ Precinct plan and opportunity areas - identifies the general direction in terms of the role and function of eight precincts and highlights the “opportunity areas” that have the greatest potential to enhance the area and capacity for development activity and change.

§ Implementation framework - incorporates statutory mechanisms to give effect to the Plan; it also includes economic development and partnership initiatives; outlines infrastructure and public realm upgrades and projects; and sets out approaches relating to requirements for regular monitoring and enforcement. 

Key outcomes

The outputs of the Thomastown Industrial Area Plan focus on delivering improvements to the area largely from an economic and traffic perspective.  It has the aim of creating an area that is visually and economically viable for businesses to invest.

Some of the key outcomes of the Plan include:

§ Providing certainty to existing and future investors/businesses/employees in the area by outlining Council’s long term vision for the area.

§ Supporting and encouraging economic investment and local employment opportunities to enhance ability for local residents to access jobs close to where they live.

§ Encouraging urban renewal around Keon Park Station and High Street to improve the profile and image of the area.

§ Promoting a greater diversity of land uses, improved connectivity and access and significant landscape enhancements and visual amenity improvements.

§ Elevating the importance of the removal of level crossings through grade separation to enhance movement and encourage pedestrian and cyclist.

§ Identifying key infrastructure projects that will improve accessibility for transport vehicles.

In outlining the key outcomes, the Plan is focused on how Council and the State Government can help improve the area. It does not mandate existing businesses or landowners to redevelop or upgrade their premises, nor does it require existing businesses to comply retrospectively with any new planning controls or guidelines that may be introduced.

Consultation

The consultation program for this project sought to achieve many objectives including:

§ To gain a strong understanding about how the area functions and operates now, what people value about Thomastown Industrial Area and what they perceive the key challenges to be.

§ To gain an understanding of the priorities for the area and what is realistic and achievable for a planning strategy.

§ To gain an understanding about what people would like to see the area look and feel like in the future and achieve support for the vision and direction for the Industrial Area. 

§ To target and structure the consultation process so that meaningful and useful engagement occurred.

§ To ensure consultation focused on the issues within the scope of the project.

§ To identify the most appropriate and effective ways for continued engagement with stakeholders.

 

The consultation program for the project was carried out over three stages:

Stage 1

This consultation was undertaken between September and November 2013.  Stage 1 included site visits, mailouts and surveys and sought to understand public and stakeholder views on the area and provide feedback on the issues and opportunities the area presents. It was targeted primarily at business operators, land owners and government departments and agencies.

A summary of the key findings indicated businesses:

-     Are long standing operators and were satisfied with the area;

-     Choose the area due to the suitable sized land and buildings;

-     Noted it was a desirable location given transport access;

-     Required the need for clearer strategic direction on building design; and

-     Agreed with the need to investigate and determine how to retain existing businesses.

Stage 2

The consultation undertaken in September 2014 built upon the earlier consultation. Stage 2 primarily consisted of data collection and targeted surveys. This engagement established an understanding of priorities and principles with key stakeholders, including businesses and landowners, developers, key agencies, government bodies. It enhanced the on-going role of the Thomastown Industrial Area Advisory Group and tested the initial issues and opportunities identified to inform the vision and key directions that were to underpin the draft Thomastown Industrial Area Plan. The results were reported to Council on 15 September 2015 and adopted by Council allowing Stage 3 to proceed.

Stage 3

The final stage of consultation was undertaken over a four week period commencing in November, 2015. For the final round of consultation, a draft version of the Thomastown Industrial Area Plan was produced by the project team outlining the Vision, Objectives, Precincts and Actions.  The purpose of Stage 3 was to inform all owners and occupiers of the draft Plan and to allow the community and key stakeholders the opportunity to provide feedback on the draft document.   

Stage 3 sought to ensure that all the issues and opportunities that were raised were captured with a view to determining whether they would be addressed as actions in the implementation plan. It included pulling out the overall vision of the Plan and the relevant identified issues in each area.  Discussions were individualised as well as broadened to the overall area.

Over 3,000 letters were sent, followed up with 20 interviews, and numerous meetings and phone calls with local businesses and other community members. A small number of other groups, including some residents who live just outside the municipality, also made submissions to Council.  Over 50 responses were received.

Key findings showed that generally the most agreed upon actions were landscape upgrades, beautification of the area and major intersection upgrades.  For example, adjoining Darebin residents strongly agreed with landscaping enhancements along Mahoneys Road to assist with beautifying the area and creating a buffer between residential and industrial.  The Dalton Road and Settlement Road intersection was consistently raised as an intersection of concern.  In light of the feedback received, changes were made to the Plan.

Following on from the work undertaken in 2015, Council officers have re-engaged with the stakeholders that provided feedback in the earlier stages of consultation. This additional consultation with key stakeholders ensured all interested parties were aware of the progression of the Thomastown Industrial Area Plan, and the changes made to the document in response to the submissions. A letter of response was sent to all stakeholders that directly addresses the comments made during the consultation period, and outlined how the Thomastown Industrial Area Plan incorporated the feedback.

In addition, contact was made with the advisory group inviting the members to a project update meeting that was held on 20 February 2018. In excess of 60 letters were prepared and sent to stakeholders during this final phase of consultation. It was evident from the responses that stakeholders were eager for the progression of the Plan to ensure the Thomastown Industrial Area continues encourage investment and remain a valued employment hub in the City of Whittlesea.

To summarise the consultation process, a Consultation Report has been prepared (see Attachment 3). The Consultation Report details each stage of consultation, summarises each individual submission made during Stage 3, and outlines the officer response and changes made to the document as a result of the feedback received.

NEXT STEPS

Should the Thomastown Industrial Area Plan be adopted by Council, the Plan will enter the implementation phase and offices will begin by prioritising the short term actions.  This will include working with relevant internal departments and communicating with relevant statutory authorities. In particular this will involve working closely with the Advocacy, Communications and Economic Development Department in developing an action plan for the Economic Development Strategy to ensure key actions are reflected in both strategies.

Financial Implications

The Action Plan sets out a preferred timeline and the anticipated financial implications of the Thomastown Industrial Area Plan over a 20 year period. The financial implications will need to be considered as part of future budgetary processes and additional funding opportunities will be investigated for higher order projects.

Policy strategy and legislation

Council’s Economic Development Strategy sets a vision to attract 10,000 new jobs to the municipality in the next five years. The strategy is 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 Thomastown Industrial Area Plan is closely aligned with the Economic Development Strategy and sets out clear and measurable actions to achieve these directions through the action plan.

Plan Melbourne sets out the Victorian Government’s vision for the city to 2050. It contains a number of directions relating to the delivery of investment and jobs by creating a city structure that drives productivity, supports investment through certainty and creates more jobs.  The Thomastown Industrial Area is identified within the Northern Industrial Precinct which is one of the metropolitan area’s three identified State Significant Industrial Precincts. A number of potential Urban Renewal Sites are identified in the Plan including Keon Park Station, which is within the Thomastown Industrial Area.

The Whittlesea Planning Scheme guides land use and development within the municipality. There are several provisions in the scheme that are relevant to this Plan. In addition, zones, overlays, particular and general provisions affect land use and development. The Thomastown Industrial Area is identified in the Scheme as strategically significant industrial and employment precinct in the municipality.

Other Council related strategies include:

Whittlesea Council Plan 2013-2017 - outlines a number of key initiatives and programs to make the City of Whittlesea a better place to live.

Environmental Sustainability Strategy – sets policy direction for building fit outs and actions for Sustainable development assistance programs.

Open Space Strategy – identifies areas in the Thomastown Industrial Area for new local spaces as well as improvements to local pipe tracks to improve connections.

Whittlesea Bicycle Plan 2016-2020 – provides policy to increase cycling participation at the City of Whittlesea by providing safety improvements, promotional initiatives and improvement to the current network.  Identified cycle paths have been included in the Plan and will be implemented in accordance with the Bicycle Plan.


 

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

FUTURE DIRECTION          Growing our economy

Theme                                   Economic development

Strategic Objective              We have strategies that encourage new business investment

 

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

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

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

Conclusion

The Thomastown Industrial Area Plan sets out a range of strategies and actions to create an attractive place for businesses.  These strategies and actions were informed by the three stages of consultation with the community and major stakeholders.

 

It is anticipated that the strategies and actions prepared will enhance the functionality and appearance of the industrial precinct and assist with Council being more proactive in encouraging investment. Existing business activity and developers in the area will be able to plan and invest with greater certainty with a clear vision and future direction for the area. This kind of economic investment in the locality will heighten the areas importance as an employment hub and enhance local resident’s ability to access jobs close to where they live.

 

To ensure a coordinated approach is taken, the Thomastown Industrial Area Plan strongly aligns with the Economic Development Strategy to achieve a strong economy with diverse jobs and increased local investment.

 

It is therefore recommended that the draft Thomastown Industrial Area Plan (March 2018) be adopted by Council.

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to adopt the Thomastown Industrial Area Plan (March 2018).

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

6.1.2    328 - 338 McKimmies Road, Mill Park - Application for development of 110 dwellings and removal of native vegetation.

File No:                                  716834

Attachments:                        1        Locality Maps  

2        Site plans and elevations    

Responsible Officer:           Director Planning & Major Projects

Author:                                  Principal Planner   

 

APPLICANT:                        Branson Property Group Pty Ltd

COUNCIL POLICY:              22.10     River Red Gum Protection Policy

ZONING:                               Residential Growth Zone Schedule 1 and (at McKimmies Road frontage only) Road Zone Category 2 Zone.

OVERLAY:                            Development Contributions Plan Overlay Schedule 3
Special Building Overlay (northern part)

REFERRALS:                       Transport for Victoria
Melbourne Water

OBJECTIONS:                      Two objections received

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council resolve that if it were open to do so it would have approved Planning Application No. 716834 for the multi-dwelling development and removal of native vegetation subject to conditions and modifications, and that this position be represented at the upcoming Compulsory Conference on 9 April 2018 associated with a review to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT).

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·        The application seeks a permit for the redevelopment of the land for a total of 110 dwellings with removal of two native trees.  Other trees to be removed do not require planning permission.

·        The land is in the Residential Growth Zone.  It was included in that Zone as part of the State Government’s transition to new residential zones in August 2016.  The land is also in the Neighbourhood Renewal Area under Council’s Housing Diversity Strategy (HDS).  Both encourage higher density housing.

·        The application was advertised and there were two objections received.

·        The applicant has lodged an appeal to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT).  This report seeks to establish a Council position on the application for the purposes of representing Council’s position through the VCAT process.

·        The proposal achieves a satisfactory level of compliance with the relevant provisions of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme including the Housing Diversity Strategy and Clause 55 (ResCode).

·        Approval is recommended as the Council position for the upcoming appeal at VCAT subject to conditions, including conditions that require a new primary access to the site be from McKimmies Road (retaining a minor access from Betula Avenue).

Report

SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

The subject site is located on the north-east side of the intersection of McKimmies Road and Betula Avenue, in Mill Park.  (see Attachment 1).

It is irregular in shape with frontage to Betula Avenue of 93.62 metres, frontage to McKimmies Road of 155.09 metres, an overall site area of approximately 21,666 square metres (2.16ha).

The site has three road frontages being McKimmies Road to the south, Betula Avenue to the west and Belmont Way to the north.  To the eastern side the land abuts the Belmont Park (Council reserve) at the northern part and the rear of four dwellings at the southern part, being the properties at Nos. 6, 7, 8 and 9 Mosstrooper Court.

The site is currently occupied by a single-storey detached dwelling and some associated single level buildings which operate as a light industrial use.  There is a large paved car parking area provided on-site to cater for the car parking demand generated by the light industrial component of the site.  Vehicular access to the site is currently provided via a double-width crossover connecting to/from McKimmies Road and single-width crossover connecting to/from Betula Avenue.

Some of the key land uses within the vicinity of the site include:

·    RMIT University Bundoora Campus, located directly opposite the subject site (located on the southern side of McKimmies Road).  The recently constructed RMIT six-storey student accommodation building is close to the McKimmies Road frontage, diagonally opposite the subject site.

·    A medium density residential development, located on the opposite side of Betula Avenue, on the corner of McKimmies Road.  This development has an access to both Betula Avenue and McKimmies Road which operate independently for different parts of that development.

·    A medium density residential development, located diagonally opposite the site on the south-western corner of McKimmies Road and Betula Avenue.  This has access directly off the roundabout at this intersection and an additional access directly to McKimmies Road further west.

·    Belmont Park, located abutting to the northern side of the eastern boundary of the site.

·    Botanica Park, located approximately 700 metres south-west of the subject site.

·    University Hill commercial precinct approximately 900 metres to the east (opposite the eastern end of McKimmies Road at Plenty Road).

·    Mill Park Primary School, located 900 metres north-east of the subject site.

·    The Stables shopping centre 1.1km to the north (opposite the northern end of Betula Avenue at Childs Road).

·    Bundoora Retirement Village, located approximately 1.2km east of the subject site.

restrictions and easements

The land is formally known as Lot 2 on Plan of Subdivision 329278T, as described in Certificate of Title Volume 10162 Folio 392.  There are no covenants, agreements or restrictions registered on title that affect the consideration of this planning application.

The site includes the following portions affected by easement or proposed road widening on the three road frontages, as follows:

·    A 20m to 25m wide drainage easement along its northern side that is delineated as a drainage reserve (on PS 304391N).  This strip adjoins Belmont Way and visually, this appears to be a westerly extension to the Belmont Reserve.  It also matches the configuration of Jacaranda Park on the western side of Betula Avenue.

·    A strip of land along and within the southern boundary (approx. 11.6m wide) that is zoned Road Zone Category 2 (the same as McKimmies Road).

·    A 5m wide strip of land along and within the Betula Avenue frontage, within which part of the Betula Avenue shoulder has been constructed. 

Proposal

The application proposes the removal of the existing buildings on-site (for which no permit is required) and the construction of 110 two-storey and three-storey townhouses.  The proposal includes the intention to transfer to Council the strips of land referred to above along the McKimmies Road, Betula Avenue and Belmont Way frontages.

The proposed development comprises the following:

·    110 townhouses, comprising:

16 x two-bedroom townhouses; and

94 x three-bedroom townhouses.

·    227 car parking spaces, allocated as follows:

204 resident car parking spaces, located within single garages and tandem at-grade car spaces; and

23 visitor car parking spaces.

 

The proposal also includes the removal of most of the trees from the site.  The application included an arborist report which identified and assessed all trees on the site and trees immediately adjoining the site on the Council reserve and private land to the eastern side.

It was identified that two trees are remnant native vegetation and require a permit to be removed.  One is located in the central part of the site and the other situated close to the Betula Avenue frontage, and would not survive due to the proposed roadworks/footpath to be constructed in that part of the site to be transferred to Council with works to complete the eastern side of Betula Avenue.  Other trees have been determined as planted vegetation or other vegetation that do not require a permit for their removal.

Existing access points to Betula Avenue and McKimmies Road would be removed.  It is proposed that the development would be serviced by the creation of a sole point of access from Betula Avenue , with a new double access to be constructed about 9m north of the existing access to Betula Avenue.

Resident bicycle storage areas are proposed within each of the garages and additional bicycle rails (30 spaces) provided throughout the site for use by visitors.

Primary pedestrian access to the site will be via separate entrances located along McKimmies Road and Betula Avenue.  Further individual pedestrian entrances will be provided to each of the dwellings fronting McKimmies Road and Betula Avenue.

Refuse and recycling will be collected on-site by a private waste contractor.  Refuse and Recycling storage areas are proposed to be provided within each of the garages.


 

Public Notification

Advertising of the application has resulted in two objections being received.  The grounds of objection can be summarised as follows:

1.       An expected increase in traffic in the area with corresponding increase in traffic congestion and cause overflow parking resulting in loss of street parking and an increase in noise levels of traffic.

2.       A single point of access to Betula Avenue as proposed will increase traffic congestion in Betula Avenue and its intersection with McKimmies Road in particular.

3.       The proposed density is too great.

4.       Visual impact due to number and heights (three-storey) of dwelling and contrary to the character of the area.

5.       Loss of character and residential amenity due to the height and bulk of the proposed dwellings.

6.       Reduction in privacy.

7.       An increase in criminal activity in the area.

VCAT APPEAL

The Applicant has lodged an appeal to VCAT against a decision not being made within 60 days of the lodgement of the application.  The formal hearing of the matter is listed to be heard on 28 May 2018, with a Compulsory Conference listed for hearing on 9 April 2018.

Council can still resolve that it would approve or refuse the application (but not issue a formal decision in that respect).  In this instance, it is important for Council to establish a position as to whether it would support the application, and if so what conditions it would impose, to enable Council’s position to be represented in the upcoming Compulsory Conference.

There were two objections to the application, neither of whom has elected to become party to the VCAT proceedings.

There have been an ongoing dialogue with the applicant, and the applicant has previously responded with alterations to plans to seek to address specific concerns, where raised.  The latest plans were lodged on 5 February 2018, and among other things have made changes that:

·    Altered the proposed access to Betula Avenue (seeking to improve access).

·    Increased setbacks to both McKimmies Road and Betula Avenue.

·    Altered on site access and car parking to improve parking and reversing dimensions.

·    Improved the built form presentations to both McKimmies Road and Betula Avenue.

·    Removed private open space areas from tree overhang areas from trees in adjoining properties (including in Belmont Park).

The latest plans are intended to be pursued through the VCAT process.  However, the applicant has also indicated that it would be prepared to consider creating a main access point to/from McKimmies Road (and relocating/downgrading the access to Betula Avenue as a minor or secondary access point) if that was a Council requirement.

river red gum protection policy

This policy is at Clause 22.10 of the Planning Scheme.  It has the objective to ensure that development takes into account the presence, retention, enhancement and long term viability of River Red Gums in urban areas.

The application included an arborist report that identified all trees on and immediately adjacent to the site.  A permit is not required to remove all trees proposed to be removed except for two River Red Gums.  These are both assessed as ‘below average’ health, and are nominated for removal as:

·    One is located in the Betula Avenue road reserve close to the boundary and would not survive the required construction of the edge to Betula Avenue with footpath and parking lane, which will be at a lower level than the boundary.

·    The other is more central to the site, but consists of regrowth originating from the stump of a previously removed tree.

The site also has a number of River Red Gums encroaching from the adjoining properties on its eastern side, including from Belmont Park.  The proposal has generally offset dwellings and open space clear of the Tree Protection Zones and overhang of these trees to ensure that the viability of these trees are not affected.

The proposal is considered to represent an appropriate response to the River Red Gum Protection Policy.

HOUSING DIVERSITY STRATEGY

The 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 will not be supported.  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 now a reference document in the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

The site is designated as a Neighbourhood Renewal Area.  Notably, surrounding land in the ‘Suburban Residential Change Area’, with the subject site distinguished from the surrounding residential area as it was seen as a large redevelopment site that warranted a more intensive development.

The Neighbourhood Renewal Area encourages medium and higher density housing, recognising that these areas generally are well serviced and close to neighbourhood activity centres, public transport and community services and facilities.  Preferred housing types are stated as townhouses, multi-units, small scale apartments, shop-top housing and mixed use development.

The Neighbourhood Renewal Area has a number of Key Design Principles, including:

·    A range of medium building heights.

·    Building heights that achieve passive surveillance.

·    Building heights that are of a human scale and integrate well with existing housing stock.

·    Reduced front setbacks to encourage activation to the street while still allowing space for low level landscaping.

·    Medium to higher site coverage to balance increased density and landscaping opportunities.

·    Usable private open space, balconies and communal shared spaces.

·    Landscaping to complement medium to higher density built form.

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

The existing character of the areas is low scale residential, with mainly conventional single storey dwellings surrounding the subject site.

The HDS encourages higher density townhouses and multi-units (as well as small scale apartments), however, relevant objectives require that buildings be of a ‘human scale’ and integrate with existing housing stock.

Notably, the site has only one boundary (i.e. the eastern boundary) which adjoins existing residential development with the other three boundaries facing roads.

While the majority of the dwellings are three storey, notably where the site abuts existing dwellings, the proposed dwellings are only two-storey in form and are provided with generous offsets from that boundary, ranging in distance from 6.1m to 10m.

This takes account of existing housing stock and provides an appropriate scale and integration.

With the subject site being in the Neighbourhood Renewal Area (under the HDS) and being in the Residential Growth Zone, a higher density residential development is expected and encouraged on this site.

It is considered that the proposal is of a scale that recognises the encouragement for a development more intense than the surrounding existing housing development but also integrates well with the existing housing stock.

B2

Residential Policy

P

P

The proposal is consistent with State and Local policy that encourage increased residential densities close to urban facilities.

The proposal is consistent with the Neighbourhood Renewal Change Area in the HDS as well as consistent with the purpose of the Residential Growth Zone.

B3

Dwelling Diversity

P

P

This is applicable to developments of ten or more dwellings.

The proposal provides 16 two-bedroom dwellings and 94 three-bedroom dwellings. 

There are a range of varying dwelling designs, with the majority being three level with the middle level (Level 2) providing the living areas and private open space in the form of balconies.  Bedrooms are generally at the upper level (Level 3) with some also containing an additional level at ground level (Level 1).  The garage space is also provided within the building envelope at Level 1.

The dwellings that abut the eastern side boundary (the common boundary with adjoining existing dwellings in Mosstrooper Court) are two level and have ground level open space in addition to first level balconies.

This provides a satisfactory diversity of dwellings within the development itself and a variation to the predominant form of existing housing provision in the area.

B4

Infrastructure

P

P

The location is an established urban area where all required services are available.

B5

Integration with the street

P

P

The proposed dwellings are oriented to face both the McKimmies Road and Betula frontages, with proposed low front fences.  The latest plans increase the setbacks from these frontages enabling opportunities for low level planting in accordance with HDS requirements.

Dwellings on the north side have an abuttal to the drainage reserve.

B6

Street setback

P

P

 

B7

Building height

P

P

This provides that the height of dwellings must not exceed the height that applies in the applicable Zone.  The Residential Growth Zone nominates a maximum height of 13.5m.

B8

Site coverage

P

P

 

B9

Permeability

P

P

 

B10

Energy efficiency

P

P

 

B11

Open space

P

P

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

A landscape plan was submitted with the application.

B14

Access

P

P

 

B15

Parking location

P

P

 

B17

Side and rear setbacks

P

P

 

B18

Walls on boundaries

P

P

N/A.  There are no walls on boundaries.

B19

Daylight to existing windows

P

P

 

B20

North-facing windows

P

P

No north facing windows of existing dwellings affected.

B21

Overshadowing open space

P

P

 

B22

Overlooking

P

P

 

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 in most instance is provided by balconies at Level 2 of the dwellings, which connects to the internal living areas.  The areas and dimensions of balconies meets or exceeds the requirements of this Standard.

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.  Pursuant to this clause the car parking is required at the rate of two spaces to each dwelling containing three or more bedrooms, one space to each dwelling containing two or less bedrooms plus visitor parking on site at the rate of one space per five dwellings.

The proposal complies with these requirements, providing a total of 204 resident parking with two spaces to each three bedroom dwelling and one space to each two bedroom dwelling.  It provides a total of 23 visitor car parking spaces in the central access (one more than required), which would be readily apparent to visitors to the site.

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.

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN OVERLAY (SCHEDULE 3)

The site is affected by the Development Contributions Plan Overlay.  Pursuant to Clause 45.06 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, the Development Contributions Plan Overlay enables the levying of contributions for the provision of works, services and facilities prior to development commencing.  Schedule 3 to the overlay requires contributions for drainage infrastructure for medium density residential development at a current rate of $2.19 per square metre of the total site area.  This requirement must be included as a condition on any planning permit that is issued.

Comments on Grounds of Objection

1.       An expected increase in traffic in the area with corresponding increase in traffic congestion in the area, overflow parking with loss of street parking and an increase in noise levels of traffic.

It is acknowledged that the proposal will increase traffic in the area.  However, the recommendation includes a requirement that a new principle access be to McKimmies Road with properly constructed two-way access with appropriate alterations in McKimmies Road (i.e. deceleration and right turn lances).  The access to Betula Avenue would be required to be located further north on that frontage with left-in and left-out only to render this only a minor or secondary access.  This is expected to better accommodate the traffic impacts of the proposal.

2.       A single point of access to Betula Avenue as proposed will increase traffic congestion in Betula Avenue and its intersection with McKimmies Road.

Having regard to the comments above to point 1, the access to Betula Avenue would be relocated and downgraded to a minor access, with the principle point of access being to McKimmies Road.

3.       The proposed density is too great.

The density reflects the Residential Growth Zone and the designation of the site as a Neighbourhood Renewal Area in the HDS, both of which encourage medium and higher density housing.  In that regard, the proposed density is seen as appropriate on a site which is effectively a large, undeveloped parcel of land which can accommodate a higher density redevelopment.

4.       Visual impact due to number and heights (three-storey) of dwelling and contrary to the character of the area.

The proposed height complies with the maximum height requirements of the Zone, and similarly is reflective of the Zone and designation under Council’s HDS.  Notably, the dwellings on the eastern side of the site, where there is adjoining dwellings (in Mosstrooper Court) are designed as two-storey with generous setbacks from the common boundary, which in that respect is an appropriate response to the site and context.

5.       Loss of character and residential amenity due to the height and bulk of the proposed dwellings.

Clearly the proposal will have a different character to the surrounding low density residential area, which comprises mainly single dwellings on larger lots (most single storey).  However, with the Residential Growth Zone and Neighbourhood Renewal Area (HDS) in place, there is a clear expectation for a high density residential development on this large site.  It is also noted that the development proposal has been designed as an appropriate response to the site and the existing housing stock in the area.

6.       Reduction in privacy.

The proposal has been assessed against ResCode, including those aspects that relate to privacy impacts both to external properties and to the dwellings themselves within the development.  The proposal complies.

7.       An increase in criminal activity in the area.

This is an assertion with no supporting evidence.  An increase in dwellings does not necessarily mean an increase in crime and in fact can actually reduce crime through increased activity and surveillance.

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

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

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

Conclusion

The proposed development has been assessed under applicable planning controls and policies, including the Residential Growth Zone, Housing Diversity Strategy and ResCode, and is assessed as being an appropriate development that responds positively to the site and its context.

As a VCAT Appeal has been lodged, the application cannot be formally determined by Council.  However, a Council position is necessary as to whether or not it would approve the application and if so, what conditions should be imposed.  This is necessary for Council to have its position properly represented at the upcoming VCAT hearing.

It is recommended that Council support the application based on the latest plans, subject to appropriate conditions as set out below.  Notably, these conditions include the following matters:

·    Amended plans to include:

Creation of the principle access to the development from McKimmies Road at an appropriate position along that frontage toward the eastern end (to maximise distance from the intersection).

The access to Betula Avenue downgraded to a secondary access and to be relocated further north along the Betula Avenue frontage.

Inclusion of a splay at the south-western corner of the site.

Modification to the layout of the dwellings to accommodate the proposed additional access to McKimmies Road and relocation of the Betula Avenue access point and provision of splay at the corner.

·    The transfer to Council (at no cost to Council) the following parts of the site:

The drainage reserve along the northern side.

The 5m wide strip along the Betula Avenue frontage.

The southern strip along the southern boundary which is in the Road Zone Category 2.

The inclusion of a splay at the south-western corner of the site for the intersection of McKimmies Road and Betula Avenue.

·    Prior to the transfer to Council of these parcels, the carrying out and completion of works in those areas including pathways to match and connect with existing pathways adjoining and the completion of the required roadworks in Betula Avenue.  All works to be to Council requirements and satisfaction.

·    Submission to Council of full Functional Layout Plans and Engineering Construction Plans relating to the works required in the parcels to be transferred to Council.

It is recommended accordingly that Council resolve that if it were open to do so it would approve the application subject to conditions.

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve that if were open to do so it would have approved Planning application No. 716834 for the multi-dwelling development and removal of native vegetation subject to conditions and modifications, and that this position be represented at the upcoming Compulsory Conference on 9 April 2018 associated with a review to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) as follows:

Payments Required

1.       Prior to the endorsement of the plans required under Condition No. 3 of this permit, the permit holder must pay to Council a contribution for drainage pursuant to Clause 45.06 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.  The drainage contribution will be subject to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) applicable at the time of payment.

2.       (a)     Prior to the endorsement of the plans required under Condition No. 3, or at such later date as the Responsible Authority may approve in writing, there shall be lodged with the Responsible Authority an amount of $10,000 as security deposit for the satisfactory completion and maintenance of the landscaping works hereby permitted.

(b)     Upon completion of the landscaping works to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, the Responsible Authority will refund the security deposit to the then owner of the subject land.

 

Plans Required

3.       Before the development starts, three copies of a revised plan must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority, showing:

(a)     Creation of a new access to McKimmies Road at an appropriate position along that frontage toward the eastern end (to maximise distance from the intersection).  That access is to be a minimum of 6.1 metres wide for the first 7 metres into the site (in accordance with Clause 52.06-9 of the Planning Scheme) and provide a separate pedestrian path of a minimum 1.5 metres width and appropriate offset from dwellings, and provide for appropriate modifications within McKimmies Road to provide for a deceleration lane and right turn lane.  The layout of the development must be amended to ensure that this access point is the primary and principal access to and from the proposed dwellings.

(b)     The access to Betula Avenue relocated further north along the Betula Avenue frontage and downgraded to be a secondary access providing for and designed for left-in and left-out vehicle movements.

(c)     The Tree Protection Zones of all River Red Gum trees in accordance with Council guidelines.

          (www.whittlesea.vic.gov.au/media/2014/sdl201a-tree-protection-zone-tpz.pdf)

(d)     The transfer of the parts land in accordance with Condition 5.

(e)     In accordance with Clause 52.06-8 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, accessways must have a corner splay or area at least 50 per cent clear of visual obstructions extending at least 2m along the frontage road from the edge of the exit lane and 2.5m along the exit lane from the frontage, to provide a clear view of pedestrians on the footpath of the frontage road.  The area clear of visual obstructions may include an adjacent entry or exit lane where more than one lane is provided, or adjacent landscaped areas, provided the landscaping in those areas is less than 900mm high and in accordance with Condition 7.

4.       Before the development starts and approval of construction plans (engineering plans), a functional layout plan, generally in accordance with plans endorsed pursuant to Condition 3 to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority.  When approved, the functional layout plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit.  Three copies of the functional layout plan must be drawn at a scale of 1:500 to acceptable drafting standards and an electronic copy (PDF) must be provided.  The functional layout plan must show:

(a)     Full dimensions of the completion of Betula Avenue, the construction of the pedestrian paths, parking lane, kerb and channel, nature strip along the eastern side of Betula Avenue, including typical cross-sections for the road, widths of road reservation and pathways, dimensioning individual elements, services offsets, topography and existing features (including contours) and any other spatial requirements.

(b)     Full dimensions of the modifications required to McKimmies Road, including construction of deceleration lane, right-turn lane with any consequential alterations to McKimmies Road alignment, typical cross-sections for the road, widths of road reservation and pathways, dimensioning individual elements, services offsets, topography and existing features (including contours) and any other spatial requirements.

(c)     A table of offsets for all utility services and street trees.

(d)     Location and alignment of kerbs, indented parking spaces, footpaths, shared paths and traffic controls.

(e)     The proposed drainage network.

5.       Before occupation of any dwelling approved under this permit the following areas are transferred to Council:

(a)     The drainage easement along the northern side (that is delineated as a drainage reserve on PS 304391N).

(b)     The strip of land along and within the southern boundary that is zoned Road Zone Category 2.

(c)     The strip of land along and within the Betula Avenue frontage, within which part of the Betula Avenue shoulder has been constructed.

(d)     A splay at the south-western corner of the site.

6.       Before occupation of any dwelling approved under this permit the land must be subdivided and the areas specified in Condition 5 transferred to Council.  Prior to being transferred, the works required in the land to be transferred must be fully constructed to the requirements and satisfaction of the Responsible Authority in accordance with Condition 17 of this permit.

7.       Before the development starts a detailed landscape plan prepared by a person suitably qualified or experienced in landscape 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, including details of any existing vegetation to be removed or retained, 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.

Waste Management

8.       Collection of waste must be in accordance with a Waste Management Plan as approved by the Responsible Authority and must be undertaken by a private contractor and must not cause unreasonable disturbance to nearby residential properties to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

In the preparation of such a management plan, the following items must be addressed:

(a)     How the collection of refuse and recycling material will be managed.

(b)     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)     Where such refuse and recycling shall be stored within the site.

(f)      Waste collection to occur on-site.

(g)     Trucks are to have a length of not more than 6.4m and a height of not more than 2.1m.

(h)     Collection to occur only outside of peak traffic hours, or as otherwise agreed.

Site Management Plan

9.       Before any works start, including works required by other authorities, three copies of a site management plan must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the Site Management Plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The Site Management Plan must:

(a)     Include separate parts describing relevant matters of occupational health and safety, traffic management and delivery times and methods.

(b)     Include proposed location of car parking for construction workers’ private vehicles if they are not to be parked on site.

(c)     Include the proposed route for construction vehicle access to the site including a program for the upgrade and maintenance works required along this route while any works are in progress.

(d)     Include means by which foreign material will be restricted from being deposited on public roads by vehicles associated with building and works on the land to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

The developer must keep the Responsible Authority informed in writing of any changes to the Site Management Plan.  If in the opinion of the Responsible Authority the changes represent a significant departure from the approved Site Management Plan then an amended Site Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority.  The approved measures must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Layout Not Altered

10.     The development allowed by this permit and shown on the plans and/or schedules endorsed to accompany this permit shall not be amended for any reason without the consent of the Responsible Authority.

11.     Once the development has started it must be continued and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Landscaping

12.     Before the use of the development allowed by this permit starts, landscaping works shown on the endorsed plan must be completed and then maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Actions Before Occupation of the dwellings

13.     Before the dwellings permitted by this permit are occupied, the car parking areas and access ways must be drained, and fully sealed and constructed with asphalt, interlocking paving bricks, coloured concrete or other similar materials to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

14.     In areas set aside for car parking, measures must be taken to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority to prevent damage to fences or landscaped areas.

15.     Vehicular access to the site must be by way of a vehicle crossing constructed in accordance with Council’s Vehicle Crossing Specifications to suit the proposed driveway(s) and the vehicles that will be using the crossing(s).  The location, design, and construction of the vehicle crossing(s) must be approved by the Responsible Authority.  Any existing unused or redundant crossing(s) must be removed and replaced with concrete kerb, channel and naturestrip to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.  All vehicle crossing works are to be carried out with Council supervision under a Road Opening Permit.

16.     Before starting any buildings or works, engineering plans showing a properly prepared design (with computations) for the internal drainage and method of disposal of stormwater from all roofed and sealed areas, including the use of an on-site detention system, must be submitted to Council for approval.  These internal drainage works must be completed to Council’s satisfaction prior to using or occupying any building on the site.

17.     Before any roads, paths or drainage works associated with road and pathways in land to be transferred to the Council, and after the approval of the Functional Layout Plan, submission of landscape plans, and locations of authorities’ services have been provided to the satisfaction of the responsible authority, detailed construction plans for works must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority.  When approved, the construction plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit.  The construction plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided.

The construction plans must include the following to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority:

(a)     All necessary computations and supporting documentation.

(b)     All details of works consistent with the approved functional layout plan and approved landscape plan.

(c)     Design for full construction of streets and underground drainage, including measures to control/capture pollutants and silt.

(d)     Design for full construction of pavements with kerb and channel and vehicular crossings where appropriate.

(e)     Provision for street tree planting.

(f)      Provision for all services and conduits (underground), including alignments and offsets, on a separate services layout plan.

(g)     Provision of concrete footpaths in the new road and reserves.

(h)     Details of the proposed treatment and provision for lot boundary fencing adjoining reserves other than road reserves.

On a separate construction plan sheet if considered necessary by the applicant, provision of conduits, including pits and ancillary works for optical fibre telecommunications services or any equivalent alternative approved by the responsible authority and the conduit, unless otherwise approved, to be designed in accordance with clause 22.13 Telecommunications Conduit Policy of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme and Advisory Note 49, Revised June 2013, Telecommunications services and facilities in subdivisions.

The relocation underground of all existing aerial services, including electricity and telecommunications assets, within new road or as otherwise approved by the Responsible Authority.

Any details and requirements for drainage and water sensitive urban design features.

Road works, drainage and other civil works must be provided, in accordance with construction plans and specifications as approved by the Responsible Authority.

18.     Prior to using or occupying any building on the site, the permit holder is required to construct at no cost to Council, drainage works between the subject site and the Council nominated point of discharge.  Such drainage works must be designed by a qualified engineer and submitted to and approved by Council.  Computations will also be required to demonstrate that the drainage system will not be overloaded by the new development.  Construction of the drainage system must be carried out in accordance with Council specifications and under Council supervision.

19.     Before the use of the development commences, reticulated (water, sewerage, gas and electricity) services must be constructed and available to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

20.     The permit holder shall be responsible to meet all costs associated with reinstatement and/or alterations to Council or other Public Authority assets deemed necessary by such Authorities as a result of the development.  The permit holder shall be responsible for obtaining prior specific written approval for any works involving the alteration of Council or other Public Authority assets.

21.     Prior to occupation of any dwelling on the subject site, a letter box and house number to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority shall be provided for each apartment.

General Amenity – Construction works

22.     At all times during the construction phase of the development, the permit holder shall take measures to ensure that pedestrians are able to use with safety any footpath along the boundaries of the site.

23.     Upon completion of all buildings and works authorised by this permit the permit holder must notify the Responsible Authority of the satisfactory completion of the development and compliance with all relevant conditions.

24.     Any litter generated by building activities on the site shall be collected and stored in an appropriate enclosure which complies with Council’s Code of Practice for building/development sites.  The enclosures shall be regularly emptied and maintained such that no litter overspills onto adjoining land.  Prior to occupation and/or use of the building, all litter shall be completely removed from the site.

25.     During the construction phase, a truck wheel washing facility or similar device must be installed and used to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority so that vehicles leaving the site do not deposit mud or other materials on roadways. Any mud or other materials deposited on roadways as a result of construction works on the site must be cleaned to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority within two hours of it being deposited.

Melbourne Water Condition (Condition 26)

26.     Finished floor levels of the dwellings must be constructed no lower than as shown on the referenced plans, job number 17-0395, drawing number TP01 and TP02, revision C, dated October 2017.

Permit Expiry

27.     This permit will expire if:

(a)     the approved development does not start within two years of the date of this permit; or

(b)     the approved development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit.

The responsible authority may extend the periods referred to above if a request is made in writing.  This request must be made before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date where the development has not yet started and within 12 months after the permit expiry date where the development allowed by the permit has lawfully started before the permit expires.

NOTES

Street Numbering Note

Property Numbers will be allocated by the City of Whittlesea in accordance with Council’s Street Numbering Policy. Please do not give potential buyers any interim numbering as this often leads to confusion and problems once the correct number is issued. Please check with Council’s Subdivision Department or GIS Department to verify all street numbering before commencement of any advertising for sale or lease.

 

Works in Road Reserves

All works to be undertaken within the road reserve will require a road opening permit.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 



Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

6.1.3    46 Cookes Road, Doreen and Cookes Road Road Reserve - Amendment to Planning Permit No. 714335 (Amended) to Allow the Removal of Native Vegetation (River Red Gums)

File No:                                  714335

Attachments:                        1        Locality Maps

2        Proposed Subdivision Layout Plan and Tree Removal Plan

3        Photos of trees proposed to be removed   

Responsible Officer:           Director Planning & Major Projects

Author:                                  Senior Planning Officer   

 

APPLICANT:                        Eight Property Group

COUNCIL POLICY:              22.10     River Redgum Protection Policy

ZONING:                               General Residential Zone

                                               Mixed Use Zone

                                               Farming Zone

OVERLAY:                            Development Contributions Plan Overlay – Schedule 5

Development Plan Overlay – Schedule 5

Incorporated Plan Overlay – Schedule 1

Vegetation Protection Overlay – Schedule 1

REFERRAL:                          Parks and Open Space Department
Sustainability Planning Unit
Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning

OBJECTIONS:                      N/A - Exempt

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council resolve to approve the application to amend Planning Permit No. 714335 (Amended) and issue an Amended Planning Permit, allowing the removal of four additional River Red Gum trees.  

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    This application proposes to amend Planning Permit No. 714335 (Amended) in order to allow for the removal of four additional River Red Gum trees from the subject land and the adjacent road reserve.  The proposal also includes the removal of a Peppercorn tree, however a planning permit is not required to remove non-native vegetation. 

·    The original permit and subsequent amendments on two separate occasions were considered by Council (at the meetings on 8 October 2013, 15 March 2016 and 11 October 2016), allowing for the removal of River Red Gums from the land (total of seven trees). 

·    The trees proposed to be removed are classified as Low to Medium Value in terms of their retention rating. 

·    It was determined that after reviewing the detailed engineering designs for the estate that the trees were not viable for retention due to the need to provide for critical infrastructure to complete the subdivision. 

·    Council officers have considered the current proposal and consider it reasonable to allow the removal of a further four relatively immature River Red Gum trees from the land so that the subdivision may be completed.

Report

BACKGROUND

Planning Permit No. 713483 was issued on 12 November 2013 for the purpose of undertaking a multi-lot residential subdivision (48 residential lots, one larger lot for a convenience centre, and the construction of Cookes Road along part of the property boundary) at 46 Cookes Road, Doreen. As part of this development, one superlot (known as Lot A) was created at the western end of the site for future development.

 

To facilitate the subdivision, a separate planning application (No. 714335) was lodged for the removal of 0.233 hectares of Plains Grassy Woodland and two River Red Gum trees from the land.  This application was considered and approved by Council at its meeting on 8 October 2013. 

 

Through the detailed engineering design of the subdivision and, due to the requirement of Melbourne Water to fill lots to a depth of 0.8m, four additional River Red Gums were proposed to be removed as an amendment to this application.  These trees would have been impacted by necessary construction activity and would not have been able to survive beyond the construction of the subdivision.  As a consequence, the amended planning application to remove these four additional River Red Gums was approved by Council at its meeting on 15 March 2016. 

 

One further tree which had previously been retained was found to require removal as a result of engineering design of the footpath along the southern side of Cookes Road.  An amended planning application to remove this River Red Gum was approved by Council at its meeting on 11 October 2016. 

 

The original approval of Planning Permit No. 714335 did not take into account the future development of Lot A. However, Planning Application No. 716226 has now been lodged with Council in order to develop the land.  The proposed subdivision layout as submitted under this application is indicated in Attachment 2.

 

An assessment of this new subdivision application has determined that four additional River Red Gums are required to be removed to facilitate the orderly development of the land. One tree is located within the subject site, while three are located within the road reserve, along the southern side of Cookes Road. One Peppercorn is also required to be removed within the subject site, however a planning permit is not required for its removal.

 

It is noted that appropriate offsets are required for the removal of these trees.

SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

The subject site is located on the south-west corner of Bassets Road and Cookes Road, Doreen, is generally rectangular in shape and covers an area of 3.913 hectares (see Attachment 1).  The eastern part of the site has been subdivided.  The entire site has a frontage to Cookes Road of 387.54m along its northern boundary.  Cookes Road also extends around the western boundary of the site (albeit unformed) for a length of 104.48m.  The site has frontage to Bassetts Road on its eastern boundary for a length of 95.82m.  The southern boundary of the site measures 429.20m in length. 

 

The site is predominantly located in the General Residential Zone.  However, a portion of the western side of the site is located within a Farming Zone. The lot at the north-eastern corner of the site is intended for a convenience centre and is located within a Mixed Use Zone.

 

The locality has undergone significant change over the past five years from rural living and agricultural uses to a more urban character.  Surrounding developments include the Panorama Estate located approximately 90 metres to the south of the site and the Bella Vista Estate to the north of Cookes Road which have both been developed for residential purposes.  A planning permit has also been issued for a residential subdivision at 25 Bassetts Road, Doreen which abuts the site to the south. 

restrictions and easements

The site is legally described as Crown Allotment 1A, Section 4, Parish of Yan Yean, Volume 10043, Folio 121.  There are no restrictions on Title that preclude Council from determining this application. 

Proposal

The current application seeks to further amend Planning Permit No. 714335 (Amended) to allow the removal of four additional relatively immature River Red Gum trees (Eucalyptus Camaldulensis) to facilitate the orderly subdivision of the “Lot A” area.  A Peppercorn is also required to be removed, however a planning permit is not required to remove this tree as it is not a native species.

 

The Tree Removal Plan (Attachment 2) shows both the vegetation proposed to be removed under this amended application, as well as the trees previously approved for removal.  Photographs of the trees proposed to be removed are included in Attachment 3. 

 

These trees are identified as follows: 

 

Tree number

(as per Attachment 2)

Tree type

DBH

ABZECO Retention Value rating

Comments

Tree 1

River Red Gum

57

Medium

Along roadside (Habitat Zone 1)

Tree 2

River Red Gum

40

Low

Along roadside (Habitat Zone 1)

Tree 3

River Red Gum

47

Medium

Along roadside (Habitat Zone 1)

Tree 4

(Removed)

River Red Gum

49

Medium

In Habitat Zone 2 / Lot 56

Tree 5

Peppercorn

Unnumbered

Not assessed 

Included for clarity only.  No Permit required for removal.  Located in Lot 52

 

Tree removal consistent with past approvals has already been undertaken from the subject site.

Public Notification

The site is covered by the Development Plan Overlay – Schedule 5 (DPO5) and the Incorporated Plan Overlay – Schedule 1 (IPO1) which both exempt planning permit applications from the notice requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d) of the Planning and Environment Act, 1987, provided that the application is generally in accordance with the associated incorporated or approved plan. 


 

PLANNING CONTEXT

State Planning Policy Framework

Clause 12.01-1 Protection of Biodiversity

This clause of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme relates to biodiversity and the protection of Victoria’s natural habitat. The objective of this clause is to assist the protection and conservation of Victoria’s biodiversity.

Clause 12.01-2 Native Vegetation Management

This clause seeks to ensure that there is no net loss in the extent and quality biodiversity as a result of the clearing of native vegetation.  The strategy to achieve this is to apply the three step approach to managing native vegetation as set out in Guidelines for the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation (Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, 2017). 

These are:

·    Avoid the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation. 

·    Minimise impacts from the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation that cannot be avoided. 

·    Provide an offset to compensate for the biodiversity impact from the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation. 

LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

Clause 22.10 River Red Gum Protection Policy

Clause 22.10 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme relates to Council’s River Red Gum Protection Policy. This policy applies to the protection of River Red Gums located in urban and rural areas. The objective of this policy is “to ensure that the development of urban and rural areas takes into account the presence, retention, enhancement and long term viability of Red Gums in urban areas.” The key policy directions are to:

·    Recognise the intrinsic value of River Red Gums in establishing character and identity in urban and rural areas.

·    Request a comprehensive site analysis and arborist’s report with any planning proposal for development on land which contains one or more remnant River Red Gums.

·    Encourage that the majority of River Red Gums proposed for retention are sited in public open space reserves and/or road reserves.

·    Ensure that, where a tree is to be located in a lot, the lot is large enough to accommodate a suitable development envelope that does not disturb the tree or its root system.

·    Ensure that, where feasible, areas of significant River Red Gum regeneration are protected in any development proposal.

·    Encourage tree removal to be generally limited to only those trees independently assessed as presenting a danger to people and property.

·    Appropriately protect trees identified for retention during the construction phase, and thereafter ensure that their health is regularly monitored by an appropriate environmental consultant where located on public land.

·    Ensure that any tree nominated on a development and/or subdivision plan for protection is located within an appropriate tree protection zone. The protection zone must be large enough to ensure that the trunk and canopy remain intact and that the root system is not severely damaged or destroyed during the construction phase.

When assessed against the relevant decision guidelines of this policy and in the context of the level of remnant River Red Gums being retained across the site as a whole, the proposed removal of the River Red Gums is considered acceptable.

ZONE AND OVERLAY DECISION GUIDELINES

 

Zone

 

General Residential Zone and Farming Zone

 

The majority of the subject site is located within the General Residential Zone and a small section within the western portion of the site is zoned Farming Zone.  The subdivision proposed under Planning Application No. 716226 is contained fully within the land zoned General Residential Zone.

 

Pursuant to Clause 32.08 and Clause 35.07 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, a planning permit is not required to remove native vegetation from the land within the General Residential Zone or Farming Zone, in which the trees earmarked for removal are located. 

 

Overlays

 

The site is affected by the following overlays:

 

·        Development Contributions Plan Overlay Schedule 5

·        Development Plan Overlay Schedule 5

·        Incorporated Plan Overlay Schedule 1

·        Vegetation Protection Overlay Schedule 1

 

Given this application is for tree removal the primary focus will be on the Vegetation Protection Overlay.

 

Vegetation Protection Overlay – Schedule 1

 

Of particular relevance to this application is the Vegetation Protection Overlay – Clause 42.02 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme which requires a planning permit for the removal, destruction and lopping of native vegetation on land affected by the overlay.  Schedule 1 to this overlay relates to the River Red Gum Grassy Woodland region within the Mernda Doreen and South Morang area, where the subject site is located.  This schedule has the following objectives: 

 

·    To preserve and maintain significant vegetation and the character of the area;

·    Maintain soil qualities and minimise the impacts of erosion; and

·    Preserve natural habitat for flora and fauna.

Particular Provisions

Clause 52.17 – Native Vegetation

 

This application was lodged with Council prior to the State Government’s recent review of the planning provisions relating to native vegetation removal and a review of Clause 52.17 – Native Vegetation.  Accordingly, this application must be in assessed under the former provisions. 

 

Pursuant to the former provisions, planning approval is required to remove, destroy or lop native vegetation. 

 

This does not apply: 

 

·    If the table to Clause 52.17-6 specifically states that a permit is not required. 

·    To the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation specified in the schedule to this clause. 

·    To an area specified in the schedule to this clause. 

 

The permit exemptions in Clause 52.17-6 do not apply to this proposal. 

 

Therefore, vegetation removal must follow the Department of Environment and Primary Industries’ Permitted clearing of native vegetation – Biodiversity assessment guidelines and one of the risk –based assessment pathways. 

 

The applicant’s advice is that the removal of four additional River Red Gums is considered “low risk”, allowing a Biodiversity Assessment Report to be generated using the Native Vegetation Information Management tool.  They advise that though this is a “course” system to assess the proposal, “discrepancies are considered extremely minor and negligible”.  The resultant offset is 0.012 General Biodiversity Equivalence Units and must be secured in the Port Philip and Westernport Catchment Management Area.  This must have a minimum strategic biodiversity score of 0.080. 

REFERRALS

The application was referred internally to Council’s Parks and Open Space Department and Sustainability Planning Unit.  It was also referred externally to the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP). 

 

Council’s Parks and Open Space Department do not offer an objection to the removal of the trees to facilitate construction of the subdivision and vehicle access to proposed lots and were satisfied with the applicant’s amended plan for the estate. 

 

The Sustainability Planning Unit also supports the removal of the native vegetation subject to meeting the native vegetation offset requirements. 

 

DELWP responded that they had no objection to the planning permit application, but recommended applying offsets in accordance with Permitted Clearing of Native Vegetation – Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines (BAG). 

PLANNING COMMENTS

The importance of native vegetation is acknowledged, and in particular River Red Gum trees, as a visual and environmental feature within the municipality.   In this instance, the request to remove four additional River Red Gum trees from the land is considered acceptable. 

 

The trees proposed for removal are afforded “low” or “medium” retention values in the applicant’s arboricultural report, and are relatively immature compared to the vegetation which will be retained.  The works to be carried out have been designed to minimise the number of trees to be removed, with only those that cannot be avoided, being removed. The tree protection zone and structural root zone characteristics of the subject trees have been documented in the arborist report. The proposed subdivision works (which will introduce key infrastructure for the subdivision) will occur substantially within these critical zones and for this reason the subject trees are not capable of being retained. 

 

The loss of these relatively immature trees with a low and/or medium retention value is consistent with the previous approvals, where all River Red Gum trees previously approved for removal have also been of low and/or medium retention value.  The vegetation removal is justified given the need to facilitate the subdivision of the land and to ensure residents of the proposed lots benefit from key infrastructure and safe and efficient vehicular access. 

 

The tree on the land which has a “high” retention value is proposed for retention within a reserve and ten River Red Gums will also be retained within the road reserve along the northern boundary of the site adjacent to the proposed reserve, thus preserving the values and characteristics of the immediate area.

 

The future development of the land will accord with the Mernda Strategy Plan and the Bassetts Road Development Plan by providing a residential subdivision with appropriate densities and road connections. The removal of vegetation is a consequence of this development and is considered to provide a balanced outcome through protecting the majority of vegetation within the reserves whilst facilitating development that accords with the relevant policies of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme. In addition, the proposal is considered to generally accord with the Bassetts Road Development Plan, as the development plan does not specifically require the retention of any of the trees proposed for removal. 

 

Given the scale of the development and remaining biodiversity values on site, it is unlikely that offsetting can be achieved onsite.  As a result, there is an existing condition on the permit which will  require that offsets be undertaken in line with the State Government’s Biodiversity assessment guidelines (DEPI 2013) and Native vegetation gain scoring manual (DEPI 2013).

 

It is considered that the relevant policy objectives relating to Clauses 22.10 (River Red Gum

Protection Policy), 42.02 (Vegetation Protection Policy Overlay Schedule 1), and 52.17 (Native Vegetation Removal) of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme have been appropriately addressed in the planning assessment. Offsets in accordance with the provisions of the Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines (DEPI 2013) and Native Vegetation Gain Scoring Manual (DEPI 2013) will be provided in accordance with the condition on the planning permit. 

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 considered that the proposal is in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme and that the removal of four additional River Red gum trees from the site is acceptable in this instance.  It is therefore recommended that the amendment to the permit be approved.

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to:

1.    Approve the application to amend Planning Permit No. 714335 (Amended) and issue an Amended Planning Permit, allowing the removal of four additional River Red Gum trees. 

2.    Endorse the Concept Development Plan, Drawing M1332-ODP Version v.24, Drawn by KW, Prepared by Fratello Projects dated 18 December 2017 and showing the removal of these four trees.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

6.1.4    1480 Plenty Road, Mernda - Demolition of a heritage building (Graffs House remains) within land affected by Heritage Overlay

File No:                                  716367

Attachments:                        1        Locality Maps

2        Aerial Photograph

3        Photographs of destroyed Graff's House

4        Heritage Citation - Graff's House   

Responsible Officer:           Director Planning & Major Projects

Author:                                  Team Leader Statutory Planning   

 

APPLICANT:                        Whiteman Property and Accounting

COUNCIL POLICY:              21.08     Built Heritage and Environment

                                               22.04     Heritage Conservation Policy

ZONING:                               General Residential Zone

OVERLAY:                            Development Contributions Plan Overlay

Development Plan Overlay

Heritage Overlay

Incorporated Plan Overlay

Vegetation Protection Overlay

REFERRAL:                          The application was not required to be referred to any authority under the provisions of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

OBJECTIONS:                     The proposal is exempt from notice requirements.

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

THAT Council resolve to approve Planning Application No. 716367 and issue a Planning Permit for demolition and works associated with the remains of the Graff’s House heritage place (within land affected by a Heritage Overlay) at 1480 Plenty Road, Mernda, subject to conditions.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    The application for planning permit seeks the demolition of the remains of a heritage building (Graff’s House) that has been substantially destroyed by fire.  The building is not capable of being repaired and reconstruction of the heritage building is not recommended.

·    The application is exempt from public notification.

·    The proposal demonstrates a satisfactory level of compliance with the heritage provisions of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme as permit conditions will ensure that is a formal designation of a heritage open space area which will be integrated with future proposed urban development.

·    The heritage open space area will include an interpretation scheme including retention and restoration of some remaining elements of the former building.

·    Approval is therefore recommended, subject to conditions.


 

Report

SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

The subject land forms part of the historic Mernda Township area bounded by Plenty Road to the west, Station Lane to the south (an unused laneway) and Station Road to the north and east (see Attachment 1).  The subject land comprises two lots in common ownership with a total area of 2.26ha.  The heritage place is located on the northern lot (Lot 1 TP 955220V) which has an area of approximately 0.76ha.  This land parcel has a 109m frontage to Plenty Road (near the junction of the former Old Plenty Road - the original road alignment). 

The subject land contains the historic ruinous remains of the mid-19th Century ‘Graff’s House’, a former weatherboard residence and shop associated with the early settlement of the district.  A Heritage Overlay (comprising an area of approximately 2,400m2) defines the former house, shop and associated curtilage.  The heritage place occupies a slightly elevated position within the surrounding landscape.  The heritage place is vegetated with small exotic trees (predominantly regrowth) and woody weeds.  Areas of pasture define the balance of the land (see Attachment 2).

The subject land is within close proximity to a further heritage place to the north comprising the bluestone Mernda Catholic church.  The remains of a drystone wall define the boundary between the subject land and the church land. 

Land on the opposite side of Plenty Road comprises a large property also containing a heritage place known as ‘Preston Hall’ (bluestone cottage).  This land is in Council ownership and will contain the future Mernda regional recreation facility.  A Federation era dwelling is located to the south on nearby land at 1470 Plenty Road. 

The subject land and surrounding land are designated for medium density housing under the Mernda Strategy Plan.  This form of housing will support the Mernda Town Centre to the south and associated train station (currently under construction).  A development plan is currently being prepared by consultants on behalf of interested local landholders/ developers but has not yet been formally lodged for approval with Council.  Planning applications for subdivision and housing can be considered following the approval of a development plan.

The Graff’s House heritage place was originally assessed in the late 1980s by Council’s heritage consultants (Meredith Gould and Associates) as part of the original Whittlesea Heritage Study.  At that time the place was recorded to be in poor condition but notwithstanding was considered to be of State heritage significance.  The place was included in a Heritage Overlay (HO) under the old format Whittlesea Planning Scheme in 1994.  The extent of the HO was refined as part of the approval of the Mernda Strategy Plan in 2004.  The heritage place experienced significant deterioration in the decades since its initial assessment and was substantially destroyed by fire in late 2015 and again in early 2016.  Attachment 3 contains photographs of the burnt-out remains of the site.

background

The full 1990 Whittlesea Heritage Study citation relating to the Graff’s house heritage place is shown in Attachment 4.  The citation concludes:

 

While a reasonable number of timber buildings from the mid to late 1850s survive in Victoria, very few however are combined in a shop…This building is architecturally significant on a State level for this reason.  Locally it is significant as the last shop to survive in Morang and as one of the few houses built close to the Plenty Road transport route to survive from the late 1850s.

 

Council sought the cooperation of the current landowner to preserve the heritage place and offered to undertake more detailed heritage investigations in 2008.  This offer was not taken up.  The site subsequently fell into further disrepair through neglect.  By 2013 the site had been vandalised.

 

In October 2015 the heritage building was substantially destroyed in a suspected arson attack.  Despite requests by Council officers for Police Victoria to undertake a formal investigation, the matter was not pursued and the cause of the fire (and those responsible) are unknown.  Remaining (non-contributory) building elements of the site were subject to a further suspected arson attack in February 2016.

 

A Building Order was subsequently issued by Council’s Municipal Building Surveyor requiring the site to be fenced and secured.  An application was also made at this time by Council officers to include the site within the Heritage Inventory of Heritage Victoria (HV) as an archaeological place.  This nomination was subsequently approved in November 2015 (reference HV H7922-0499).  A ‘Consent to Disturb’ the archaeological features of the site will be necessary if demolitions works are approved under a planning permit.

Proposal

The application proposal is for the demolition of remaining building fabric on the site (not destroyed in the previous fires) and associated works to clear the site.  These works are in part necessary to make the site safe and satisfy requirements of a Building Order. The proposed works would allow the site to be fully cleared and levelled.  The fabric to be removed predominately comprises the brick chimney and a section of the rear wall, a row of bluestone blocks which possibly supported the wooded floorboards, a basalt boulder-lined well/ depression at the rear of the former house and damaged outbuildings. 

 

The landowner has engaged a heritage consultant who has undertaken a historic archaeological assessment.  The assessment sets out recommendations for removal of the remaining fabric and recording.  An arboricultural assessment has also been undertaken showing that all of the trees on the land comprise exotic elm, cherry plum and Hawthorn (predominately regrowth).  There are no tree controls under the schedule to the Heritage Overlay and no trees are recommended for retention.

Following discussions and negotiations with Council officers, the applicant (on behalf of the landowner) has agreed on a without prejudice basis to the following compensatory and interpretative outcomes in relation to any permit that may be issued:

·    Preparation of a heritage conservation management plan to achieve the following outcomes:

Setting aside an embellished area of open space of not less than 1,000m2 within the HO area with the exact location and configuration of this area to be further resolved at the development plan and subdivision stages.  The configuration will need to be to the satisfaction of the responsible authority and retain the visual relationship of the place with Plenty Road and the adjacent bluestone church.

Reinstatement of the chimney structure generally in situ (following repairs and restoration) within the heritage open space.  Other fabric to be recorded and removed (unless able to be salvaged for reuse as part of the management plan or interpretation scheme).

·    Preparation and implementation of an interpretation scheme to communicate the history and significance of the site. 

·    Preparation of a statement of significance.  The statement will assist in the naming of the reserve and provide opportunities for the naming of nearby future local subdivision roads to reflect their historical setting.

·    An agreement to be entered into under section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to require that the above outcomes be secured as part of the development of the land (either by the current owner or any future developer/ owner).  The agreement will also make it clear that the provision of the open space will not be available as part of any open space credit (i.e. it will need to be set aside above any statutory future public open space provision/ contribution).

There is currently no proposal to delete the Heritage Overlay from the Whittlesea Planning Scheme as part of the demolition proposal because the place continues to have heritage significance (although such significance is now only likely to be at the local level rather than State level).

The remains of a drystone wall along the common boundary of the subject land and the adjoining church land will not be disturbed or removed and will be further considered as part of the future preparation of the heritage conservation management plan. 

An example of a similar heritage outcome was achieved as part of Council’s previous decision to approve the demolition of Graff’s Cottage (a related site) in 2007 which was also assessed at that time to be ruinous and not capable of repair.  This heritage place (also within a HO) was transformed and embellished as a heritage reserve with interpretation as part of a new residential estate.  This reserve is located at 32E Eminence Boulevard (northern termination of Graff’s Avenue).  The area of this reserve is 0.42ha although it should be noted that this reserve was in the context of a standard density residential area and required the protection of both indigenous and heritage trees.

Public Notification

An Incorporated Plan Overlay (Schedule 1), relating to the approved Mernda Strategy Plan, exempts an application from public notification requirements where the use and development of land is generally in accordance with this plan.  The Plan does require the retention of heritage places such as Graff’s House.  However, there are no prescriptive requirements under the Plan stating in what form a heritage place must be retained.  As the place will continue to be recognised, it is considered that the application is generally in accordance with the Mernda Strategy Plan and therefore exempt from public notification.

ASSESSMENT AGAINST THE WHITTLESEA PLANNING SCHEME

The following State and local planning policies, particular provisions and zoning and overlay controls, as set out in the Whittlesea Planning Scheme (the Scheme), are considered relevant to this application proposal.

State Planning Policy Framework

Clause 15.03 (Heritage conservation) sets out State objectives to ensure the conservation of places of heritage significance.  Relevant strategies seek to:

·    Encourage appropriate development that respects places with identified heritage values and creates a worthy legacy for future generations.

·    Ensure an appropriate setting and context for heritage places is maintained or enhanced.

 

·    Support adaptive reuse of heritage buildings whose use has become redundant.

Clause 15.01-2 (Urban design principles) sets out an objective to achieve ‘architectural and urban design outcomes that contribute positively to local urban character and enhance the public realm…’.  In relation to heritage, ‘new development should ‘create a worthy legacy for future generations.’

Local Planning Policy Framework

Clause 21.08-4 sets out local objectives to ensure heritage places are ‘retained and incorporated within the development process’. 

Clause 22.04 (Heritage conservation policy) contains the following statement:

Whittlesea’s cultural heritage contributes greatly to the identity of the City. It is essential that significant heritage places are protected, retained and integrated as the City develops.  As an identified Growth Area the municipality faces a number of challenges as it seeks to protect and manage heritage places in unique contexts including established, rural and greenfield areas. The City of Whittlesea is committed to conserving and enhancing heritage and recognises that it is an integral part of all planning processes.

Under this policy, a heritage place includes an archaeological site.

Policy objectives (Clause 22.04-2) seek to:

·    identify, protect and maintain the integrity and character of Whittlesea’s heritage places.

·    recognise local heritage and other cultural features when considering development and subdivision proposals in accordance with Council’s guidelines for urban design, infrastructure development, development plans and precinct structure plans.

·    require that heritage places are considered and secured at the earliest stages of the development process.

·    protect and, where possible, enhance the setting of heritage places and the visual relationship between heritage places.

·    protect views of, and vistas to, heritage places including mature vegetation and landmarks that contribute to the character of a heritage place.

In response to these objectives it is relevant to note that even though Graff’s House has now been destroyed, the heritage place will continue to have significance for future generations.  The place is located within a future urban growth area for which planning is at an early stage of development and the site is within the setting of other heritage places and has a close visual relationship with these places and the public realm. 

Further particular policies relating to heritage conservation (Clause 22.04-4) require that the Responsible Authority:

·    Seek owner co-operation and commitment to early stabilization and security for heritage places, particularly where future subdivision and development are proposed via Section 173 Agreement or similar.

·    Require proponents to provide appropriate interpretation and recognition of the place or part of a place that is demolished.  Interpretation may take the form of ‘integration into open space reserves’.

·    Require the provision of an appropriate setting for a heritage place that retains significant view lines, topographical features and significant vegetation (in relation to future subdivision).

·    Refer a planning permit application to Heritage Victoria for comment if it affects land included on the Victorian Heritage Inventory.

In relation to the last dot point above, Heritage Victoria is aware of the application proposal and will work with Council to achieve an appropriate outcome if a permit is granted.

In relation to demolition requests, Clause 22.04-4 of the heritage conservation policy sets out the following requirements.  Officer comments are provided under each provision:

Avoid the complete demolition of a heritage place unless the building is professionally assessed as being structurally unsound and posing an immediate risk, and it is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority that it cannot feasibly be repaired or adapted for reuse.

The heritage place has substantially been destroyed by fire (perpetrators are unknown) and what partially remains has been assessed by Council’s Municipal Building Surveyor as being structurally unsound and warranting a Building Order for structural demolition (a fencing exclusion order is place pending any planning permit that may be issued).  In this instance it is the view of officers that the structure is now no longer capable of being restored from the remaining limited fabric.  A full reconstruction would be necessary to replace the building and this outcome (replica building) is generally not supported on heritage grounds.  There are no plans or architectural drawings on which to base any reconstruction outcome (which was the case with the nearby Black Brae’s Farm).  However, the site can be adapted for reuse as part of an open space proposal.

Generally not accept poor condition or low integrity of a heritage place as justification for its demolition, particularly if in the opinion of the Responsible Authority the condition of the heritage place has been deliberately allowed to deteriorate or if its deterioration has arisen as a consequence of unlawful activities.

The heritage place did fall into disrepair from neglect.  The landowner did not take any proactive steps to prevent further deterioration over a considerable period during which the building was included in a HO.  However, it should be noted that the landowner was not under any statutory obligation to take proactive action to prevent deterioration.  The destruction of the heritage place is suspected to be the consequence of unlawful activities (arson) by person(s) unknown. 

Require appropriate redevelopment including open space protection and interpretation of heritage places as part of any unavoidable demolition.

It is considered demolition of remaining fabric is unavoidable and under these circumstances open space interpretation is an appropriate outcome.

Recognise that heritage places may continue to retain value and significance even if buildings are demolished.

As previously noted in this report the heritage place will continue to have significance (although not at the State level).  No request has been lodged seeking the deletion of the HO.

Require that an archival record is provided to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority prior to demolition being approved. An archival record includes measured drawings and maps in addition to a photographic record of the heritage place.

A detailed statement of significance will need to be prepared for the heritage place as a condition requirement of any permit issued.  Further recording of the heritage place will form a requirement of HV when issuing a Consent to Disturb.  This information will inform the interpretation scheme for the site.

Address unauthorized demolition of a heritage place through restitution and compensatory outcomes.

It is considered the proposed future open space provision and interpretation outcome discussed in this report will provide an appropriate compensatory outcome.

Zone Provisions

The subject land is included in a General Residential Zone (GRZ1) under the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.  There are no planning permit requirements relating to the application proposal.

Overlay Provisions

Incorporated Plan Overlay (Schedule 1)

Under this provision the use and development of land must accord with the Mernda Strategy Plan incorporated document.  The land forms part of ‘Precinct 3’ where there is a particular requirement that ‘heritage places such as Graff’s farmhouse [sic] and St Joseph’s Church are to be protected within the medium density housing area.’  The open space interpretation will satisfy this requirement.

Development Plan Overlay (Schedule 5)

This planning provision requires a development plan to be prepared for the area to set out the form and condition of future land use, development and subdivision.  As noted previously in this report, this plan is under preparation and will need to be considered by Council at a future date.  It is a requirement of the DPO Schedule that a plan provide for the protection, restoration and interpretation of European cultural heritage places.   A permit is not required under this provision for the proposed demolition works.  The development plan will need to ensure that there is an appropriate and sensitive housing interface to the proposed heritage open space.

Heritage Overlay (Schedule 21)

The HO comprises an area of 2,400m2 extending from the Plenty Road frontage to the rear of the site.  Pursuant to Clause 43.01-1, a permit is required to demolish or remove a building and to carry out works.  As noted previously, there are no tree controls under the schedule to the Heritage Overlay.  Before deciding on an application a Responsible Authority must consider whether the demolition or removal will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place.  Compensatory outcomes are proposed to mitigate the adverse outcomes of the demolition.

Vegetation Protection Overlay (Schedule 1)

The exotic vegetation to be removed as part of the proposed works is not indigenous or native and a planning permit is not required under this provision.


 

Development Contribution Plan Overlay (Schedule 9)

Development contributions for physical and social infrastructure will be sought at the planning permit stage.  It should be noted that the open space to be set aside for heritage protection and interpretation will be in addition to future public open space contributions.

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

Although the loss and demise of the building elements relating to the Graff’s House heritage place are regrettable, the proposed outcomes will ensure that the heritage place continues to have significance as the area undergoes a transition to an urban environment.  The proposed demolition is supported because the compensatory outcomes as set out in the recommended conditions adequately address the State and local planning requirements of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, including the provisions of Council’s heritage conservation policy and the Heritage Overlay. 

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to approve Planning Application No. 716367and issue a Planning Permit for demolition and works associated with the remains of the Graff’s House heritage place (within land affected by a Heritage Overlay) at 1480 Plenty Road, Mernda, in accordance with the endorsed plans and subject to the following conditions:

1.       Prior to commencement of demolition works, three copies of a heritage conservation management plan must be prepared by a suitably qualified heritage consultant and submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority.  The plan must include:

a)     Provision of an area of not less than 1,000m2 to be set aside within the existing Heritage Overlay area for heritage open space and interpretation.  The area and its configuration must maintain a visual relationship with Plenty Road and the adjoining heritage place to the north to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

b)     The retention and/ or reconstruction of the standing fire place and its integration within the heritage open space.

c)     The area of demolition works including any other heritage fabric to be retained or removed (including retained in storage pending the development of the heritage open space).

d)     An interpretation scheme for the heritage place to be implemented within the heritage open space.

e)     Location of any drystone walls within or adjacent to the heritage open space.

 

2.       Prior to any works, the applicant must enter into an agreement under Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 with the Responsible Authority to provide for the following:

a)     Provision of an area of not less than 1,000m2 to be set aside for heritage open space and interpretation in accordance with Condition No. 1.

b)     The implementation of the heritage conservation management plan.

c)     That the designated heritage open space will not form part of future credits of open space requirements.  

            All costs associated with the preparation and execution of the Agreement must      be borne by the owner of the land.

3.       The works allowed by this permit and shown on the plans and/or schedules endorsed to accompany this permit shall not be amended for any reason without the consent of the Responsible Authority.

4.       Within 12 months of demolition works occurring, a Statement of Significance must be prepared by a suitably qualified heritage consultant and submitted to the Responsible Authority.

5.       Upon completion of all demolition works authorised by this permit the permit holder must notify the Responsible Authority of the satisfactory completion of the works and compliance with all relevant conditions.

6.       In accordance with the Planning and Environment Act 1987 a permit for the development expires if:

a)     the approved works do not start within 2 years of the date of this permit; or

b)      the approved works are not completed within 4 years of the date of this permit.

The responsible authority may extend the periods referred to above if a request is made in writing. This request must be made before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date where the development has not yet started and within 12 months after the permit expiry date where the development allowed by the permit has lawfully started before the permit expires.

Notes:

1.         A Building Application for Demolition is required to remove remaining building structures authorised under this permit and will need to be obtained before works commence.

2.         A Consent to Disturb archaeological remains associated with the heritage place is required from Heritage Victoria and must be obtained before works commence.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

6.1.5    23-25 Nickson Street, Bundoora - Amendment to Planning Permit No. 715748

File No:                                  715748

Attachments:                        1        Locality Maps

2        Amended Development Plans   

Responsible Officer:           Director Planning & Major Projects

Author:                                  Principal Planner   

 

APPLICANT:                        Kangjun Huang

COUNCIL POLICY:              Housing Diversity Strategy

ZONING:                               General Residential Zone

OVERLAY:                            Development Contributions Plan Overlay

REFERRAL:                          Not applicable

OBJECTIONS:                      Three (including a 60 signature petition)

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council resolve to approve the application to amend Planning Permit No. 715748 and issue a Notice of Decision to amend a planning permit.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·        The application proposes minor changes to the proposal approved by VCAT.

·        At its meeting of 13 December 2016, Council resolved to refuse Planning Application No. 715748 for the construction of eight dwellings and a reduction in the required car parking rate.  Council’s decision was appealed and a permit was issued at the direction of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

·        The applicant submitted an application to amend Planning Permit No. 715748 on 31 October 2017.

·        The application was advertised, which resulted in three objections, including a 60 signature petition being received.  It is noted that the head petitioner has withdrawn his individual objection, however the petition remains.  Concerns raised related to the development as a whole as opposed to the specific changes. These included loss of privacy, increased traffic, height of development, likelihood of development being used as short term high density accommodation for itinerants, tourists and students, loss of views, overshadowing, loss of property values.

·        The proposed changes demonstrate a satisfactory level of compliance with the provisions of Clause 55 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, and provides an overall improved development when compared to the original approval, consistent with the VCAT decision.

·        On this basis it is recommended that Council approve the application to amend the permit.

Report

SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

The subject site is located on the southeast corner of Nickson Street and Cook Street, in Bundoora (see Attachment 1).  The site comprises of two allotments with a total site area of 1,058m2.  The site contains two existing dwellings both fronting Nickson Street, with vehicular access to No. 23 from Nickson Street (northeast corner) and vehicular access to No. 25 from Cook Street (southwest corner).  The site is located approximately 30m north of Settlement Road and 215m from Plenty Road to the east.

 

The immediate surrounding locality is characterised by the Bundoora Neighbourhood Activity Centre, an ageing residential housing stock and pockets of medium density residential development.  The character of the area is made up of older single and double storey dwellings typically from the 1960s onwards, with examples of newer infill development dispersed throughout and a greater focus at the western end of Nickson Street where there are in excess of 100 residential dwellings in medium to higher density developments ranging from effectively double storey townhouses through to 3-4 storey apartment buildings. 

 

The change being experienced in this area is reflective of the site’s location in proximity to the following sites, services and infrastructure:

 

·        St Damien’s Primary School and Catholic Church (50m south).

·        Bundoora Activity Centre including shopping centre, with Coles, Woolworths and various specialty shops (75m east).

·        Northside Christian College (120m north).

·        Nickson Street West Neighbourhood Park (200m west).

·        Norris Bank Parklands (360m northwest).

·        Principal Public Transport Network including tram and bus access along Plenty Road within approximately 200m (Bus Route 955 and Tram Routes).

 

restrictions and easements

 

The site is legally described as Lots 41 and 42 on Plan of Subdivision 068676.  A 2.4m easement traverses the southern boundary of the two lots.  There are no restrictions on title that preclude Council from determining the application.  

 

Proposal

 

The applicant proposes to amend the approved development as follows:

·         Ground Floor: internal reconfiguration including the provision of additional bathroom to Dwelling Nos. 5-8;

·         First Floor: internal reconfiguration including the provision of an additional enclosed study to Dwelling Nos. 1-8;

·         Reconfiguration / relocation of balcony to Dwelling No. 1 from the north-east corner of the dwelling to the front resulting in a reduced front setback, from 5.7m to 4.2m for the extent of the dwelling;

·         Second Floor: internal reconfiguration to Dwelling Nos. 1-8;

·         Provision of 1.2m high timber front fence to Nickson Street and Cook Street frontages; and

·         Relocation of external storage (including waste storage) to garages, providing additional ground level private open space area to Dwelling No. 4

Details of the proposed amendments are outlined in the following table:

 

 

Height/Scale

No. of Bedrooms

Setbacks

Private Open Space

Car Parking

Dwelling No. 1

Three storey

(no change)

3 + study

(3 previously)

 4.2m from Nickson Street at first floor

(Minimum of 4.2m - 5.7m previously)

11.6m2

(11.9m2 previously)

Double garage

(no change)

Dwelling No. 2

Three storey

(no change)

3 + study

(3 previously)

No change

No change

Double garage

(no change)

Dwelling No. 3

Three storey

(no change)

3 + study

(3 previously)

No change

No change

Double garage

(no change)

Dwelling No. 4

Three storey

(no change)

3 + study

(3 previously)

No change

11.5m2

(9.4m2 previously) + additional ground level POS

Double garage

(no change)

Dwelling No. 5

Three storey

(no change)

3 + study

(3 previously)

No change

No change

Double garage

(no change)

Dwelling No. 6

Three storey

(no change)

3 + study

(3 previously)

No change

No change

Double garage

(no change)

Dwelling No. 7

Three storey

(no change)

3 + study

(3 previously)

No change

No change

Double garage

(no change)

Dwelling No. 8

Three storey

(no change)

3 + study

(3 previously)

2.2m from Cook Street

(2.1m previously)

No change

Double garage

(no change)

 

Public Notification

 

Advertising of the application has resulted in three objections being received, including a 60 signature petition.  The grounds of objection relate to the development as a whole and can be summarised as follows:

 

·        Loss of privacy;

·        Increased traffic;

·        Height of development;

·        Likelihood of development being used as short term high density accommodation for itinerants, tourists and students;

·        Loss of views;

·        Overshadowing;

·        Loss of property values.

HOUSING DIVERSITY STRATEGY

The Housing Diversity Strategy (HDS) was introduced into the Whittlesea Planning Scheme via Planning Scheme Amendment C181, gazetted on 22 October 2015.  The 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.

ASSESSMENT AGAINST CLAUSE 55 OF THE WHITTLESEA PLANNING SCHEME

The proposal includes the following outcomes:

·    There is no change to the front setbacks to Nickson Street and Cook Street.

·    The side and rear setbacks to adjoining properties to the east and south have not been reduced.

·    A 1.2m front fence is proposed to both Nickson Street and Cook Street.

·    Unit 1 has been reconfigured to locate the associated balcony to front Nickson Street rather than the side (east) boundary.

·    The communal bin storage area has been moved from the south-east corner to within the respective unit’s garage.

·    All units have reconfigured internally to provide for a study area and small bathroom in place of a powder room.

·    Appropriate car parking continues to be provided for each dwelling.

All of the proposed changes are in compliance with Clause 55 (ResCode) of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

Overall, the proposed changes are considered to be appropriate as they improve the amenity to the adjoining properties by removing the communal bin area previously located in the south-east corner of the site as well as relocating the balcony of unit 1 to front Nickson Street rather the residential site to the east.

Further to the above, the proposed changes are considered to be an overall improvement to the approved permit that was issued by VCAT by improving both the internal amenity of each dwelling as well as the external amenity of immediately adjacent sites.

CAR PARKING 

 

Clause 52.06 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme prescribes the rate and design standards for car parking spaces required on site.  Pursuant to this clause the following car spaces are required:


 

Dwelling No.

No. of bedrooms

Car spaces required

Car spaces provided

Complies

Dwelling No. 1

3 + study

2

2

Yes

Dwelling No. 2

3 + study

2

2

Yes

Dwelling No. 3

3 + study

2

2

Yes

Dwelling No. 4

3 + study

2

2

Yes

Dwelling No. 5

3 + study

2

2

Yes

Dwelling No. 6

3 + study

2

2

Yes

Dwelling No. 7

3 + study

2

2

Yes

Dwelling No. 8

3 + study

2

2

Yes

Visitor Car parking

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. There are no additional car parking requirements as a result of the provision of an enclosed study to each dwelling, with all dwellings to be provided with two car spaces within a double garage.

 

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN OVERLAY (SCHEDULE 3)

 

The site is affected by the Development Contributions Plan Overlay.  Pursuant to Clause 45.06 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, the Development Contributions Plan Overlay enables the levying of contributions for the provision of works, services and facilities prior to development commencing.  Schedule 3 to the overlay requires contributions for drainage infrastructure for medium density residential development at a current rate of $2.19 per square metre of the total site area. Condition No. 1 of Planning Permit No. 715748 required the payment of a development contribution in accordance with the Development Contributions Plan Overlay (DCPO3) prior to the endorsement of plans.  This has already been paid. 

Comments on Grounds of Objection

 

The grounds of objection relate to the development as a whole, which has already been approved.  Consideration can only be given to the amendments sought and as such, a response to the grounds is provided below.

 

1.       Loss of privacy

No additional impacts on the privacy of adjoining and surrounding properties are likely to result due to the proposed amendment.  The relocation of the first floor balcony to Dwelling No. 1 from the north-east corner to the front of the dwelling and provision of a small study in this location is likely to reduce privacy impacts to the adjoining property.

 

2.       Increased traffic

The development complies with the requirements of Clause 52.06 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme (Car Parking).  The proposed amendment includes the provision of a study to each dwelling.  There are no additional car parking requirements as a result of the provision of an enclosed study to each dwelling, with each dwelling provided with two car spaces within a double garage.

 

It is noted that the site is well serviced by public transport, with bus and tram routes located just 200m away on Plenty Road and the Bundoora Activity Centre located within a short 75m walk.

 

3.       Height of development

The proposed amendment will not result in any increase to the height of the approved dwellings.  Notwithstanding this, Clause 55.03-2 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme states that the ‘maximum building height should not exceed 9m, unless the slope of the natural ground level at any cross section wider than 8m of the site of the building is 2.5 degrees or more, in which case the maximum building height should not exceed 10m’.  The proposed development complies with this requirement, with the highest points of the development ranging between 8.7m and 9m above finished ground level. 

 

4.       Likelihood of development being used as short term high density accommodation for itinerants, tourists and students

The nature of tenure is not a relevant planning consideration. The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) has long held the position that good neighbours are not determined by nature of tenure.

 

5.       Loss of views

It has been consistently upheld by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) that there is no right to a view in an urban setting and that any loss of an existing view is not a relevant planning consideration.  It is noted that the proposed amendment will not result in any additional loss of views.

 

6.       Overshadowing

The shadow diagrams submitted with the amendment application show that the level of overshadowing experienced by neighbouring properties will be in accordance with Clause 55.04-5 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme which aims to ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow existing secluded private open space of an existing dwelling.  No additional overshadowing will result due to the proposed amendment.

 

7.       Loss of property values

It has been consistently upheld by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) that property devaluation is not a relevant planning consideration. 

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 amendment application 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 proposed changes are relatively minor and result in an improved development outcome.  Approval of the amendment application is recommended.

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to approve the application to Amend Planning Permit No. 715748 and issue a Notice of Decision to Amend a Planning Permit for the Construction of Eight Triple Storey Dwellings in accordance with the endorsed plans.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 



Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

6.1.6    Planning Scheme Amendment C200 - Stage Two Implementation of the Housing Diversity Strategy

File No:                                  180172

Attachments:                        1        Housing Diversity and Design Policy

2        Zone Schedules Housing Diversity Strategy   

Responsible Officer:           Director Planning & Major Projects

Author:                                  Senior Strategic Policy Planner     

 

Report

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council resolve to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit Planning Scheme Amendment C200 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme which:

1.         Introduces the Housing Diversity and Design Policy to the Local Planning Policy Framework.

2.         Introduces new zone schedules (Residential Growth Zone and General Residential Zone).

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·        The purpose of Amendment C200 is the Stage Two implementation of City of Whittlesea’s Housing Diversity Strategy.

·        Consultation was undertaken with Councillors at three separate briefings in 2017 and 2018, and with the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, to identify appropriate statutory tools to address Council’s most pressing housing policy issues in the context of a dynamic state housing policy environment.

·        Taking into consideration the outcome of the consultation process and the direction provided by Council’s Housing Diversity Strategy, the proposed Amendment will address the design, diversity and location of new housing. This will involve:

Ø the preparation of a local planning policy to set out Council’s expectations for the quality, diversity and location of housing; and

Ø making changes to residential zone schedules to address the quality of residential development.


 

BACKGROUND

The Housing Diversity Strategy 2013-2033 (HDS), adopted in 2013, was intended to provide clear guidance about locations where housing growth should be directed, and to encourage a diverse range of housing types. Housing quality would be driven by the implementation of ‘Key Design Principles’.

The Victorian State Government’s 2013 introduction of reformed residential zones and tight timelines for their implementation meant that the decision was made to implement the HDS in two stages.

The first stage of the implementation (Amendment C181) was approved in October 2015. Through Amendment C181, Council had sought Neighbourhood Residential Zone for 70% of the established areas of the municipality (aligned with the Suburban Residential Change Areas from the Housing Diversity Strategy).

However, the Minister for Planning ultimately applied General Residential Zone to the majority of these areas with the result that the underlying zone is frequently at odds with the strategic direction of the HDS. As a result, Council decisions have not been supported at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) and this has significantly eroded Council’s ability to implement the HDS.

New challenges to the HDS implementation have arisen from State Government reforms to residential planning controls in March 2017. The most significant changes were:

 

·           Strengthened building height controls in the Neighbourhood Residential Zone (NRZ) and the General Residential Zone (GRZ). This included an increased building height in the GRZ of 11 metres which allows for the construction of three storey buildings.

 

·           A mandatory “garden area” to be provided in residential developments in the NRZ and GRZ; and

 

·           Removing the two dwelling restriction on land in the NRZ.

The recent zone changes have forced a re-assessment of the available planning tools.  Re-zoning has been considered in line with the original intention of Amendment C181 as this would implement HDS Housing Change Areas.  However, this option has not had consistent support from the Department Environment Land Water and Planning (DELWP), despite the recent zone reforms that drive more housing change in both the GRZ and the NRZ. 

Nevertheless, this option could be revisited at some stage should circumstances change and the State Government’s position becomes clearer.

DISCUSSION

Whilst acknowledging that housing growth should not be constrained, the HDS directs the highest level of housing change in areas in proximity to transport and services. This approach delivers housing that reduces car dependency, is closer to employment opportunities, and is more affordable to live in.

The HDS also supports the development of a diversity of housing that matches demographic profiles and that is well-designed, enhancing the attractiveness of our suburbs and improving the quality of life for all residents.

As such, the Stage Two Implementation has focussed on identifying the appropriate statutory tools to achieve these key strategic objectives of the HDS. The recommended elements of the planning scheme amendment are:       

·        Development of a Local Planning Policy – to reinforce the design aspirations of the Housing Diversity Strategy and explain the locational requirements for the most housing change to occur in areas in close proximity to transport and services. The proposed Housing Diversity and Design Policy (refer Attachment 1)  will apply to the development of two or more dwellings in the established areas of the municipality on land zoned Residential Growth Zone, General Residential Zone, and Neighbourhood Residential Zone. Established area suburbs include Bundoora, Lalor, Mill Park, Thomastown and parts of Epping and South Morang.  

·        Vary zone schedules to incorporate key elements from the Housing Diversity Strategy as follows (refer Attachment 2):

Ø   Preferred Character or Design Objectives,

Ø   Canopy tree provision

Ø   Useable private open space

Ø   Incremental change in housing typology.

·        The above planning scheme changes would be supported by a Design Guide, which would assist with interpreting the policy but would not be incorporated in the planning scheme. The Design Guide would be developed following the Amendment process.

The structure of planning schemes in Victoria is changing, in line with the State Government’s Smart Planning Program. To this end, the Department Environment Land Water and Planning (DELWP) have advised that they are taking a much harder line on the type of content that can be included in a local planning policy. Local planning policies cannot contain any detailed provisions and should instead provide broad objectives and policy direction and guidance.

As such, the proposed planning scheme changes have been drafted to target the issues that provide the greatest opportunity to influence housing outcomes:

·        Housing Location;

·        Housing Diversity; and

·        Housing Design.

The sections that follow will focus on the issues to be addressed under each of the topics above, and how the proposed changes would assist.

The lack of clarity around the State Government’s position on housing policy and the structure of planning schemes, means that a conservative approach has been taken in this stage of the HDS implementation. The content of the local planning policy and schedules can be re-visited once these circumstances change.

Housing Location

Problem Statement:

As mentioned above, the HDS supports the highest level of housing change in areas in proximity to transport and services. However, following Amendment C181, Council has had difficulty implementing its housing policy due to conflict with the underlying zone and unfavourable decisions at VCAT.

Some VCAT decisions have failed to correctly interpret the walkable catchment, defined as 400-800m proximity to services and transport, that helps determine the HDS Change Areas. VCAT decisions have measured the distance to services radially instead of via the path of travel; or nominated lower order retail centres and poorly serviced bus stops as within a walkable catchment (whereas the HDS nominates the relevant services as activity centres and the Principal Public Transport Network).


 

Response:

The policy will include a clarification of the walkable catchment as follows:

Walkable catchments for tram and rail stops, and Metropolitan Activity and Neighbourhood centres are determined by measuring the length of the access route on foot via the road and open space network.   The walkable catchments are:

·        Neighbourhood Renewal Change Area: 400 metres or less.

·        Neighbourhood Interface Change Area: 800 metres of less.

Housing Design

Problem Statement:

Housing Quality and Design

The Stage 2 HDS Implementation must address recurring internal and external amenity issues arising from the poor design response in medium density housing applications. There is concern about the poor quality of new housing being delivered in the established areas, and DELWP have been sympathetic to the need to address these design issues.

The specific design issues to be addressed by the Amendment were selected following a review of relevant VCAT decisions, consultation with Council’s statutory planners, and an analysis of development applications. They can be summarised as follows:

Internal amenity:

•     Balcony screening for overlooking

•     ‘Reverse living’ where living areas are at the upper level, usually with secluded private open space provided on a balcony or deck   – to address accessibility and outlook.

•     Impact of vehicle infrastructure on landscaping and dwelling entries.

External amenity:

•     Building form and quality.

•     Useability of open space – dimensions, location and outlook.

•     Screening of bins in proximity to dwellings to improve both internal and external amenity.

•     Canopy trees, high quality garden design.

Canopy Trees

Canopy tree provision is a major spatial element of the key design principles that drive the HDS preferred character objectives. Canopy trees in a residential setting influence local amenity, built form outcomes and community resilience to urban heat island effect.

Total urban tree canopy cover for the established areas of the municipality in 2017 was 7.97%. This is inequitable when compared to canopy cover measurement in other middle-ring Victorian LGAs:

·        Moonee Valley  12%

·        Monash              20%

·        Whitehorse        24%

·        Banyule             33%

·        Maroondah        40%

An analysis of urban tree canopy cover showed that canopy loss has been significantly higher in areas subject to the highest levels of infill development, such as Lalor and Thomastown.  While Lalor and Thomastown represent a combined 45% of the study area, they comprise less than 10% of the overall urban tree canopy cover. Between 2009 and 2017, areas of highest development activity within these two suburbs experienced a loss of 23.45% canopy cover (Lalor) and 25.25% (Thomastown).

Response:

Two of the proposed local policy objectives of the Housing Diversity and Design will address the broader issues of housing design and landscaping:

·        To achieve preferred character and design objectives by encouraging generous landscaping and high quality design of multi-dwelling development.

 

·        To encourage residential development that maintains and enhances internal and external amenity for existing and future residents.

The policy detail will specifically seek to implement the Key Design Principles of the HDS by noting a preference for how each design issue is resolved. For example, encouraging development that:

·        achieves generous side and rear setbacks where a sense of space and separation between dwellings is part of the preferred neighbourhood character” and

·        “achieves a single shared point of vehicle access for development sites, to maximise landscaping opportunities in the front setback and to maintain on-street parking provision”.

State government zone reforms in March, 2017 mandated the provision of ‘neighbourhood character objectives’ or, in the case of the RGZ, ‘design objectives’ in zone schedules.  This provides an opportunity to add local content to zone schedules, specifically the preferred character and design objectives for three HDS Housing Change Areas - Neighbourhood Renewal (RGZ), Neighbourhood Interface (GRZ2), and Suburban Residential (GRZ3) (refer Attachment 2).

A variation to the Landscape Objective of ResCode is proposed in GRZ zone schedules (refer Attachment 2) to ensure that medium density housing developments in the Neighbourhood Interface and Suburban Residential Change Areas include canopy trees in both the front and rear setback. The proposed ResCode variation (Standard B13) seeks to ensure the delivery, and survival, of canopy trees within residential properties:

Provide at least one canopy tree in both the front and rear setbacks. Each canopy tree must achieve a minimum six metres mature height and be accommodated in a clear unpaved area of at least 5 metres by 5 metres.

This spatial allowance for a canopy tree, a minimum rear setback of 5 metres (Standard A10 and B17), and changes to secluded private open space (Standard B28) should deliver functional and attractive backyard spaces for future residents.  For example, in the Suburban Residential Change Area, the minimum area of secluded private open space would be increased from 25 square metres to 40 square metres to be provided at the side or rear of dwellings.  In the Neighbourhood Interface Change Area, the area provided for a canopy tree would be required in addition to the minimum secluded private open space of 25 square metres.

A landscape plan would be required to be submitted with the planning permit application, showing that the development is designed with the spatial requirements of the canopy trees taken into account. 

In Neighbourhood Renewal Areas (Residential Growth Zone), the functionality of secluded open space would be addressed through schedule changes that ensure that balcony dimensions are comparable with the Better Apartment Design Standards (Standard B28). There would also be an adjustment to front setbacks to deliver incremental change in the housing typology for these areas (Standard A3 and B6).  


 

Housing Diversity

Problem Statement: 

The HDS supports a greater diversity in housing to accommodate projected household types, including housing for a range of household sizes, and accessible housing to accommodate people with a disability and to allow the existing population to age in place.

The Stage 1 implementation of the HDS was supported by a 2012 Residential Market Analysis which established that the proposed policy settings would deliver a level of housing growth in the municipality that would accommodate forecast population increases and household types.

The forecast population for the study area is now estimated to be 156,656 persons by 2037. Forecast dwelling construction figures indicate that sufficient dwelling numbers should be available for the expected 9,341 additional households. 

The forecast change in household types for the Study Area by 2037 varies little from that provided in the 2012 report, with approximately 40% of household types to be families with children/ group households, and 60% comprising lone person households/couples without children.

The demand for accessible housing was not addressed in the 2012 report. Existing demand can be understood using a combination of annual household survey data and 2016 Census data:

·        City of Whittlesea’s Annual Household Survey in 2017 reported that 12.11% of established areas residents have a permanent or long term disability or medical condition.

 

·        Census 2016 data for City of Whittlesea advised that 5.7% of the population report needing help in their day to day lives due to disability.   This Census also reports that 11.8% of residents provide unpaid assistance on a daily basis to a person with a disability. Percentages reported for residents of Lalor and Thomastown were consistently higher.

In order to determine highest priorities for housing diversity, the following analyses were undertaken:

·        Of development applications received over the past eighteen months, what is the proportion of one, two, three and four bedroom dwellings proposed and do they align with household types?

The analysis found that the number of bedrooms being delivered in multi-dwelling developments correlates very well with current household types. Dwellings with 3-5 bedrooms were 55.63% of the total, and dwellings with 1-2 bedrooms were 44.37% of the total. This result indicates that on this specific issue, the housing market is reasonably responsive to demand and will continue to be so as household types change over the coming decades.

However, the analysis found that development applications for more than ten dwellings were less likely to provide any variation in the number of bedrooms within the development, despite an existing ResCode standard that encourages such an approach.

·        Of development applications for ten or more dwellings received over the past eighteen months, what is the proportion of accessible dwellings proposed and do they align with household types?

The analysis found that the delivery rate for accessible housing in larger developments over the last eighteen months is 3.28%.  This is despite an existing ResCode objective that encourages developments of ten dwellings or more to provide at least one dwelling that suits people with a range of abilities. Therefore it might be expected that the delivery rate would be closer to 10%.

Response:

It is appropriate to achieve more housing diversity in the larger developments, from both a community development and housing affordability perspective.    As such, the local planning policy will encourage more variation in the number of bedrooms in a development of ten dwellings or more.

The delivery rate of 3.28% accessible housing is well below the existing demand, as outlined above, and will not cater for expected increases in demand in the future to accommodate the proportion of residents with a disability as residents age in place. The proposed local planning policy will encourage the delivery of more accessible and adaptable housing in developments of ten dwellings or more.

CRITICAL DATES

If the Minister for Planning grants authorisation for the preparation of the Amendment, Council must give notice of the Amendment within 40 business days of receiving authorisation. Given this timeframe, it is likely that exhibition of the Amendment would commence in May 2018.

CONSULTATION

Targeted consultation has been undertaken with Council’s statutory planners at key stages in the project.

The project was also informed by feedback from Councillors at three Council Forums in 2017 and 2018.

Ongoing consultation has also been undertaken with DELWP, to refine the elements of the Stage Two Implementation.

It is important to note also that the content of Council’s Housing Diversity Strategy 2013-2033 was informed by extensive community consultation. The proposed Amendment addresses key consultation outcomes such as:

·        Greater housing choice and accessibility

·        Directing housing growth to well-serviced locations

·        Design elements such as:

Ø  generous landscaping;

Ø  usable and well-designed private open space;

Ø  accessible and environmentally sustainable design; and

Ø  setbacks to create building separation and opportunities for landscaping.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Statutory fees will be incurred as part of the Planning Scheme Amendment process, however these fees are part the usual department business planning and budgeting.

Policy strategy and legislation

State Planning Policy Framework

Clause 11.06-2 (Housing Choice) seeks to provide housing choice close to jobs and services. Strategies that are supported by this Amendment are:

·        to support housing growth and diversity in defined housing change areas and redevelopment sites.

·        direct more housing closer to jobs and public transport.

·        identify and plan for greyfield areas to deliver a greater mix and diversity of housing, particularly through opportunities for land consolidation.

·        Facilitate diverse housing that offers choice and meets changing household needs through:

Ø   provision of a greater mix of housing types.

Ø   adaptable internal dwelling design.

Ø   universal design.

Clause 16.01-2 (Location of residential development) seeks to locate new housing in or close to activity centres and in urban renewal precincts and sites that offer good access to jobs, services and transport. Strategies that are supported by this Amendment are:

·        Ensure an adequate supply of redevelopment opportunities within established urban areas to reduce the pressure for fringe development.

·        Identify opportunities for increased residential densities to help consolidate urban areas.

Clause 16.01-4 (Housing Diversity) seeks to provide for a range of housing types to meet increasingly diverse needs. Strategies that are supported by this Amendment are:

·        Encourage the development of well-designed medium-density housing which:

Ø   Respects the neighbourhood character

Ø   Improves housing choice

Ø   Makes better use of existing infrastructure

Ø   Improves energy efficiency of housing.

·        Support opportunities for a wide range of income groups to choose housing in well serviced locations.

Plan Melbourne 2017-2050

 

Plan Melbourne 2017-2050 adopts an approach to housing with multiple objectives.  The document provides strong policy support for facilitating an increased percentage of new housing in established areas to create a city of 20 minute neighbourhoods close to existing services, jobs and public transport (Policy 2.1.2).  At the same time, policy support is provided for “certainty” about the scale of growth in the suburbs (Policy 2.1.4). This policy cites mandatory height provisions and site coverage requirements (introduced as part of the March 2017 zone reforms) as promoting this certainty.

Importantly, the policy states that “local government and the community also need confidence that the built form objectives they sign up to will be adhered to.” This last statement reflects Council’s aspirations in implementing the HDS, but there have been the reported difficulties in applying the key design principles of the HDS to the assessment of housing development.

The intention from the HDS to include canopy trees in front and rear setbacks of new development is strongly supported by Outcome 5 of Plan Melbourne ( Melbourne is a city of inclusive, vibrant and healthy neighbourhoods) and Outcome 6 (Melbourne is a sustainable and resilient city), both of which seek to increase urban greening.

 


 

Local Planning Policy Framework - Municipal Strategic Statement

 

The Stage One implementation introduced policy content from the HDS to the Municipal Strategic Statement, including the following:

Clause 21.09-4 Change Areas in the Established Suburbs

Objective 1: To accommodate varying levels of housing growth and change in the established residential areas of the municipality by implementing the identified Housing Change Areas in the Housing Diversity Strategy.

Strategy 1.2 - Encourage medium and higher density in a Neighbourhood Renewal Change Areas that is appropriate in a neighbourhood context.

Strategy 1.3 - Encourage medium and standard density in Neighbourhood Interface Change Areas that provides a suitable transition between more intensive change areas and standard density housing.

Strategy 1.4 – Encourage standard density housing that maintains and enhances the amenity of the surrounding neighbourhood in Suburban Residential Change Areas.

Objective 2: To ensure the housing types and design of residential development is appropriate in each of the Housing Change Areas.

Strategy 2.1 Ensure residential developments have regard to the Preferred Housing Types and the Key Design Principles in the Housing Diversity Strategy 2013-2033.

 

Disability Action Plan 2017-2021

Council’s Disability Action Plan includes priority areas that reflect the concerns of people across the community living with a disability. One priority area that is of relevance to this Amendment is the availability of affordable, accessible, high quality housing for people with disabilities.

Social and Affordable Housing Strategy 2012-2016

The Social and Affordable Housing Strategy states that elements impacting housing affordability are:

·        the location of housing,

·        the quality and type of housing in relation to diverse households, and

·        the quality and type of housing provided by the housing industry.

The Amendment proposes to directly address these elements, in the context of decreasing housing affordability in the established areas of the municipality.  One strategy that is also supported by this Amendment is that Council promote housing that incorporates universal housing standards and adaptable housing standards to ensure housing is appropriate for older persons and people with a disability.

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 Amendment implements Council’s Housing Diversity Strategy, which will result in new residential development that provides a diverse range of housing types, and enhance the appearance of our established suburbs.

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

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

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

Conclusion

The proposed Amendment C200 represents a targeted approach to issues that provide the greatest opportunity to influence housing outcomes in the established areas of the municipality, and represents the Stage Two implementation of the HDS.

The planning scheme changes have been informed by extensive consultation with external and internal stakeholders, and are supported by Council plans and strategies as well as the state and local planning policy framework. 

The proposed amendment will address recurring housing design issues, housing diversity and preferred locations for the highest level of housing growth.

It is recommended that Council seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning, to prepare and exhibit Amendment C200 to further implement the Housing Diversity Strategy into the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit Planning Scheme Amendment C200 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, as detailed in Attachments 1 and 2 of this report, which:

1.       Introduces the Housing Diversity and Design Policy to the Local Planning Policy Framework.

2.       Introduces new zone schedules, specifically the Residential Growth Zone Schedule 1 (Neighbourhood Renewal Areas), General Residential Zone Schedule 2 (Neighbourhood Interface Areas) and General Residential Zone Schedule 3 (Suburban Residential Areas).

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

6.1.7    357 Childs road, mill park - construction of three dwellings and alteration of access to a road in a Road Zone, Category 1

File No:                                  716386

Attachments:                        1        Locality Maps

2        Architectural Plans

3        Shadow Diagrams   

Responsible Officer:           Director Planning & Major Projects

Author:                                  Planning Officer   

 

APPLICANT:                        Nates Adams & Associates

COUNCIL POLICY:              Nil

ZONING:                               General Residential Zone

OVERLAY:                            Development Contributions Plan Overlay

REFERRAL:                          VicRoads

OBJECTIONS:                      One

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

THAT Council resolve to approve Planning Application No. 716884 and issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for a multi-dwelling development comprising the construction of three dwellings and alteration of access to a road in a Road Zone Category 1 subject to conditions.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    An application has been lodged to construct three double storey dwellings and alter the access to Childs Road through the intensification of the use of the land. No physical change to the existing access is proposed.

 

·    The application was advertised, which resulted in one objection being received.  The concerns raised were related to overshadowing, overlooking, drainage concerns, and property devaluation.

 

·    The original application that sought the construction of a second access to Childs Road was referred to VicRoads, who raised concerns, and the application was subsequently amended to delete the second access.  VicRoads offered no objection to the amended design and layout.

 

·    The proposal demonstrates a satisfactory level of compliance with the relevant provisions of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, particularly in relation to Clause 55 (ResCode) and Council’s Housing Diversity Strategy.


 

Report

SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

The subject site is a residential property located on the south of Childs Road, Mill Park, approximately 120m southeast of the Mill Park Stables Shopping Centre (see Attachment 1).

 

The land has a fall of 2.8m that runs from the north to the south of the lot. The site is regular in shape but has a slight diagonal frontage of 18.5m to Childs Road and a maximum depth of 36.6m. The site has a total site area of approximately 664m2.

 

The site currently contains a detached single storey dwelling constructed of rendered brick with a pitched and tiled roof. The presentation to the street is comprised of the existing driveway, lawn, and a 1.4m high picket fence. There is a large nature strip tree immediately fronting the property.

 

The surrounding area is largely characterised by a variety of detached single and double storey dwellings. The adjoining properties immediately to the east, west, and south of the site are all single storey dwellings with pitched and tiled roofs.

 

Examples of medium density development in the general area include 6 Corrigan Place, 2 Boyle Crescent and 12 Buckmaster Drive. 

 

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

 

Bus Route 383 – Palisades to University Hill (18m west)

 

·    Bus Route 564 – Bundoora RMIT to South Morang (18m west)

·    Bus Route 566 – Lalor to Northland (18m west)

·    Mill Park Stables Shopping Centre (120m northwest)

·    Redleap Reserve (170m north)

·    Dr Harry Jenkins Reserve (250m southwest)

·    St. Francis of Assisi Primary School (300m northwest)

restrictions and easements

The site is legally described as Lot 186 on Plan of Subdivision 118292. There are no encumbrances on title that preclude Council from making a decision.

 

A 2.5m wide easement traverses the rear of the property and contains Council drainage infrastructure. A garage is proposed to be built over this easement. This will be discussed later on in the report.

Proposal

It is proposed to construct three new double storey dwellings on the subject land (see Attachment 2).

Dwelling 1 will contain an open plan kitchen/meals/living area, two bedrooms, a study nook, amenities and an attached single garage.

Dwelling 2 will similarly contain an open plan kitchen/meals/living area, three bedrooms, amenities, an attached single garage, and a tandem open car space.

Dwelling 3 will also contain an open plan kitchen/meals/living area, two bedrooms, amenities and an attached single garage.

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

 

Scale

Number of Bedrooms

Setbacks

Private Open Space

Car Parking

Maximum Height

Dwelling No. 1

Double storey

2

8.0m from the front boundary (north)

130m2 including 27m2 of secluded private open space

Single garage with dimensions of 3.5m x 6.0m

7.2m

Dwelling No. 2

Double storey

3

17.5m from the front boundary

44m2 including 32m2 of secluded private open space

Single garage with dimensions of 3.5m x 6.0m

 

Open car space with dimensions of 2.6m x 4.9m

7.0m

Dwelling No. 3

Double storey

2

27.3m from the front boundary

51m2 including 27m2 of secluded private open space

Single garage with dimensions of 3.5m x 6.0m

7.2m

Public Notification

Advertising of the application has resulted in one objection being received.  The grounds of objection can be summarised as follows:

1.       Overshadowing

2.       Overlooking

3.       Drainage concerns

4.       Property devaluation

HOUSING DIVERSITY STRATEGY

The Housing Diversity Strategy (HDS) was introduced into the Whittlesea Planning Scheme (WPS) via Planning Scheme Amendment C181, gazetted on 22 October 2015. The Strategy 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 will not be supported. 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 now a reference document in the WPS and an assessment against it is provided under Standard B2 of the Clause 55 assessment.


 

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

 

B2

Residential Policy

P

P

The HDS nominates this site as being within the Neighbourhood Interface Change Area.

 

The proposed development is consistent with the preferred density and key design principles outlined in the HDS, including standard building heights, provision of sufficient area to allow for the planting of medium canopy trees in the front setback, and modest site coverage, private open space areas with dimensions that allow usability, and compliant setbacks.

 

B3

Dwelling Diversity

N/A

N/A

Only applicable to developments of ten (10) or more dwellings

B4

Infrastructure

P

P

 

B5

Integration with the street

P

P

 

B6

Street setback

P

P

 

B7

Building height

P

P

 

B8

Site coverage

P

P

 

B9

Permeability

P

P

 

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

P

 

B17

Side and rear setbacks

P

P

 

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

 

B22

Overlooking

P

P

 

B23

Internal views

P

P

Although the proposal is compliant with Standard B22, the stairs associated with Dwelling No. 3 has a window that could be used to overlook into the private open space area of the dwelling immediately to the south (7 Hales Court). Accordingly, revised plans requiring the subject window to be appropriately obscured will be included on any permit issued.

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

 

B29

Solar access to open space

P

P

 

B30

Storage

P

P

 

B31

Design detail

P

P

 

B32

Front fences

N/A

N/A

No front fence proposed

B33

Common property

P

P

 

B34

Site services

P

P

 

 


 

CAR PARKING & ACCESS

Clause 52.06 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme prescribes the rate and design standards for car parking spaces required on site.  Pursuant to this clause the following car spaces are required:

Dwelling No.

No. of bedrooms

Car spaces required

Car spaces provided

Complies

1

2

1

1

Yes

2

3

2

2

Yes

3

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.

The single garage proposed for Dwelling No. 3 is proposed to be built over an easement. The applicant has not provided relevant approval for this, and has indicated that it could be changed to a carport. Accordingly, a condition will be included on any permit issued providing evidence of permission to build over the easement or alternatively requiring this change to a carport with the necessary approval.

Pursuant to Clause 52.29, a permit is required to create or alter access to a road in a Road Zone, Category 1.

The original proposal sought to create an additional access point and concerns were raised by VicRoads.  As a result of amended plans, while no physical ‘alteration’ is now proposed, the intensification of use on the subject land is considered to trigger this permit requirement, consistent with the findings of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal’s (VCAT) decision in Peninsula Blue Developments Pty Ltd v Frankston CC (P36/2015).

 

Accordingly, the application was referred to VicRoads pursuant to Section 55 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, and the following decision guidelines have been considered:

 

·    The State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.

·    The views of the relevant road authority.

·    The effect of the proposal on the operation of the road and on public safety.

·    Any policy made by the relevant road authority pursuant to Schedule 2, Clause 3 of the Road Management Act 2004 regarding access between a controlled access road and adjacent land.

VicRoads had no objection or comments to make. Officers consider the proposal to be generally conventional in nature and typical of residential developments, where the impacts on Childs Road will be minimal as the associated use is technically solely an increase of two vehicles (as the existing dwelling has provision for two cars within a carport) accessing the site. Further, the submitted plans show that there are provisions within the parking area that shows a vehicle can exit onto Childs Road in a forward direction.


 

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN OVERLAY (SCHEDULE 3)

The site is affected by the Development Contributions Plan Overlay. Pursuant to Clause45.06 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, the Development Contributions Plan Overlay enables the levying of contributions for the provision of works, services and facilities prior to development commencing.

 

Schedule 3 to the overlay requires contributions for drainage infrastructure for medium density residential development at a current rate of $2.19 per square metre of the total site area. This requirement must be included as a condition on any planning permit that is issued.

Comments on Grounds of Objection

1.   Overlooking

The proposal includes appropriate screening to habitable room windows located on the second storey of each dwelling that are in accordance with the requirements of Rescode. Further, a condition requiring the Dwelling No. 3 stairs to be appropriately screened will be included on any permit issued.

 

2.   Overshadowing

The shadow diagrams (see Attachment 3) demonstrate compliance with Rescode and while concern was raised at the loss of access to sunlight to neighbouring solar panels, the shadow diagrams demonstrate that the shadows cast don’t affect the solar panels in question.

 

3.   Drainage concerns

This is an issue that will be appropriately addressed through engineering, and relevant engineering plans. Standard permit conditions require the submission of such plans as part of the construction.

 

4.   Property devaluation

It has been consistently upheld by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal

(VCAT) that loss of property values are not relevant planning considerations. 

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 provides a satisfactory response to the requirements of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme and in particular Clause 52.06, 52.29, Clause 55, and Council’s Housing Diversity Strategy. The proposal meets the preferred density and key design principles of Clause 21.09-4 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme (Neighbourhood Interface Change Area).

 

It is considered that the proposal will not result in unreasonable impacts on the character of the neighbourhood and surrounding residential properties. It is therefore recommended that Council approve the application.

 

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to approve Planning Application No. 716386 and issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for the Construction of three dwellings and an Alteration of access to a road in a Road Zone, Category 1, in accordance with the endorsed plans and subject to the following conditions:

Payments Required

1.       Prior to the endorsement of plans, the permit holder must pay to Council a contribution for drainage pursuant to Clause 45.06 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.  The drainage contribution will be subject to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) applicable at the time of payment.

2.       Prior to the endorsement of the plans, or at such later date as the Responsible Authority may approve in writing, there shall be lodged with the Responsible Authority an amount of $600 as security deposit for the satisfactory completion and maintenance of the landscaping works hereby permitted.

Upon completion of the landscaping works to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, the Responsible Authority will refund the security deposit to the payee of the bond.

Plans Required

3.       Before the development and/or use hereby permitted starts, three copies of amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of this permit. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans dated 22 October 2017 and prepared by Nates Adams & Associates but modified to show:

a)      The Dwelling No. 3 stair windows obscured in accordance with Standard B22 of Clause 55 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme

b)      The location, size (width x depth x height) and maximum height above ground level of all electricity meters;

c)      The inclusion of corner splays in accordance with Clause 52.06 ‘Car Parking’ of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme;

d)      Landscaping as required by Condition 4 of this permit; and

e)      Schedule of external materials, finishes and colours.

4.       Concurrent with the endorsement of plans under Condition 3 and before the development hereby permitted commences, three copies of a landscape plan prepared by a suitably qualified (or experienced) landscape designer to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of this permit. The plan must show:

a)      Details of landscaping for the front setback including a schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers;

b)      The provision of 2 canopy trees with a (minimum) mature height of  8.0m planted at a semi-advanced state within the front setback of Dwelling 1;

c)      Paving, retaining walls, fence design details and other landscape works including areas of cut and fill; and

d)      Consistency with the City of Whittlesea Landscape Guidelines (Residential Development).

Layout Not Altered

5.       The development allowed by this permit and shown on the plans and/or schedules endorsed to accompany this permit shall not be amended for any reason without the consent of the Responsible Authority.

6.       Once the development has started it must be continued and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Landscaping

7.       Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby approved, landscaping works shown on the endorsed plan must be completed and then maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Actions Before Occupation of the Dwellings

8.       Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby approved, the car parking areas and access ways must be drained, fully sealed and constructed with asphalt, interlocking paving bricks, coloured concrete or other similar materials to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

9.       In areas set aside for car parking, measures must be taken to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority to prevent damage to fences or landscaped areas.

10.     Vehicular access to the site must be by way of a vehicle crossing constructed in accordance with Council’s Vehicle Crossing Specifications to suit the proposed driveway(s) and the vehicles that will be using the crossing(s).  The location, design and construction of the vehicle crossing(s) must be approved by the Responsible Authority.  Any existing unused or redundant crossing(s) must be removed and replaced with concrete kerb, channel and naturestrip to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.  All vehicle crossing works are to be carried out with Council supervision under a Road Opening Permit.

11.     The permit holder shall be responsible to meet all costs associated with reinstatement and/or alterations to Council or other Public Authority assets deemed necessary by such Authorities as a result of the development.  The permit holder shall be responsible for obtaining prior specific written approval for any works involving the alteration of Council or other Public Authority assets.

12.     Prior to occupation of any dwelling on the subject site, a letter box and house number to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority shall be provided for each dwelling.

13.     At all times during the construction phase of the development, the permit holder shall take measures to ensure that pedestrians are able to use with safety any footpath along the boundaries of the site.

14.     Upon completion of all buildings and works authorised by this permit the permit holder must notify the Responsible Authority of the satisfactory completion of the development and compliance with all relevant conditions.

15.     Before starting any buildings or works, engineering plans showing a properly prepared design (with computations) for the internal drainage and method of disposal of stormwater from all roofed and sealed areas, including the use of an on-site detention system (if required), must be submitted to Council for approval.  These internal drainage works must be completed to Council’s satisfaction prior to using or occupying any building on the site.

16.     Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby approved, the permit holder is required to construct at no cost to Council, drainage works between the subject site and the Council nominated point of discharge.  Such drainage works must be designed by a qualified engineer and submitted to and approved by Council.  Computations will also be required to demonstrate that the drainage system will not be overloaded by the new development.  Construction of the drainage system must be carried out in accordance with Council specifications and under Council supervision.

17.     Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby approved, reticulated (water, sewerage, gas and electricity) services must be constructed and available to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

General Amenity – Construction works

18.     Any litter generated by building activities on the site shall be collected and stored in an appropriate enclosure which complies with Council’s Code of Practice for building/development sites.  The enclosures shall be regularly emptied and maintained such that no litter overspills onto adjoining land.  Prior to occupation and/or use of the building, all litter shall be completely removed from the site.

19.     During the construction phase, a truck wheel washing facility or similar device must be installed and used to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority so that vehicles leaving the site do not deposit mud or other materials on roadways. Any mud or other materials deposited on roadways as a result of construction works on the site must be cleaned to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority within two hours of it being deposited.

Permit Expiry

20.     In accordance with the Planning and Environment Act 1987 a permit for the development expires:

a)      the approved development does not start within 2 years of the date of this permit; or

b)      the approved development is not completed within 4 years of the date of this permit. 

The responsible authority may extend the periods referred to above if a request is made in writing.  This request must be made before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date where the development has not yet started and within 12 months after the permit expiry date where the development allowed by the permit has lawfully started before the permit expires.

NOTES

Advanced Trees

An advanced tree under this permit shall generally constitute the following:

·        Evergreen – minimum container size 45 litre spring ring, calliper at ground level 50mm.

·        Deciduous – minimum calliper at ground level 65mm, minimum height 2 metres.

Easements

No structure may be built over an easement on the subject site without the consent of the relevant Responsible Authority.

Property Numbering

Please note that property addresses and numbering is allocated by Council.  This is usually formalised at the time of the subdivision. Please check with Council’s Subdivision Department to verify all street numberings.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

6.2       Community Services

6.2.1    City of Whittlesea Soccer Strategy

File No:                                  194424

Attachments:                        1        City of Whittlesea Soccer Strategy   

Responsible Officer:           Director Community Services

Author:                                  Team Leader Strategic Planning   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

THAT Council resolve to adopt the City of Whittlesea Soccer Strategy.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

The City of Whittlesea Soccer Strategy will provide strategic direction in Council’s efforts to ensure residents have access to soccer facilities and programs.

Key issues impacting soccer are:

·    Soccer participation is increasing although female participation is decreasing.

·    A number of existing facilities are at, or exceeding, capacity and cannot support the current or forecast demand.

·    Epping Soccer Stadium’s annual maintenance costs are high; however, usage is low.

·    Current planning indicates 11 capital works projects that will be required to meet growth and future demand as identified in the Strategy.


 

Report

Introduction

The City of Whittlesea Soccer Strategy (Attachment 1) is tabled for Council’s consideration.

In developing the Soccer Strategy, a comprehensive review of the sport including current industry and State trends, a facility audit and participation rates was undertaken. To support this research, a participation and engagement process was undertaken with all local soccer clubs, Football Federation Victoria and the broader community. Following this process five strategic objectives were developed to guide Council’s investment in and administration of soccer. These objectives are:

1.       Ground allocations – In collaboration with all soccer clubs, review current ground allocations and where required make appropriate changes to meet facility, club and programmatic needs.

2.       Equitable facility provision – Plan the future upgrade and redevelopment of existing facilities and potential development of new facilities to meet the identified need and predicted growth in soccer.

3.       Epping Soccer Stadium – Identify the required actions to improve the use of the elite Stadium to maximise the benefits of this community asset.

4.       Female participation and growth – Address the low ratio and decline in female participation in the municipality.

5.       Player pathways – Ensure a pathway of participation through the provision of facilities and services to support and encourage all levels of soccer competition and involvement from grassroots through to elite.

Under these five strategic objectives Council will deliver 26 actions over the next five years, therefore, aimed at ensuring that residents have equitable access to soccer programs, services and facilities in line with the recommended facility standards. All new works items will be referred to the 4/15 New Works Program and associated approval process.

Background

As with the rest of Australia, soccer participation within the City of Whittlesea is increasing. Soccer participation has increased by almost 24% over the last five years. In 2017, there were 2,416 registered players across eleven soccer clubs.

The City of Whittlesea’s previous soccer strategy was drafted in 2002. Since 2002, soccer has experienced considerable change.  The sport now has healthy elite national competitions (A-League and W-League) and has developed stronger development pathways for both men and women with the introduction of the National Premier League competition. 

Given the current and anticipated future population growth and changes to the sport since 2002, there is a clear need for a contemporary strategy to assist in the planning and delivery of soccer within the municipality. The need for a soccer strategy was identified in Council’s Recreation Strategy 2012-2017.

Proposal

This report seeks Council’s consideration of the City of Whittlesea Soccer Strategy.

PARTICiPATION and ENGAGEMENT

Throughout the development of the strategy there has been participation and engagement with key stakeholders including:

·     Football Federation of Victoria/Australia and the Churches Soccer Association.

·     Neighbouring municipalities.

·     Melbourne City Football Club.

·     Sport and Recreation Victoria.

·     Internal Council departments.

Engagement with local soccer clubs has been extensive including: 

·    One-on-one meetings with all clubs and numerous meetings with those clubs most affected by any proposed changes.

·    Three club forums were held (July 2016, October 2017 and February 2018)  

·    The revised draft Strategy was disseminated to all clubs for comment.

 

The draft Strategy in its current form has received broad support from the local soccer community.

 

Broad scale community consultation was also undertaken through Council’s Community Voice page and via the Council Facebook page.

Critical Dates

Nil

Financial Implications

The Soccer Strategy’s five year action plan outlines 11 capital works projects.  Four of these projects have already commenced with approved budgets.  The remaining seven projects, indicatively costed at $5.650M will need to be considered as part of future New Works Programs and will be subject to feasibility and business case planning prior to budget approval.

Policy strategy and legislation

The development of the Soccer Strategy was identified in the City of Whittlesea Recreation Strategy 2012-2017. The Soccer Strategy has been developed in line with all growth area planning documents such as Precinct Structure Plans and Master Plans.

The Strategy is also linked to the Victorian State Government’s Active Victoria Framework, which has a focus on increasing capacity of existing infrastructure to meet increasing demands as well as ensuring that participation is diverse and inclusive.

 

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

Council Priority                    Planning and Infrastructure

Future Direction                   Places and spaces to connect people

Theme                                   Leisure and recreation

Strategic Objective              We can access recreation facilities and open spaces that reflect and respond to local need

 

Soccer facilities and clubs are integral elements for building strong, connected and healthy communities. It is estimated there are over 6000 local residents affiliated with soccer as players, coaches, administrators or volunteers. The actions outlined in the strategy will guide Council in the delivery of quality soccer facilities, strengthen player pathways and improve facility accessibility. This will allow the municipality’s local clubs to continue to meet the needs of the local community now and into the future.

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

Soccer is an important sport for the City of Whittlesea; it estimated that over 6,000 people have an affiliation with a local soccer club.  Soccer has experienced growing participation in the municipality mostly lead by junior participants and the overall population growth.

The five strategic objectives that formulate the basis of the Soccer Strategy will enable Council to meet the needs of soccer participants now and into the future; therefore, meeting Council’s broader goal of ensuring residents have equitable access to soccer programs, services and facilities in line with the recommended facility standards.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to adopt the City of Whittlesea Soccer Strategy.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

6.3       City Transport and Presentation

6.3.1    Contract 2017-207 - Design of Mill Park All Abilities Play Space - Tender Evaluation

File No:                                  196029

Attachments:                        1        2017-207 Design of all abilities play space in Mill Park - Confidential Evaluation Report - Confidential    

The attachment is presented to Council as a confidential document on the basis that it contains details relating to contractual matters, in accordance with Section 89(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1989.

Responsible Officer:           Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Senior Parks Project Management Officer   

 

Report

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

It is recommended that contract number 2017-207 for Design of the Mill Park all abilities play space:

·    is awarded to Jeavons Landscape Architecture

·    for the price of $212,250.00 excluding GST

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

The tender evaluation panel advises that:

·    8 tenders were received

·    the recommended tender was the highest ranked and is considered best value

 


Background

The purpose of this contract is to engage a suitably experienced landscape consultant to develop a concept for the all abilities play space in Mill Park and to fully document the drawings to enable construction to be undertaken.

Tenders for the contract closed on 14 February 2018.  The tendered prices and a summary of the evaluation are detailed in the confidential attachment.

EVALUATION

No member of the Tender Evaluation Panel declared any conflict of interest in relation to this tender evaluation.

A Tender Probity & Evaluation Plan was designed specifically for this tender process and it was authorised prior to this tender being advertised.  All tenders received were evaluated in accordance with that plan.  The evaluation involved scoring of conforming and competitive tenders according to these pre-determined criteria and weightings:

Criteria

Weighting

Price

40%

Capability

30%

Capacity

25%

Impact

5%

The weightings reflect the relative importance of each element to this particular contract.  They were determined as being most appropriate after considering numerous factors including (but not restricted to) the time, quality, risk and contract management requirements which were likely to have the most impact on the achievement of best value.

Only tenders that were conforming and competitive were fully scored.  Tender submissions that were evaluated as non-conforming or not sufficiently competitive were set aside from further evaluation.  In cases where this occurred the reasons for that outcome are detailed in the confidential attachment.

The evaluation outcome was as follows:

TENDERER

CONFORMING

COMPETITIVE

SCORE

RANK

Tenderer A
Jeavons Landscape Architects

Yes

Yes

69.4

1

Tenderer B

Yes

No

N/A

N/A

Tenderer C

Yes

No

N/A

N/A

Tenderer D

Yes

Yes

59.0

3

Tenderer E

Yes

Yes

61.9

2

Tenderer F

Yes

No

N/A

N/A

Tenderer G

Yes

No

N/A

N/A

Tenderer H

Yes

No

N/A

N/A

Refer to the confidential attachment for further details of the evaluation of all tenders.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

Council Priority                    Organisational Sustainability

Future Direction                   Good Governance

Theme                                   Continuous Improvement

Strategic Objective              Council explores and adopts best practice models

Design of the all abilities play space on Morang Drive in Mill Park will provide the wider community with a public open space that all users can interact with and enjoy on multiple levels.  Through thoughtful and innovative design, the play space will provide a place for people to connect and interact with different members of the community through engaging and explorative play. 

 

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 tender from Jeavons Landscape Architects was determined to be best value and it is considered that this company can perform the contract to the required standards. 

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolves to:

1.         Accept the tender submitted by Jeavons Landscape Architecture for the sum of $212,250.00 (excluding GST) for the following contract:

Number:    2017-207

Title:          Design of Mill Park all abilities play space

subject to the following conditions:

a)    Tenderer to provide proof of currency of insurance cover as required in the tender documents.

b)    Price variations to be in accordance with the provisions as set out in the tender documents.

2.         Approve the funding arrangements detailed in the confidential attachment.

3.         Sign and seal the Contract documents.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

6.3.2    Road Safety and Parking Management for Thomastown West Kindergarten and Childcare Centre

File No:                                  ST 141809

Attachments:                        1        Locality Plan

2        Existing Car Park

3        Car Park Upgrade

4        On-street Parking

5        VicRoads Partial Indent

6        VicRoads Painted Lane Separator   

Responsible Officer:           Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Team Leader Transport Engineering   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council:

1.       Continue advocating to VicRoads for the reduction in the Edgars Road speed limit from 70km/h to 60km/h between Mahoney’s Road and Cooper Street;

2.       Note that VicRoads does not support indented parking bays on Edgars Road at this location.

3.       Provide a wide painted lane separator on Edgars Road between the parking lane and traffic lane.

4.       Alter the internal layout of the Thomastown West Kindergarten (TWK) and Thomastown Childcare Centre (TCC) car park to gain additional off-street car spaces and refer this item to the new works program.

5.       Implement 15 minute parking restrictions to the internal off-street car park. 

6.       Monitor the recently installed retro-reflective sign placed on the power pole at the sites entrance to determine its effectiveness.

7.       Advise the petitioners of Council’s decision on these matters.

KEY FACTS AND ISSUES

·        This report discusses a petition tabled at the Council Meeting held on, 29 August 2017, concerning safety issues during drop-off and pick-up times at the TWK and TCC, located at 127 - 129 Edgars Road, Thomastown.

·        Staff and parents are concerned for safety during drop-off and pick-up times, due to:

o The 70km/h speed limit on Edgars Road.

o Insufficient off-street parking at the Thomastown West Kindergarten and Thomastown Child Care Centre resulting in an overflow of parents using on-street parking on Edgars Road.

·        The petitioners have requested:

a reduced speed limit on Edgars Road,

Indented parking on Edgars Road that will provide a safer drop off point,

The removal of the power pole between the entry and exit access point to the site.

·        VicRoads do not support the indented parking proposal

·         Alternative improvements to both off-street and on-street parking have been investigated and recommended.

Report

Background

Council received a petition from 138 persons requesting Council reduce the speed limit on Edgars Road; provide a safer parking zone for the children and parents of the Thomastown West Kindergarten (TWK) and Thomastown Childcare Centre (TCC) on Edgars Road Thomastown and removal of the power pole at the entrance.  The petition was tabled at the meeting on 29 August 2017 and Council resolved to receive a report from officers that investigated the petitioners concerns. 

In support of the petition, a covering letter was submitted; this referred to concerns such as:

·    Inadequate and unsafe parking.

·    Parked vehicles being side-swiped.

·    Violent and aggressive behaviour of local residents (due to parents parking across driveways).

·    70km/h speed limit on Edgars Road.

·    Vehicles hitting the power pole between the entry and exit vehicle crossings.

DISCUSSION

Land Use

The TWK and TCC are Council owned facilities located on Edgars Road, a key arterial road, with limited off-street parking available. There are a maximum of 67 children between the two facilities at any given time. Both facilities share a single internal off-street car park, containing 11 unrestricted and one restricted disabled parking bay. Users who cannot find parking in this off-street car park are required to park on Edgars Road. The nearest alternative on-street parking is on side streets which are approximately 150m away.

Road Network and Layout

Edgars Road is a Declared Arterial Road approximately 5km in length and generally runs between Mahoney’s Road (south) and Cooper Street (north).  In the future it will extend further north to O’Herns Road completing the link to Craigieburn Road.  The road is approximately 35m in width (fence to fence).  This width generally provides for:

·    1.5m wide footpaths (both sides).

·    3.0m wide nature strips (both sides).

·    2.5m to 3.0m wide parking lane (both sides), 2.8m is the width in front of the Kindergarten and Childcare Centre.

·    2 x 3.5m road traffic lanes

·    6.0m (approximately) wide grassed central median.

This section of Edgars Road forms part of the 557 and 554 bus routes.

Road Safety

There have been no reported crashes in the past 5 years on this northbound section of Edgars Road serious enough to be listed in VicRoads’ CrashStats (data since 2012 updated October 2017). CrashStats only lists casualty crashes attended by the Police; any minor non-injury crashes are not recorded.

There is however evidence (photographs provided by centre operators) of an incident which involved an open door of a parked vehicle being struck by a truck. There is other anecdotal advice of crashes from centre operators.

Traffic Conditions

Traffic surveys were conducted in this section of Edgars Road in March 2017, the results summarised below:

 

Two Way

Northbound
(Childcare Centre side)

Average Daily Vehicle Volume

33,351

17,367

Percentage of Heavy Vehicles

5%

6%

Average Speed

58

58

85th Percentile 1 Speed (km/h)

67

63

1.     The 85th percentile speed is the speed at which 85 per cent of drivers are travelling at or below; it is the
factor used in determining the safe operating speed on a road.

The results indicate that traffic speeds and volumes are within the acceptable range for an arterial road of this nature with a 70km/h speed limit.

Speed Limit

The current speed limit on Edgars Road is 70km/h. In August 2012, VicRoads announced that all 70km/h speed limits would be replaced with 60km/h or 80km/h speed limits. In December 2013, Council Officer’s wrote to VicRoads in support of a change to 60km/h.

VicRoads are currently conducting an overall safety review of Edgars Road; this includes determining the appropriate speed limit for Edgars Road. VicRoads have not provided a timeline on this.

A lower speed limit would improve safety on Edgars Road. This position is the basis of the TAC Wipe off 5 campaign and both VicRoads, Towards Safer Speeds Challenge and Safer Streets Program. Whilst both VicRoads programs are targeted at local streets the principle of reduced speeds resulting in reduced crashes and road trauma is applicable.

Off-street Parking

The off-street car park has 14 available parking spaces. This is made up of 11 unrestricted bays, one accessible (disabled) bay and two drop-off / pick-up spaces (Attachment 2). The 11 unrestricted bays are generally occupied by management and staff and thus are rarely available for parents dropping-off and picking-up children.

The two drop-off / pick-up spaces do not function efficiently due to parents parking for extended periods and thus making it difficult for others parents when entering or leaving.

Off-street Parking Improvement Options

There is opportunity to provide an additional four parking bays internally.  This is by removing the two drop-off / pick-up spaces, removing a traffic / turn around island in the car park and altering the allocation of parking through sign and line-marking changes (Attachment 3).

To encourage use of the off-street car park by parents, rather than TWK and TCC management and staff, 15 minute parking restrictions could be implemented within the car park for all bays. This is a practical solution and would encourage staff to park on-street, thus freeing up the valuable off-street car park for parents and providing a safer drop-off and pick-up point for children. This would provide a higher level of safety for the more vulnerable users of these facilities.

This option was discussed in detail over several consultation meetings with the Committee of Management (COM) for both facilities, however was ultimately rejected due to a safety concern from staff being required to park on-street. The COM indicated that staff are concerned about their personal safety walking to and from their vehicle parked on-street particularly in the winter months when it gets dark earlier.

On-Street Parking

Currently on Edgars Road there are 20 line-marked parking bays within 100m walk of the entrances to the Kindergarten and Childcare Centre (Attachment 4). Due to off-street parking generally being unavailable or difficult to use, parents park in these locations (on-street) on Edgars Road.

The offset between vehicles parked anywhere along this section of Edgars Road and the adjacent traffic lane varies, but it is approximately 0.7m on average. 

There is a risk with parents parking on-street in this situation due to Edgars Road being a busy, 70km/h arterial road. The most preferable option is for parents who park on-street to have their children alight onto the nature strip and away from the busy Edgars Road traffic; however, it is acknowledged that in some cases this is not practical.

To address the concerns noted above, a safer practice would be achieved by providing a clear delineation and separation between the on-street parking bay and the traffic lane so that improved parking practices are achieved.

Notwithstanding, the safest option is for parents to drop-off and pick-up children in the off-street car park where the risk of conflict with Edgars Road traffic is eliminated. This can be achieved by increasing off-street drop-off and pick-up parking opportunities.

On-street Options - Indented Parking

The petitioners requested that an indented parking area be created in addition to the existing designated parking lane already present on Edgars Road. This parking indent aims to provide an extra separation from the busy traffic on Edgars Road.

A number of options are available for indented parking, for example the parking bays could be fully indented or partially indented. In the case of the partially indented option, a range of offsets from 0.1m to 1.9m could be achieved. Any offsets greater than, 1m however, would require major infrastructure changes (i.e. alterations to high voltage overhead power cables and underground drainage services).

The indented parking option presented in Attachment 5 allows for five partially indented bays at 1m. This option will simply replace the existing five parking bays, with not net-gain to current on-street parking numbers, however, will create a greater separation distance from the existing traffic lane from 0.7m (on average) to 1.7m (on average).

The inclusion of a 1m parking indent would enhance safety and reduce ongoing concerns associated with parking on the busy Edgars Road via increasing the distance between parked cars and traffic lanes. However, VicRoads do not support the proposal for indented parking bays on this section of Edgars Road, indicating a view that a sufficiently wide parking lane is already present.


 

On-street Options - Painted Lane Separator

There is an opportunity to paint a 0.7m (on average) wide separator (Attachment 6).  This separator would provide a bold buffer between the parking lane and the traffic lane. Its primary benefit would be to encourage parking as near as practicable to the kerb, with a clear painted visual separation from vehicles travelling in the traffic lane and the parking bays.

On-street Options - Power Pole

The petitioners have indicated that when entering the car park the current location of a power pole is unsafe and have requested the pole to be relocated. The pole carries both high and low voltage power cables and telecommunications as well as supporting a street light.

There is evidence of the pole being struck; therefore, a bright retro-reflective yellow chevron sign has been installed on the pole to increase visibility. There have been no reported incidents since the signs installation.

Consultation

Thomastown West Kindergarten and Thomastown Childcare Centre

Council Officers have met with the Centre of Management (COM) on a number of occasions since February 2017.  The COM comprises management, staff, parents and operators for both Centres.  The meetings and other exchanges of information (telephone calls and emails) were focused on road safety, parking arrangements and the power pole.

The proposed internal (off-street) car park alteration option and 15 minute drop off area was discussed in detail over several meetings and was ultimately not supported by the COM, due to their concerns raised for the wellbeing and safety of staff parking in the street and concern of more vehicles reversing in the car park.

As detailed above, this proposal’s intent is for use by the parents and to generate a higher turnover of off-street parking for children being dropped-off and picked-up under parent supervision. It is considered that less interaction with vehicles travelling at high speeds along Edgars Road will significantly reduce the overall risk to the most vulnerable users of both centres.

VicRoads

As this section of Edgars Road is a declared arterial road, any works and changes to speed limit are the responsibility to be approved by VicRoads.

VicRoads has advised that no decision has been made on the Edgars Road speed limit and “as there is a wide parking lane already” at this site, “indented parking bays are unnecessary and unsupported.

Financial Implications

Indented Parking Bay

The cost of constructing five partially indented parking bays has been estimated at $100,000.  There is no specific budget allocated for these works in the current or future New Works program.

Power Pole

AusNet Services have estimated the cost of relocating the pole at $30,000, however, this estimate does not include any costs for alterations of telecommunication and lighting. Previous experience indicates that these additional items are likely to be in the order of an additional $30,000 (Total = $60,000). AusNet have advised that Council will be responsible for all relocation costs. A firm cost has yet to be determined until such time that a detailed design is prepared. An additional $1,100 cost to Council is required to ascertain this firm removal cost.

There is no specific budget allocated for these works in the current or future New Works program.

Off-street Car Park Alterations

The cost of altering the internal car park layout (Attachment 3) is estimated at $30,000.  There is no specific budget allocated for these works in the current or future New Works program.

On-street Line-marking

The cost of line-marking is estimated at $5,000.  This can be funded through existing operation budgets.

Policy strategy and legislation

The investigations accords with Council’s commitment to the City of Whittlesea Road Safety Strategy 2017 which was adopted by Council October 2017.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

Council Priority                    Community Safety

Future Direction                   Health and wellbeing

Theme                                   Safety

Strategic Objective              Our neighbourhoods are designed to create safe 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 60km/h speed limit on Edgars Road will enhance the safety and operation of the road, particularly in front of the TWK and TCC, and will address one of the major concerns of the petitioners. This speed limit change is subject to VicRoads’ approval. Council officer continue to advocate for this change to occur.

Off-street parking can be altered to provide four additional parking bays at an estimated cost of $30,000. To encourage a safe and more efficient use of the off-street car park by parents and children, a 15 minute parking restrictions should be implemented. 

Indented parking will provide a greater separation of parked vehicles from the busy Edgars Road traffic, however, is not supported by the responsible road authority, VicRoads.

Line-marking improvements to the existing on-street parking bays will provide additional separation to the busy Edgars Road traffic, improve parking behaviour and enhance safety.

Enhancements to signage have been made to the existing power pole at the entrance and therefore its relocation is not recommended at this time.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Continue to advocate to VicRoads for the change of speed limit from 70km/h to 60km/h on Edgars Road, between Mahoney’s Road and Cooper Street;

2.       Note that VicRoads do not support indented parking bays at this location on Edgars Road;

3.       Paint a wide lane separator on Edgars Road in front of Thomastown West Kindergarten and Thomastown Childcare Centre;

4.       Alter the existing off-street car park to provide an additional four parking bays and refer this item to the 2018/2019 new works program;

5.       Implement 15 minute parking restriction to the off-street car park to encourage parents and children use, as the preferred drop-off and pick-up point;

6.       Monitor the recently installed retro-reflective sign placed on the power pole at the sites entrance to determine its effectiveness

7.       Advise the petitioners of Council’s decision on these matters.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

6.3.3    E6 COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES

File No:                                  177059

Attachments:                        1        E6 Transport Corridor Community Survey

2        E6 Community Survey Outcomes   

Responsible Officer:           Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Senior Transport Planner   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council resolve to:

1.       Note the outcomes of the E6 Transport Corridor Community Survey

2.       Further consider the form of the corridor when new traffic data becomes available by the State Government

3.       Advocate to the State Government to bring forward the delivery of the E6.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    The E6 is a key proposed north-south transport corridor, to be delivered by the State Government, that will accommodate future population growth and alleviate traffic congestion.

·    At its meeting on 18 April 2017 Council resolved to commence community consultation on the E6 Transport Corridor following a petition requesting that Council support and advocate for a six lane freeway.

·    Council’s position prior to this meeting was that it supported the construction of the E6 corridor as an arterial road.

·    An online survey was undertaken from 18 September to 15 October 2017 with 1044 surveys received.

·    Respondents overwhelmingly want a road built now.

·    Respondents indicated a strong preference that the road be designed as a freeway.

·    Timing for the delivery the E6 as a freeway by the State Government is not proposed for another 15-30 years, which is not in alignment with current community expectations. 

·    Council noted at the 18 April 2017 meeting that it would further consider its position of the form of the corridor once new traffic data becomes available. This data has not been released.


 

Report

Background

On 18 April 2017, Council considered a report on the E6 Transport Corridor following a petition with 514 signatures requesting that Council support and advocate for the delivery of a six lane freeway.  Council has long supported the E6 Transport Corridor as a key transport link and has held the position that it be constructed in the form of an arterial road.  At this meeting Council resolved to continue to advocate for the timely construction of the E6; further consider its position on the form of the Corridor when new traffic data becomes available; and to commence community consultation on the E6 Transport Corridor. 

The community has consistently identified traffic congestion, commute times and access to major roads as the number one issue in the municipality.  This has resulted in a lower quality of life for residents due to a lack of time for family and friends; low levels of physical activity and higher proportions of overweight and obesity leading to poorer physical health; and lower resilience, compared to the Victorian average.

An online survey was prepared and comments invited from the community to gain more insight and understanding about the kind of road features our community do and do not want to see built as part of this road project.  The E6 Transport Corridor Community Survey was open from 18 September to 15 October 2017 and Council received 1044 completed surveys (refer to survey questionnaire in Attachment 1).

Metropolitan Transport Planning

In 2009, VicRoads released details on the conceptual design of the E6 Transport Corridor as a six lane freeway extending 23 kilometres from the Metropolitan Ring Road to Beveridge/ Kalkallo connecting to the Outer Metropolitan Ring Road (OMR) Transport Corridor and the Hume Freeway.  In December 2016, Infrastructure Victoria released Victoria’s 30 Year Infrastructure Strategy that placed a 15-30 year construction timeline for the OMR/E6 Transport Corridor.  The Infrastructure Victoria Strategy also makes reference to some sections of the corridor being warranted earlier, perhaps initially as an arterial road.

In October 2017, the State Government released the Victorian Infrastructure Plan, in response to Victoria’s 30 Year Infrastructure Strategy.  The OMR/E6 Transport Corridor is supported by the State Government.  The Plan advises that the build component of this recommendation is over 15-30 years and full implementation will be considered as part of future budgets.  It is noted that delivery will be staged and may extend beyond the 30 year period.  Council has sought but has not yet received any new traffic modelling data on the E6 from State Government agencies and it is understood that this is still some months away from being complete.  It is important that new traffic modelling be considered for the E6 given the high population growth within metropolitan Melbourne and the impact of planned major road projects, like the North East Link, on traffic patterns.

E6 Road Design

A municipal wide traffic model was undertaken by Council in 2015 that modelled the E6 from the Metropolitan Ring Road to the Outer Metropolitan Ring Road at Hume Freeway as a four lane arterial road and separately as a four lane freeway. Both options revealed significant benefits in reducing traffic on the surrounding road network. The E6 as a freeway showed marginally better reductions of one to two per cent in traffic on the surrounding road network.

The model identified that significant transport benefits would be derived for existing and future City of Whittlesea residents through the development of the E6 as an arterial road, in combination with other key transport projects such as the Edgars Road extension, O’Herns Road Interchange, Findon Road extension, Epping Road duplication, Plenty Road widening and Bridge Inn Road duplication.

Constructing the E6 as a freeway will benefit the surrounding road network, however, it will attract more vehicles through the municipality, including a transfer of traffic volumes from the Hume Freeway. As a consequence, the E6 effectively becomes a duplication of the Hume Freeway.

Council Position On E6

Council has consistently maintained its position that the E6 Transport Corridor is critical in addressing population growth and providing a much needed alternative north-south route to the High Street-Epping Road corridor and the Plenty Road corridor. 

Between 2002 and April 2017, Council maintained a consistent position that the corridor should be constructed as an arterial road. This differed from VicRoads’ position that the corridor should be constructed as a freeway. Council maintained its support for an arterial road on the basis that the E6 freeway will have significant amenity and social impacts for nearby residents and that an arterial road provides good transport capacity and better access for the local community. 

Consultation

The E6 Transport Corridor Community Survey was an online survey that was open from 18 September to 15 October 2017. A total of 1044 responses were received and is considered statistically significant (refer to survey results in Attachment 2).  Hard copy versions of the survey were made available upon request.  The Survey was widely publicised and available to view at Council offices and facilities, local libraries and online.  Social media was identified as a significant communication tool to inform residents about the consultation, and the survey was posted to Council’s Twitter and Facebook accounts. Each time this was posted there was substantial community engagement with a high of 30,000 people and a low of 7,000 people.

A ‘Have your say’ webpage was created on Council’s website that hosted information about the consultation, including why we were implementing this survey and the expected next steps. This webpage received 122 views. A special edition of Council’s e-news was distributed encouraging residents to participate. This was distributed to 852 residents, and received an open rate of 55.53% and a click through rate of 34.32%.

Local media published articles in both the Whittlesea Leader and Northern Star Weekly and advertisements were also placed in the Whittlesea Leader. Translated versions of the survey were available in Council’s top 10 languages at the Welcome Expo. 

A petition was presented to Council in June 2016 with 514 signatures requesting that Council support and advocate for the delivery of a six lane freeway along the E6 Transport Corridor.

E6 SURVEY RESULTS

The E6 Transport Corridor Community Survey was an online survey that was accessible via Council’s web site (refer to survey results in Attachment 2). The respondents to the survey included:

·    66.1% from City of Whittlesea residents

·    13.8% from commuters travelling through the area

·    12.6% from those that work in the municipality

·    A relatively even spread of respondents who live in Mernda, Doreen, Mill Park, South Morang and Epping and lower numbers from other suburbs in the municipality

A total of 86.4% of respondents indicated they would use the road and 83.7% would use the road by car (as driver or passenger) for all times of the day and during all days of the week, and for longer and shorter trips. 

The main reasons to use the road for travel included:

·    To / from relatives or friends

·    To / from work

·    To / from leisure or recreational activities

·    To / from shopping

Road Design Preferences

A question on the importance of road design factors highlighted the respondent’s main preference, such as:

·    ‘use overpasses and underpasses instead of traffic signals and traffic lights’, at 89.7%,

·    ‘ability for free flowing traffic at high speed (i.e. fewer traffic intersections)’ at 83.8%. 

·    ‘ability for users to readily access the road via multiple access points (i.e. traffic intersections)’ is considered less important at 68.1%. 

Another question asked respondents to rank the top five factors to be taken into consideration when designing a road – this revealed:

·    the ‘ability for free flowing traffic at high speed (i.e. fewer traffic intersections)’ was ranked as the number one factor (21.38% weighted score). 

·    the ‘use of overpasses or underpasses instead of traffic intersections and traffic lights’ was ranked at number two (18.44%). 

·    the ‘ability for users to readily access the road via multiple points (i.e. traffic intersections)’ was ranked third at 13.15%.  

Other Comments

The survey offered the opportunity for respondents to list any other factors to consider in road design and to provide any other comments regarding the road.  443 comments were received with:

·    64 respondents requesting that the road be built as a freeway

·    11 respondents requesting that the road be built as an arterial road

·    54 comments on the need to build the E6 now

·    22 comments were concerned with the reduction in local amenity (environmental, social and visual impacts)

·    22 comments were concerned with noise impacts. 

A further question on ‘any other comments regarding the road’ resulted in 403 comments with the number one comment being that the community wants the E6 to be built now (115 responses) followed by the comment that it should be designed as a freeway (49 responses).


 

The survey identified that 165 respondents live within one kilometre of the E6 Transport Corridor.  The responses to ‘other factors to consider when designing the road’ revealed 84 comments, including:

·    loss of amenity (20 comments) 

·    noise impacts (15 comments)

·    the need to build the E6 now (13 comments)

·    the road should be built as a freeway (11 comments)

·    the road should be built as an arterial road (5 comments). 

In respect to the question seeking any other comments regarding the road, 69 comments were provided:

·    the need to build the E6 now (21 comments)

·    opposition to the E6 (15 comments)

·    loss of amenity (11 comments)

·    noise impacts (10 comments)

·    loss of property values for residents along the corridor (8 comments).

Analysis

The survey results highlight that respondents have a strong preference that the corridor be constructed as a freeway, and that this be built immediately. There is more opposition to the E6 and more concerns regarding loss of amenity, noise impacts and loss of property values for residents who live within one kilometre of the corridor. However, the preference for residents in these areas is that the corridor be constructed as a freeway. 

Financial Implications

The construction of the E6 Transport Corridor, either as a freeway or arterial road, will incur significant cost that will be funded by the State Government.

Policy strategy and legislation

Construction of the E6 Transport Corridor will assist in the delivery of the following Future Direction(s) as described in the Council Plan 2017 – 2021:

·    Accessibility in, out and around our City

·    Growing our economy

·    Places and spaces to connect people

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

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 E6 Transport Corridor Community Survey resulted in a high number of respondents and engagement of the local community. The results highlighted that the community overwhelmingly want the E6 Transport Corridor built immediately and support the construction a freeway.  This is reflective of the traffic congestion and access issues encountered by the community and reported in Council’s Annual Household Survey. Residents who live within one kilometre of the E6 Transport Corridor also support a freeway but do raise more concerns regarding loss of amenity, noise impacts and loss of property values.

The State Government’s proposed timing for the E6 is 15-30 years, as articulated in the 2017 Victorian Infrastructure Plan. This does not meet community expectations to address congestion and transport access needs. Strong advocacy is therefore required by Council on behalf of the community to progress the E6 now and for Council staff to collaborate with State Government agencies to work towards implementing this important piece of transport infrastructure.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Note the outcomes of the E6 Transport Corridor Community Survey;

2.       Further consider the form of the corridor when new traffic data becomes available by the State Government; and

3.       Advocate to the State Government to bring forward the delivery of the E6.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


 


 


 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

6.4       Corporate Services

6.4.1    Contract No 2017-197 - Internal Audit Services

File No:                                  2017-197

Attachments:                        1        Tender Evaluation Report - Confidential    

The attachment is presented to Council as a confidential document on the basis that it contains details relating to contractual matters, in accordance with Section 89(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1989.

Responsible Officer:           Director Corporate Services

Author:                                  Manager Finance & Assets    

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

It is recommended that contract number 2017-197 for Internal Audit Services:

·    Is awarded to Crowe Horwath

·    For the tendered schedule of rates with total expenditure limited to $450,000

·    For a term from 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2021 with extension options to 30 June 2023.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

The tender evaluation panel advises that:

·    Eight tenders were received

·    The recommended tender was the highest ranked and is considered best value because there is a high percentage of senior involvement in the internal audit service, the blended price per hour to be charged under the contract is the most competitive and the capability of the tenderer is most suited to Council’s needs.


 

Report

Background

The purpose of this contract is to provide Internal Audit Services to Council.

Tenders for the contract closed on 14 February 2018.  The tendered prices and a summary of the evaluation are detailed in the confidential attachment.

EVALUATION

No member of the Tender Evaluation Panel declared any conflict of interest in relation to this tender evaluation.

A Tender Probity & Evaluation Plan was designed specifically for this tender process and it was authorised prior to this tender being advertised.  All tenders received were evaluated in accordance with that plan.  The evaluation involved scoring of conforming and competitive tenders according to these pre-determined criteria and weightings:

Criteria

Weighting

Price

25%

Capability

25%

Capacity

25%

Impact

25%

The weightings reflect the relative importance of each element to this particular contract.  They were determined as being most appropriate after considering numerous factors including (but not restricted to) the time, quality, risk and contract management requirements which were likely to have the most impact on the achievement of best value.

Only tenders that were conforming and competitive were fully scored.  Tender submissions that were evaluated as non-conforming or not sufficiently competitive were set aside from further evaluation.  In cases where this occurred the reasons for that outcome are detailed in the confidential attachment.

The evaluation outcome was as follows:

TENDERER

CONFORMING

COMPETITIVE

SCORE

RANK

Tenderer A Crowe Horwath

Yes

Yes

87.6

1

Tenderer B

Yes

Yes

49.0

8

Tenderer C

Yes

Yes

86.1

2

Tenderer D

Yes

Yes

64.0

6

Tenderer E

Yes

Yes

77.3

4

Tenderer F

Yes

Yes

82.4

3

Tenderer G

Yes

Yes

57.5

7

Tenderer H

Yes

Yes

66.1

5

Refer to the confidential attachment for further details of the evaluation of all tenders.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

Council Priority                    Organisational Sustainability

Future Direction                   Good Governance

Theme                                   Continuous Improvement

Strategic Objective              Council explores and adopts best practice models

A robust internal audit program ensures good governance and sustainability of the organisation.

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 tender from Crowe Horwath was determined to be best value and it is considered that this company can perform the contract to the required standards. 

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to:

1.         Accept the tender submitted by Crowe Horwath for the schedule of rates detailed in the confidential attachment for the following contract:

Number:    2017-197

Title:          Internal Audit Service

Term:         1 July 2018 to  30 June 2021

Options:    Term extensions up to 30 June 2023 (only to be exercised if separately approved by Council)

Value:        Total expenditure is limited to a maximum of $450,000 (excluding GST) unless otherwise approved by Council.

subject to the following conditions:

a)    Tenderer to provide proof of currency of insurance cover as required in the tender documents.

b)    Price variations to be in accordance with the provisions as set out in the tender documents.

c)    Tenderer to provide contract security as required in the tender documents.

2.         Approve the funding arrangements detailed in the confidential attachment.

3.         Sign and seal the Contract documents.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

6.4.2    44W Embling Drive South Morang - Hope Youth accommodation - Lease

File No:                                  180229

Attachments:                        1        Hope Proposal

2        Site Plan   

Responsible Officer:           Director Corporate Services

Author:                                  Senior Property Officer   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

1.       Resolve that Council officers commence the statutory processes required under the Local Government Act 1989, to lease part of Council’s land located at 44W Embling Drive, South Morang, for the purposes of constructing and operating a 12 bed supported crisis accommodation and support services for young people (16-25 years) and their children.

2.       Invite and consider public submissions received pursuant of Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 and that all findings be presented in a report to Council on 5 June 2018.

3.       Enter into a joint application with Hope Street to advocate to government, corporate, philanthropy and other stakeholders in 2018 for capital and operational funding of a purpose designed youth supported accommodation.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

Hope Street has approached Council seeking support in addressing the needs of vulnerable young people and young families who experience and are impacted by homelessness in the City of Whittlesea with the establishment of a purpose designed enhanced youth supported accommodation.

·    The service will offer a 12 bed supported crisis accommodation centre with a 24/7 wrap around response assisting 220 young people per annum (120 via mobile outreach support, 100 via emergency accommodation).

·    City of Whittlesea has identified the need for crisis accommodation and the need for youth supported accommodation as a key advocacy priority for a number of years.

·    Hope Street will be offered a 30 year lease plus one option of a further 10 year term at a commencement date rental of $104 per annum (plus GST and outgoings) in light of the significant financial contributions that will be obtained for the design and development of the facility (projected to be $4.8 million for the build and over $2 million per annum for the operating costs).  The rental will be adjusted annually by CPI.

·    The lease will cover approximately 2,500m² of land within Council’s reserve located at 44W Embling Avenue, South Morang. The design of the facility will be integrated with the existing respite facility constructed by Scope within the same parcel of land in 2013.

·    Hope Street will be responsible for returning the leased land back to open space.

·    Hope Street is also seeking joint advocacy to government, corporate and philanthropy sectors for capital and operational funding for this initiative.

·    This proposal is pending the securing of funding for the capital and on-going recurrent operational costs.

Report

Background

 

Based in the northern and western regions of Melbourne, Hope Street is one of the longest established specialist youth homelessness services in Victoria, providing strategically targeted and holistic programs for young people/families (16-25 years) who are homeless or at risk of homelessness.

 

Hope Street has had a long-standing relationship with the City of Whittlesea, other community service agencies and stakeholders operating in the municipality with the provision of specialist homelessness, housing and support programs.

 

There is currently very limited data on homelessness in the City of Whittlesea, largely due to the difficulties in reaching people who are homeless, as well as a lack of services collecting and reporting this information.  However, specialist homelessness services report that they cannot keep up with the demand for housing and support services for young people in the municipality.

 

Currently, young people experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness, including young parents with accompanying children, must move out of the area if they require supported crisis accommodation.  This often means they are forced to leave school or training as well as key local social connections.  Their support networks are undermined leading to a feeling of disconnection with their community and lack of resilience.

 

Hope Street has approached Council officers, seeking support for the establishment of youth supported accommodation within the City of Whittlesea.  Hope Street is seeking a long term land lease arrangement that will enable the establishment of a purpose design 12 bed supported crisis accommodation and support services for young people (16-25 years) and their children.  The project will be subject to capital funding being obtained from the government, corporate and philanthropy sectors, to fund all capital and operational costs (see Attachment 1 – Hope proposal and Attachment 2 – Site Plan).

 

Council will support Hope Street in their sourcing of funding from business, philanthropy and government sectors.  Named the Hope Street First Response Youth Service, it is based on a proven successful model operating from Hope Street’s Brunswick site and the Hope Street First Response Youth Service model in Melton.  The new purpose built initiative in Melton is in partnership with the State Government, Melton City Council, philanthropic trusts, the corporate sector, Victoria Police (Melton) and the local community.  It is due to open in October 2018.

 

This facility will provide crisis accommodation and support services for young people (16-25 years) and their children. The service will offer an immediate 24/7 wrap around response assisting 220 young people per annum (120 via mobile outreach supports, 100 via emergency accommodation).

 

There are four key aspects to the First Response Service model:

1.   Emergency accommodation for young people and families -100 young people.

2.   Holistic wrap around case management and integrated support.

3.   Prevention and life-long diversion from homelessness.

4.   Mobile emergency response available 24/7 to 100 young people per annum enhancing the supported crisis accommodation response.

 

The land is zoned for residential use which is appropriate for the purpose.  Hope Street representatives have reviewed officers’ assessment of the site and consider that the site would be very suitable for the youth crisis accommodation and service facility. It is flat and well located with access to major roads, public transport, shops, schools and community centres.

 

This proposal is pending the securing of funding for the capital and ongoing recurrent operational costs.

Proposal

To enter into a proposed lease with Hope Street for the purposes of constructing and operating a 12 bed supported crisis accommodation and support services for youth people (16-25 years) and their children within part of Council’s land located at 44W Embling Drive, South Morang. 

It proposed that the lease will be for an initial term of 30 years plus an option of a further 10 year term.  A commencement date rental of $104 per annum (plus GST and outgoings) will be charged and an allocation of approximately 2,500m2 will be set aside to enable the construction of the facility and embellishments, i.e. building, car park, landscaping. The site area will exclude all open space areas to which significant trees are located.  These will be permanently fenced off from access by users of the Hope facility and managed by Council’s Parks & Open Space department.  The proposed location will be within part of 44W Embling Drive, South Morang, which presently accommodates Scope’s respite facility (2,200m2), one significant tree reserve (1,000m2) and additional open space for future purposes (1,300m2).  This site was previously earmarked for a possible future Community Activity Centre (CAC), however due to the proximity of the Gordons Road community facility, there are no plans to proceed with the CAC development.

Consultation

Council officers have referred the proposal to all relevant internal departments to ensure that there were no objections.

Officers engaged with a number of agencies that provide youth supported accommodation to discuss the needs of our community, to inform them that we are looking for innovative solutions and that we to open for dialogue. Following Council’s Social and Affordable Housing Forum in October 2017, Hope Street approached the City of Whittlesea with their proposal.

Further consultation is being undertaken through the Whittlesea Advisory Committee which has been operating since February 2017 and is comprised of representatives from: Victoria Police; Whittlesea City Council (Youth Services); local businesses (e.g. Pacific Epping, VicBank, Bunnings, Ray White); Hume Whittlesea LLEN; Whittlesea Community Connections and Haven Home Safe.

In the event the project went ahead, Council officers would develop a Communication Strategy to be endorsed by Hope Street, City of Whittlesea and the Department of Health and Human Services and any other relevant stakeholders.

public submissions

Council will invite public submissions under Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 with regard to the proposed lease.  An advertisement will be placed in the Whittlesea Leader newspaper and Council’s website on Tuesday 10 April 2018 requesting that public submissions be received by Wednesday 9 May 2018 (12 noon).

Financial Implications

Council’s Manager Property, Rates & Valuations has proposed a commencement rental of $104 per annum plus GST and outgoings, adjusted annually by CPI, in light of the significant financial contributions that will be obtained for the design and development of the facility (projected to be $4.8 million for the build and over $2 million per annum for the operating costs).

Hope Street is seeking support from the State Government, the philanthropy sector and local businesses to fund and resource this project. Hope Street is not seeking financial support from Council for this initiative.

Policy strategy and legislation

Council must seek public submissions on the proposed lease under Section 190 of the Local Government Act 1989.  Submissions will be invited for a period no less than 28 days and referred onto an elected Committee of Council for consideration.  The appointed Committee will consider and report all findings to Council for its final recommendation at their next available meeting. 

 

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

Council Priority                    Planning and Infrastructure

Future Direction                   Places and spaces to connect people

Theme                                   Community hubs

Strategic Objective              We have public spaces and community hubs that bring people together

 

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 initiative would provide a much needed enhanced crisis response service in the City of Whittlesea for youth aged 16-25 and their children.  Council will provide the land at a commencement date rental of $104 per annum plus GST and outgoings and funding will be sourced from government, corporate and philanthropy sectors for the build and operational costs.   Council will retain ownership of the building following the termination of the lease and Hope Street will be responsible for returning the leased land back to open space.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Invite public submissions in accordance with Section 190 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989, on its intentions to lease the land located at 44W Embling Drive, South Morang, to Hope Street.  The lease will be drawn under the following terms and conditions –

a)      The Tenant will be offered a lease for an initial period of 30 years with one further term of 10 years.

b)      The Tenant will pay a commencement date rental of $104 per annum (plus GST), annually adjusted by CPI, in light of the significant financial contributions that will be obtained for the design and development of the facility (projected to be $4.8 million for the build and over $2 million per annum for the operating costs).

2.       Establish an advisory Committee of Council comprising of Cr..............; Cr..............; Cr..............; and Cr.............., to consider any written submissions received on the proposal and make recommendations to Council on any such submissions.

3.       Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to carry out administrative procedures necessary to enable Council to carry out its functions under Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989.

4.       Receive a further report on the proposed lease following the close of the submission period.

5.       Enter into a joint application with Hope Street to advocate to government, corporate, philanthropic and other stakeholders in 2018 for capital and operational funding of a purpose designed youth supported accommodation.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 



Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                          Tuesday 3 April 2018

 



Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

6.4.3    Unconfirmed Minutes of Audit & Risk Committee Meeting

File No:                                  160616

Attachments:                        1        Unconfirmed Minutes of Audit & RIsk Committee Meeting - 8 March 2018   

Responsible Officer:           Director Corporate Services

Author:                                  Internal Compliance Officer   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

The Audit & Risk Committee met on 8 March 2018. The minutes of that meeting are attached for the information of Council.

1.       Council note the unconfirmed minutes of the Audit & Risk Committee meeting held on 8 March 2018.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

The Audit & Risk Committee Charter requires minutes of meetings to be provided to Council after each Audit & Risk Committee meeting.


 

Report

Background

The Audit & Risk Committee is an independent advisory committee of Council and its role is to report to Council and provide appropriate advice and recommendations on matters presented to it.  It acts in this capacity by monitoring, reviewing and advising on issues within its scope of responsibility and assisting Council’s governance obligations to its community.

The Audit & Risk Committee considered a number of reports at the meeting held 8 March 2018, as well as confirming minutes from the previous meeting held on 23 November 2017.

Main agenda items included:

·    Audit & Risk Committee Work Plan

·    Financial Performance Report for the Period Ended 31 December 2017

·    Risk Management Report

·    Update on Results from IBAC Local Government Corruption Questionnaire

·    Internal Audit:

-     Internal Audit Status Report

-     Internal Audit Reviews: Road Renewals

·    Outstanding Action items Report from Previous Internal Audits

·    External Audit:

-      External Audit Strategy

·    Internal Compliance Reviews

·    LGPRF Quarter 2 Performance Report

·    External Agency Examinations

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

Council Priority          Organisational Sustainability

Future Direction         Good Governance

Theme                          Continuous Improvement

Strategic Objective     Our Council monitors and evaluates all of its operations.

The establishment of the Audit & Risk Committee and the reports it receives are reflective of Council’s commitment to the implementation of good governance principles. The Committee provides advice to Council to assist with fulfilling its oversight responsibilities for the financial and non-financial reporting process, internal controls, the audit process, risk management and Council’s process for monitoring compliance with legislation and regulations and the Code of Conduct.


 

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

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

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

CONCLUSION

That Council note the minutes of the Audit & Risk Committee meeting attached to the report.

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to note the unconfirmed minutes of the Audit & Risk Committee meeting held on 8 March 2018.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                   Tuesday 3 April 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                      Tuesday 3 April 2018

 

6.5       Partnerships & Engagement

6.5.1    ASSEMBLIES OF COUNCILLOR REPORT - 3 APRIL 2018

File No:                                  188199   

Responsible Officer:           Director Partnerships & Engagement 

Author:                                  Governance Officer   

 

recommendation summary

That Council note the record of the Assemblies of Councillors meetings as set out in the table in the report.

key facts and/or issues

To report to Council the records of Assemblies of Councillors in accordance with Section 80A(2) of the Local Government Act.


 

Report

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

Municipal Emergency Management Planning Committee

14 November 2017

 

 

Cr Cox

DMRO

EAO

EC

ERO

MERO

MFPO

MRM

REMC

SEMO

1.     Community Festival and Events

2.     Matters arising from Previous Minutes

(a)   ‘Sleeping Rough’ Policy

(b)   Ascertain if severe weather warnings are disseminated to large builders in the LGA

(c)   Clarify the risk identified in the CERA review and prepare a plan to mitigate the risk

(d)   Contact the RRT to obtain details for inclusion in the MEMP

 

3.     Municipal Reports

(a)   MEMP Audit

(b)   Single Incidents

(c)   Fire Season

 

4.     Agency Reports

5.     Community Sub-Committee

6.     New and Emerging Risks

7.     MEMP Review

8.     Other business

(a)   Northern Hospital

(b)   State Emergency Service (SES)

(c)   Department of Health & Human Services (DHHS)

(d)   Ambulance Victoria

(e)   Country Fire Authority (CFA)

(f)    Department of Environment, Land, Water & Planning (DELWP) Forest Fire Management

(g)   SKM Fire

9.     DEWLP Powerline

10.  Single Incident Protocol

11.  Emergency Accommodation and essential shop funding

12.  City of Whittlesea Thunderstorm Asthma

                                                                      Nil disclosures

Council Forum

13 February 2018

Cr Pavlidis
(Mayor)

Cr Alessi

Cr Joseph

Cr Kozmevski

Cr Monteleone

 

CEO

CIO

DCS

DCRS

DCTP

DPE

DPMP

MACED

MCBP

MG

PUD

SSPP

TLSPP

1.     Options and Effectiveness of Live Streaming of Ordinary Council Meetings

2.     Hope Street First Response Youth Supported Accommodation Facility

3.     Housing Diversity and Design Policy – Stage two Implementation of the Housing Diversity Strategy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nil disclosures

CEO Employment Matters Advisory Committee (CEMAC)

16 February 2018

Cr Pavlidis (Mayor)

Cr Alessi

Cr Cox

Cr Monteleone

CEO

MG

CEO Employment Matters

 

 

 

                        Nil disclosures

CEO Employment Matters Advisory Committee (CEMAC)

20 February 2018

Cr Pavlidis (Mayor)

Cr Alessi

Cr Cox

Cr Monteleone

CEO

MG

CEO Employment Matters

 

 

Nil disclosures

Council Forum

20 February 2018

Cr Pavlidis (Mayor)

Cr Alessi

Cr Cox

Cr Desiato

Cr Joseph

Cr Kirkham

Cr Kelly

Cr Kozmevski

Cr Lalios

Cr Monteleone

CEO

CP

DCS

DCRS

DCTP

DPMP

DPE

MCAP

TLCPI

1.     Council Action Plan 2018/2019 – First Draft

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nil disclosures

The table below represents an Index of Officer titles:

Initials

Title of Officer

Initials

Title of Officer

AMFPO

Assistant Municipal Fire Prevention Officer – David Foster

EC

Events Co-ordinator – Julie McBride

AOHS

Administration Officer Health Services – Rhian Fisher

ERO

Emergency Resilience Officer – Peter Duncombe

CEO

Chief Executive Officer – Simon Overland

MACED

Manager Advocacy Communications and Economic Development – Sean McManus

CIO

Chief Information Officer – Hans Wolf

MCAP

Manager Corporate Accountability and Performance – Frank Joyce

CP

Corporate Planner – David Echeverry

MCBP

Manager Community Building and Planning – Belgin Besim

DCS/MRM

Director Community Services & Municipal Recovery Manager – Russell Hopkins

MFPO

Municipal Fire Management Planning Officer – David Foster

DCRS

Director Corporate Services – Helen Sui

MG

Manager Governance – Michael Tonta

DCTP/MERO/EXO

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

PUD

Principal Urban Design – Fiona Henningsen

DMRO

Deputy Municipal Resource Officer – Nick Mazzarella

REMC

Resilience and Emergency Management Coordinator – Andrew Tierney

DPE

Director Partnerships and Engagement – Liana Thompson

SEMO

Senior Emergency Managem