Logo_Primary_BlackWhite%20(JPG)

Agenda

 

OF Ordinary
COUNCIL MEETING

HELD ON

Tuesday 7 August 2018

AT 6.30pm

summons

 

You are advised that a Meeting of Council has been called by the Chief Executive Officer on Tuesday, 7 August 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 7 August 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 7 August 2018

 

 

 

SENIOR OFFICERS

 

 

SIMON OVERLAND                          CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

RUSSELL HOPKINS                         DIRECTOR COMMUNITY SERVICES

NICK MANN                                       DIRECTOR CITY TRANSPORT & PRESENTATION

HELEN SUI                                        DIRECTOR CORPORATE SERVICES

LIANA THOMPSON                          DIRECTOR PARTNERSHIPS & ENGAGEMENT

MICHAEL TONTA                              MANAGER GOVERNANCE

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                  Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

 

ORDER OF BUSINESS

 

The Chief Executive Officer submits the following business:

1.            Opening.. 9

1.1         MEETING OPENING AND PRAYER.. 9

1.2         ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF TRADITIONAL OWNERS STATEMENT.. 9

1.3         Present.. 9

2.            Apologies.. 9

3.            Declarations of Interest.. 9

4.            Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meeting.. 9

5.            Questions, Petitions and Joint Letters.. 11

5.1         Questions To Councillors.. 11

5.2         Petitions.. 11

5.2.1       Petition - Whittlesea Public Garden Draft Master Plan   11

5.3         Joint Letters.. 13

5.3.1       Joint Letter objecting to Planning Application 711026 - 1063 Plenty Road, South Morang.. 13

6.            Officers' Reports.. 15

6.1         Planning and Major Projects.. 15

6.1.1       TH HURREY RESERVE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT WORKS CONTRACT 2018-21 - TENDER EVALUATION REPORT. 15

6.1.2       PAINTED HILLS RECREATION RESERVE CONSTRUCTION OF PAVILION, SOCCER PITCHES AND LANDSCAPE WORKS CONTRACT 2017-95 - TENDER EVALUATION REPORT. 19

6.1.3       Amendment C223 - Child Care Centres Policy - Exhibition Outcomes and Adoption.. 23

6.1.4       1 BLACK FLAT ROAD, WHITTLESEA - USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF LAND FOR A CHILD CARE CENTRE AND THE DISPLAY OF ADVERTISING SIGNAGE.. 35

6.1.5       25 Neilsen Crescent Bundoora - Construction of Six Dwellings and a Reduction of the Visitor Car Parking Requirement of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.. 73

6.1.6       Amendment C209 Heritage Overlay - Panel Report and Adoption   99

6.1.7       AMENDMENT C200 - HOUSING DIVERSITY AND DESIGN POLICY - EXHIBITION OUTCOMES.. 109

6.1.8       Amendment C216 - Advertising Signs Policy - Authorisation   127

6.2         Community Services.. 147

6.2.1       Laurimar Community Centre Name Change.. 147

6.3         City Transport and Presentation.. 151

6.3.1       Management and Operation of Thomastown Recreation and Aquatic Centre, Mill Park Leisure Centre, and Whittlesea Swim Centre.. 151

6.3.2       Response to Petition - Romsey Street, Epping - Parking Management. 163

6.3.3       Response to Petition - Bud Lane, Epping - Traffic Management  171

6.3.4       Response to Petition - Riverdale Boulevard, South Morang - Traffic Management. 175

6.3.5       Local Area Traffic Management and Streetscape Improvements, Thomastown.. 183

6.3.6       Response to Petition - Removal of Gum Trees on Jubilee Crescent, Mill Park.. 199

6.3.7       Response to Petition - Tasman Drive, Bundoora - Parking Management. 211

6.4         Corporate Services.. 223

6.4.1       30 Brand Drive Thomastown - Sale of Council Land.. 223

6.4.2       CONTRACT FINALISATION REPORT - PRESENTED QUARTER 1, FY 2019  235

6.4.3       Epping Cemetery Trust - Freedom of Information Requests and Abstract of Accounts.. 239

6.4.4       Rating Methodology - Response to Joint Letter.. 253

6.4.5       315W Cooper Street Epping - Sale of Council Land - Riverlee   257

6.5         Partnerships & Engagement.. 273

6.5.1       Assemblies of Councillors Report - 7 August 2018. 273

6.5.2       Review of Approval Process for Using External Consultants for Participation and Engagement. 277

6.5.3       Interstate Conference - National Growth Areas Alliance (NGAA) National Congress, 19 – 20 November 2018. 287

6.6         Executive Services.. 291

Nil Reports.. 291

7.            Notices of Motion.. 291

Nil Reports.. 291

8.            Questions to Officers.. 291

9.            Urgent BusineSS.. 291

10.         Reports from Delegates Appointed BY Council TO Other Bodies.. 291

11.         Confidential Business.. 293

11.1       Planning and Major Projects.. 293

Nil Reports.. 293

11.2       Community Services.. 293

Nil Reports.. 293

11.3       City Transport and Presentation.. 295

11.3.1    Variation to Contract CT080901 Provision of Parks & Gardens Services.. 295

11.4       Corporate Services.. 297

Nil Reports.. 297

11.5       Partnerships & Engagement.. 297

Nil Reports.. 297

11.6       Executive Services.. 299

11.6.1    Meetings of the Chief Executive Officer 25 June 2018 to 27 July 2018. 299

11.7       Notices of Motion.. 301

Nil Reports.. 301

12.         Closure.. 301

 


 

 

Note:

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

 

 

Question Time:

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

 

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

 

 

Large Attachments:

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

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

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

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

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                  Tuesday 7 August 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 3 July 2018; and

Special Meeting of Council held 3 July 2018


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                  Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

 

5.         Questions, Petitions and Joint Letters

5.1       Questions To Councillors

5.2       Petitions

5.2.1    Petition - Whittlesea Public Garden Draft Master Plan

 

Petition from 97 residents and 9 non-residents requesting Council reject recommendation 11 of the Draft Whittlesea Public Gardens Master Plan to establish a new road and residential housing facing onto the gardens along Downs Road to improve passive surveillance in the reserve.

 

MOtion

THAT Council resolve to:

1.   Receive the petition from 97 residents and 9 non-residents requesting Council reject recommendation 11 of the Draft Whittlesea Public Gardens Master Plan to establish a new road and residential housing facing onto the gardens along Downs Road to improve passive surveillance in the reserve; and

2.   Consider the petition in the Council report on the Draft Whittlesea Public Gardens Master Plan at a future meeting.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                  Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

5.3       Joint Letters

5.3.1    Joint Letter objecting to Planning Application 711026 - 1063 Plenty Road, South Morang

 

Joint Letter received from 5 residents objecting to Application for Planning Permit 711026 at 1063 Plenty Road, South Morang.

 

MOtion

THAT Council resolve to receive the Joint Letter from 5 residents objecting to Planning Permit 711026 relating to property at 1063 Plenty Road, South Morang and consider the petition in conjunction with the Council Report on this planning permit application.

 

   


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                  Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

6.         Officers' Reports

6.1       Planning and Major Projects

6.1.1    TH HURREY RESERVE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT WORKS CONTRACT 2018-21 - TENDER EVALUATION REPORT

Attachments:                        1        Detailed Evaluation - Confidential

Confidential in accordance with Section 89(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1989 as it contains details relating to contractual matters.    

Responsible Officer:           Director Corporate Services

Author:                                  Senior Contracts Executive   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

It is recommended that contract number 2018-21 for TH Hurrey Reserve Intersection Improvement Works:

·    Is awarded to Negri Contractors (Vic) Pty Ltd

·    For the lump sum price of $857,657.39 (excl. GST)

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

The tender evaluation panel advises that:

·    Five tenders were received

·    The recommended tender was the highest ranked and is considered best value because of its competitive price and its demonstrated ability and relevant experience to deliver this project in accordance with Council’s requirements.

 

Report

Background

The purpose of this contract is to engage a contractor to undertake the intersection improvement works at the TH Hurrey Reserve. The new intersection will provide improved safe vehicle access to the new tennis club and reserve facilities. Works will include widening a length of Plenty Road to provide a designated right hand and left hand turn lanes into the newly built car park. The new intersection has been designed to improve the entry and exit to the reserve and is required in order to comply with VicRoads requirements and the Ausroad Guide to Road Design.

Tenders for the contract closed on 23 May 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

50%

Capability

23%

Capacity

20%

Impact

7%

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
Negri Contractors (Vic) Pty Ltd

Yes

Yes

90.9

1

Tenderer C

Yes

Yes

82.1

2

Tenderer B

Yes

Yes

64.3

3

Tenderer D

No

Yes

NA

NA

Tenderer E

Yes

No

NA

NA

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

This project directly links to the Tennis Strategy 2013-2018 and the Recreation Strategy 2012-2017.  The Tennis Strategy 2013-2018 lists TH Hurrey Reserve as a medium to high priority for redevelopment.

The project also has links with the draft Cycling Sports Strategy that suggests that Plenty Road is a significant recreational cycling route and TH Hurrey Reserve remains a popular location as a rest stop for cyclists.

 

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 Negri Contractors (Vic) Pty Ltd 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 Negri Contractors (Vic) Pty Ltd for the sum of $857,657.39 (excluding GST) for the following contract:

Number:    2018-21

Title:          TH Hurrey Reserve Intersection Improvement Works

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 7 August 2018

 

6.1.2    PAINTED HILLS RECREATION RESERVE CONSTRUCTION OF PAVILION, SOCCER PITCHES AND LANDSCAPE WORKS CONTRACT 2017-95 - TENDER EVALUATION REPORT

Attachments:                        1        Detailed Evaluation - Confidential

Confidential in accordance with Section 89(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1989 as it contains details relating to contractual matters.    

Responsible Officer:           Director Corporate Services

Author:                                  Senior Contracts Executive   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

 

It is recommended that contract number 2017-95 for Painted Hills Recreation Reserve Construction of Pavilion, Soccer Pitches and Landscape Works:

·    Is awarded to JR & BL Kendall Pty Ltd

·    For the lump sum price of $7,070,161 (excl. GST)

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

The tender evaluation panel advises that:

·    Six tenders were received

·    The recommended tender was not the highest ranked but is considered best value because it is the most competitive tender and it has demonstrated ability to deliver this project in accordance with Council’s requirements.

 

Report

Background

The Painted Hills Road Recreation Reserve (PHRR) is located at 180 Painted Hills Road, Doreen. The “Mernda Strategy Plan – Development Contribution Plan Precinct 2A” (Appendix 1) identified this site for community sports, in particular soccer.

The purpose of this contract is to engage a Contractor to undertake the construction works that will deliver:

·    A community soccer pavilion

·    One synthetic soccer pitch

·    One natural turf pitch

·    Drainage and other supporting amenities

Tenders for the contract closed on 23 May 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

50%

Capability

23%

Capacity

20%

Impact

7%

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 D

Yes

Yes

90.6

1

Tenderer B

JR & BL Kendall Pty Ltd

Yes

Yes

88.5

2

Tenderer C

Yes

Yes

84.9

3

Tenderer E

Yes

No

79.6

4

Tenderer F

Yes

No

79.1

5

Tenderer A

No

Yes

NA

NA

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

The highest ranked tenderer was not recommended for award of this contract because its tender price is not the most competitive and overall did not represent best value for Council.

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

The Painted Hills Road Recreation Reserve (PHRR) is identified in the “Mernda Strategy Plan – Development Contribution Plan Precinct 2A” (Appendix 1) for community sports.

The “Mernda Strategy Plan – Development Contribution Plan” also included a Community Centre to be located within the same precinct (2A). Subsequent investigations identified the Painted Hills Recreation Reserve as a suitable location for this development.

The Draft Soccer Strategy 2016-2026 recommended this development as high priority to meet the needs of the growing communities of Mernda and Doreen.

 

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 JR & BL Kendall Pty Ltd 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 JR & BL Kendall Pty Ltd for the sum of $7,070,161 (excluding GST) for the following contract:

Number:    2017-95

Title:          Painted Hills Recreation Reserve Construction of Pavilion, Soccer Pitches and Landscape Works

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 7 August 2018

 

6.1.3    Amendment C223 - Child Care Centres Policy - Exhibition Outcomes and Adoption

Attachments:                        1        Clause 22.05 Child Care Centre Policy - Post Exhibition Version   

Responsible Officer:           Director Partnerships & Engagement

Author:                                  Senior Strategic Policy Planner   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

Adopt Planning Scheme Amendment C223 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, incorporating the post exhibition changes as contained in Attachment 1 of this report, and forward to the Minister for Planning for approval.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

Amendment C223 replaces the existing Clause 22.05 Child Care Centre Policy with an updated policy.

·    Following the public exhibition of the Amendment, three submissions were received.  All three submissions were supportive of the proposed Amendment. One submission sought minor changes to the exhibited version of the policy.  The agreed changes have been included in Attachment 1.

·    The current policy is dated and lacks the guidance necessary to assist in the preparation and assessment of applications.  The updated policy outlines Council’s expectations regarding the location and design of child care centres to manage adverse impacts. The policy seeks to direct child care centres into appropriate locations to ensure positive community outcomes.

·    There is a perception that because the City of Whittlesea is a growth area, there is a demand for child care centres.  This has led to a substantial increase in the number of applications, many of which are speculative applications in inappropriate locations. This has led to an oversupply, with 6702 existing/proposed child care places, while only 3408 places are needed in the municipality.

·    To address this concern of oversupply, as well as providing guidance on preferred location and siting/design criteria, the policy introduces ‘need’ as a policy objective and a decision guideline.

·    In line with statutory requirements, Council must make a decision within 60 business days of the closing date of submissions, being 23 August, 2018.

 

Report

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to seek adoption of Planning Scheme Amendment C223 to replace the current Child Care Centres Policy (Clause 22.05 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme) with an updated policy.

BACKGROUND

Council’s existing CCC Policy is over 15 years old, comprises limited policy content and lacks the guidance necessary to assist in the preparation and assessment of applications.

The Child Care Centres (CCCs) Policy has been updated in response to the substantial increase in child care centre planning permit applications, both in the established suburbs and the growth areas.  There is a perception that as a growth area, there is a demand for CCCs, and this has led to increased numbers of applications, many of which are speculative and sought in inappropriate locations.  This has led to an oversupply, with 6702 existing/proposed child care places provided, while only 3408 places are currently needed in the municipality.

PROPOSED AMENDMENT

The revised policy seeks to direct CCC proposals into appropriate locations to improve place making and community outcomes.

The policy applies to all land in the municipality, including land within the urban growth boundary.  The policy will only be considered where a planning permit is already required by the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.  Its sole purpose is to guide decision making when considering a planning permit application. 

The policy outlines the City of Whittlesea local context and the need for the policy.  This includes a rapidly increasing population, in conjunction with unprecedented numbers of applications, where supply greatly exceeds demand.  It also highlights the need for the location and built form outcomes of CCC’s to make a positive contribution to the community in order to satisfy broader land use and development objectives for the municipality.

The policy sets out what Council is trying to achieve to address the issues arising from current CCC applications.  In particular, it seeks to specifically encourage applicants to:

·    Prioritise Activity Centre or appropriate non-residential/community hub locations;

·    Discourage locations near roads with, or planned to have, high traffic volumes;

·    Ensure the siting and design of centres positively contribute to the appearance of the surrounding context;

·    Satisfy a demonstrated need for the local community;

·    Provide separation of pedestrian and vehicular/waste collection access and movement through the site; and

·    Ensure that centres do not adversely impact residential amenity.

The policy requires applicants to demonstrate a local need to address concerns of oversupply to ensure the viable operation of proposed applications and avoid poor community outcomes.  However the policy does not impact on competition or competitive pricing. 

Currently, the municipality has 6702 existing/proposed child care places, while only 3408 places are needed.  As a result there is an oversupply of 3294 child care places (existing/proposed).  A recently released Productivity Commission Report, Childcare and Early learning – Productivity Commission Inquiry Report Vol.1, No.73, 31 October 2014 has found that an oversupply of places leads to cost cutting, centres employing less qualified staff, providing lower quality services, not maintaining the buildings/site, and impacts to competition within the local area.  The cumulative impact of this is detrimental to the municipality with lower quality services and poor choices for the community.

The policy provides for flexibility and discretion where a child care centre is located in or adjacent to an activity centre or sited on a collector road that avoids extra generation of traffic on residential streets. In this way, the policy does not constrain competition, which is not a valid planning consideration under the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

EXHIBITION OF THE AMENDMENT AND SUBMISSIONS

Council resolved on 6 March 2018 to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit Amendment C223.

Ministerial Authorisation was granted, and the Amendment was placed on public exhibition for a four week period between 3rd and 31st May 2018.  Notification packages were sent to:

·    Prescribed Ministers,

·    Relevant Child Care Centre Organisations, including the Department of Education and Training, and

·    The major developers operating within the municipality that are involved with substantial master planning/town centre development and large scale subdivisions.  (Given the speculative nature of many proposals, it is not possible to identify all possible applicants).

Notices were also placed in the Victorian Government Gazette and the Whittlesea Leader.  Information about the Amendment was also uploaded to Council’s website.

Following the Exhibition process, three submissions were received.  The submitters were the developers – LendLease and Stockland, and the Environment Protection Authority (EPA).  All three submissions supported the proposed Amendment.  Stockland provided commentary on some aspects of the revised policy and the EPA requested some minor changes to the policy.  Both Stockland’s and the EPA’s submissions prompted written responses from Council Officers.  The key comments/suggested changes raised and Council Officer responses, where relevant, are summarised below.

LendLease

LendLease supports the proposed Amendment and advised that ‘LendLease’s experiences with child care centres has seen them being most successful when located in or adjacent to activity hubs or adjacent open spaces on connector roads with good vehicular and pedestrian accessibility.

No changes were sought to the exhibited policy.

Stockland

The Stockland submission supported the Amendment and provided some additional commentary about some components of the revised policy.  Council Officers provided a written response to the submission addressing the issues/queries raised.  Following this clarification, Stockland advised in writing of the withdrawal of its submission. 

Stockland noted that given anticipated population growth, further CCC’s would be required.  There will be an obvious requirement for centres in areas yet to be developed, e.g. Donnybrook/Woodstock etc. 

Accordingly the policy seeks to place greater onus on applicants to demonstrate that a genuine need exists for a proposal particularly when sought in developed and substantially developing areas.

Stockland also sought clarity on stand-alone centres.  The Amendment does not preclude the development of stand-alone centres.  However, given the substantial oversupply of centres already evidenced in the existing and emerging suburbs, many of which are stand-alone centres or inappropriately co-located with petrol stations and convenience restaurants etc. the policy is encouraging new applicants in these areas to provide centres within appropriate Activity Centre/community hub locations, supporting other higher level community building and multi-trip purpose policy outcomes.

Finally, Stockland queried the preference for parking areas to be located away from the front setback.  This design objective in the policy stems from extensive complaints to Council from parents/carers experiencing difficulty entering, parking and leaving existing centres during peak pick-up and drop-off times and conflict between vehicles and pedestrian children/adults at this location.  Further, it was noted that urban design principles promote front setbacks in line with adjoining premises, as well as, articulated front facades with readily identifiable front entrances.  This improves and promotes pedestrian accessibility to the site, and the overall appearance of the proposal in the streetscape.  Inclusion of this objective seeks to ensure this matter is considered as early as possible to encourage better site selection in the first instance.

Environment Protection Authority

The EPA submission was also supportive of the proposed Amendment and advised Council that the potential impacts of traffic related air pollution on sensitive uses is an emerging issue that they are currently investigating with the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP).  To this end, EPA suggested some changes to the exhibited policy to introduce content regarding traffic related air emissions from higher order roads (e.g. arterial roads).  Council Officers provided a written response to the submission, identifying where and how the policy could be amended to address the EPA’s issues.  The EPA advised in writing that subject to the suggested changes outlined by Council Officers, the EPA is happy to withdraw its submission.  The key issues and changes sought by EPA together with the Council Officers response are summarised below.  Attachment 1 incorporates the post exhibition changes to the policy by way of tracked changes that were agreed by the EPA.

·    The EPA advised Council that health impacts of traffic related air pollution near major roads is an emerging concern that the EPA is working with the DELWP to develop policy guidance specifically as it relates to the Victorian planning system.  It is also identified in Policy 6.6.1 in Plan Melbourne Refresh.  Although the research and findings are not finalised, EPA expressed a preference that Council incorporate content into the policy to address this emerging concern. 

Officer response

Council Officers acknowledged this as an emerging issue for EPA and DELWP and welcomed ongoing dialogue and progress regarding the matter.  Officers noted that the Amendment seeks to discourage CCCs being located on arterial roads or being co-located with service stations, is seeking in part, to address this concern.

·    The EPA suggested that the exhibited policy be amended to include ‘air quality’ as a consideration in the design and location of playspaces and accordingly, incorporated into this section. 

Officer response

Officers advised that the term ‘air quality’ was too broad and impractical for applicants and decision makers to apply to the policy and instead proposed the following wording: ‘traffic related air impacts from arterial roads’ under the ‘Playspaces and landscaping’ heading in Cl. 22.05-3.

·    The EPA sought changes to the Decision Guidelines to include air quality and in particular to require proposals within 100m of a major road to submit a risk based assessment of air quality which informs the design response and proposed mitigation including building design controls.

Officer response

Council Officers advised that in the absence of the EPA and DELWP finalising state policy guidance on this matter, including setback distances, that it is premature to include this requirement in a local policy.  It was suggested that a more general approach be taken to provide flexibility to the EPA and DELWP to provide further planning policy direction in the future without contradicting the policy.  Accordingly, minor changes could be made to ‘Need and preferred location’ in Cl.22.05-3 and Decision Guidelines in Cl.22.05-4, to make reference to their proximity to/from arterial roads. 

EPA agreed to withdraw their submission on the basis of these proposed changes, which have been incorporated into Attachment 1 as the post exhibition version of the policy.  In general, the EPA acknowledged the limitations of including state-wide guidance in a local planning policy and were satisfied that the reference to the proximity to arterial roads is in line with the directions they proposed.

CRITICAL DATES

Amendment C223 received authorisation from the Minister for Planning on 28 March 2018 and was subsequently exhibited from 3 to 31 May 2018.

In accordance with Ministerial Direction No. 15: The Planning Scheme Amendment Process, Council must make a decision within 60 days of the closing date of submissions, being 23 August 2018.

If Amendment C223 is adopted by Council, a request to approve the Amendment will be sent to the Minister for Planning.  If the Amendment is approved by the Minister for Planning, it is likely that it will be Gazetted before the end of the year.

CONSULTATION

The revised CCC policy has been developed in consultation with an internal Working Group with cross-Council representation.  DELWP was also consulted in the preparation of the policy.

Policy strategy and legislation

The development of the policy is supported by the following clauses in the WPS:

State Planning Policy Framework:

·    Clause 11 Settlement – that land use planning recognises and contributes towards a high standard of urban design and amenity, accessibility and land use and transport integration.

·    Clause 11.03-2 Activity centre planning – which seeks to encourage the concentration of uses into activity centres that provide a variety of land uses that are highly accessible to the community and that meet local needs.

·    Clause 15.01-1 Urban design and Clause 15.01-2 Urban design principles – whereby planning should achieve high quality urban design and architectural outcomes that contribute positively to local urban character and sense of place, and minimises detrimental impacts on neighbouring properties.

Local Planning Policy Framework:

·    Clause 21.04-1 Activity Centre Planning – seeks to incorporate a mix of retail, commercial and community facilities within an activated street based environment.

·    Clause 21.08-1 Urban Design, which seeks to utilise urban design principles to inform built form outcomes including:

Ø To utilise urban design principles to support built outcomes which encourage connection to place and the community,

Ø To avoid visually dominant car parks in new developments,

Ø To create walkable neighbourhoods defined by a 400-800m walk to facilities.

·    Clause 21.12 Infrastructure – builds on Clauses 21.04-1 & 21.04-2 to co-locate community based facilities and maximise beneficial relationships between compatible uses, including to:

Ø Co-locate facilities close to other community assets including retail precincts, arts facilities and libraries to maximise accessibility and convenience to users.

Ø Develop hubs and precincts with the aim of facilitating an integrated service provision.

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 revised policy builds on objectives in the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) of the WPS, which seek to utilise urban design principles to inform built form outcomes. This is relevant for non-residential buildings, including CCC’s, to help build a connection to place.

Council Priority

Planning and Infrastructure

Future Direction

Places and spaces to connect people

Theme

Built environment

Strategic Objective

Our neighbourhoods are designed to be well-connected and create cohesive communities

The CCC Policy builds on the MSS objectives supporting co-location of retail, commercial and community uses in a walkable catchment and connected to public transport.

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

Amendment C223 seeks to update and replace the current Child Care Centres Local Planning Policy.  The revised policy seeks to direct child care centre proposals into appropriate locations to improve place making and community outcomes.

Following exhibition of the Amendment, three submissions were received.  All of the submissions were supportive of the proposed local policy.  One submission did not seek any changes to the policy, while another submission was withdrawn following further clarification from Council Officers.

The submission from the Environment Protection Authority sought some minor changes to the exhibited policy to introduce content regarding traffic related air emissions from higher order roads.  Officers suggested alternate wording which the Environment Protection Authority advised they were comfortable with and withdrew their submission on that basis.

Given the submissions have been resolved or withdrawn, it is recommended that Council resolve to adopt Amendment C223 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, including the post exhibition changes suggested to the Environment Protection Authority as identified in Attachment 1 of this report, and to forward the Amendment to the Minister for Planning for approval.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to adopt Amendment C223 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, incorporating the post exhibition changes as outlined in Attachment 1 of this report, and forward the Amendment to the Minister for Planning for approval.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                  Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

6.1.4    1 BLACK FLAT ROAD, WHITTLESEA - USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF LAND FOR A CHILD CARE CENTRE AND THE DISPLAY OF ADVERTISING SIGNAGE

Attachments:                        1        Locality Maps

2        Development Plans   

Responsible Officer:           Director Partnerships & Engagement

Author:                                  Principal Planner   

 

APPLICANT:                         Centrum Architects

COUNCIL POLICY:              22.05     Child Care Centre Policy

ZONING:                               General Residential Zone

OVERLAY:                            Not applicable

REFERRAL:                          Not applicable

OBJECTIONS:                      Thirteen

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council resolve to approve Planning Application No. 716166 and issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for the use and development of land for a child care centre and the display of advertising signage, subject to conditions.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    It is proposed to use and develop the subject site for the purpose of a childcare centre which will be of a contemporary design for 111 children and 24 educational staff members.

 

·    The application was advertised, which resulted in thirteen objections being received.  The concerns raised were related to inappropriate use in a residential area; additional traffic and parking; additional noise; sewerage treatment concerns; loss of property values; loss of views; loss of vegetation; loss of privacy and loss of security which the proposal appropriately addresses.

 

·    The proposal is consistent with the relevant provisions of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme including Clause 22.05 (Child Care Centre Policy) in terms of location, access to public transportation, layout and design. Support for the proposal is therefore recommended subject to conditions.

 

Report

SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

The subject site is located on the south-east corner of Black Flat Road and Wallan Road (see Attachment 1).  The land is an irregular shaped allotment with a site area of approximately 3600m2, with frontage of 58m to Black Flat Road. A 12m tree reserve separates the subject site and the Wallan Road road reserve.  The site contains an existing dwelling and various outbuildings, with a number of mature trees throughout the site.

 

The surrounding area is characterised by larger low density residential allotments to the south and east; standard residential allotments to the north, separated by a 22m wide Melbourne Water reserve (Black Flat Reserve).  Immediately to the west, across Wallan Road is the Whitehaven Reception Centre, further to the west low density residential properties and to the north-west larger rural-residential properties.

 

The subject site is serviced by Bus Route 382 (Whittlesea - Northland SC via South Morang Station), with a bus stop directly outside the site.  The subject site is located within proximity to the following sites, services and infrastructure:

 

·        Willow Park (approximately 300m south-east);

·        St Mary’s Primary School (250m south);

·        Whittlesea Community House and Whittlesea Preschool (800m east).

·        Whittlesea Primary School (1km south).

restrictions and easements

The site is legally described as Lot 1 on Plan of Subdivision 133421.  The site is affected by Restrictive Covenant K821804 which restricts size of dwellings, relocated dwellings; and the style of boundary fencing (rural post and wire or corral type fencing).  All fencing associated with the proposed child care centre will be internal to the site, with the existing post and wire fencing on the boundary remaining in compliance with the covenant.  A 2.5m drainage easement also traverses the eastern side boundary of the site.  There are no encumbrances on title that preclude Council from making a decision. 

Proposal

The applicant proposes to demolish the existing dwelling and other structures on the site and construct a single storey building for use as a child care centre (see Attachment 2).  The child care centre will have places for up to 111 children and will be developed in two stages as follows:

Stage 1:

·        250m2 children’s space (56 children);

·        100m2 staff support space;

·        50m2 circulation space;

·        Two external play areas – 280m2 baby play area and 112m2 junior play area;

·        Car park containing 24 car parking spaces, including one accessible (disabled) car space;

·        Associated external works, including external pavement and landscaping.

Stage 2:

·        200m2 kindergarten space (55 children);

·        45m2 circulation space;

·        One external play area – 385m2 kindergarten play area;

·        Associated external works, including external pavement and landscaping.

The child care centre will employ up to 24 educational staff and several support staff.  Proposed hours of operation will be Monday to Friday 6.30am to 7.00pm.

The proposed child care centre will be of a contemporary design which incorporates a range of materials and finishes, including colorbond cladding and roofing, timber cladding, some painted surfaces and glazing.  The maximum building height will be 7.3m above natural ground level.

The existing vehicle crossover will be extended and used for vehicular access to the site.  Pedestrian access will be provided centrally to the site from Black Flat Road. A sustainable onsite wastewater management system will be provided for the development.

The application also proposes two 2.4m x 1.8m (4.3m2) business identification signs, with one at the front of the site adjacent to the car parking area and one at the corner of Black Flat Road and Wallan Road.

A number of well-established trees will be removed from the site to facilitate the proposed development.  It should be noted that although some of these trees are native to Victoria, including some River Red Gums, there is no Vegetation Protection Overlay or other tree protection controls applicable to this site, therefore a planning permit is not triggered for this aspect of the proposal.  Vegetation will be retained where possible, including within the front setback area adjacent to the car parking area.

Public Notification

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

1.       Inappropriate location for commercial business;

2.       Additional traffic and parking along Wallan Road and Black Flat Road;

3.       Non-compliance with caveat which seeks to protect country atmosphere;

4.       Additional noise;

5.       Non-compliance with Whittlesea Childcare Policy;

6.       Concerns with sewerage treatment;

7.       Too close to Whittlesea kindergarten;

8.       Loss of property values;

9.       Loss of views;

10.     Loss of existing trees and vegetation;

11.     Inappropriate precedent for more “non-residential” buildings in the area;

12.     Loss of privacy.

 

A response to the grounds of objection can be found later in this report.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

The application has been assessed against the following relevant policies:

 

 

Local Planning Policy

 

Child Care Centre Policy (Clause 22.05)

 

The objective of this policy is to ensure appropriately located and well-designed child care centres have a minimal impact on the amenity of the area and serve the needs of the community.

It is considered the proposed child care centre is generally in accordance with the Child Care Centre Local Planning Policy.  An assessment against the requirements of the policy is provided below.

·        Encourage child care centres to locate adjacent to or in proximity to other community support facilities such as schools, pre-schools, open space, medical centres, and recreational facilities.

The subject site is located approximately 1.2kms north-west of the Whittlesea town centre and within proximity to the following services:

- Willow Park (approximately 300m south-east);

- St Mary’s Primary School (250m south);

- Whittlesea Community House and Whittlesea Preschool (800m east);

-             Whittlesea Primary School (1km south);

- Bright Stars Early Learning Centre (1.4km south);

- Whittlesea Child Care Centre / Laurel Street Preschool (1.5km south-east).

As a result of the subject site’s proximity to community support facilities, it is considered that the location of the proposed child care centre is appropriate.

 

·        Encourage child care centres to locate in proximity to public transport routes.

While Whittlesea township is not well serviced by public transport, the subject site is serviced by Bus Route 382 (Whittlesea - Northland SC via South Morang Station), with a bus stop directly outside the site. 

·        Minimise impacts on residential amenity and enhance access, corner sites are preferred locations for child care centres. Establishment of child care centres within cul-de-sacs and on main roads is discouraged.

The site is on the corner of Black Flat Road and Wallan Road, with a 12m tree reserve separating the site from Wallan Road.  As preferred by the policy, the childcare centre is located on a corner allotment and is not proposed to be in a cul-de-sac or with main road access. Access to the subject site is available exclusively from Black Flat Road with vehicular access not possible from Wallan Road. Furthermore, as the site is on the periphery of the residential context, the location of the subject site is considered to be appropriate.

·        Ensure that the scale and appearance of purpose built child care centres is consistent with surrounding land use, site characteristics, and site location. In residential areas child care centres should have a residential scale, height and building form, which is sympathetic to the character of adjoining dwellings and the streetscape.

The proposed child care centre will be consistent with the scale of built form in the area which includes large single storey dwellings to the east and south, and standard density residential to the north.  The presentation of the built form varies from the residential style given that it is a purpose built child care centre, however the features are not a significant departure from dwelling styles in the greater area through a maximum height of 7.3m, generous front setback, colourbond pitched roofing (albeit of a contemporary nature) and a rendered finish with wood cladding. 

·        Ensure that access to and from the site is to be designed in such a way as to allow for the safe and efficient movement of vehicle and pedestrian traffic, including safe set down areas.

The proposal includes a private car park for 24 spaces, meeting the requirements of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.  Vehicular and pedestrian access has been designed to ensure safe and efficient movements within and from the site.  Pedestrian access through the car parking area will be provided from Black Flat Road. 

·        Ensure proposals fulfil a demonstrated need.

There are only two existing childcare centres within the township of Whittlesea and one kindergarten within 1.5km of the subject site.  Continually there is additional housing in the area with an increase in the number of families.  The population of the township has grown by almost 21% since 2011 with a further forecast growth of around 26% between now and 2041.

 

Capacity at Childcare Centres at present in the township is at 181 places for a population of over 5500 and therefore the lack of centres in the immediate vicinity and forecast increases in population demonstrate that there is a need.  Moreover, the proposed Child Care centre will offer a babies room catering for 0-18month olds which has been identified within the industry as a gap with inadequate supply across metropolitan Melbourne.

 

To confirm the above, the application was referred to Council’s Early Years team who have reviewed the proposal and raised no concerns with over supply in this area.

 

Based on the assessment above, it is considered that the proposal responds well to the child care policy in terms of its site location and demand as detailed within the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

 

Zoning and Overlay Provisions

General Residential Zone (Clause 32.08)

 

The subject site is located within the General Residential Zone (GRZ1).  Pursuant to Clause 32.08-1 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, a Child Care Centre is a Section 2 – permit required use, therefore a planning permit is required.  Additionally, Clause 32.08-6 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, states that any buildings and works associated with a Section 2 use require a planning permit.

 

It is considered the proposed child care centre is generally in accordance with the objectives of the General Residential Zone.

 

There are a number of decision guidelines provided for non-residential uses and development that form part of the consideration, as outlined below:

 

·        Whether the use or development is compatible with residential use.

 

It is considered that the proposed use and development are both compatible with surrounding residential uses.  The child care centre is likely to create some noise (children playing), however given the general nature of child care centres, the peak times for outdoor play are not in the earlier or later hours of operation.  The built form is appropriate through being purpose built, yet adopting elements found on larger scale dwellings.  The building is well setback from the street and property boundaries and is set down into the land so as to ensure that the building height does not impact upon the streetscape.

 

·        Whether the use generally serves local community needs.

 

As identified previously, it is considered the proposed child care centre is appropriately located to service the needs of the surrounding community, consistent with the purpose of the General Residential Zone. The child care centre has designated areas for babies, toddlers, juniors, pre-kinder and kindergarten which in turns provides parents access to all form of pre-school care.

 

·        The scale and intensity of the use and development.

 

The scale and intensity of the use is considered proportionate to the size of the land.  The child care centre will be accommodated on a larger residential allotment, therefore allowing adequate space to accommodate the use while minimising impacts outside the site. 

 

The child care centre will operate from 6:30am to 7:00pm, Monday to Friday.  These hours of operation will be confirmed via a condition on any permit issued to protect the amenity of surrounding residents.

 

·        The design, height, setback and appearance of the proposed buildings and works.

 

It is considered the design, overall height, setbacks and general appearance of the building is commensurate to large dwellings found in area as well as the reception centre on the opposite side of Wallan Road.  Additional landscaping will complement the design response to the site ensuring an appropriate outcome for the site and area.

 

·        The proposed landscaping.

 

A concept Landscape Plan was submitted as part of the application.  It is considered the landscape areas provided for planting are satisfactory. 

 

·        The provision of car and bicycle parking and associated accessways.

 

Details of car parking are discussed within later sections of this report.  No bicycle parking is required for the proposed child care centre in accordance with Clause 52.34 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

 

·        Any proposed loading and refuse collection facilities.

 

It is anticipated that deliveries to the site will be via smaller vehicles for supplies and food.  The proposed car park will be able to accommodate such vehicles.  Waste will be stored and collected from within the car parking area via private waste collection.  The waste management plan submitted with the application will be endorsed and will form part of any planning permit that is issued.

 

·        The safety, efficiency and amenity effects of traffic to be generated by the proposal.

 

The application was referred internally to Council’s City Design and Transport department who did not raise concerns arising from the anticipated traffic on the surrounding network.  Standard conditions will require the submission of engineering plans including line marking plans which will assist in protecting safety on and off site. 

 

Particular Provisions

Advertising Signage (Clause 52.05)

 

Clause 52.05 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme outlines the requirements for advertising signage. 

 

Signage within the General Residential Zone is Category 3 – High amenity areas signage and must be assessed against Clause 52.05-9.  The applicant proposes two 2.4m x 1.8m business identification signs on the site.  All business identification signs are Section 2 – Permit required signs within the General Residential Zone.

 

Car Parking (Clause 52.06)

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:

Proposed use

Rate

Number of children proposed

Car spaces required

Car spaces proposed

Child Care Centre

0.22 spaces per child

111

24

24

 

The proposal complies with these requirements.

 

Whilst the proposal seeks a maximum of 111 child care spaces, due to best practice scenarios requiring even numbers of child care spaces, a condition will be included on any permit to issue to have a maximum of 112 child care spaces available which will not affect the parking requirements and avoid the need to amend the permit once it is issued.

Comments on Grounds of ObjectioN

Inappropriate location for commercial business

Clause 22.05 (Child Care Centre Policy) encourages child care centres that serve the local population to locate within residential areas, while ensuring that these centres do not have a negative impact on residential amenity through inappropriate location, unsympathetic design and traffic impacts.  The General Residential Zone allows for a range of non-residential uses to serve local community needs in appropriate locations.  The subject site is considered to be appropriate as outlined above with the form and scale of the proposed building consistent with surrounding residential development. 

Additional traffic and parking along Wallan Road and Black Flat Road

The proposed child care centre will provide the required number of car parking spaces on the site in accordance with Clause 52.06 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.  Furthermore, it is considered the level of traffic generated by the proposed child care centre will not have a detrimental impact on safety or operation of Black Flat Road, Wallan Road and the surrounding road network. 

Non-compliance with caveat which seeks to protect country atmosphere

The site is affected by Restrictive Covenant K821804 which restricts size of dwellings, relocated dwellings and the style of boundary fencing (rural post and wire or corral type fencing).  The covenant does not restrict the uses on the land to only that of a dwelling but rather requires any dwelling to be built on the site to be greater than 110 square metres. As such, the proposal is not in contravention of the restriction registered on title. All fencing associated with the proposed child care centre will be internal to the site, with the existing post and wire fencing on the boundary remaining in compliance with the covenant

Additional noise

The objectors have concerns regarding noise, including from cars visiting the site, delivery and waste collection trucks, and from kids screaming and playing all day.  The proposed child care centre will provide care to children aged from 0-5 years, with extensive quiet times (sleeping / rest) part of the care. It is however noted that the play areas are located to the sides and rear of the property, adjacent to the rear open space areas of adjoining properties.  While the noise of children playing within the play areas may be generated throughout the day, this is considered compatible with the expected noise levels within a residential area.  It is noted that the applicant proposes to erect colorbond acoustic fencing around the outdoor play areas to limit noise external to the site.  Any noise generated during construction will be enforced through EPA requirements on Residential Noise.

Non-compliance with Whittlesea Childcare Policy

The proposed child care centre demonstrates an appropriate level of compliance with Clause 22.05 (Child Care Centres) of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme as detailed above.

Concerns with sewerage treatment

The application proposes treatment of waste water on site with a septic tank system proposed which complies with the EPA Code of Practice – Onsite Wastewater Management No. 891.3 February 2013; and AS/NZS 1547:2012 – On-site domestic wastewater management, Standards Australia.

Too close to Whittlesea kindergarten

Clause 22.05 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme encourages child care centres to locate adjacent to or in proximity to other community support facilities such as schools, pre-schools, open space, medical centres, and recreational facilities.  The subject site is in proximity to a variety of community uses, with Whittlesea Preschool approximately 450m east of the site.  The proposal meets the objectives of Council’s Child Care Centre policy in this regard. 

Loss of property values

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

Loss of views

Evidence has not been provided to show existing view lines which will be impacted by the proposed development.  Additionally, there is no Significant Landscape Overlay (SLO) on the land which seeks to protect view lines; therefore it is not considered a valid planning consideration.

Loss of existing trees and vegetation

A number of well-established trees will be removed from the site to facilitate the proposed development.  It should be noted that although some of these trees are native to Victoria, including some River Red Gums, there is no Vegetation Protection Overlay or other vegetation protection controls applicable to this site, therefore a planning permit is not triggered for this aspect of the proposal.  Vegetation will be retained where possible, including within the front setback area adjacent to the car parking area.

Inappropriate precedent for more “non-residential” buildings in the area

The approval of a use or development does not mean that future use or development will be approved, as each application must be assessed on its merits based on the existing features of the subject land as well as the surrounding environment.

Loss of privacy

Although not applicable to the proposed development, the child centre building has been designed to ensure compliance with the applicable objectives and standards within Clause 55.04 (ResCode) relating to Amenity Impacts.  This includes overshadowing, overlooking and noise impacts. The proposed building and outdoor play areas have been designed to prevent overlooking to neighbouring properties through high fences and acoustic fences. The child care centre is generally of a residential scale and impacts on the privacy of surrounding properties are likely to be minimal. 

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 has been assessed against the Whittlesea Planning Scheme and in particular the provisions of the zoning of the site and Clause 22.05 Child Care Centre Policy.  The proposal demonstrates a satisfactory level of compliance subject to minor modifications as outlined.  It is considered that the proposal will not have a detrimental impact on the character of the neighbourhood nor on existing surrounding residential properties and accordingly approval of the application is recommended. 

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to approve Planning Application No. 716166 and issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for use and development of a child care centre and display of advertising signage at No. 1 Black Flat Road, Whittlesea in accordance with the endorsed plans and subject to the following conditions:

CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF WORKS

 

1.       Before the development and 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 June 2017 and prepared by Centrum Architects but modified to show:

 

a)      Notation that all external lighting onsite must be baffled to ensure no light         spills onto adjoinging sites, protecting the amenity of the neighbouring sites

b)      Amendments as recommended in the approved Sustainable Design Assessment required as per Condition No. 3. 

 

2.       Before development hereby permitted starts, a Lighting, Signage and Line Marking Plan showing all external lighting, road markings and signs must be submitted to the Responsible Authority for approval.  The use and installation of signs and line marking must be in accordance with all relevant standards, including Council Standard Drawings, VicRoads, Australian Standards and AustRoads. 

 

3.       Before the development hereby permitted starts, a Sustainability Design Assessment must be prepared by a suitably qualified expert to the satisfaction of the responsible Authority and submitted to the Responsible Authority for approval. The report must consider the following design criteria:

 

a)      Indoor environment quality

b)      Energy efficiency

c)      Water resources

d)      Stormwater management

e)      Building materials

f)       Transport

g)      Waste Management

h)      Urban Ecology

i)       Innovation

j)       On-going building and site management.

 

4.       Before the development hereby permitted starts (including any demolition, excavations, tree removal, delivery of building/construction materials and/or temporary buildings), the trees marked on the endorsed plans as being retained (including those within the adjoining road reserve or tree reserve) must have a Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) defined on a plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Unless works have already been shown on endorsed plans within the periphery, the zone for each tree shall be marked to extend to at least 1 metre from the drip line of each tree. If works are shown on the endorsed plan within the periphery, then the tree protection zone must be taken in to only the minimum amount necessary to allow the works to be completed. All tree protection fencing required by this permit must be erected in accordance with the approved TPZ.

 

5.       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.

 

6.       Before the development hereby permitted starts, including demolition and excavation, a Construction Management Plan must be submitted to and endorsed by the Responsible Authority. No works are permitted to occur until the Plan has been endorsed by the Responsible Authority. Once endorsed, the construction management plan will form part of the permit and must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The plan must be prepared in accordance with Council’s Construction Management Plan template and provide details of the following:

 

a)      Hours for construction activity in accordance with any other condition of this Permit;

b)      Measures to control noise, dust, water and sediment laden runoff;

c)      Measures relating to removal of hazardous or dangerous material from the site, where applicable.

d)      A plan showing the location of parking areas for construction and sub- contractors’ vehicles on and surrounding the site, to ensure that vehicles associated with construction activity cause minimum disruption to surrounding premises. Any basement car park on the land must be made available for use by sub-constructors / tradespersons upon completion of such areas, without delay;

e)      A Traffic Management Plan showing truck routes to and from the site;

f)       Swept path analysis demonstrating the ability for trucks to enter and exit the site in a safe manner for the largest anticipated truck associated with the construction;

g)      A plan showing the location and design of a vehicle wash-down bay for construction vehicles on the site;

h)      Measures to ensure that sub-contractors / tradespersons operating on the site are aware of the contents of the Construction Management Plan;

i)       Contact details of key construction site staff;

j)       A site plan showing the location of any site sheds, on-site amenities, building waste storage and the like, noting that Council does  not support site sheds on Council road reserves; and

k)      Any other relevant matters, including the requirements of VicRoads.

 

LAYOUT NOT ALTERED

 

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

 

CONDITIONS TO BE MET DURING CONSTRUCTION

 

8.       Before the development hereby permitted starts (including any            demolition, excavations, tree removal, delivery of building/construction materials and/or temporary buildings), tree protection zone fencing must be     constructed to the following requirements:

 

a)      Ring lock wire mesh approximately 1.8 metres high

b)      Main posts 100mm treated pine (TP)

c)      Intermediate posts steel star pickets (SP)

d)      The corner posts are to be TP with TP stays

e)      Every third post is to be TP

f)       SP to be placed intermediately between the TP posts at 3 metre intervals

g)      The ring lock mesh to encircle the structure and be firmly secured at each post

h)      Posts must be sunk into the ground by 450mm (there is to be no concrete to secure posts as this will affect p.H. levels).

 

9.        Before development hereby permitted starts (including any demolition, excavations, tree removal, delivery of building/construction materials and/or temporary buildings), the tree protection fencing must be erected to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority in accordance with the approved tree protection zone(s). The fencing must be erected to form a visual and physical barrier, be a minimum height of 1.5 metres above ground level, and include signage clearly marked Tree Protection Zone – No Entry” on all sides.

 

10.      The tree protection zone fencing must not be removed or relocated at any time during construction without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

 

11.      The storing or disposing of chemicals or toxic materials must not be undertaken within 10 metres of any tree protection zone. Where the slope of the land suggests these materials may drain towards a tree protection zone, the storing or disposing of these materials is strictly forbidden.

 

12.      The following actions must not be undertaken in any tree protection zone as identified on the endorsed plan, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority:

 

a)      Storage of materials or equipment;

b)      Attachment of materials to trees (including temporary service wires, nails, screws or any other fixing device);

c)      Open cut trenching or excavation works (whether or not for laying of services);

d)      Changes to the soil grade level (including filling);

e)      Parking of vehicles or machinery.

 

13.     The permit holder must 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 must be responsible for obtaining prior specific written approval for any works involving the alteration of Council or other Public Authority assets.

 

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.     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.

 

16.     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.

 

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

 

18.     During the construction phase, 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.

 

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

 

20.     Discharge of stormwater from the land will be required by means of an underground pipe drainage system designed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and discharging to the legal point of discharge in a street or an underground pipe drain to the requirements of the Responsible Authority. In this regard no water may be discharged from any pipe or paved area onto the surface of any adjacent land.

 

          Stormwater flows in excess of the approved capacity of the pipe drainage system must not be trapped by any construction but must be permitted to flow over the finished surface of the site to the street or drainage easement.

 

CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO THE USE COMMENCING

 

21.     Before occupation of any building approved under this permit, a report from the author of the Sustainable Design Assessment, approved pursuant to this permit, or similarly qualified person or company, must be submitted to the responsible authority. The report must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and must confirm that all measures specified in the Sustainability Design Assessment have been implemented in accordance with the approved documentation.

 

22.     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.

 

23.     Prior to the occupation of the child care centre the following works must be undertaken to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority:

 

a)      Landscaping works shown on the endorsed plan must be completed and then maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

b)      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.

c)      Construction and connection of all internal drainage including the drainage between the subject site and the Council nominated point of discharge.

 

24.     Unless with the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority, before the occupation of the development and/or use hereby permitted commences and/or within 6 months and/or 12 months of the completion of the development, the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out, completed and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

 

USE CONDITIONS

 

25.     Unless with the prior written consent from the Responsible Authority, the child care centre must only operate from 6:30am to 7.00pm, Monday to Friday.

 

26.     No more than 112 children must be accommodated within the child care centre at any one given time to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 

 

27.     A minimum of 24 car spaces must be provided on the land for the child care centre to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

 

28.     A minimum of one car space(s) must be provided for the exclusive use of disabled persons and be designed in accordance with AS 2890.6 2009. The car space(s) must be provided as close as practicable to (a) suitable entrance(s) of the building and must be clearly marked with a sign to indicate that the space(s) must only be utilised by disabled persons.

 

29.     Vehicles under the control of the operator of the use or the operator’s staff must not be parked on nearby roads.

 

30.     Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, the landscaping areas shown on the endorsed plans must be used for landscaping and no other purpose and any landscaping must be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.

 

31.     Outdoor lighting must be designed, baffled and located to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority to prevent any adverse effect to adjoining land.

 

32.     Surveillance cameras are to be located to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and are not to be directed onto any adjoining residential property.

 

33.     No air conditioning equipment, plant or the like may be installed on the roof of the building such that it would visible to the public.

 

34.     Air conditioning and other plant and equipment installed on the subject building must be positioned and baffled so that noise disturbance is minimised, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

 

35.     All security alarms or similar devices installed on the land must be of a silent type to minimise the impact on the amenity of the area.

 

36.     No external sound amplification equipment or loud speakers are to be used for the purpose of announcement, broadcast, playing of music or similar purpose, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

 

37.     The site must at all times be kept in a neat and tidy condition to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Any litter must be immediately removed from the site and surrounding area at the direction of the Responsible Authority.

 

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

 

39.     Collection of waste (including recyclables) must be conducted within the site and must not cause any unreasonable disturbance to nearby residential properties and may only take place during the following times:

 

·        Monday to Friday:                                 7:00am to 7:00pm

·        Saturday & Public Holidays:                9:00am to 7:00pm

·        Sunday:                                                   No collection allowed

 

To the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

 

 

40.     The permit holder must promptly remove or obliterate any graffiti on the subject site which is visible to the public and keep the site free from graffiti at all times to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

 

41.     The amenity of the area must not be detrimentally affected by the use or development through the:

 

a)      Transport of materials, goods or commodities to and from the land;

b)      Appearance of any building, works or materials;

c)      Emission of noise, artificial light, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, vapour, steam, soot, ash, dust, waste water, waste products, grit or oil;

d)      Presence of vermin.

 

42.     All sewage and sullage waters must be treated in accordance with the requirements of the Environment Protection Act 1970. All wastewater must be disposed of within the curtilage of the land and sufficient area shall be kept available for the purpose of wastewater disposal to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. No wastewater may drain directly or indirectly onto an adjoining property, street or any watercourse or drain to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

 

43.     Approval of wastewater disposal must be obtained from the Responsible Authority prior to a Building Permit being issued

 

44.     All effluent must be disposed of within the designated effluent envelope to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Under no circumstances is the effluent disposal envelope shown on the endorsed plan to be built over or covered with fill. This includes swimming pools, tennis courts, driveways, paths, outbuildings or any other development

 

SIGNAGE CONDITIONS

 

45.     The location and details of the signs, including supporting structures, as shown on the endorsed plans, must not be altered unless with the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

 

46.     The  signs  must  not  contain  any  flashing  or  moving  light,  to  the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

 

47.     The signs must not be illuminated by external or internal light.

 

48.     The signs must be constructed and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

 

49.     No bunting, streamers, windvanes or the like may be displayed unless with the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

 

50.     The signage component of the permit expires 15 years from the date of issue.

 

EXPIRY CONDITION

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

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; or

c)      The use of the land for a child care centre has not commenced within four years of the date of this permit; or

d)      The use of the land is discontinued for a continuous period of two years.

           

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.

 

PERMIT NOTES

 

Health Department

 

The child care centre kitchen is required to be registered with Whittlesea City Council under the Food Act 1984.  Detailed plans and elevations of the kitchen/work areas must be submitted to Council’s Health Department for approval prior to any building or fit out works commencing, to ensure compliance with the required standards.

 

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.

 

Building Over Easements

 

Any building or works to occur within an easement must be carried out to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. In addition, the following will apply:

 

a)      Access to any drainage pit in the easement is to be maintained.

b)      Council reserves the right to excavate, lay, repair or replace pipes within the easement.

c)      Council is not liable for any damage from such works and that reinstatement shall be the owner's responsibility and at the owner's expense.

d)      Prior to a building approval being issued, any drain(s) existing in the easement are required to be shown on the plans, with a detailed sketch indicating any pier and beam footings required to span these public assets.

e)      Building approval must be obtained prior to the commencement of the works.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                      Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                  Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

6.1.5    25 Neilsen Crescent Bundoora - Construction of Six Dwellings and a Reduction of the Visitor Car Parking Requirement of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme

Attachments:                        1        Locality Maps

2        Development Plans   

Responsible Officer:           Director Partnerships & Engagement

Author:                                  Senior Planning Officer   

 

APPLICANT:                         Custom Design Paving Pty Ltd

COUNCIL POLICY:              22.11 - Development Contributions Plan Policy

ZONING:                               General Residential Zone

OVERLAYS:                         Development Contributions Plan Overlay – Schedule 3

REFERRALS:                       Nil

OBJECTIONS:                     Nine

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council resolve to refuse Planning Application No. 716774 and issue a Notice of Refusal, for the construction of six dwellings and a reduction of the visitor car parking requirement of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, at 25 Neilsen Crescent Bundoora. 

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    It is proposed to construct four double storey and two triple storey dwellings on the site.  The proposal also seeks a reduction of the one required on-site visitor car parking space.  The dwellings will be sited along the length of the site, with a shared accessway along the eastern side boundary.   

·    Notification of the application was undertaken and nine (9) objections have been received.  The main grounds of objection include; lack of on-site visitor car parking, lack of on-street car parking, the narrow nature of Neilsen Crescent to support additional traffic, insufficient turning areas on site to allow vehicles to enter and exit in a forwards direction, insufficient drainage infrastructure, overlooking, overshadowing, contrary to the existing neighbourhood character, overdevelopment, obscuring of city views and decreasing property values.

·    It is considered the proposal does not accord with the purposes and design standards of Clause 52.06 – Car Parking as well as several objectives and standards of Clause 55 – ResCode of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme and therefore should be refused.

 

Report

SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

The site is a residential property located on the southern side of Neilsen Crescent in Bundoora, directly north of Holt Park, Bundoora Park Public Golf Course and Bundoora Park Farm and Café (see Attachment 1).

The site contains a slightly curved 13.7m frontage to Neilsen Crescent, an average depth of 72.8m and a total site area of 1,309m².  The site contains a significant 15.4m fall from the north eastern boundary corner to the southern boundary corner.   

The site currently contains a single storey brick veneer dwelling with a pitched tiled roof.  Vehicle access to the dwelling is obtained from a single width crossover and accessway along the eastern side boundary.  The site does not contain any front fencing and landscaping is sparse, consisting of mainly lawn areas.    

The surrounding area is characterised by a combination of single and double storey dwellings, consistently finished in brick veneer with pitched tiled roofs.  Secondary additions and detached outbuildings are present along side and rear boundaries.  Front fences, if present, vary in overall height, transparency and construction materials.  Landscaping is present within front setbacks and more significant in rear secluded private open spaces, including established canopy trees.   

Directly to the north and east of the site are single dwelling developments, while to the west of the site is a two dwelling development.  As identified earlier, to the south of the site is Holt Park, Bundoora Park Public Golf Course and Bundoora Park Farm and Café.  

Medium density developments are located at 11 and 27 Neilsen Crescent, 104 Holt Parade, 20 and 22 Norris Crescent and 17 Glenn Crescent. 

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

·    Bus Route 902 – Chelsea to Airport West (300m north);

·    Norris Crescent Park (350m north); 

·    Norris Bank Primary School (400m north);

·    Northside Christian College (1.4m east);

·    Dalton Road shopping strip (1.8km west); and 

·    Keon Park train station (2.9km west).  

restrictions and easements

The site is formally described as Lot 32 on Plan of Subdivision No. 082028. 

The site is not covered by any Restrictive Covenants or Section 173 Agreements. 

A 2.4m wide drainage and sewerage easement traverses the centre of the site.   

Proposal

The application seeks approval for the construction of six dwellings and a reduction of the visitor car parking requirement of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme (see Attachment 2).  The existing dwelling and associated structures will be demolished. 

Further details of the proposal are outlined in the following table:-

 

Dwelling No.

Height / Scale

No. of Bedrooms

Setbacks

Secluded Private Open Space

Car Parking

Dwelling No. 1

Double Storey

3

7.9m front (north)

4.0m side (east)

3.2m side (west)

40m²

Double Garage

Dwelling No. 2

Double Storey

2

5.0m side (east)

2.5m side (west)

40m²

Single Garage

Dwelling No. 3

Double Storey

2

5.0m side (east)

3.2m side (west)

40m²

Single Garage

Dwelling No. 4

Double Storey

3

5.3m side (east)

1.2m side (west)

47m²

Single Garage and Open Car Space

Dwelling No. 5

Triple Storey

3

2.8m rear (south)

2.0m side (west)

61m²

Single Garage and Tandem Car Space

Dwelling No. 6

Triple Storey

3

0m rear (south)

1.2m side (east)

42m² 

Double Garage

Public Notification

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

1.       Lack of on-site visitor car parking;

2.       Lack of on-street car parking;

3.       The narrow nature of Neilsen Crescent to support additional traffic;

4.       Insufficient turning areas on site to allow vehicles to enter and exit in a forwards direction;

5.       Insufficient drainage infrastructure;

6.       Overlooking;

7.       Overshadowing;

8.       Contrary to the existing neighbourhood character;

9.       Overdevelopment;

10.     Obscuring of city views; and

11.     Decreasing property values.

A response to the grounds of objection will be provided later in this report. 

HOUSING DIVERSITY STRATEGY

The Housing Diversity Strategy (HDS) was introduced into the Whittlesea Planning Scheme (WPS) by 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 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 a reference document in the Planning Scheme.

The site is within a Suburban Residential change area, which recognises areas typically a fifteen minute plus walk to public transport and activity centres.  The preferred housing types are noted as detached dwellings, dual occupancies and duplexes.

The Suburban Residential change area has a number of Key Design Principles, including:-

·    Low building heights to reflect the existing suburban scale and character;

·    Front setback to allow for significant landscaping and large canopy trees to create a sense of openness to the street;

·    Increased side and rear setbacks to provide for building separation and landscaping;

·    Standard site coverage to facilitate landscaping opportunities;

·    An increased area of private open space to allow for significant landscaping;

·    Large canopy tree in the front setback; and

·    Extra-large canopy tree in the rear setback. 

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; and

·    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

x

x

The existing character of the area is dominated by dwellings, finished in brick veneer with pitched tiled roofs.  Additional dwelling detailing, including porch, window and first floor materials vary, with no consistent character.  The presentation of dwellings onto the public realm differs from the north side of the street to the south side of the street due to the significant slope within the area.  Dwellings on the north side of Neilsen Crescent present as almost double storey due to the protruding nature of the associated finished floor levels.  On the south side of the street, the dwellings at 25 to 35 Neilsen Crescent, which are characterised by a similar slope, maintain visible ground floor windows.  

Medium density developments in the immediate area, excluding the Norris Crescent cluster, are characterised by detached or semi-detached dwellings, with consistent breaks in the built form occupied by landscaping.  A combination of single and double storey dwellings are present in the immediate vicinity, however the developments at 11 and 27 Neilsen Crescent are single storey. 

Elements of the proposal are at odds with the existing and preferred neighbourhood character for the area.

The double and triple storey dwellings are an acceptable response not only to the slope of the site, but also the character of the area.  The modern style of architecture, which incorporates the prevalent brick veneer, with modern cladding and sheet roofing is also acceptable.

While the slope of the site is a challenging site constraint, the proposal, unlike adjoining and abutting dwellings with similar obstacles, has a poor sense of address to the street.  The entry and ground floor windows of Dwelling No. 1 are obscured from the street, which not only is at odds with the existing neighbourhood character, but also results in low levels of compliance with passive surveillance and solar access objectives of ResCode.  A more acceptable design response should include a reduced street setback and higher finished floor levels, which would also improve passive surveillance of the street and solar access for the dwelling. 

Views from the public realm (Neilsen Crescent) are limited to Dwelling No. 1 due to the slope of the site.  Dwelling Nos. 1 to 3 and Dwelling Nos. 4 to 6 are completely attached at the ground floor level.  The separation provided between the two modules contains an open car parking space for Dwelling No. 4 as well as storage sheds and rain water tanks.  First floor separation is provided between Dwelling No. 1 and Dwelling No. 2, Dwelling No. 3 and Dwelling No. 4, and between Dwelling No. 4 and Dwelling no. 5. 

The siting of the dwellings, particularly the continuous built form along the eastern and western ground floor elevations is at odds with other medium density developments along Neilsen Crescent, particularly when viewed from adjoining land to the east and west, noting the resident of 27 Neilsen Crescent to the west has objected to the current application. The siting hampers opportunities for meaningful building separation and landscaping, including the provision of extra-large canopy trees in accordance with the Key Design Principles contained in Council’s Housing diversity Strategy.

B2

Residential Policy

x

x

The site is located within a Suburban Residential change area.  The site is 300m from the nearest bus stop, which provides connections to Keon Park train station as well as Campbellfield and Greensborough Plaza Shopping Centres.  The only other services and infrastructure within a walkable catchment are a milk bar, Norris Crescent Park and Norris Bank Primary School.   

Based on the zoning of the land and the size of the site, semi attached medium density development (more than two dwellings on the land) is supported.  Furthermore, if the site was located within a walkable distance to a train station, which is given more weight within the Whittlesea Planning, and demonstrated a high level of compliance with the objectives and standards of ResCode, a semi attached, two and three bedroom, six dwelling development on the site may also be deemed as acceptable. 

The site however is not in proximity to a train station or activity centre and has a low level of compliance with the objectives and standards of ResCode.  As discussed, the ground floor built form is of a continuous nature.  For these reasons, it is considered such an intense development is unacceptable and does not accord with the overall intend of the Housing Diversity Strategy.  

B3

Dwelling Diversity

N/A

N/A

Only applicable in developments of ten or more dwellings. 

B4

Infrastructure

x

x

The application was referred to Council’s Engineers for assessment.  Council’s Engineers are satisfied that the additional stormwater generated by the development can be dealt with utilising existing infrastructure, however the shared accessway must be graded to the south west corner of the site to manage any overland flows, which has not been shown on the current development plans.

B5

Integration with the Street

x

x

Unlike 23 and 27 Neilsen Crescent, the entry and ground floor windows of Dwelling No. 1 do not integrate with the street.  Hard landscaping, in the form of a pedestrian path with an unspecified grade, will assist in way finding, while first floor windows provide limited passive surveillance.  Considering the existing dwelling is proposed to be demolished, the current proposal is an unacceptable design response. 

The shared accessway, which provides both vehicular and pedestrian access, contains ramp grades ranging from 1:15 to as steep as 1:4.  The Whittlesea Planning Scheme does not specify acceptable ramp grades for pedestrian access compared to vehicle access contained in Clause 52.06 – Car Parking. Part 2.5 – Safe Movement and Access of the Building Code of Australia seeks to provide people with safe access to and within a building.  Performance Requirement 2.5.1 – Stairways and Ramps states so that people can move safely to and within a building walking surfaces must have safe gradients.  Section 10.3 – Ramps of Australian Standard AS 1428.1-2009 – Design for Access and Mobility states the maximum gradient of a ramp exceeding 1.9m in length shall be 1:14.  The shared accessway to provide pedestrian access to Dwelling Nos 2 to 6 does not satisfy this requirements and falls well below the ramp grades prescribed.  The pedestrian link proposed is therefore unacceptable. 

B6

Street Setback

P

P

 

B7

Building Height

P

P

 

B8

Site Coverage

P

P

 

B9

Permeability

P

P

 

B10

Energy Efficiency

x

x

While Dwelling No. 1 contains north facing ground floor living rooms windows, the solar access these windows will receive is diminished by the slope of the land and the 2.3m retaining wall setback 5.3 metres from the subject windows. 

Dwelling Nos. 2, 3 and 5 contain no ground floor north facing windows due to the attached nature of the built form.  While this lack of ground floor solar access is complemented by first floor north facing living and balcony areas for Dwelling No. 5, the deficiency is exacerbated for Dwelling Nos. 2 and 3 with no first floor north facing windows. 

The energy efficiency of Dwelling No. 4 could be further improved with the provision of north facing windows for Bedroom Nos. 2 and 3 on the first floor. 

B11

Open Space

x

x

Dwelling Nos. 5 and 6 will back onto Holt Park. 1.7m high balconies and fixed obscure glazing will be used to address the overlooking and internal views requirements of ResCode. 

This design response is contrary to providing outlook for the dwellings and passive surveillance of Holt Park.  Fin screens and / or planter boxes should be used to maximise overlooking open space, while confining overlooking into secluded private open spaces both on the site and on adjoining land to the west. 

B12

Safety

x

x

The entry to Dwelling No. 1 is obscured and isolated from Neilsen Crescent and therefore unacceptable. 

B13

Landscaping

x

x

A concept Landscape plan was submitted as part of the planning permit application.

The existing landscape character of the neighbourhood can be summarised as basic landscaping within front setbacks and more significant plantings in rear secluded private open spaces, including established canopy trees.

The 1.0m wide landscape buffer along the eastern side boundary and the sectional narrow evergreen 5.0m high screen plantings are positive responses for a medium density development in this context. 

The width of the secluded private open spaces along the western side boundary of Dwelling Nos. 1 to 3 are minimal to satisfy other objectives and standards of ResCode, however insufficient to facilitate the provision of canopy trees to soften the continuous built form and accord with both the existing and preferred neighbourhood character.  This aspect is exacerbated along the western boundary of Dwelling No. 5, where a 2.0m setback has been provided to accommodate 5.0m high landscaping, not including any canopy trees, to soften a triple storey dwelling, with an overall height of over 10.0m.       

B14

Access

P

P

 

B15

Parking Location

x

x

The proposal seeks to reduce the on-site visitor car parking requirement and rely on on-street visitor car parking only. 

All visitors to the site will be required to traverse a significantly steep shared accessway, which is neither convenient nor acceptable.  

B17

Side and Rear Setbacks

P

P

 

B18

Walls on Boundaries

P

P

 

B19

Daylight to Existing Windows

P

P

 

B20

North-facing Windows

N/A

N/A

 

B21

Overshadowing Open Space

P

P

 

B22

Overlooking

x

x

Dwelling Nos. 5 and 6 will back onto Holt Park. 1.7m high balconies and fixed obscure glazing will be used to address the overlooking and internal views requirements of ResCode.  This design response reduces the internal amenity for these dwellings.  Fin screens and / or planter boxes should be used to maximise internal daylight and amenity, while confining overlooking into secluded private open spaces both on the site and on adjoining land to the west. 

B23

Internal Views

x

x

As addressed above. 

B24

Noise Impacts

P

P

The noise generated by the proposed development is considered acceptable for a residential zoned area. 

B25

Accessibility

x

x

Dwelling Nos. 2 and 3 can be easily modified for persons with limited mobility.  However, as identified earlier in this report, the slope of the site and consequently the grade of the shared accessway renders all six dwellings inconvenient to access for abled pedestrians (and extremely difficult for persons with limited mobility), on a daily basis, whether residents or visitors. 

B26

Dwelling Entry

x

x

The entry to Dwelling No. 1 is not visible from Neilsen Crescent or the internal accessway.  The entry to Dwelling No. 1 is entirely dependent on way finding measures such as a pedestrian path, which is unacceptable for a dwelling fronting Neilsen Crescent. 

B27

Daylight to New Windows

P

P

 

B28

Private Open Space

x

x

Each dwelling will be provided with 40.0m² of secluded private open space.

Dwelling No. 1 will contain 12.0m² of usable secluded private open space for active recreation.  The remainder of the private open space for this dwelling does not meet the minimum 3.0m width due to the external storage shed and retaining wall or is fragmented and not at a consistent grade with the primary secluded private open space.  The secluded private open space for Dwelling No. 1 is inadequate.   

Dwelling No. 2 will contain 20.9m² of usable secluded private open space for active recreation, with all site services, excluding the clothes line, confined to behind the associated garage.  The secluded private open space for Dwelling No. 2 is acceptable.

Dwelling No. 3 will contain 12.0m² of usable secluded private open space for active recreation.  The remainder of the secluded private open space for this dwelling is fragmented and not at a consistent grade with the primary secluded private open space connected to the living area.  The secluded private open space for Dwelling No. 3 is inadequate.  

Dwelling No. 4 will contain 31.4m² of usable secluded private open space for active recreation.  This design response is acceptable.

Dwelling Nos. 5 and 6 will contain over 18.0m² of usable balconies for active recreation as well as additional ground floor private open spaces.  These design responses are acceptable.   

B29

Solar Access to Open Space

x

x

A majority of the ground floor secluded private open space for Dwelling No. 6 will be overshadowed between 9:00am and 3:00pm.  The entire dwelling is reliant on the 9.0m² of north facing balcony for sunlight.  This is an unacceptable design response, which is symptomatic of an overdevelopment of the site.   

B30

Storage

x

x

All six dwellings will have 6.0m³ of external storage space. 

The external storage spaces for Dwelling Nos. 1 and 3 require goods to be moved up or down stairs to access the associated garage.  The external storage space for Dwelling No. 5 has no direct access to the associated garage or shared accessway.  These external storage spaces do not have convenient access and are therefore inadequate.  

The external storage spaces for Dwelling Nos. 5 and 6 are oddly shaped and will hamper the effective storage of goods.  These external storage spaces are also inadequate.    

B31

Design Detail

x

x

The siting of the dwellings, particularly the continuous built form along the eastern and western ground floor elevations is at odds with other medium density developments along Neilsen Crescent, particularly when viewed from adjoining land to the east and west, noting the resident of 27 Neilsen Crescent to the west has objected to the current application.  The siting hampers opportunities for meaningful building separation and landscaping, including the provision of extra-large canopy trees in accordance with the Key Design Principles contained in Council’s Housing diversity Strategy.

The first floor north-east and north-west apexes of Dwelling No. 1 and the first floor eastern elevation of Dwelling Nos. 2 and 3 present as top heavy, with minimal recession and landscaping to soften the built form.  This is an unacceptable design response. 

B32

Front Fences

N/A

N/A

 

B33

Common Property

P

P

 

B34

Site Services

x

x

A Waste Management Plan was submitted as part of the application, which proposes a private waste collection, for both garbage and recycling bins, from Neilsen Crescent.

Waste bins will be stored in the respective private open spaces of each dwelling and will be relocated to the Neilsen Crescent kerb for collection by residents.

The location of the waste bins for Dwelling No. 5 does not include a direct path to Neilsen Crescent.  Furthermore, all six dwellings will be required to relocate waste bins up and down a steep shared accessway. 

The waste collection measures proposed are impractical and therefore unacceptable. 

CAR PARKING 

Clause 52.06 – Car Parking 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

3

2

2

Yes

2

2

1

1

Yes

3

2

1

1

Yes

4

3

2

2

Yes

5

3

2

2

Yes

6

3

2

2

Yes

Visitor

N/A

1

0

No

The proposal seeks to reduce the one on-site visitor car parking space required.  A Traffic Impact Assessment Report was submitted as part of the application, which justified the waiver of the one visitor car parking space requirement. 

A waiver of the visitor car parking space requirement is considered inappropriate in this instance. 

The site is 2.9km from Keon Park train station.  The site is 300m from the nearest bus stop, which provides connections to Keon Park train station as well as Campbellfield and Greensborough Plaza Shopping Centres.  The only other services and infrastructure within a walkable catchment are a milk bar, Norris Crescent Park and Norris Bank Primary School.  Access to alternative transport modes to and from the land is limited and does not justify a reduction to the visitor car parking requirement.

While on street visitor car parking is available directly in front of the site, on street car parking is limited to the west of the site due to the curved nature of the Crescent and the unbroken dividing line. 

Finally, while vehicles can safely traverse the shared accessway, the grades provided are below standards for pedestrians, therefore limiting safe access for visitors to each dwelling. 

The proposal must also comply with the following Design Standards:-

 

Requirements

Compliance

Comment

Number of Car Parking Spaces Required Under Table 1

x

For the aforementioned reasons, including concerns raised by the community, a waiver of the visitor car parking requirement should not be supported.  A request for a waiver of the visitor car parking requirement is symptomatic of an overdevelopment of the site and may hamper the orderly and proper planning of the area.

Design Standard 1 – Accessways

x

A passing area at least 6.1m wide must be provided as the proposal contains ten car parking spaces and has a shared accessway in excess of 50.0m in length (67.0m).  

Design Standard 2 – Car Parking Spaces (dimensions)

P

 

Design Standard 3 – Gradients

x

The design of gradients must have regard to pedestrian and vehicular traffic volumes.  The gradients proposed are unsafe and unacceptable for pedestrian traffic. 

Design Standard 4 – Mechanical Parking

N/A

 

Design Standard 5 – Urban Design

P

 

Design Standard 6 – Safety

x

Pedestrian access to car parking areas from the street must be convenient.  The gradients proposed are considered inconvenient for both residents and visitors.    

Design Standard 7 – Landscaping

P

 

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.   Lack of on-site visitor car parking;

A waiver of the visitor car parking requirement should not be supported.  A request for a waiver of the visitor car parking requirement is symptomatic of an overdevelopment of the site and may hamper the orderly and proper planning of the area.

2.   Lack of on-street car parking;

While on street visitor car parking is available directly in front of the site, on street car parking is limited to the west of the site due to the curved nature of the Crescent and the unbroken dividing line.

3.   The narrow nature of Neilsen Crescent to support additional traffic;

The application was referred to Council’s Engineers who offered no objection to the additional traffic to utilise Neilsen Crescent. 

4.   Insufficient turning areas on site to allow vehicles to enter and exit in a forwards direction;

An assessment of the turning areas has been undertaken.  All vehicles are able to enter and exit the site in a forwards direction in accordance with Clause 52.06 – Car Parking of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme. 

5.   Insufficient drainage infrastructure;

The application was referred to Council Engineers who,  subject to conditions for further civil engineering plans, are satisfied with the current drainage infrastructure, in accordance with Standard B4 – Infrastructure of Clause 55 – ResCode of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme. 

 

6.   Overlooking;

The proposal includes measures to address overlooking in accordance with Standard B22 – Overlooking of Clause 55 – ResCode of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme. 

7.   Overshadowing;

The proposal will cast shadows onto the adjoining land, however the adjoining land to the east, south and west will still receive the minimum 40.0m² of secluded private open space free from shadows between 9:00am and 3:00pm. 

8.   Contrary to the existing neighbourhood character;

Elements of the proposal are contrary to the existing neighbourhood character, as detailed earlier in this report, which is symptomatic of an overdevelopment of the site. 

9.   Overdevelopment;

The high levels of non-compliance with Clause 55 – ResCode of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme indicates the proposal may be an overdevelopment of the site. 

10. Obscuring of city views; and

The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) have determined on many occasions that no one land holder is entitled to a view and this is not a relevant planning consideration. 

11. Decreasing property values.

VCAT has determined on many occasions that property values are 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 application has been assessed against the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, and in particular the objectives and standards of Clause 52.06 and Clause 55 and the State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks, including the Housing Diversity Strategy.  The proposal demonstrates an unsatisfactory level of compliance.  It is considered that the proposal is inappropriately designed, and will have a detrimental impact on the character of the neighbourhood and on existing surrounding residential properties.  Accordingly, refusal of the application is recommended.

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to refuse Planning Permit Application No. 716774, and issue a Notice of Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit, for the construction of six dwellings and a reduction of the visitor car parking requirement of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, at 25 Neilsen Crescent Bundoora, on the following grounds:-

1.         The proposed development does not achieve satisfactory compliance with the        following:-

a)      Clause 55.02-1 - Neighbourhood Character;

b)      Clause 55.02-2 - Residential Policy;

c)      Clause 55.02-4 – Infrastructure;

d)      Clause 55.02-5 – Integration with the Street;

e)      Clause 55.03-5 – Energy Efficiency;

f)       Clause 55.03-6 – Open Space;

g)      Clause 55.03-7 – Safety;

h)      Clause 55.03-8 – Landscaping;

i)       Clause 55.03-10 – Parking Location;

j)       Clause 55.04-6 – Overlooking;

k)      Clause 55.04-7 – Internal Views; 

l)       Clause 55.05-1 – Accessibility;

m)     Clause 55.05-2 – Dwelling Entry;

n)      Clause 55.05-4 - Private Open Space;

o)      Clause 55.05-5 – Solar Access to Open Space;

p)      Clause 55.05-6 – Storage;

q)      Clause 55.06-1 - Design Detail; and 

r)       Clause 55.06-4 - Site Services.   

 

2.       The proposal does not comply with Clause 52.06-5 – Number of Car Parking Spaces Required of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

3.       The proposal does not comply with Clause 52.06-9 – Design Standards for Car Parking of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme. 

4.       The proposal will result in an overdevelopment of the site and will have an adverse impact on neighbourhood character and onsite amenity.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                      Tuesday 7 August 2018

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                  Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

6.1.6    Amendment C209 Heritage Overlay - Panel Report and Adoption 

Responsible Officer:           Director Partnerships & Engagement

Author:                                  Strategic Policy Planner   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

1.        Adopt Amendment C209 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme in line with the Officer recommendations outlined in Table 1 of this report.

2.        Forward Amendment C209, together with Council’s response to the Panel’s recommendations and the Panel Report, to the Minister for Planning for approval.

3.        Note the position on the Mayfield Precinct, in particular, on maintaining the Heritage Overlay for the individual properties in the Mayfield Precinct, as exhibited in Amendment C209.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    The purpose of this report is to consider the Panel Report arising from the Hearing held in relation to Amendment C209 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

 

·    As exhibited, Amendment C209 proposed to apply the Heritage Overlay to six additional places of local heritage to apply the Heritage Overlay, one heritage precinct and to amend the heritage curtilage for two sites already covered by the Heritage Overlay.

 

·    The recommendations of the Panel generally align with Council’s formal position on the amendment adopted at the 6 February 2018 Council meeting, and does not recommend any substantive changes on Council officer/submitter negotiated outcomes.

 

·    This report proposes Council’s adoption of the amendment as per the Officer response to each of the Panel’s recommendations. Council’s position on the amendment, the Panel’s recommendations, and the Panel Report will then be forwarded to the Minister for Planning for ultimate determination.

 

·    In accordance with Section 26 1(b) of the Planning and Environment Act, the Panel Report must be made publically available 28 days from the date of receipt, being 25 June 2018. The Report was released to submitters on 23 July 2018.

 

·    In accordance with Section 30 1(a) of the Planning and Environment Act a Planning Scheme Amendment lapses if no decision is made two years after the date public notice was given of the Amendment (being September 2019).

 

Report

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to consider the Panel Report arising from the Panel Hearing held in relation to Amendment C209 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

BACKGROUND

Amendment C209 proposed to apply the Heritage Overlay (HO) to a number of significant heritage places.

 

As exhibited, the Amendment proposes to apply the HO to six additional places identified as local heritage significance, add one heritage precinct and to amend the heritage curtilage for two sites already covered by the HO.

 

Amendment C209 is consistent with Council’s on-going incremental identification, assessment and protection of significant heritage places. The sites proposed as part of this amendment were initially “flagged” as potentially warranting heritage protection and/or requiring further investigation on their heritage significance, through the advancement/refinement of strategic Development Plans, Precinct Structure plans and the development applications within the site and surrounds. Heritage Consultant, Ray Tonkin was commissioned in May 2017 to investigate the heritage significance of a number of these “flagged” sites and to ascertain any merit for their inclusion as part of the HO. The heritage citation reports for each of the proposed sites provide the strategic justification for application of the HO including the extent of heritage curtilage area that forms the basis of this Amendment.

Proposal

The sites proposed for heritage protection under Amendment C209 are:

 

New application of Heritage Overlay

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Amend the current Heritage Overlay Curtilage

·    10A Sir John Terrace (formally known as 65A Cravens Road) - Black Braes Farm (HO14: Dwelling and agricultural outbuilding).

·    1485 Plenty Road, Mernda - Preston Hall (HO68: Blue stone dwelling and surrounds).

 

New Application of Heritage Precinct

·    Mayfield Precinct - 1321, 1325 and 1345 Plenty Road, Mernda (These sites are individually covered by the HO).

 

Amendment Process and Consultation

Following Council consideration on 27 June 2017, Ministerial Authorisation was granted for the preparation and exhibition of Planning Scheme Amendment C209. The amendment was subsequently placed on exhibition for eight weeks between 7 September and 2 November 2017.

Notification packages were sent to all affected property owners and occupiers, relevant community groups, neighbouring Councils, State Government Departments, Statutory Authorities and Prescribed Ministers.

 

In addition notices were placed in the Whittlesea Leader and the Victorian Government Gazette on 7 September 2017.

 

Submissions Received

 

A total of seven submissions were received in response to the exhibition process.

 

As is common practice in Amendment processes, Council officers contacted all submitters with a view to discussing the detail of the submission and to ascertain whether there was any potential to resolve any issues raised. Four of the submissions were able to be resolved prior to the reporting of the exhibition outcomes at the 6 February 2018 Council Meeting.

 

The three remaining unresolved submissions included:

·    250 O’ Herns Road, Epping (application of an individual HO),(subject to a specific Council resolution);

·    260 Craigieburn Road, Wollert (application of an individual HO);

·    1325 Plenty Road Mernda (application of a Heritage Precinct).

 

On the basis of the three unresolved submissions, Council resolved at its Council Meeting of 6 February 2018, to request that the Minister for Planning convene an independent Planning Panel to assess and make recommendations on the unresolved submissions. The resolution also authorised Council Officers to continue to negotiate to resolve submissions prior to the Panel Hearing.

 

In relation to two specific sites Council also resolved to:

·    65A Cravens Road, Mernda – Black Braes Farm – HO14 (now known as 33 Farmstead Way) - remove the proposed curtilage reduction to HO14 from Amendment C209, thereby retaining the existing HO curtilage on this property, and notify the landowner to enable them to lodge a late submission. The landowner was notified and elected not to make a submission.

 

·    250 O’ Herns Road, Epping - provided in-principle support to the future relocation of the heritage significant dwelling. As well as request a Section 173 Agreement be entered into with, and at expense of, the developer to ensure the proposed relocation of the heritage building meets agreed outcomes with Council. If a mutually acceptable 173 agreement can be achieved the proponent would withdrawal the submission. If an agreement cannot be reached the submission will be referred to the Panel.

panel hearing 

In line with Council’s resolution above, the Minister for Planning appointed a Panel to consider unresolved submissions to Amendment C209. Prior to the Panel Hearing the remaining three submissions were subsequently withdrawn and written confirmation received to this end.

 

A Directions Hearing to deal with scheduling and administrative matters was held on 12 April 2018. At the Directions Hearing, the Panel member requested that Council provide clarification/information on the following:

 

·    A description for the physical extent of the Heritage Overlay where it does not align with lot boundaries, in order to provide greater clarity to the extent of the Heritage Overlay curtilage in the instances where it is shown within a larger property area.

·    Clarify the status and location of the heritage citations (which outline sites heritage significance) in the planning scheme and how they will be referred to in the planning permit application process.

 

The Panel Hearing was held on 7 May 2018. It is noted that none of the submitters wished to be heard and as such, were not present at the Panel Hearing, except for the legal representative for 250 O’Herns Road who was present at the hearing to provide background / information for the 173 agreement proposal.

 

Following the conclusion of the Hearing, the Panel member undertook site visits to each of the three sites that were the subject to unresolved submissions.

 

The Panel provided its formal recommendation on the amendment and submissions within a Panel Report received on 25 June 2018. All submitters were notified of the Panel Report which was publicly released on 23 July 2018.

PAnel Report summary

In summary the Panel Report concluded that all the places included in Amendment C209 are worthy of inclusion in the HO and meet the thresholds of local significance.

 

In relation to specific sites, the Panel supported Council’s recommendations as submitted at the hearing. Importantly, the Panel supported the negotiated agreements made between Council officers and submitters that resulted in minor changes to physical descriptions, proposed controls, and the extent of the HO curtilage on the property.

 

Table 1 below outlines Council position on each of properties included in Amendment C209, the Panel Report recommendation and Council final position.

 

Property Address / Proposal as part of Amendment C209

Council Position at Panel Hearing

Panel Report Recommendation

Agreed / Accepted in line with Council Recommendation

65A Cravens Road, Mernda ( now known as 10A Sir John Terrace) –  Black Braes Farm - H014

Amend the current HO curtilage.

Remove the proposed curtilage reduction to HO14 from Amendment C209.

As per Council recommendation, retain current curtilage area by removing HO14 curtilage reduction from Amendment C209. 

Accept Panel recommendation.

Mayfield Precinct

Apply a new precinct HO to three properties in addition to the current individual HO’s at properties :

·    1345 Plenty, Road Mernda – HO17, Presbyterian Church and stables.

·    1325 Plenty, Road, Mernda – HO18, State School  schoolmasters residence.

·    1321 Plenty Road, Mernda – HO85. The Poplars.

Application of a new Heritage Precinct to encompass the Mayfield Precinct, in addition to the existing individual HOs that already apply to each of the sites.

Supports the application of the Mayfield precinct as per Council recommendation.

Additional recommendation:

Amend Clause 22.04 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme to include under reference document “Mayfield Heritage Precinct Citation, Context Revised March 2012.

Accept Panel recommendation.

It is appropriate that a separate reference to the Mayfield Heritage precinct citation is included as part of Clause 22.04.

Note: The Panel Report incorrectly described C209 as applying the Heritage Precinct to replace the individual HOs. C209, as exhibited, retains the individual HOs

260 Craigieburn Road, Wollert  - Wattlepark (Drystone walls and surrounds)- HO190

New application of HO

Application of the HO to reflect the revised curtilage11 HO Map  reflecting the polygon shape.

At the Panel’s request, Officers also provided the following description for the physical extent of the Heritage Overlay, to be updated in HO Schedule 43.01:

“the heritage place is defined as all of the Dry Stone walls and land within 10 metres outside of the walls”.

Supports application of the HO as per Council recommendations for revised 11 HO Map and update to the HO schedule to describe the physical extent of HO.

Additional recommendation: to Update clause 43.01-3 HO Schedule Outbuildings/Fences column to  note “yes” to specifically reference dry stone walls only.

Accept Panel recommendation.

It is considered appropriate to update the HO schedule Outbuildings/Fences column to specify “dry stone walls only”. It will provide greater clarity of the specific significant historic elements in the farm complex that are to be protected.

250 O’Herns Road, Epping Myee (dwelling) – HO186

New application of HO

Reference Incorporated Plan Myee, 250 O’Herns Road, Epping, in line with the negotiated S.173 Agreement proposal.

At the Panel’s request, Officers also provided the following description for the physical extent of the Heritage Overlay, to be updated in HO Schedule 43.01:

Section of land defined by the southern, eastern and western property boundaries, set back a distance of 48 metres from the northern property boundary.”

Supports application of the HO as per Council recommendations including the incorporated plan detailing dwelling relocation and updates to HO schedule 43.01

Accept Panel recommendation.

300 Mc Donald’s Road, South Morang – Former Station Masters House - HO187.

New application of HO

Schedule 43.01 to Heritage Overlay amended to :

Update property reference address to 11 Old Plenty Road, South Morang to correct an administrative error.

To allow consideration of prohibited uses with a “Yes” placed in the ‘Prohibited Uses’ column.

Supports application of the HO and updates to HO Schedule 43.01, as per Council recommendations.

Accept Panel recommendation.

105W Hunters Road, Mernda – Sea View Park (stone cottage and surrounds)- HO188.

New application of HO

 

At the Panel’s request, Officers provided the following description for the physical extent of the Heritage Overlay, to be updated in HO Schedule 43.01:

“Section of land defined by the eastern boundary set back a distance of 18 metres from the western boundary, 679 metres from the northern boundary and 49 metres from the southern boundary to encompass the remnant stone cottage and surrounds"

Supports application of the HO as per Council recommendations and updates to HO Schedule 43.01.

Accept Panel recommendation.

1190 Donnybrook Road – St Martins) stone Cottage and surrounds)-  HO395.

New application of HO

 

At the Panel’s request, Officers also provided the following description for the physical extent of the Heritage Overlay, to be updated in HO Schedule 43.01:

 “Section of land defined by a distance of 100 metres starting from the northern property boundary (facing Donnybrook Road), with a depth of 286 metres and an approximate width of 115 metres to encompass the farm house and surrounds”

Supports application of the HO as per Council recommendations and updates to HO Schedule 43.01.

Accept Panel recommendation.

395 Epping Road, Wollert – Inverlochie (Stone Cottage and Surrounds) HO200

New application of HO

 

At the Panel’s request, Officers also provided the following description for the physical extent of the Heritage Overlay, to be updated in HO Schedule 43.01:

Section of land defined by the eastern property boundary (facing Epping Road), extending to Findon Creek to the west, setback 464 metres from the southern boundary (facing Craigieburn Road), 68 metres from the northern boundary to encompass stone cottage and surrounds."

Supports application of the HO as per Council recommendations and updates to HO Schedule 43.01.

 

Accept Panel recommendation.

Note: The Panel Report cites the wrong property description, although the intention is clear that the Panel supports and intended to cite the description recommended by Council Officers.

1485 Plenty Road, Mernda – Preston Hall (Blue Stone Cottage and Surrounds)- HO68,

Amend the current HO curtilage.

At the Panel’s request, Officers also provided the following description for the physical extent of the Heritage Overlay, to be updated in HO Schedule 43.01:

 “Section of land defined by the eastern boundary (facing Plenty Road), set back a distance of 84 metres from the northern property boundary, 107 metres from the southern property boundary and 15 metres from the western property boundary”.

Supports HO68 curtilage as per Council recommendations and updates to HO Schedule 43.01.

Accept Panel recommendation.

 

All properties included as part of Amendment C209.

 

At the Panel’s request, Officers provided the following recommendation regarding the status and location of the heritage citations in the planning scheme:

Update Clause 22.04 Heritage Conservation Policy to reference Amendment C209 heritage citation reports as: “The City of Whittlesea Additional citations 2018 reports”. 

Supports updates to Clause 22.04 Heritage Conservation Policy to list the C209 heritage citations as a reference document.

Accept Panel recommendation.

 

 

DISCUSSION

From a statutory perspective, Council is required to provide a formal position on each of the Panel’s recommendations, and the Amendment as a whole. This will be forwarded to the Minister for Planning for his ultimate decision. Whilst the Minister for Planning will seriously consider the recommendations of the Panel and Council in his decision-making, it is important to note that the Minister for Planning is not bound by these recommendations, and as such, can determine the amendment as he deems appropriate.

As highlighted in Table 1 above, all recommendations in the Panel Report align with Council’s formal position on the Amendment. The Panel Report also provides for two additional recommendations. These include updating the HO schedule to clarify the “dry stone walls” as a significant element at 260 Craigieburn Road, Wollert, and an update to Clause 22.04 Heritage Conservation Policy, to separately reference the Mayfield heritage precinct citation. Both these recommendations are considered appropriate and will provide greater clarity and guidance for the significant heritage features for these sites, and are therefore supported.

Through this Amendment process Council Officers adopted a facilitative approach and through discussions and negotiations with submitters, all seven submissions were withdrawn prior to the Panel Hearing.

 

It is noted that whilst the Panel did consider all submissions to the Amendment, the Panel did not recommend changes to any negotiated outcomes or recommendations agreed by Council or later negotiated by Council officers with the submitters, in line with the Council resolution.

Clarification of Panel Statements

In reviewing the Panel Report it is noted that the Report makes two statements that require further clarification on Council’s position in relation to the Mayfield Precinct, as follows:

 

·    The Panel finds that all of the places included in the Amendment are worthy as a heritage precinct and applying the Precinct approach, in place of the existing listing of three separate sites, will enable a more holistic design response to the place. (Executive Summary)

Council Position

 

Amendment C209 does not propose to remove the existing individual HOs for the three sites proposed within the Mayfield Precinct. The Amendment, as exhibited and outlined in Council’s submission to the Panel, proposed application of the Mayfield Precinct HO, in addition to retaining the current individual HO’s for the sites at 1345 Plenty, Road Mernda (HO18),1325 Plenty, Road, Mernda (HO16), and 1321 Plenty Road, Mernda (HO85). Further, this was not raised in the submission received from the landowner at 1325 Plenty, Road, Mernda.

 

·    Council submitted that the current Development Plan will need to be updated in the near future as it is tied too specifically to a future use of the land for a school which is compromising future development options. (3.3 Evidence and submissions (Page10))

Council Position

 

This statement refers to the Mayfield Development Plan (June 2013). Council Officers did discuss the specific nature of the Development Plan in relation to property at 1325 Plenty Road, at the hearing. However, it is important to note that Officers did not submit that Council would be initiating an update to the Mayfield Development Plan, nor was any timeframe discussed. Officers advised the Panel that should the landowner wish to undertake a use other than that identified in the current Development Plan, the landowner would need to prepare and submit a new Development Plan to Council for consideration, in accordance with statutory processes.

 

In addition to the above, there are a few other minor administrative errors. In particular the recommendation for the physical description of the extent of the HO for 395 Epping Road, Wollert (Inverlochie) inadvertently duplicated the description of a different site.  Notwithstanding this, it is clear in the Report that the Panel accepted and intended to cite the description provided by Council Officers at the Panel Hearing.

CRITICAL DATES

Minister for Planning prepared and adopted an amendment to apply the HO on an interim basis at 250 O’Herns Road, Epping. The Amendment was gazetted on 17 August 2017. The interim heritage control will expiry on 31 August 2018.

 

In accordance with Section 26 1(b) of the Planning and Environment Act, the Panel Report must be made publically available 28 days from the date of receipt being 25 June 2018. The Report was released to submitters on 23 July 2018.

 

In accordance with Section 30 1(a) of the Planning and Environment Act a Planning Scheme Amendment lapses if no decision is made two years after the date public notice was given of the Amendment (being September 2019).

referral

Internal consultation has been undertaken to advise and discuss sites extent of sites to include as part this Heritage Overlay Planning Scheme Amendment. Officers also consulted with DELWP throughout the Amendment process who did not raise any concerns with this Planning Scheme Amendment.

Policy strategy and legislation

·    Under the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the Planning Authority must give effect to the objectives of planning in Victoria, including: “to conserve and enhance those buildings, areas or other places which are of…historical or otherwise special cultural value” (section 4(b)).

·     Council must undertake local heritage studies to identify places of interest and appropriately apply the HO to places identified as having local (or higher) significance. The application of the HO is the only statutory mechanism for conserving locally significant heritage places.

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

·     Whittlesea Planning Scheme:

Clause 15.03-1 (Heritage conservation) compels Local Governments to “Identify, assess and document places of natural and cultural heritage as a basis for their inclusion in the planning scheme.”

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

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

·     The Green Wedge Management Plan 2011-2021 identified the following:

P26: Following the heritage study undertaken during 2009/10, implement and apply a Heritage Overlay to all significant places not protected. Any proposed amendment to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme will provide additional opportunity for public submission.

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

Amendment C209 is consistent in meeting the objectives in the Community Plan and the Council Plan, particularly Council Plan Goal 4.4 “Council will work towards strengthening and implementing planning tools to build connections”. This Amendment will achieve this by linking places and the community through the recognition, appreciation and protection of places identified as local heritage significance in the Municipality.

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

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

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

Conclusion

Amendment C209 supports Council’s commitment to protecting its local heritage through its ongoing implementation of sites identified as significant to the HO as well as its statutory obligation. The requirement for this amendment arises from Council’s responsibility as set out in the Planning and Environment Act1987.

This Amendment will apply the HO to six new places, one heritage precinct and modify the existing heritage curtilage of one site.

Following the public exhibition period, seven submissions were received to the Amendment. As a result of Council Officers active role in addressing the concerns of the submitters and identifying solutions which would not undermine the intent of the HO, four submissions were resolved prior to the Council meeting on 6 February, 2018. The remaining three submissions referred to Panel were also able to be resolved prior to the Panel Hearing, in line with the Council resolution.

 

The Panel Report findings concluded that all the places included in Amendment C209 are worthy of inclusion in the HO and meet the thresholds of local significance. In addition the Panel recommendations align with Council’s position on the amendment, and do not recommend any substantive changes on Council officer/submitter negotiated outcomes.

s

It is recommended that Council resolve to adopt Amendment C209 in line with the officer recommendations contained in Table 1, of this report and forward the amendment and Panel report to the Minister for Planning for his determination.

 

Further, it is recommended that Council’s position on the Mayfield Precinct, in particular, on maintaining the Heritage Overlay for the individual properties, as exhibited in Amendment C209, is formally noted.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

 

1.       Adopt Amendment C209 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme in line with the Officer recommendations outlined in Table 1 of this report;

 

2.       Forward Amendment C209, together with Council’s response to the Panel’s recommendations and the Panel Report, to the Minister for Planning for approval;

 

3.       Note the position on the Mayfield Precinct, in particular, on maintaining the Heritage Overlay for the individual properties in the Mayfield Precinct, as exhibited in Amendment C209; and

 

4.       Advise submitters of the above.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                  Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

6.1.7    AMENDMENT C200 - HOUSING DIVERSITY AND DESIGN POLICY - EXHIBITION OUTCOMES

Attachments:                        1        Clause 22.16 Housing Diversity and Design Policy

2        Clause 32.07 Schedule 1

3        Clause 32.08 Schedule 4

4        Clause 32.08 Schedule 5   

Responsible Officer:           Director Partnerships & Engagement

Author:                                  Senior Strategic Policy Planner   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

1.       Request the Minister for Planning appoint an independent Planning Panel to consider the unresolved submission to the Amendment.

2.       Refer the unresolved submission to the Panel.

3.       Submit to the Panel at the first available opportunity that the unresolved submission is directed to matters which are not within the scope of the Amendment and should therefore not be considered as relevant by the Panel.

4.       Endorse the exhibition version of Amendment C200 as contained in Attachments 1 to 4 of this report, as Council’s position to the Panel.

5.       Advise the submitter of the resolutions above.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·        Amendment C200 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme introduces:

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

Ø Preferred character objectives and revised residential zone provisions to address the quality of residential development.

·    Following public exhibition of the amendment, one submission was received. The submission relates to issues that are beyond the scope of the Amendment.

·    Notwithstanding, under the relevant provisions of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, Council must refer the outstanding submissions to an independent Planning Panel.

·    Given there were no submissions that addressed the content of the amendment, it is recommended that Council endorse the amendment, as exhibited, as Council’s position to the Panel.

In line with statutory requirements, Council must make a decision within 60 business days of the closing date of submissions, being 21 September 2018.

Report

BACKGROUND

Amendment C200 represents the second stage of implementation of Whittlesea City Council’s Housing Diversity Strategy 2013-2033 (HDS) in the Whittlesea Planning Scheme. The preparation of a planning scheme amendment to implement the HDS is a 2017/18 initiative of the Council Plan – Shaping our Future 2017-2021.

City of Whittlesea’s HDS applies to the established suburbs of the municipality. It was adopted in December 2013 following extensive community consultation and seeks to:

·        Guide the highest levels of housing change to areas that are well serviced by public transport, services and employment;

·        Increase the diversity of housing stock to better respond to the community’s changing housing needs; and

·        Establish a preferred neighbourhood character to maintain and improve the liveability of our suburbs.

Stage 1 of the HDS implementation (Amendment C181) introduced the suite of new residential zones and was approved in October 2015.

Stage 2 has focussed on identifying the appropriate statutory tools to achieve the strategic objectives above, and on the subsequent preparation of Amendment C200 which introduces:

 

·        A new local planning policy (Housing Diversity and Design) to set out Council’s expectations for the quality, diversity and location of multi-dwelling housing development; and

·        Residential zone schedules that include preferred character objectives for the respective Housing Change Areas and that supplement the zone provisions to address the quality of residential development.

During the Stage 2 investigation, Councillor Forums to help inform the policy direction were held in May and October 2017, and in February 2018. Memos to Councillors summarising the central themes arising from the Forums were provided in June and October, 2017.

The expected development outcomes of the Amendment would include:

·    A clearer transition in housing typologies from areas where the highest level of housing change would be expected to areas of lowest level of change, as identified in the Housing Diversity Strategy 2013-2033;

·    Canopy trees would be provided in front and rear setbacks of new development in areas zoned General Residential Zone; and

·    An increase in the minimum dimensions for secluded private open space would improve landscaping opportunities and functionality for future residents.

AMENDMENT AND STATUTORY EXHIBITION OUTCOMES

Council resolved on 3 April 2018 to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit Amendment C200. Ministerial authorisation was granted, and the Amendment was placed on public exhibition for four weeks between 31 May 2018 and 2 July 2018. Notification packages were sent to:

·        Prescribed Ministers;

·        Submitters to Amendment C181, which was the Stage 1 implementation of the Housing Diversity Strategy (136 individuals/organisations); and

·        External stakeholder lists from previous community consultations for the Housing Diversity Strategy (94 individuals/organisations).

Notices were placed in the Victorian Government Gazette and the Whittlesea Leader. Information about the amendment was also uploaded to Council’s website.

Submissions as a result of statutory exhibition

Following the exhibition process, one submission relating to a common interest in specific land in Shire of Nillumbik was received, having been granted an extension of time to submit. The submission raised the following issues:

1.       Concern that the current zoning of specific land parcels at Diamond Creek and Yarrambat (in Nillumbik Shire) is rural, and requesting that it be changed to General Residential Zone; and

2.       An historic water infrastructure contribution said to have been paid by the landowners/submitters, which they consider is wrongfully benefitting urban development elsewhere.

The submissions are considered to be beyond the scope of Amendment C200 for the following reasons:

·        Amendment C200 does not make any changes to the zoning of land and, in particular, does not apply to land in the Shire of Nillumbik. The scope of the amendment is confined to policy and provision changes relating to assessment of residential development in the established suburbs of City of Whittlesea, including Bundoora, Thomastown, Lalor, Mill Park, and parts of Epping and South Morang.

·        It is beyond the power of City of Whittlesea, as the planning authority for this Amendment, to rezone land parcels in Shire of Nillumbik.

·        Amendment C200 does not relate to water infrastructure contributions.

The submitter has advised that she has raised these same issues in submissions to previous City of Whittlesea Amendments C26, C30, C45, C181 and C182. The earliest of these amendments (C26, C30 and C45) were in the year 2003, and the latest (C181) was in the year 2014.

Discussion

The submitter has raised issues concerning the zoning of her land in Shire of Nillumbik as part of many Amendment processes over a long period of time. The submitter is seeking to again ventilate these issues as part of this amendment process. As noted above, the Amendment has no relationship to the issues of concern to the submitter.

Council does not have the ability to ignore the submission on the grounds of its relevance to the Amendment. Pursuant to Section 23(1)(b) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987,  Council must refer the submission received to an independent Planning Panel.

However, there is significant time and cost involved in undertaking a Planning Panel hearing for a submission that focusses on issues that are of no relevance to the Amendment. It is therefore recommended that Council resolve that at the customary Directions Hearing for the Planning Panel, the Panel be requested to deal with the submission in a summary manner by ruling that it is not relevant to the subject matter of the Amendment. If the Panel accepts this recommendation, then there will be no need for a Panel Hearing.

Given there were no other submissions that directly address the content of the Amendment, it is recommended that Council endorse Amendment C200, as exhibited (refer Attachments 1-4), for the purpose of any Panel.

CRITICAL DATES

Amendment C200 received authorisation from the Minister for Planning on 7 May 2018 and was subsequently exhibited from 31 May 2018 to 2 July 2018.

In accordance with Ministerial Direction No. 15: The Planning Scheme Amendment Process, Council must make a decision within 60 days of the closing date of submissions, being 21 September 2018.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial implications for Council in relation to the amendment other than the administrative costs of the Panel, and legal fees, which are already factored into department budgets. Panel costs would be approximately $4,000 for a typical one day hearing.

Policy strategy and legislation

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.

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.

Local Planning Policy Framework (including the 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 directly addresses 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 promotes 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

Amendment C200 represents the second stage of implementation of Whittlesea City Council’s Housing Diversity Strategy 2013-2033 (HDS) in the Whittlesea Planning Scheme. Amendment C200 seeks to introduce a local planning policy to set out Council’s expectations for the quality, diversity and location of housing. The Amendment also revises residential zone schedules to include preferred character objectives and zone provisions that address the quality of residential development.

One submission relating to a common interest in land in the Shire of Nillumbik was received following exhibition of the Amendment. This submission is outside the scope of the Amendment and cannot be resolved. However, Council has no option within provisions of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, other than to refer the submissions to an independent Planning Panel. It is recommended that the Panel be requested to deal with the submission in a summary manner at the Directions Hearing by ruling that it is not relevant to the subject matter of the amendment. It is recommended that the submitter be advised of Council’s intention so that she can be prepared to respond to the proposed course of conduct. Ultimately, however, whether a full Panel Hearing will be required will be a matter for the Panel to determine.

Given there have been no submissions that are relevant to the Amendment, it is recommended that Council endorse the Amendment as exhibited (refer Attachments 1-4) for the purposes of any Panel.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Request the Minister for Planning appoint an independent Planning Panel to consider the unresolved submission to the Amendment.

2.       Refer the unresolved submission to the Panel.

3.       Submit to the Panel at the first available opportunity that the unresolved submission is directed to matters which are not within the scope of the Amendment and should therefore not be considered as relevant by the Panel.

4.       Endorse the exhibition version of Amendment C200 as contained in Attachments 1 to 4 of this report, as Council’s position to the Panel.

5.       Advise the submitter of the resolutions above.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                  Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

6.1.8    Amendment C216 - Advertising Signs Policy - Authorisation

Attachments:                        1        Clause 22.12 Advertising Signs Policy

2        Clause 21.08 - MSS Update

3        Clause 22.12 Advertising Signs Policy - Tracked Changes   

Responsible Officer:           Director Partnerships & Engagement

Author:                                  Senior Strategic Policy Planner   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning, to formally prepare and exhibit Amendment C216 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, which introduces the Advertising Signs Policy and updates the Municipal Strategic Statement as detailed in Attachments 1 and 2 of this report; and

2.       Authorise officers to make minor changes/updates to the proposed Advertising Signs policy in line with any State Government amendment that relates to advertising signs, in the event that the amendment is gazetted prior to exhibition of Amendment C216.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    Amendment C216 proposes to introduce a new Advertising Signs policy to replace Clause 22.12 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme and make a minor, related update to the Municipal Strategic Statement. The existing local policy, Advertising Signs Adjoining the Metropolitan Ring Road, does not offer a municipal-wide application, or respond to contemporary signage issues.

·    The new, more comprehensive, policy applies to various signage typologies across the whole municipality and responds to contemporary signage issues. It is noted that the policy exempts the commercial precincts within Epping Central (identified as 4A, 6 and 7) to avoid duplication with existing advertising sign planning controls that apply to these areas.

·    The policy only applies where a planning permit is already required by the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

·    The policy allows for a more considered approach in the assessment of applications, better outcomes, and more direction for applicants and the community. The policy fills a need as there is currently no policy direction available in the assessment of signage applications.

 

Report

Introduction

The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval to request authorisation from the Minister for Planning, to prepare and exhibit Amendment C216 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme. The amendment proposes to introduce an Advertising Signs local planning policy to Clause 22.12 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme (refer Attachment 1) and make minor changes to the Municipal Strategic Statement at Clause 21.08 - Built Environment and Heritage (refer Attachment 2).

The new policy will replace and supersede the existing local planning policy at Clause 22.12 - Advertising Signs Adjoining the Metropolitan Ring Road. A review of the existing policy was required as it did not offer a municipal-wide application or respond to contemporary signage designs, technologies and practices.

The policy addresses the following consistent concerns that arise with advertising signage:

·        Encourages the use of clear, well designed signs that complement the development upon which they are displayed;

·        Discourages visual clutter by taking existing signage into account when assessing new proposals, and encouraging business identification signs to be located on properties rather than promotion signs that relate to businesses or events elsewhere;

·        Encourages a precinct based approach to signage in residential and employment estates;

·        Encourages a design-led approach to the perimeter signs that are used to shroud construction works;

·        Restricts the use of bunting, banners, trailers, balloons and streamers as permanent signage, to motor vehicle sales premises;

·        Ensures portable signage is well secured and limited in number and size to avoid visual clutter;

·        Ensures that sponsorship signs proposed for community open space are compatible with the natural and built environment.

This report provides the background to the development of the policy, a summary of the policy content and application, and a discussion of key issues that have driven the policy changes.

Background

Unlike most local councils across Victoria, the City of Whittlesea does not have a metropolitan-wide policy that provides guidance on advertising signs when a planning permit is triggered. The current policy in the Whittlesea Planning Scheme only relates to signage abutting the metropolitan ring road and is therefore very limited.

A new policy will provide updated and clear guidance with respect to a range of signage typologies, while also addressing emerging changes in technology and advertising practices. As urbanisation continues to increase across the City of Whittlesea, a clear and all-encompassing signage policy is required to provide guidance to members of the community, business owners and Council staff.

To support the development of a new draft policy, officers undertook a gap analysis and policy case studies from other local governments in metropolitan Melbourne. Several internal departments were also consulted to identify the issues and inform the development of the policy.

 

State planning provisions relating to advertising signs are found in Clause 52.05 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme. The State planning provisions (Clauses 52.05-7 to 52.05-10) set out the types of signs that are prohibited or require a planning permit based on the zoning of the land where they are to be located. The provisions also include restrictions on the number and size of certain types of signs, such as business identification signs. The State planning provisions cannot be varied by the local policy.

The Victorian State Government recently gazetted Amendment VC144 that made the following changes to the Victoria Planning Provisions in relation to advertising signs:

·        Amending Clause 52.05 (Advertising signs) to:

Ø  Allow ‘electronic signs’ in Category 3 (high amenity areas), with a condition that the advertisement area must not exceed three square metres. Electronic signs were previously prohibited in these areas. However, businesses are increasingly using electronic signs in place of traditional signs. Electronic technology enables the content of signs to be updated quickly and remotely and can also reduce occupational health and safety concerns associated with manual sign changes.

Ø  Increase the permitted maximum advertisement area of a ‘promotion sign’ in Category 3 to three square metres (whereas the limit was previously two square metres). The two square metre limit precluded the larger promotion signs (up to three square metres) which are typically displayed on public transport infrastructure (such as shelters at tram stops). Increasing the maximum permitted size of a promotion sign by one square metre will, subject to the grant of a permit, enable these larger promotion signs to also be displayed on public transport infrastructure in Category 3 areas.

·        Amending Clause 52.05 and Clause 73 (Outdoor Advertising Terms) to replace the term ‘home occupation’ with ‘home based business.’ This ensures the definition is consistent with that provided at Clause 74 (Land Use Terms).

The above changes do not have any impact on the direction of the proposed new local policy beyond changes to signage definitions. The Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) have flagged further changes to the Victoria Planning Provisions in relation to Advertising Signs as part of the Smart Planning Program. This will be part of a future State amendment that is intended to be gazetted at some stage this year. The potential for these additional changes was flagged 7 months ago but there is still no definitive date available for when the State amendment will be gazetted. As such, officers have decided to progress the amendment. DELWP has confirmed that it is happy for the amendment to proceed. The content of the VC amendment may require minor changes to the form of the amendment, or any approved local policy. Therefore, it is recommended that Council authorise officers to make minor changes/updates to the proposed local policy in line with any VC amendment, if it is gazetted prior to exhibition of this amendment.

It is noted that some types of signs are exempt from a planning permit and will not be subject to this planning policy. Instead, they may be subject to a Local Laws permit or consent from Council for community event signage. Upon adoption of the local planning policy, information will be provided on Council’s website to explain the approval/consent pathways and exemptions that apply.

Proposal

Amendment C216 introduces a local planning policy (Attachment 1 - Clause 22.12 Advertising Signs) to provide guidance on advertising signs when a planning permit is triggered. The policy will only apply in instances when a planning permit application is already required by the planning scheme.

It should be noted that there are already planning controls in place for outdoor advertising signs within Epping Central (Activity Centre Zone Schedule 1).

Commercial precincts within Epping Central (identified as 4A, 6 and 7) have therefore been exempted from the proposed new policy to avoid duplication in planning controls in these areas.

Specifically, the Amendment will:

·        Replace Clause 22.12: Advertising Signs Adjoining the Metropolitan Ring Road in the Local Planning Policy Framework of the City of Whittlesea Planning Scheme with a new Clause 22.12: Advertising Signs (refer Attachment 1); and

·        Update Clause 21.08: Built Environment and Heritage of the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) to ensure consistency with the content of the new local policy (refer Attachment 2).

Advertising plays an important role in business communication. The proposed policy recognises these factors while providing clear performance criteria for the location and design of various signage typologies. A key objective of the policy is to ensure that advertising signs enhance, rather than detract from, the visual amenity of the municipality.

The proposed policy contains objectives and specific policies related to the following signage categories and locations:

·    Business identification signs;

·    Promotion and major promotion signs;

·    Precinct and estate Signage;

·    Residential areas;

·    Shop fronts; and

·    Land adjoining metropolitan ring roads and freeways.

The policy addresses the placement and visual quality of the above signage types, and is generally consistent with signage planning policies adopted by other Councils. The policy has also been prepared in accordance with current DELWP guidance on local planning policies. Local planning policies cannot contain prescriptive elements and should instead provide broad objectives and policy direction.

The broader application of the new policy and the application of current practice in policy drafting has required a substantial re-write of the existing Clause 22.12. Attachment 3 contains a tracked changes version of the proposed policy.

The Land adjoining metropolitan ring roads and freeways section of the new policy incorporates some of the relevant guidance contained within the existing Clause 22.12 policy. However, this section of the new policy has expanded the existing content to include land adjoining all freeways (e.g. Hume Freeway and Craigieburn Bypass) within the municipality.

Portable and Temporary Signage

Portable (A-frame) and temporary community event signs are of particular interest to the community and represent a large proportion of signage enquires. A Councillor Forum presentation on the policy and these matters was held in November, 2017. It is important to note the following with respect to this type of signage:

Portable signs located on road reserves, footpaths or outside of property boundaries are not addressed by this planning policy as they are managed by the Local Laws Department. Pursuant to Clauses 12.1 (1) and (2) and 13.3 of the General Municipal Law, a person must not place a sign, or portable advertising sign, on a road, footway, Council land, or a public place without a Local Laws permit.

This local planning policy only applies to signage within lot boundaries or inside premises. The policy encourages portable signs when they meet the following criteria:

·        they are located on the premises where the advertised service is being provided;

·        they are minimal in size, and limited in numbers, to avoid visual clutter; and

·        they are secure or weighted at all times.

Some popular temporary signage types, such as Variable Message Signs (VMS), are illuminated, animated, and are often more than two square metres in size. As such, they can be potentially distracting for drivers, negatively impact amenity in residential or rural areas, and may be prohibited or require a planning permit under the State planning provisions. The decision guidelines for Clause 52.05 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme (Advertising Signs) address the impact of such signage on road safety and the amenity of the area. It is also noted that signage proposals that are within 60 metres of a freeway or arterial roads are subject to mandatory referral to VicRoads, meaning VicRoads has the option to refuse them.

The local policy will aid decision making by addressing such signage in the context of the location where it is proposed – such as real estate advertising in rural areas, and promotion signs in Council Reserves or adjacent to metropolitan ring roads and freeways.

In relation to temporary community event signs or other special event signs, these are generally exempt from a planning permit under requirements in the State Planning Policy Framework at Clause 52.05-4, as detailed below:

·        Exemptions from permit requirement under the State provisions (Clause 52.05-4):

o   Signs publicising a local community event not held for commercial purposes can be displayed on land, including land other than where the event will be held, for up to 14 days after the event is held or a 3 month period overall. Only one sign may be displayed on the land, and it must not be an animated or internally-illuminated sign;

o   Signs publicising a community event on the land on which it is displayed can be erected, provided there are no more than 8 signs in a calendar year, and the signs are displayed for no more than 28 days in a calendar year.

Updates to the Municipal Strategic Statement

A key objective of the MSS in the Whittlesea Planning Scheme places emphasis on image and amenity improvements in places of business, major gateways and main roads in urban areas to upgrade the image and appearance of the City of Whittlesea. The introduction of the new advertising signs planning policy supports the implementation of this objective.

In addition, the amendment will also make the following minor updates to the MSS:

·        Amend Strategy 2.5 listed under Clause 21.08-1 (Urban Design), to broaden consideration of urban design to all signage in the municipality rather than just the current limitation for signage adjacent to major gateways and transport corridors (refer Attachment 2).

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 September 2018 for a four week period.

Consultation

Extensive consultation was undertaken to inform the policy direction with various internal departments, including officers from Economic Development, Local Laws, Development Assessment, Parks and Open Space, and Leisure and Community Facilities.

 

A Councillor Forum was also held in November 2017 to discuss the key elements of the proposed policy. Noting that signage is dealt with by various Council departments, a recommendation from the Forum was that the various assessment pathways should be provided on Council’s website. This will be prepared once the local policy is adopted.

Following the Councillor Forum, the Director, Planning and Major Projects advised Councillors by email on 12 January 2018 that the project had been placed on hold at the request of DELWP until a State amendment on advertising signs was gazetted. DELWP have since advised that, while this amendment is still pending, Council may proceed with the local policy.

DELWP have been consulted on the content of the policy, and have provided extensive advice on the drafting of the policy in line with Smart Planning.

A policy review and external consultation was also undertaken with various Metropolitan Councils to discuss their existing signage local policies, and to gain an understanding of current best practice.

As part of the four week statutory exhibition process, a notice will be placed in the Government Gazette and Leader newspaper and information about the amendment will be added to the DELWP and Council websites, to inform the community and provide opportunities to make a submission to the Amendment.

Policy strategy and legislation

The development of the policy is supported by the following clauses of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme:

Municipal Strategic Statement:

·        Clause 21.08 - Built Environment and Heritage: includes a strategy to “reduce the adverse impacts of visual clutter associated with signage on land or buildings which adjoin or have exposure to major gateways and important transport corridors”.

Local Planning Policy Framework:

·        Clause 22.12 - Advertising Signs Adjoining the Metropolitan Ring Road: provides guidance for pole mounted signs, sky signs and panel signs on building facades exposed to the alignment of the Metropolitan Ring Road. The policy also addresses associated issues such as visual clutter, intrusiveness to nearby residential areas as well as the degradation of the existing built form.

State Planning Policy Framework:

·    Particular Provisions - Clause 52.05 (Advertising Signs) sets out state-wide application requirements, advertising categories, referral, expiry, decision guidelines, exempted signs, existing signs and specific provisions affecting major promotion signs.

·    Clause 73: Outdoor Advertising Terms lists terms which may be used in the planning scheme in relation to outdoor advertising and their definitions.

·    VicSmart Planning Assessment Clause 93.09 (Advertising Sign) which sets out the information requirements and decision guidelines for State VicSmart advertising sign applications.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

Council Priority                    Planning and Infrastructure

Future Direction                   Places and spaces to connect people

Theme                                   Planning our space

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

The proposed policy will help Council manage the visual impact of new advertising signs across the municipality, provide policy guidance to inform decision-making in planning applications, and improve the amenity of the public realm where advertising signs interact with the built form and users of the area.

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

Amendment C216 proposes to introduce an Advertising Signs local planning policy at Clause 22.12 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, in addition to making a related minor change to the Municipal Strategic Statement at Clause 21.08 – Built Environment and Heritage. The Amendment replaces the existing local planning policy that relates only to advertising signage adjacent to the Metropolitan Ring Road.

The proposed Advertising Signs policy applies across the municipality and responds to contemporary signage designs, technologies and practices. A variety of signage typologies are included in the policy along with performance objectives that seek to increase legibility, reduce clutter, and ensure that advertising signs enhance the visual amenity of the municipality.

The policy has undergone an extensive process of consultation with internal stakeholders, Councillors and state government. The public exhibition of the draft policy will enable input from the community to be considered.

It is recommended that Council resolve to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit Amendment C216. In addition, it is recommended that Council authorise officers to make minor changes to the exhibited policy in the event that a pending State Government planning scheme amendment relating to advertising signs is gazetted prior to exhibition.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning, to formally prepare and exhibit Amendment C216 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, which introduces the Advertising Signs Policy and updates the Municipal Strategic Statement as detailed in Attachments 1 and 2 of this report; and

2.       Authorise officers to make minor changes/updates to the proposed Advertising Signs policy in line with any State Government amendment that relates to advertising signs, in the event that the amendment is gazetted prior to exhibition of Amendment C216.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

6.2       Community Services

6.2.1    Laurimar Community Centre Name Change  

Responsible Officer:           Director Community Services

Author:                                  Manager Leisure & Community Facilities   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

1.       Note that no conforming submissions were received during the submission period.

2.       Advise the Office of Geographic Names of the proposed name change of Laurimar Community Centre to ‘Brookwood Community Centre’.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    Council’s owned and operated Laurimar Community Centre is situated approximately 1km from Council’s Laurimar Community Activity Centre. The naming similarity and proximity between these two Council operated community centres causes significant confusion for residents and emergency services.

·    It is proposed to formally rename the Laurimar Community Centre to ‘Brookwood Community Centre’ as it is located on the corner of Brookwood Avenue and Hazelglen Drive, Doreen. 

·    A public consultation and submission process was undertaken in accordance with the Naming rules for places in Victoria.

·    No submissions adhering to the Naming Rules for places in Victoria (The Rules) minimum requirements were received.

 

 

Report

Introduction

This report seeks Council’s consideration and decision to advise the Office of Geographic Names of a proposed name change for the Laurimar Community Centre (LCC), located at 25 Hazelglen Drive Doreen. The centre is situated approximately 1km from Council’s Laurimar Community Activity Centre (LCAC), located at 110 Hazelglen Drive, Doreen. The naming similarity between these two Centres has historically and recently caused confusion for local residents and emergency services in locating either centre. It is proposed to formally name the Centre ‘Brookwood Community Centre’ as the centre is on the corner of Brookwood Avenue, Doreen.

Background

Originally utilised as a sales office for the Laurimar Estate, since 1 March 2010 the LCC has been managed by the City of Whittlesea as a bookable community space.

LCC is currently well utilised with over 30 regular users and many casual bookings, providing a valuable cost-effective facility for the residents of Doreen and the surrounding areas.

However, its proximity to the Laurimar Community Activity Centre has caused confusion to the centre hirers, particularly those that use the centre for casual sessions or events.  Accordingly, it is proposed to rename LCC to ‘Brookwood Community Centre’.

At its meeting of 1 May Council resolved to;

1.   Endorse the proposal to rename the centre located at 25 Hazelglen Drive Doreen, ‘Brookwood Community Centre’

2.   Invite written public submissions on the proposed renaming, in accordance with the Naming Rules for Places in Victoria

3.   Appoint an Advisory Committee of Council comprising Cr Sterjova, Cr Joseph and Cr Cox to hear and consider any written submissions

4.   Have the Advisory Committee report back to Council with recommendation/s on the proposal at the close of the submission period.

Throughout May and June 2018 local residents, centre users and the broader community were invited to complete a public submission regarding the proposed name change. This consultation period was open for more than the four weeks required by the Naming Rules for Places in Victoria (‘the Rules’). During the consultation period one submission was received, however, this submission failed to address any of the Office of Geographic Names 13 Principles and minimum requirements for consideration.

As the only submission failed to address any of the Office of Geographic Names 13 Principles the appointed Advisory Committee of Council has not required to meet and the named submission group was notified.  

Proposal

Following a public submission process this report seeks Council’s consideration to rename the Laurimar Community Centre to ‘Brookwood Community Centre’ and advise the Office of Geographic Names of the proposed name.

To allow residents, emergency services and other users to easily identify the Centre, formally renaming the Centre will see it included in electronic mapping systems and will aid in the formal identification and location of the Centre. Council has received support from a clear majority of current user groups to rename the centre to the ‘Brookwood Community Centre’.

Consultation

Throughout January to March 2018 Council Officers engaged a range of local user groups in discussion regarding a potential name change.

All users engaged agreed with the necessity to change the name and to avoid future confusion.  

Naming processes are regulated by the State Government’s Office of Rules for places in Victoria which set out the process for naming and renaming features, localities and roads.  Council is the naming authority on behalf of the State Government.

The Rules state that the proposed name must conform to 13 Principles.  Council is required to provide a detailed assessment against each Principle.  A preliminary assessment indicates that the proposed name generally conforms to the 13 Principles.

The Rules state that naming authorities must consult with the public on any naming proposal and must invite comments on the proposal from local residents, ratepayers and business in the immediate area. In this instance, the level of consultation was restricted to the immediate and extended community through Council’s website and letters to affected user groups. This consultation was undertaken during May to June 2018; via formal written correspondence, Council’s website, local advertising and Council’s Officers.    

Critical Dates

Following the Council Meeting, the Office of Geographic Names will be advised of the proposed name.

Financial Implications

The costs associated with the proposed name change can be covered within existing budget allocations.

Policy strategy and legislation

The naming process is governed by State Government Rules and there is a requirement for the proposed name to be assessed against specific criteria set out in the Rules.

Once Council has advised the Office of Geographic Names of the proposed name change, it will consider the proposal and advise Council of its decision.

 

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

It is recommended that Council advise the Office of Geographic Names of the proposed name change of Laurimar Community Centre to ‘Brookwood Community Centre’.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.   Note that no conforming submissions were received during the submission period.

2.   Advise the Office of Geographic Names of the proposed name change of Laurimar Community Centre to ‘Brookwood Community Centre’.

 

  


6.3       City Transport and Presentation

6.3.1    Management and Operation of Thomastown Recreation and Aquatic Centre, Mill Park Leisure Centre, and Whittlesea Swim Centre

Attachments:                        1        Confidential Report - Confidential

Confidential in accordance with Section 89(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1989 as it contains details relating to contractual matters.  

2        Attachment 1 - Contract Lifecycle

3        Attachment 2 - Financial Structure

4        Attachment 3 - Financial Performance - Confidential

Confidential in accordance with Section 89(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1989 as it contains details relating to contractual matters.    

Responsible Officer:           Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Director City Transport & Presentation   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

It is recommended that Council:

1.   Extend contract

a.   CT2014-160 Operation of Thomastown Recreation and Aquatic Centre for the period of 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2021 with Whittlesea YMCA and;

b.   CT111201A Operation of Mill Park Leisure for the period of 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2021 with Whittlesea YMCA and;

c.   CT111201B Operation of Whittlesea Swim Centre, for the period of 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2021, with Whittlesea YMCA.

2.   Provide Whittlesea YMCA, by agreement with Council officers, with authority to reduce the user fees by up to 20% from that set by the annual Council budget for:

a.   Thomastown Recreation and Aquatic Centre

b.   Mill Park Leisure

3.   Vary the guaranteed return model for contract CT2014-160 – Operation of Thomastown Recreation & Aquatic Centre from 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2021 with Whittlesea YMCA so that Council forgoes the guaranteed return and shares all profits and losses (60:40 in Councils favour).

4.   Vary the guaranteed return model for contract CT111201A – Operation of Mill Park Leisure from 1 July 2017 to 30 June 2021 with Whittlesea YMCA so that Council forgoes the guaranteed return and funds any operating losses.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    Contract terms expired on the 30 June 2018 for the operation of:

·    Mill Park Leisure (MPL),

·    Thomastown Recreation and Aquatic Centre (TRAC)

·    Whittlesea Swim Centre (WSC)

·    MPL closed on 30 June 2018 in preparation for a $25 million redevelopment that is expected to take approximately 20 months.

·    Extending MPL and TRAC contracts under one operator assists with the transition of members back to MPL when it reopens, and aligns the leisure centre services to enable reciprocal rights memberships across the group.

·    The contract extension positions Council to manage the three leisure centres under the one contract from 2021, with tender processes informed by patronage data gathered once MPL is reopened.

·    Current contracts for the Centres are structured around a Net Guaranteed Return to Council (for MPL and TRAC), and a Net Guaranteed Loss for WSC. All contracts have a profit share arrangement beyond a determined operating result threshold.

·    Current operating models of Net Guaranteed Return/Loss to Council stifle product innovation and stops flexibility to address competitive marketplace (pricing model remains unchanged for more than 10 years).

·    A shared risk and reward contract structure at TRAC and open book contract structure at MPL, with defined flexibility to restructure the user fees and product offerings, enables the operator to respond to market changes and incentivises the operator to develop a more innovative and competitive product. This contract structure is also more effective when there is uncertainty around patronage levels, which is the case for MPL once it reopens.

·    The MPL redevelopment requires a contract renegotiation for the 2017/18 financial year due to a decline in use leading up to the 30 June 2018 closure, in line with expectations.

 

Report

Background

The City of Whittlesea provides three Aquatic Centres to the community, located in Thomastown, Mill Park and Whittlesea. The Centres provide various health and wellbeing programs and facilities including learn to swim programs, casual swimming, fitness classes and gymnasium access.

The Aquatic Centres provide essential health and wellbeing services to the Whittlesea community that provide people with an escape from the pressures and tensions of daily life, lead to improved levels of physical and mental health, and build up strong social networks and relationships.

In 2017/18 Thomastown Recreation & Aquatic Centre (TRAC), Mill Park Leisure (MPL) and Whittlesea Swim Centre (WSC) attracted more than 900,000 visits, and provided services to more than 5300 members and 2800 learn to swim customers.

All three aquatic centres are operated on behalf of Council by YMCA Whittlesea (YMCA) and are currently subject to varying contract terms. Existing contract terms ended on the 30 June 2018.

·    TRAC has operated under a month to month arrangement since that date

·    MPL closed on 30 June 2018 to be redeveloped

·    WSC will remain closed until November (open seasonally between November and March).

These contracts vary with respect to the remaining number of extensions available (See Attachment 1 – Contract Lifecycle).

Contract Performance

TRAC

·    Membership numbers have reduced by 15.4% over the contract term (2015-18).

·    Learn to Swim enrolments reduced by 9.8%.

·    Revenue reduced by $693,423.

·    Profits reduced by $1,267,381.

·    Poor customer satisfaction ratings. Averaging a Net Promoter Score (NPS) of -9, with a target of +32.

MPL

·    Membership numbers increased by 22.9% over the contract term (2015-18).

·    Learn to Swim enrolments reduced by 13.4%.

·    Revenue increased by $1.486M.

·    Profits reduced by $505,332.

·    Poor customer satisfaction ratings. Averaging a NPS of +21.

WSC

·    Attendance increased by 2% over the contract term (2015-18).

·    Revenue increased by $18,686.

·    Profits reduced by $60,296.

·    Good customer satisfaction ratings. Averaging a NPS of +37.

A summary of the financial performance of the contract is provided in the confidential attachment.

Contract Structure

The Centres each comprise of an operating budget which is produced, funded and managed by the Centre’s operator from which either a Net Guaranteed Return is made to Council, in the case of MPL and TRAC, or a Net Guaranteed Loss at WSC. The operator receives a management fee for their service and a profit share (where profits extend beyond the guaranteed return/loss).

Mill Park Leisure

Currently YMCA has one further option of extension on the current agreement which must end no later than 30 June 2021.

The Centre will be a construction site for a period currently estimated to be 20 months, commencing July 2018 to March 2020.

The operator will need access prior to the opening (estimated 1 November 2019) to establish a management and sales operation to promote the centres reopening and attract members, together with staff familiarization in readiness for the Centre’s reopening.

MPL is expected to return a loss in its first two years of operation whilst it re-builds a client base and Council will be required to accommodate these losses.

Whittlesea Swim Centre

Currently YMCA has one further option of extension on the current agreement which must end no later than 30 June 2021.

The agreement is aligned to the MPL agreement and cannot exist in isolation.

Thomastown Recreation and Aquatic Centre - Period: 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2021

An option exists at Council’s discretion to extend the contract for any period or periods up to a combined maximum duration of 6 years (to 30 June 2024).

The current contract’s ‘Net Guaranteed Return’ model stifles product innovation in a competitive market place. Whilst the health and fitness industry evolves, TRAC is falling behind in multiple key areas. TRAC’s fees and charges model has remained unchanged for more than 10 years and now that the business is in decline, operators are unwilling to bear the risk of making an initial loss (given the guaranteed profit that is demanded by Council) in an effort to improve the long term success of the facility.

MPL Redevelopment Announcement

The contract was impacted due to the announcement of the redevelopment prior to the end of the contract term (30 June 2018).

YMCA based the guaranteed return on the premise that they had 12 months of trading in normal trading conditions in 2017/18. Council’s decision to redevelop the facility from the 1 July 2018 in either of the construction options put before Council (close all of Centre or part of Centre (all aquatics)) would impact the Centre’s income streams with users exiting from the Centre in varying degrees, thus affecting “normal trading conditions”. As such, it is appropriate for Council to vary the guaranteed return given it was agreed on the basis of operating MPL in normal trading conditions.

As a result of MPL being shut from July 1 2018, options have been put forward to MPL members to mitigate impacts of the closure.  Members and Learn to Swim participants had the option to transfer to TRAC during the construction phase of the MPL Redevelopment at a discounted rate. Members also had a choice to continue to pay their current fee and gain access to the YMCA’s new Plenty Valley (Westfield) Group Fitness Studio which allowed participants to continue to train locally. The migration of members from MPL to TRAC will have a positive financial impact on the TRAC operating budget (see confidential attachment).

VARIATIONS AND EXTENSIONS

MPL Extension

To ensure the most competitive tendering environment is realised following the MPL redevelopment it is recommended to extend the existing contract with the YMCA for three years to allow MPL to be operational for up to 16 months prior to a new contract commencing, enabling performance data to be collected to inform a tender in 2021.

To realise economies of scale and reciprocal patron arrangements across the three centres it is recommended to retender the operation of all three centres under a single contract from July 2021 (i.e. at the end of the proposed three year extension term).

WSC Extension

As the agreement is aligned to the MPL agreement and cannot exist in isolation, WSC contract should be extended for three years.

As the fee structure at WSC does not impact its competitiveness within the market the contract structure does not require modification.

TRAC Extension

The MPL redevelopment is expected to take approximately 20 months to complete. During this time, the centre will need to close (closed on June 30, 2018). This impacts our local community including the centre’s members and learn to swim participants.

Maintaining the YMCA as operators of TRAC establishes a single operator who can manage the shift of patrons at MPL across to TRAC and then from TRAC back to MPL once the centre reopens.

Contract MODIFICATIONS

TRAC

A shared risk and reward contract structure, with defined flexibility in user fees, enables the operator to respond to market changes and encourage a more innovative product offer, as a result of Council sharing the financial risk of any short term losses that may arise.

MPL

A contract where Council is responsible for all losses is the only option available in an environment where the performance of a re-launched facility is unknown (no data to support performance projections).

TRAC & MPL

Allowing the YMCA (in consultation with Council Officers) to reduce the fees and charges by up to 20% enables the product offering to be aligned with current market conditions in an agile environment.

Transferring to a non-guaranteed contract will remove the YMCA’s liability of meeting specific short term targets that will restrict product innovation.

Transferring to an ‘Open Book’ contract will allow both Council and the YMCA to share financial responsibility by having equal oversight on all significant expenses and business changes.

Improvements to contractual terms have been made to streamline the management of the contract for both parties whilst strengthening key performance indicators/outcomes supported by more robust contract enforcement conditions.

MPL REDEVELOPMENT ANNOUNCEMENT IMPACT

It is recommended that the Net Guaranteed Return for the Financial Year 2017/18 be removed and that Council bear responsibility for the $138,794 loss as a consequence of the redevelopment.

Risks

There are a range of risks associated with retaining the existing contract model, or leaving a Net Guaranteed Return environment, which are outlined below.

Leaving a Net Guaranteed Return environment:

Means that there will not be a guaranteed income each year. It is possible that Council will receive less income under a shared risk and reward contract than it otherwise would under a Net Guaranteed Return arrangement, however it is far more likely that there will be a sustained patronage increase under this revised three year arrangement (that enables greater longer term financial and community return).

Remaining in a Net Guaranteed Return environment:

Means that there is minimal change to the product offer to meet the changing needs of the community, and that due to patronage declining the Net Guaranteed Return drops to a Net Guaranteed Loss for future contracts.

The change to an Open Book arrangement is a significant variance to the original contract that was tendered. Subsequently Council has applied and received Minister approval to extend the contracts.

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

 

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

Extending MPL and TRAC contracts with the same operator will ensure the most successful relaunch of MPL following its redevelopment, and enables Council to best manage community impacts of the centres closure.

Aligning the contracts with a single operator creates opportunities to offer reciprocal rights across multiple facilities throughout the Municipality and in doing so enhancing health and wellbeing opportunities for residents. Aligning the contracts also creates a financial advantage through economies of scale.   

The Open Book contract extensions for MPL and TRAC are the most suitable arrangement to respond to the operating impacts of the MPL upgrade, and to enable the YMCA to respond to a competitive market environment and increase community patronage. Providing the operator with flexibility in user fees, in consultation with Council officers, is also important for the operator to respond to the market and to create a multisite reciprocal rights program aimed at facilitating a whole of city membership.

Extending the WSC contract in line with TRAC and MPL allows the site to be included in a reciprocal rights program. This arrangement also enables Council to move to managing all aquatic centres under a single contract in the future, in a more certain tendering environment based on patronage levels of a redeveloped MPL.

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to:

1.    Extend contract

a.      CT2014-160 Operation of Thomastown Recreation and Aquatic Centre for the period of 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2021 with Whittlesea YMCA and;

b.      CT111201A Operation of Mill Park Leisure for the period of 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2021 with Whittlesea YMCA and;

c.      CT111201B Operation of Whittlesea Swim Centre, for the period of 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2021, with Whittlesea YMCA.

2.    Provide Whittlesea YMCA, by agreement with Council officers, with authority to reduce the user fees by up to 20% from that set by the annual Council budget for:

a.      Thomastown Recreation and Aquatic Centre

b.      Mill Park Leisure

3.    Vary the guaranteed return model for contract CT2014-160 – Operation of Thomastown Recreation & Aquatic Centre from 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2021 with Whittlesea YMCA so that Council forgoes the guaranteed return and shares all profits and losses (60:40 in Councils favour).

4.    Vary the guaranteed return model for contract CT111201A – Operation of Mill Park Leisure from 1 July 2017 to 30 June 2021 with Whittlesea YMCA so that Council forgoes the guaranteed return and funds any operating losses.

 


PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

6.3.2    Response to Petition - Romsey Street, Epping - Parking Management

Attachments:                        1        Locality Plan

2        Improvement Works   

Responsible Officer:           Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Traffic and Transport Engineer   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

THAT Council resolve to:

1.  Not install parking restrictions in Romsey Street, Epping until after the completion of the road safety, parking and traffic improvement works around the Epping Views Primary School is completed and the benefits of the works can be evaluated.

2.  Evaluate the road safety, parking and traffic improvement works around the Epping Views Primary School and consult with residents in local streets and roads around the school, including Romsey Street, and the School, to determine if some form of parking management needs to be introduced.

3.  Advise all petitioners of Council’s decision on this matter.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·   There is a high demand for parking around the Epping Views Primary School (EVPS) in the drop-off and pick up periods, particularly on the school perimeter roads and to a lesser extent on local streets and roads as you move away from the school, such as Romsey Street.

·   Petitioners’ concerns about parents and carers parking in Romsey Street can be addressed with parking restrictions in their street, however this will only transfer the problem from one street to another.

·   Council has developed a road safety, parking and improvement package of works for the Epping Views Primary School perimeter roads which will improve road safety and increase both the number and utilisation of available parking around the school. This is expected to reduce parking demand for roads beyond the immediate perimeter of the school, such as Romsey Street.

·   The need for parking restrictions should be deferred until the benefits of the road safety, parking and improvement works around the perimeter of the school can be evaluated.

 

Report

Backgound

At the Council meeting on 5 June 2018, Council received a joint letter from four residents (representing four properties) requesting a No Standing / Clear Way sign on at least one side of Romsey Street, Epping. Council resolved to receive the joint letter and requested that a report be prepared for a future meeting.

 

In the joint letter, the residents specifically advised the following:

We are the residents of Romsey Street in Lyndarum in Epping.  We would like to bring your kind attention for the trouble, we are facing during the school drop off & pick up times.

As our narrow street within the Epping Views Primary School, the parents park their cars on both sides in our street, which disturbs and delays the ongoing traffic.  This makes us very difficult to take our cars from the garage and also to park in front of our house.  This action is disturbing our day today.

Activities such as taking our children for high school, & our for work time.  This makes us under severe pressure and stress in the morning and afternoon unnecessarily.

We residents of Romsey Street would like you to take a reasonable action by installing a clear way / no standing sign at least one side of the road. 

Discussion

Road Network and Land Use

Romsey Street is a local residential street in the Lyndarum Estate in Epping North (Attachment 1).  It is located approximately 100m south of the Epping Views Primary School (EVPS) and is approximately 150m in length. 

The carriageway is approximately 7.3m wide, which is a standard width for a local street and thus adequate for parking on both sides of the carriageway and one way at a time vehicle access between parked vehicles. 

The abutting land use within 300m of Romsey Street is residential properties with the exception of the EVPS.

EVPS was designed for a maximum capacity of 475 students but has a current student enrolment of over 1,400.  This number is forecast to gradually reduce in coming years.

There are 16 residential properties abutting Romsey Street, 14 of these have a Romsey Street frontage, two have a Mansfield Street frontage. 

Traffic Conditions and Road Safety

Observations during various periods of the day and week identified that during school drop-offs and pick-ups, the parking demand is higher than at other times.

When the parking demand is higher and two-way traffic flow is required, drivers need to pause, wait and give way to on-coming traffic.  This causes some minor congestion and delays, but is only as a short term and localised inconvenience.

As a result of the congestion traffic speeds are very low as some drivers need to pause and wait before manoeuvring between parked vehicles.

A review of VicRoads’ casualty crash database, CrashStats, indicates that there have been no casualty crashes reported in Romsey Street in the past five years. 

 

Improvement Options

Parking restrictions (as requested by the petitioners) are not considered appropriate as they will be only result in parents and carers (who currently park in Romsey Street), parking in other nearby local streets, thus transferring the problem from one group of residents to another.

However, a road safety, parking and traffic improvement package of works is included within the 2018/2019 New Works Program in the perimeter roads around the EVPS (Attachment 2).  The improvement package was prepared in consultation with the EVPS and the Victoria Police.

With respect to parking, the improvement package includes the provision of an additional  36 parking spaces around the EVPS.  These works will address many of the current concerns regarding safety, parking and traffic on the perimeter roads and the additional parking space will have a positive impact in streets beyond the school perimeter. The installation of additional parking will have an adverse impact on the streetscape due to the loss of street trees.

Consultation

A broader consultation and engagement process will be conducted as part of the evaluation of future road safety parking and traffic improvement works planned as part of the 2018/19 New Works Program.

There have been several consultations with EVPS and local effected residents for the proposed Local Area Parking and Traffic Management Plan

The petitioners will be advised of Council’s decision and outcome on this matter.

Critical Dates

There are no critical dates in relation to this matter.

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications in relation to this matter.

Policy strategy and legislation

City of Whittlesea Road Safety Strategy (2017):

            Address safety of all road users and path users.

Address driver behaviour and attitude towards vulnerable road users: pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists.

City of Whittlesea Integrated Transport Strategy (2014):

            Action RF 2.2: Manage local roads to improve amenity and safety for users.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

Council Priority                    Roads, Access and Public Transport

Future Direction                   Accessibility in, out and around our City

Theme                                   Transport

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

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

Parents and carers of children from Epping Views Primary School often use Romsey Street to drop-off and pick-up children.   This can result in traffic and parking congestion in Romsey Street, however this is only for short afternoon periods on school days.

If the petitioners’ concerns are to be addressed, parking restrictions (as requested by the petitioners) could be introduced.  However, this would simply result in parents and carers (who currently park in Romsey Street), parking in other nearby local streets, thus transferring the problem from one group of residents to another.

The road safety, parking and traffic improvement package to be delivered on the Epping Views Primary School perimeter roads in 2018/2019 will address many of the current concerns regarding parking on those roads, and may have a positive impact in streets beyond the school perimeter. 

Parking and traffic conditions will need to be monitored to determine if this is the case or if the need for parking restrictions is to be further investigated. 

If it is determined that further investigations are needed, the residents from a broader area around the School (rather than just Romsey Street), and the School, would need to be consulted to ensure that an optimal outcome is achieved for the overall community.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Not install parking restrictions in Romsey Street, Epping until after the completion of the road safety, parking and traffic improvement works around the Epping Views Primary School is completed and the benefits of the works can be evaluated.

2.       Evaluate the road safety, parking and traffic improvement works around the Epping Views Primary School and consult with residents in local streets and roads around the school, including Romsey Street, and the School, to determine if some form of parking management needs to be introduced.

3.       Advise all petitioners of Council’s decision on this matter.

 


PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                      Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                  Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

6.3.3    Response to Petition - Bud Lane, Epping - Traffic Management  

Responsible Officer:           Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Traffic and Transport Engineer   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

1.   Note that the parking issues in Bud Lane, Epping have been resolved and no further action is required.

2.   Monitor parking conditions in Bud Lane, Epping after six months to ensure that the parking issues have been remedied.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    Bud Lane, Epping caters for rear vehicular access to residents between 754 to 766 Edgars Road, 4 Lapis Chase and 44 Rockfield Street.

·    Petitioners between 756 Edgars Road and 760 Edgars Road in Epping are concerned with motorists parking in the rear laneway and have their access restricted to and from their garages.

·    Bud Lane is not suitable for vehicle parking. Council Officers have undertaken steps to stop parking in Bud Lane.

·    The head petitioner has been advised of, and is satisfied with, the outcome.


 

Report

Introduction

At the meeting dated 5 June 2018, Council received a petition relating to cars parking in Bud Lane, Epping, and resolved that a report be prepared.

Background

The joint letter was signed by five residents (representing five of the nine properties) abutting Bud Lane, between Rockfield Street and Lapis Chase, in Epping.

The letter requested that Council stop the practice of vehicles parking in Bud Lane, which is restricting the ability for residents to access their garages that back onto the laneway.

Discussion

Bud Lane is a north - south local access road that provides rear vehicular access to residents of 754 to 766 Edgars Road, 4 Lapis Chase and 44 Rockfield Street (nine properties in total). Bud Lane spans 6.2 meters in width between property boundaries.

Recent site inspections carried out by Council Officers identified that on occasions vehicles were observed to be parked in Bud Lane, which restricted access to one property.

Council Officers have been advised that parking in the laneway is a result of the practices of one household. Council Officers therefore contacted this household and have made arrangements for vehicles to be parked inside the property in the future. As a result, the parking issues in Bud Lane, Epping have ceased.

While the installation of ‘No Stopping’ signage was considered, residents did not support this proposal. Given that parking conditions have changed and there is no longer vehicles parking in Bud Lane, the installation of ‘No Stopping’ signage is not considered necessary at this time.

Proposal

The matter of vehicles parking in the laneway has been resolved, with all parties comfortable with the outcome. There are no further proposed actions.

Consultation

Council Officers have liaised with all parties involved, and have negotiated that vehicles will no longer park within Bud Lane. Discussions have been held with the head petitioner, who is satisfied with the outcome.

Financial Implications

There are no Council financial implications associated with this proposal.

Policy strategy and legislation

City of Whittlesea Road Safety Strategy (2017):

            Address safety of all road users and path users.

Address driver behaviour and attitude towards vulnerable road users: pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists.

City of Whittlesea Integrated Transport Strategy (2004):

            Action RF 2.2: Manage local roads to improve amenity and safety for users.


 

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

Council Priority                    Roads, Access and Public Transport

Future Direction                   Accessibility in, out and around our City

Theme                                   Transport

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

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

Given that Council Officers have mediated to address the concerns raised in the joint letter, no further action is required.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.    Note that the parking issues in Bud Lane, Epping has been resolved and no further action is required.

2.    Monitor parking conditions in Bud Lane, Epping after six months to ensure that the parking issues have been remedied.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                  Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

6.3.4    Response to Petition - Riverdale Boulevard, South Morang - Traffic Management

Attachments:                        1        Locality Plan   

Responsible Officer:           Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Traffic and Transport Engineer   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Not install speed humps or road cushions in Riverdale Boulevard, South Morang.

2.       Monitor traffic conditions in Riverdale Boulevard as the road network and surrounding land use changes.

3.       Deploy the Speed Observation Trailers in Riverdale Boulevard.

4.       Advise the petitioners of Council’s decision on this matter.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·      Residents of Riverside Boulevard, between Plenty Road and Chamonix Parade, submitted a petition raising concerns regarding excessive traffic speeds, volumes and road safety, and requested Council install speed humps in this section of road.

·      Recently conducted traffic surveys indicate that current traffic conditions (local speeds and volumes) are within the range expected for a collector road such as Riverdale Boulevard.

·      Riverdale Boulevard has a good road safety record.

 


 

Report

Introduction

The report concludes that given current traffic conditions in Riverdale Boulevard, raised pavements in any form (flat top raised pavements, speed humps or road cushions) are not warranted.

Background

This report is in relation to a petition tabled at the Council meeting held on 6 March 2018. The petition was signed by 12 residents (representing eight properties) along Riverdale Boulevard, between Plenty Road and Chamonix Parade, in South Morang (Attachment 1) and cited the following in support of their request:

Due to the excessive amount of vehicles that enter and exit Riverdale Boulevard each day and the amount of people that speed up and down the street and not obey the speed limit and due to the safety concerns of the families that live in the street that have kids that play outside and are worried that their kids could be killed due to speeding motorist, we request speed humps to be put in our street to slow the vehicles down and restore safety for our families and children.

We, the undersigned, are concerned citizens who urge our leaders of the Whittlesea Council to act now to put Speed Humps in place on Riverdale Boulevard, South Morang.

Council resolved to receive the petition and that a report be prepared.

discussion

The investigation and this report focus on the section of Riverdale Boulevard, between Plenty Road and Chamonix Parade, South Morang.  This is the section in which the petitioners reside, and is approximately 210m in length.

Road Network and Land Use

Riverdale Boulevard is a collector road in the Riverside Estate in South Morang and Mernda.  It currently extends from Plenty Road in South Morang to Raspberry Grove in Mernda, a length of approximately 1.5km.  When the Mernda Town Centre is completed it will form part of a 2.1km north – south collector road connection between Bridge Inn Road and Plenty Road.

At the Plenty Road end, Riverdale Boulevard is divided for approximately 75m.  The east and west bound carriageways are separated by a 10m wide landscaped centre median island.  At the east end of the divide, it tapers into a typical two-way collector road.

The road cross-section provides for a traffic lane for each direction (except where it widens to two lanes at Plenty Road), an indented parking lane in front of the residential properties facing the road, footpaths (1.5m north side, 2.5m south side), and 3.0m wide nature strips.  This standard of road cross-section (two traffic lanes unencumbered by parking) is designed to cater for approximately 10,000 vehicles per day.

Riverdale Boulevard is one of three roads that provide access from Plenty Road to local streets and residential properties on the east side of Plenty Road, the Mernda Park Primary School, a convenience store (on the north-western corner Parkland Way and Riverdale Boulevard) and the café - restaurant located in the grounds of the Carome Homestead.

Traffic Conditions

The speed limit along Riverdale Boulevard is 50km/h. 

Traffic surveys were recently conducted outside 8 to 10 Riverdale Boulevard, a summary of these and those of surveys conducted in 2013 and 2014 are shown in the table below.

Date

Vehicles

per Day

Speed (km/h)

Vehicles Over (km/h)

Average

85th %ile1

40

50

60

Jul 2013

2,028

46

56

1,805
81%

659
 33%

81
 4%

Feb 2014

2,313

46

55

1,906
82%

752
 33%

56
 2.4%

Apr 2018

4,208

46

53

2,312
55%

980
 23%

63
 3%

1 ‘85%ile speed’ is the speed at which 85 per cent of motorists are travelling at or below.

These results indicate:

·    The average speed of traffic has remained steady for the past five years;

·    The 85th percentile speed of traffic has decreased by approximately 3km/h in the past five years;

·    Some vehicles travel at speeds of 10km/h or more in excessive of the speed limit; and

·    Vehicle volumes have increased in the past five years.

Overall speeds are within the expected range given the function of the road in context of the surrounding road network and land use development.  However, there is a relatively small percentage (3 to 4%) of drivers at speeds of 10km/h or more over the speed limit, and some action may be needed by Council to modify the behaviour of this small percentage of drivers.

In situations like this, the deployment of the Speed Observation Trailers can specifically target the small percentage of speeding drivers. This raises awareness of their speed and the speed limit, and is considered more appropriate than installing raised pavements which would be unreasonably restrictive on the majority of responsible drivers.

The increase in traffic is not unexpected as the Riverdale Boulevard connection to Plenty Road was completed in 2012, the residential area on the east side of Plenty Road has progressively built out over the past five years or more, and Mernda Park Primary School, established in 2017, has its main entry on Riverdale Boulevard.

When the Mernda Town Centre is completed, Riverdale Boulevard will extend north to Bridge Inn Road and complete a north – south collector road connection between Bridge Inn Road and Plenty Road.  At this stage a further increase in traffic can be expected, but whether this results in an increase or decrease in traffic speeds is difficult to determine.  However given that traffic speeds have decreased (whilst the volume has increased) in the past five years, an increase in traffic speeds is not expected in the future.

Notwithstanding, traffic conditions will need to be monitored as the road network and land use changes to determine if traffic speeds or volumes change to an extent which would require action by Council.

Road Safety

A review of VicRoads’ casualty crash database, CrashStats, indicates that there has not been any casualty crashes recorded in this section of Riverdale Boulevard in the period from 1 January 2012 to 16 October 2017 (CrashStats is only current to this latter date).

The existing signs and line markings along Riverdale Boulevard are visible and satisfactory and do not warrant any changes or upgrades at this time.

Consultation

The 12 petitioners represent eight (of the 12) properties that have a property boundary on this section of Riverdale Boulevard.

No further consultation was undertaken.

Financial Implications

There is no financial impact associated with the recommendation of this report. 

Policy strategy and legislation

City of Whittlesea Road Safety Strategy (2017):

            Address safety of all road users and path users.

Address driver behaviour and attitude towards vulnerable road users: pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists.

City of Whittlesea Integrated Transport Strategy (2004):

            Action RF 2.2: Manage local roads to improve amenity and safety for users.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

Council Priority                    Roads, Access and Public Transport

Future Direction                   Accessibility in, out and around our City

Theme                                   Transport

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

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

Current traffic conditions (speeds and volumes) are within the range expected for a collector road such as Riverdale Boulevard, and no form of raised pavement (flat top raised pavements, speed humps or road cushions) is warranted.

An increase in traffic in Riverdale Boulevard can be expected when the Mernda Town Centre is completed, however given that traffic speeds have decreased as traffic volumes have increased in the past five years, increased speeds are not expected.

Notwithstanding, traffic conditions will need to be monitored as the road network and land use changes occur to determine if speeds or volumes change to an extent that would require action by Council.

To target the small percentage of drivers who travel at speeds of 10km/h or more over the speed limit, the deployment of the Speed Observation Trailers would be more appropriate than installing raised pavements. The latter would be unreasonably restrictive on the majority of responsible drivers.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Not install any form of raised pavement in Riverdale Boulevard, South Morang;

2.       Monitor traffic conditions in Riverdale Boulevard as the road network and land use change;

3.       Deploy the Speed Observation Trailers in Riverdale Boulevard, South Morang; and

4.       Advise the petitioners of Council’s decision on this matter.

 

 


PDF Creator


6.3.5    Local Area Traffic Management and Streetscape Improvements, Thomastown

Attachments:                        1        Study Area

2        Traffic Speed and Volume Data

3        Streetscape Renewal Example

4        Draft Traffic Management and Streetscape Improvement Plan

5        Community Consultation   

Responsible Officer:           Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Traffic Engineer   

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

THAT Council resolve to:

1.   Adopt the proposed Traffic Management and Streetscape Improvement Plan for the LATM 9 study area in Thomastown, with works due to commence in the 2019/20 financial year.

2.   Advise the local residents in the study area of Council’s decision on this matter.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    Council has had a regular program to deliver Local Area Traffic Management since 1996.

·    The project methodology expands the historical approach to Local Area Traffic Management Plans, which had the sole focus of traffic safety, and seeks to provide a more holistic uplift to local neighbourhoods.

·    The project scope includes concurrently delivering a wide range of improvements that maximise opportunities for streetscape enhancements, pedestrian and bicycle linkages, park upgrades, as well as local traffic improvements.

·    The project will be delivered through a combination of existing and revised New Works Program funding allocations within the study area.

·    Community consultation has been undertaken and a high level of support for the proposed improvements has been received.

Report

INTRODUCTION

The report advises of the outcomes of the study and investigation process into the development of the Local Area Traffic Management and Streetscape Improvements Plan for a neighbourhood in Thomastown (referred to as LATM 9).

Background

In 1996, Council adopted a strategic methodology of determining the need and type of traffic management in local streets. This strategic approach ensured a consistent assessment, investigation and implementation process for local area traffic management (LATM) devices across the municipality. Historically, the sole objective when selecting the type and location of traffic management devices for an LATM program was to improve road safety in local streets.

In 2018, the revised Local Area Traffic Management and Streetscape Improvement methodology expands the historical approach to LATM delivery and seeks to provide a more holistic uplift to local neighbourhoods. The project scope includes concurrently delivering a wide range of improvements that maximise opportunities for streetscape enhancements, pedestrian and bicycle linkages, park upgrades, as well as local traffic improvements.

The methodology for prioritising the LATM study areas across the municipality is as follows:

·   Reported casualty crashes, as per VicRoads’ casualty crash database, CrashStats;

·   Traffic conditions, including recorded traffic speeds and volumes;

·   Community concerns;

·   Road network function; and

·   Abutting land use.

The selected study area (referred to as LATM 9) is bound by Edgars Road, Main Street, High Street and the M80 Ring Road in Thomastown (Attachment 1).

The development of the Local Area Traffic Management and Streetscape Improvement Plan was included as an action item in the 2017/18 Council Action Plan.

Abutting Land Use

The area has many abutting major land uses, including Thomastown Primary and Secondary School, Thomastown Recreation and Aquatic Centre, Thomastown Community Centre and Library that provide many key points of interest and generates a large number of pedestrians, cyclists and vehicular traffic.

Streetscape, Open Space and Connectivity

The current streetscape in the study area consists of ageing streets lined with mature street trees. Some streets suffer from sparse and inconsistent street tree planting, resulting in an open and unattractive streetscape. Street tree renewal is required in these streets to create consistent and uniformly planted tree lined streets.

The LATM 9 area has a low proportion of open space, with Chantal Park and Symon Park located in the south. The area does however benefit from the Edgars Creek reserve running generally north to south through the centre of study area, with an existing pedestrian / cyclist shared path between Spring Street and the M80 Ring Road. Edgars Creek, between Spring Street and Main Street, lacks any off road pedestrian / cyclist shared path connectivity. Both the creek corridor and the two parks within the neighbourhood have a tired appearance and need to be revitalised.

Pedestrian and cyclist access from this neighbourhood to Thomastown Recreation and Aquatic Centre and Thomastown Library is indirect and disconnected.

Road Function

The road network within the study area generally consists of a grid layout, with some curvilinear roads. There is good permeability of the road network; however this results in significant east to west traffic volumes on the collector roads of Main Street and Spring Street. Other roads forming the road network in the area consist of mainly local access streets, cul-de-sacs and courts.

Public Transport

The 357 (Wollert West – Thomastown Station via Epping Station) bus service operates on Main Street between Edgars Road and Lantana Avenue (two-way), Main Street between Lantana Avenue and High Street (eastbound), High Street between Main Street and Spring Street (southbound), Spring Street between High Street and Lantana Avenue (westbound) and in Lantana Avenue (northbound).

The 554 / 557 (Thomastown via West Lalor) bus service operates in both directions along the entire length of Spring Street.

Road Safety and Traffic Conditions

VicRoads’ casualty crash database, Crashstats, indicates that from 2012 to 2016, six casualty crashes were recorded in the study area; three crashes on Spring Street between Hazel Avenue and Edgars Creek, one crash on Simpson Street, one crash on Lantana Avenue and one crash on Ashley Court. Three (of the recorded six) crashes, i.e. two in Spring Street and one in Lantana Avenue, involved collisions with parked vehicles.

Traffic surveys have been undertaken on collector roads and local streets within the study area and indicate that whilst traffic speeds and volumes are within acceptable tolerances in most streets, they are unacceptable in Spring Street, Lantana Avenue and Lincoln Drive (Attachment 2).

It is worthwhile noting that the current traffic conditions in Simpson Street and Hazel Avenue are acceptable, however it is likely that traffic speeds and volumes would increase in these streets following the installation of traffic calming measures in Lantana Avenue and therefore some intervention in Simpson Street and Hazel Avenue is required.

INVESTIGATION

The aim of the study is to deliver improved pedestrian and cyclist connectivity, road safety, traffic conditions and streetscapes and park amenity to improve both road safety and the overall appearance of the neighbourhood. This is proposed to be achieved by concurrently delivering a wide range of programmed improvements that will maximise opportunities for streetscape enhancements, while minimising disruption and impact on the local community. Some examples of how this would look are contained in Attachment 3.

The following planned project improvements are included within the plan:

· Local road safety works;

· Street tree renewal;

· Road resealing and rehabilitation (kerb and channel, footpaths, etc.);

· Street lighting upgrades;

· Pedestrian and cycling pathway upgrades and repairs; and

· Local playground and park renewal.

The plan recommends the installation of a suite of traffic calming devices on Spring Street, Lincoln Drive, Lantana Avenue, Hazel Avenue and Simpson Street.

Additionally, pedestrian and cycling connectivity will be improved through the planned construction of a shared path along Edgars Creek, between Spring Street and Main Street, and various park upgrades in Chantal Park and Symon Park. New street tree planting is proposed in 11 streets.

The preparation of a Draft Traffic Management and Streetscape Improvement Plan (TMSIP) included a technical assessment aimed at addressing ongoing concerns about traffic conditions and road safety. A detailed analysis of the reported casualty crashes, resident concerns, and recorded volume and speed data were key inputs into the development of the Plan.

The Draft TMSIP is shown in Attachment 4.

Consultation

A robust community consultation process was undertaken to ensure that the Draft TMSIP met the community’s service needs and expectations.

The consultation process commenced with a multi-lingual mail out to 1,641 owners and occupiers of the local study area. This invited the community to provide feedback on the proposed plan by either completing a questionnaire, visiting Council’s Have Your Say web page or by attending a public community meeting. Additionally, feedback regarding the study was promoted on Council’s social media pages.

A suite of personal and formal consultation methods were implemented throughout the consultation period to ensure residents from have input into the proposed plan, these included:

·    A Community Meeting held at Lalor Library in May Road, Lalor on 30 April 2018;

·    A ‘drop-in’ session arranged during school pick-up time at Thomastown West Primary School in Main Street, Thomastown on 17 May 2018;

·    A door knock of all households directly abutting the proposed traffic management devices throughout the LATM 9 study area at various times of the day, and days of the week; and

·    Feedback solicited from the various key community facilities within the LATM 9 study area, including Thomastown West Primary School, Thomastown Secondary College, Thomastown Recreation and Aquatic Centre, Thomastown Library, Bubup Wilam Early Learning Centre, Thomastown Neighbourhood House and Spring Street Hall.

Furthermore, a circular letter was distributed to the local bus operator (Dyson Bus Company) and Victoria Police inviting feedback on the Draft TMSIP regarding bus route and emergency service vehicle implications.

Overall, there was strong support from the community for the revised Local Area Traffic Management and Streetscape Improvement methodology and draft plan.

Detailed results of the consultation process are provided in Attachment 5.

Financial Implications

The project will be delivered through a combination of existing and revised New Works Program funding allocations within the study area, as follows:

·     Local road safety works;

·                       Street tree renewal;

·     Road resealing and rehabilitation;

·     Street lighting upgrades;

·     Pedestrian and cycling pathway upgrades and repairs; and

·     Local playground and park renewal.

Detailed design of the TMSIP will occur in 2018/19, with delivery to commence in 2019/20. The total estimated cost for delivery will be approximately $2,500,000.

Policy strategy and legislation

City of Whittlesea Road Safety Strategy (2017):

Address safety of all road and path users.

Address driver behaviour and attitude towards vulnerable road users: pedestrian, cyclists and motorcyclists.

City of Whittlesea Bicycle Plan 2016 – 2020:

Key Direction 3: Build and maintain a high quality network.

City of Whittlesea Street Tree Management Plan (2016):

Action 14: Coordinate the Street Tree Renewal Program with the Road Rehabilitation Program.

City of Whittlesea Integrated Transport Strategy (2014):

Action RF 2.2: Manage local roads to improve amenity and safety for users.

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

Council Priority                    Roads, Access and Public Transport

Future Direction                   Accessibility in, out and around our City

Theme                                   Transport

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

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 Local Area Traffic Management and Streetscape Improvement Plan aims to improve the liveability and amenity of the Thomastown area by enhancing the existing open space, completing the connection of the pedestrian / cycling network, and addressing the road safety and traffic management concerns. This will be achieved by concurrently delivering a wide range of improvements that maximise opportunities for streetscape enhancements, pedestrian and bicycle linkages, park upgrades, as well as local traffic improvements.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Adopt the proposed Traffic Management and Streetscape Improvement Plan for the LATM 9 study area in Thomastown, with works due to commence in the 2019/20 financial year.

2.       Advise the local residents in the study area of Council’s decision on this matter.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                      Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                      Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                      Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                  Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

6.3.6    Response to Petition - Removal of Gum Trees on Jubilee Crescent, Mill Park

Attachments:                        1        Jubilee Crescent, Location of Street Trees

2        Jubilee Crescent, Current Streetscape   

Responsible Officer:           Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Arborist Services   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Retain the ‘Gum Trees’ in Jubilee Crescent, Mill Park;

2.       Assess Jubilee Crescent, Mill Park for inclusion into the intermediate street sweeping program;

3.       Write to all residents and owners of Jubilee Crescent, Mill Park advising them of Council’s decision on this matter. 

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    This report responds to the petition received in April 2018 from 9 households of the 23 properties located in Jubilee Crescent, Mill Park requesting the removal of gum trees.

·    The petition expressed concern regarding the mess from debris from the trees and the damage caused to property and infrastructure.

·    Street trees in Jubilee Crescent have been part of Council’s proactive assessment and pruning maintenance program since 2002.

·    Council officers have investigated the issues raised in the petition and inspected the street trees in Jubilee Crescent against the current standards and policy for tree management.

·    The gum trees in Jubilee Crescent do not meet the tree removal guidelines set out in the Street Tree Management Plan (STMP) and the removal of these trees would be contrary to the Environmental Sustainability Strategy.

 

Report

Introduction

At the Council meeting on 3 April 2018, Council resolved to receive and note the petition from 10 residents representing 9 properties (out of 23 properties) requesting the removal of gum trees along Jubilee Crescent, Mill Park.

The petition raised concern regarding the mess from debris from the trees, damage they cause to infrastructure and branches dropping, with the following specific concerns being expressed:

·     Cleaning up the leaf drop which is numerous and constant;

·     Needing to regularly clean gutters which is dangerous and costly;

·     The leaves block the street drainage making it prone to flooding;

·     The massive gum tree root system which lifts the nature strip soil, intertwines and damages the electricity pits and damaging sewage pipes and other plumbing infrastructure;

·     Numerous instances of branch drop, both dangerous to people and property;

·     Significant property damage where structural engineers have stated the gum trees are a contributing factor;

·     Footpaths have been raised by roots causing a hazard to walkers.

Council officers have investigated the issues raised in the petition and inspected the street trees in Jubilee Crescent. This report has been prepared in response to the petition.

Background

Jubilee Crescent is located to the west of Kurrajong View Park, which is managed by Parks Victoria and joins at either end to Blossom Park Drive (refer attachment 1).

Jubilee Crescent is part of the Blossom Park Estate Stages 1 and 2. These stages were completed around 1998. The trees chosen for Jubilee Crescent were Eucalyptus scoparia (Willow Gum) and Corymbia eximia (Yellow Bloodwood). These street tree species were approved species at the time of planting and remain on Council’s approved street tree species list.

33 of the 40 street trees in Jubilee Crescent are gum trees (refer to Attachment 1). The remaining seven are a mix of exotic and native trees. The street trees are generally 20 years old, having an average height of 10 metres and provide a strong streetscape character of upright spreading crowns with predominantly white trunks (refer to Attachment 1 & 2).

Council implements a proactive street tree maintenance program that ensures that Council managed street trees are inspected and pruned if required at least once every two years. The street trees in Jubilee Crescent were last inspected as part of Council’s proactive street tree inspection and works program in May 2017.  As a result of this program, minor maintenance pruning was undertaken on approximately 40% of the street trees within Jubilee Crescent. No significant visible structural defects were identified in any of the street trees in Jubilee Crescent.

Investigation

As a result of the Council receiving the Petition, all the trees in Jubilee Crescent were inspected by Council’s Arborist on 22 May 2018. No major structural faults were observed in any of the trees. From the inspection, it was determined that 35% of the trees require minor pruning and one small tree requires removal due to borer damage and die back in the canopy.

In response to the concern raised regarding the leaf and debris drop, all trees drop debris consisting of bark, leaves fruit flowers etc.  Residential streets in the municipality are swept by Council generally on a six to nine week cycle in line with the Street Tree Management Plan endorsed by Council in 2016. Selected roads that contain significant avenues of mature/ large trees receive supplementary street sweeping on an as needs basis, during periods of excess debris drop.  These periods vary depending on both the species of tree and local climatic conditions.  Intermediate sweeping regimes have been developed for other streets within the municipality to address leaf litter with frequency expected on a three week cycle.

In addition, Council’s drainage infrastructure is regularly inspected and cleaned as necessary. Council has 4 recorded blocked drains requests within Jubilee Crescent in the last 15 years.

In regards to the issue of leaves in the gutters, products may be of use, once installed, to reduce the leaves which accumulate in the gutters. This should reduce the frequency to clean the gutters and also reduce the amount of leaves in the gutters.

The petition included concerns regarding branches dropping off the street trees in Jubilee Crescent, there was only one registered instance of a tree losing branches in March 2018.

In response to the concern raised in the petition regarding damage to private property from the trees, Council’s records indicated that only four addresses have complained about potential damage due to trees, none of which resulted in a claim. Council responds to these complaints on a case by case basis.

As a result of the petition, Council’s City Presentation Department conducted an inspection of the foot path in Jubilee Crescent on 10 April 2018. Some minor cracking was observed and two minor footpaths displaced but only noted, as they were not outside Council’s intervention levels for repair now.

Discussion

This petition raises concerns with the existing street trees and requests their removal and replacement with a more appropriate species.

Street Trees provide many community benefits, such as providing for shade relief in the summer, health benefits of feeling connected to nature, water quality improvements, important biodiversity links with green corridors and improving streetscape amenity which has a direct relationship with increases in property values. Trees are also one of the best mechanisms for reducing the Urban Heat Island Effect.

Council’s Street Tree Management Plan (STMP) highlights the importance of these benefits to the community and provides a set of criteria for consideration, when requests for the removal of street trees are received. Under these guidelines trees are considered for removal if one or more of the following criteria are met:

·        The tree is dead or in severe decline or poses a very high risk potential that cannot be corrected by pruning, transplanting or other contemporary treatments;

·        The tree severely interferes with a neighbouring tree to the extent that neither tree can develop to its full potential;

·        The aesthetic values of the tree or tree group are so low that the site is visually enhanced by the removal of the tree or tree group;

·        The tree is found to be contributing to damage to public or private property and no other viable means are available to rectify the situation;

·        The tree or tree group is infected with an epidemic insect or disease, or is recognised as an environmental woody weed species;

·        The tree or group of trees is included in Council’s street tree renewal program.

In addition, Council’s Street Tree Management Plan (STMP) highlights that:

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

·    Reduce or eliminate leaf litter or tree debris;

·    Improve private amenity.

The inspection undertaken by Council’s Arborist did not identify any issues consistent with the guidelines detailed within the STMP that could justify either the removal of individual trees or the avenues as a whole that are the subject of this petition.

The residents’ request to remove the existing ‘Gum trees’ in Jubilee Crescent has been assessed in accordance with Council’s Street Tree Management Plan (STMP) and Environmental Sustainability Strategy and is not supported for the following reasons:

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

·    Infrastructure (footpath) damage is minimal and not at intervention levels;

·    All trees drop litter consisting of bark, leaves fruit flowers etc. The litter on footpaths in Jubilee Crescent was not observed (multiple visits) to be excessive;

·    The ‘Gum Tree’ species located in Jubilee Crescent are listed as a suitable street tree species in Council’s current street tree species planting list.

Consultation

No additional external consultation has been undertaken in preparing this report.

As indicated above 9 of the 23 properties (totalling 39%) within Jubilee Crescent have signed the petition. 

A detailed investigation and technical assessment has been conducted and forms the basis of the recommendations.

Critical Dates

There are no critical dates.

Financial Implications

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

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

The financial implications of removing the existing street trees within Jubilee Crescent and replacing them are:

·    Value of existing street trees:                                                 $277,000

·    Removal of all trees and stumps in Jubilee Crescent:           $  29,500

·    Planting Jubilee Crescent with new trees would cost            $  12,800

Policy strategy and legislation

The tree protection, levels of service and works carried out are consistent with the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, Council’s Street Tree Management Plan (2016), Environmental Sustainability Strategy (2013) and the Natural and Built Shade Policy (2016).

Links to the CoUNCIL Plan

Council Priority                    Planning and Infrastructure

Future Direction                   Places and spaces to connect people

Theme                                   Planning our space

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

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

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

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

Conclusion

This report responds to the petition received from 10 residents representing 9 properties of Jubilee Crescent, Mill Park, requesting for the removal of all ‘Gum trees’ in the street.

All trees have been inspected and found all but one tree to be in good health. The street meets Council’s adopted Street Tree Management Plan (STMP) requirements.

The assessment found that there is currently no justification for the removal of the gum trees based on the current criteria established within the Council adopted policies and strategic frameworks. Therefore, the request to remove all existing street trees within Jubilee Crescent is not justified.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Retain the ‘Gum Trees’ in Jubilee Crescent, Mill Park;

2.       Assess Jubilee Crescent, Mill Park for inclusion into the intermediate street sweeping program;

3.       Write to all residents and owners of Jubilee Crescent, Mill Park advising them of Council’s decision on this matter. 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                      Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                  Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

6.3.7    Response to Petition - Tasman Drive, Bundoora - Parking Management

Attachments:                        1        Locality Plan

2        Chronological History

3        Working Group Outcomes   

Responsible Officer:           Director City Transport & Presentation

Author:                                  Team Leader Transport Engineering   

 

 RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council resolve to:                       

1.    Note that urgent road safety and traffic operational improvements in the streets around Northpark Private Hospital in Bundoora have been implemented.

2.    Rearrange the car parking layout on Tasman Drive, between Greenhills Road and Cabernet Crescent (south), to improve safety for residents exiting abutting properties.

3.    Monitor the combined effectiveness of Tasman Drive enhancements, between Greenhills Road and Cabernet Crescent (south), to determine if the level of increased visibility is adequate.

4.    Note Local Laws activity and actions in the streets around Northpark Private Hospital in Bundoora.

5.    Continue to work with the Northpark Private Hospital with the delivery of the Hospital Travel Plan to encourage staff and visitors to the Hospital car park to use alternative modes of transport, or park in the Hospital car park.

6.    Advise owners and occupiers of properties in the streets around Northpark Private Hospital in Bundoora of Council’s decision on this matter.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·      Parking in local streets, and the concerns of road safety and traffic congestion, around the Northpark Hospital has been problematic for many years.

·      Council has received three petitions and considered four reports on this matter, and as a result parking management arrangements have been implemented in local streets within approximately 400m of the Northpark Hospital.

·      The current parking management arrangements are not to the satisfaction of 23 petitioners (representing 13 properties) in Tasman Drive, Bundoora.

·      To get a better understanding of the broader community’s concerns, an engagement process, of two community and three working group meetings, was conducted.

·      With the support of the community, adjustments have been made to the local street environment to address some urgent concerns regarding safety, parking and traffic.

·      While the above adjustments address road safety and some parking concerns, hospital staff and visitors will continue to park in streets surrounding the hospital.

·      If the completed road safety, parking and traffic improvement actions and the further planned actions do not adequately address the community’s concerns, the only other measure available to Council may be to introduce Residential Parking Permits.

 

Report

Background

On 30 August 2016 a petition was tabled from 23 residents representing 13 properties along Tasman Drive, mainly between Oxley Avenue and Greenhills Road in Bundoora.  The petitioners requested that Council find a suitable solution to the safety and parking issues in Tasman Drive, Bundoora.  Petitioners reported that the on-street parking generates a safety concern for property access and garbage collection issues. 

In response to the petition, a parking investigation area of 800m from the Northpark Private Hospital was undertaken (Attachment 1). In addition to reviewing the specific matters of concern raised in the joint letter petition, an investigation and community consultation process was completed in March 2017 and the details of this investigation and the review of petitioners’ specific concerns were presented to Council at the meeting held 30 May 2017.

On 30 May 2017, Council resolved to:

1.    Continue programmed local laws supervision in the streets around Northpark private hospital with particular attention to the parking discipline near residential crossovers and also time-based parking bays.

2.    Conduct a community meeting of residents in the streets around Northpark private hospital to determine what they would like to see as a solution in these streets.

3.    Conduct this meeting within three months of today.

4.    Report back to Council on the meeting outcomes and findings associated with the parking issues.

This report outlines the results and outcomes of the community consultation meeting and the further working group engagement process aimed at addressing the road safety, parking and traffic concerns in the streets surrounding Northpark Private Hospital (the Hospital) in Bundoora.

To provide the appropriate level of context and background, a brief chronology of significant events relating to the development of the Hospital, a summary of community concerns regarding road safety, parking and traffic in local streets around the Hospital, and previous Council resolutions in relation to these matters are summarised in Attachment 2.

Consultation

The following summarises the most recent community consultation and engagement process as per the resolution of Council dated 30 May 2017.

Community Meeting

In September 2017, an invitation to attend a Community Meeting was circulated to over 900 residents within an 800m radius of the Hospital, excluding the areas east of Plenty Road (City of Banyule) and south of Greenhills Road (this area is land-locked and has poor permeability for pedestrians or traffic to the residential area further south).

The meeting was attended by 30 residents, Councillors and Council Officers.  The residents all resided in the investigation area and were provided with an opportunity to voice their concerns and suggestions. The main themes raised during the meeting, were:

·   Current problems are due to the Hospital not providing adequate parking onsite, charging too much for parking, and visitors / staff parking on street;

·   Residential parking permits were put forward as an option to resolve the current problems and were popular with the local community;

·   Road safety, property access and parking concerns along Greenhills Road was raised as an issue of concern, with suggestions to provide indented parking put forward; and

·   Northpark Private Hospital staff and visitors should be required to park in the Hospital car park.

At the community meeting, 14 residents volunteered to participate in a working group to discuss, consider and agree on options to address the concerns raised.

The Working Group

The working group (the group), comprised the volunteer residents, South East Ward Councillors, Council Officers and the Hospital manager.  The group met on three occasions, in October & December 2017 and March 2018, to consider the community meeting concerns.

The concerns fell into three basic categories:

1.   Supported actions, ie. items which were urgently needed and implemented immediately.  These are listed as Supported Actions and Completed in (Attachment 3)

These actions were taken due road safety and traffic operational concerns along Greenhills Road (due to parking and street lights), at local road intersections (inadequate line-marking) and at the Hospital car park entrance (where pedestrian safety was a concern). 

Street trees on Tasman Drive were trimmed to improve visibility for residents when exiting driveways.

2.   Unsupported actions

3.   Supported actions to be referred to Council. 

Discussion

In the event that is determined that a further reduction in parking spaces in Tasman Drive (as discussed below) is warranted, directly affected residents will be consulted on the revised parking bay layout to minimise any parking loss.

Tasman Drive Parking

The matter of the removal or reduction in parking bays in Tasman Drive, Bundoora was raised at the community and working group meetings by Tasman Drive residents as it would increase visibility splays at their driveways.

A reduction in four car parking spaces occurred on the east side of Tasman Drive, between Greenhills Road and Oxley Avenue, following August 2016 Council resolution, i.e. …undertake a car parking line marking program within the current investigation zone, where car parking bays were formalised to match the current Australian Standards.

A similar line marking program is recommended to be applied on both sides of Tasman Drive, between Greenhills Road and Cabernet Crescent (south), resulting in a reduction of bays.  This parking reduction may be reduced when directly affected residents are consulted on the parking bay layout so that it can be tailored to meet individual resident’s specific needs.

Residential Parking Permits

The matter of Residential Parking Permits was raised at the community meeting and further explored in the working group meetings.  Consensus on this matter was not achieved as some residents were concerned with the potential of spreading the parking issues out further into the local streets. Residents who attended both meetings were also advised that the City of Whittlesea currently does not have a residential parking permit policy.

Notwithstanding, if the completed road safety, parking and traffic improvements, and the further planned actions, do not adequately address the community’s concerns, the only other measure available to Council may be to introduce Residential Parking Permits. This would need to be the subject of a separate investigation, community consultation and engagement process and a further report to Council.

Hospital Staff and Visitors

The Hospital has a Travel Plan which includes actions to encourage staff and visitors to use alternative modes of transport (to motor vehicles) when travelling to and from the Hospital.  

Consultation and engagement with the Hospital regarding the Travel Plan has only been with the development of the plan to date. In view of the current concerns, and now as these have been raised at the community and working group meetings, a proactive approach needs to be taken on this matter.

In addition to the plan, Council Officers will seek agreement from the Hospital to enable additional staff parking on campus.

Local Laws

Since May 2017, Local Laws officers have patrolled this precinct 238 times and issued 55 penalty infringement notices (PINs) to drivers of vehicles parked in non-compliance with the road rules. 

Waste and Recycling Collections

The petitioners’ have raised concerns that in situations when vehicles are parked on-street, and bins are placed on the nature strip, the bin is not accessible to the pick-up truck.

The residents have acknowledged that to overcome this problem they place the bins on their vehicle crossing. Whilst it is not the preferred outcome, this is not uncommon situation throughout the municipality and other local municipalities.

Despite these concerns, there is no recent record of residents reporting “missed” bin pick-ups.  This has been confirmed by Council’s waste and recycling contractor who has advised that there are no reports of difficulties with pick-ups.

Notwithstanding, unobstructed areas for bin pick-ups would be provided on all nature strips (in this section of Tasman Drive) if the car parking bay is rearranged. This would address the concerns of the petitioners.

Financial Implications

The total estimated cost to rearrange the car parking layouts on Tasman Drive, between Greenhills Road and Cabernet Crescent (south), in Bundoora is approximately $5,000.

Funding is available within the existing 2018/19 New Works Program funding allocations.

Policy strategy and legislation

City of Whittlesea Road Safety Strategy (2017):

Address safety of all road and path users. Address driver behaviour and attitude towards vulnerable road users: pedestrian, cyclists and motorcyclists.

City of Whittlesea Integrated Transport Strategy (2014):

Action RF 2.2: Manage local roads to improve amenity and safety for users.

City of Whittlesea Municipal Road Safety Strategy (2004):

Action Plan 3: Ensure that a safer road environment is developed and maintained.

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

A rigorous community consultation and engagement process has been undertaken in an attempt to resolve the key road safety, parking and traffic congestion concerns in local streets surrounding the Northpark Private Hospital.

Actions taken to date have been well received by the community.

If the parking bay layouts on Tasman Drive, between Greenhills Road and Cabernet Crescent (south), in Bundoora is rearranged, 17 car parking bays (49 to 32) will be lost, however the visibility and safety for residents exiting abutting properties will be enhanced, and concerns regarding waste and recycling pick-ups would be addressed.

The combined effectiveness of the Tasman Drive enhancements (tree trimming and rearranged car parking) will need to be monitored to determine if the level of increased visibility is adequate, and to ensure the waste and recycling pick-ups have been addressed.

Local Laws officers have been active in this area with regular patrols.

Council Officers need to take a proactive approach and engage with the Hospital with the delivery of the Hospital Travel Plan to encourage staff and visitors to the Hospital use alternative modes of transport, or park in the Hospital car park.

If the completed road safety, parking and traffic improvements, and the further planned actions, do not adequately address the community’s concerns, the only other measure available to Council is the introduction of Residential Parking Permits and the adoption of actions that were not supported by the community in this round of consultations.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.   Note that urgent road safety and traffic operational improvements in the streets around Northpark Private Hospital in Bundoora have been implemented. 

2.   Rearrange the car parking layout of Tasman Drive, between Greenhills Road and Cabernet Crescent (south), in Bundoora to improve safety for residents exiting abutting properties.

3.   Monitor the combined effectiveness of Tasman Drive enhancements, between Greenhills Road and Cabernet Crescent (south), to determine if the level of increased visibility is adequate.

4.   Note Local Laws activity and actions in the streets around Northpark Private Hospital in Bundoora.

5.   Continue to work with the Northpark Private Hospital with the delivery of the Hospital Travel Plan to encourage staff and visitors to the Hospital car park to use alternative modes of transport, or park in the Hospital car park.

6.   Advise owners and occupiers of properties in the streets around Northpark Private Hospital in Bundoora of Council’s decision on this matter.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                      Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                               Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                                                      Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

PDF Creator 


6.4       Corporate Services

6.4.1    30 Brand Drive Thomastown - Sale of Council Land

File No:                                  167290

Attachments:                        1        Confidential Property Information - Confidential

Confidential in accordance with Section 89(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1989 as it contains details relating to contractual matters.  

2        Site Plan & Photos

3        IRR Cashflow - Confidential

Confidential in accordance with Section 89(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1989 as it contains details relating to contractual matters.  

4        Alternative IRR Cashflow - Confidential

Confidential in accordance with Section 89(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1989 as it contains details relating to contractual matters.  

5        Certificate of Valuation - Confidential

Confidential in accordance with Section 89(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1989 as it contains details relating to contractual matters.  

6        Framework Application   

Responsible Officer:           Director Corporate Services

Author:                                  Manager Property, Rates & Valuations   

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

1.       Council officers commence the statutory processes required under the Local Government Act 1989 to sell Council’s industrial warehouse located at 30 Brand Drive, Thomastown.

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 at its next available meeting.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    The property was acquired by Council in 1998 and developed as a purpose built facility, office and warehouse complex.  The site consisted of a warehouse (2,520m2), office area (650m2 including 11 offices, three boardrooms, research and development area and suitable kitchen and bathroom facilities) and 56 car parking spaces. 

·    The premises were purpose built by Council for the initial tenant, Super Alloy Technologies, in 1998 and later assigned over to Primus Australia in 2005. The premises have been let by Cabrini Health since 2011.

·    The proposal seeks to dispose of the property and redirect the settlement funds to Council’s land banking reserve to fund future strategic property acquisitions.

·    The sale of surplus property to support property acquisition and development is a key part of Council’s Property Strategy.


 

Report

Background

The site has a total area of 5,578m2 and is located 600m east of the intersection of Dalton and Settlement Roads, Thomastown.  The property was acquired by Council in 1998 and developed as a purpose built facility, office and warehouse complex.  The site consisted of a warehouse (2,520m2), office area (650m2 including 11 offices, three boardrooms, research and development area and suitable kitchen and bathroom facilities) and 56 car parking spaces (see Attachment 2 – Site Plan & Photos).

The premises were purpose built by Council for the initial tenant, Super Alloy Technologies, in 1998 and later assigned over to Primus Australia in 2005.  Primus Australia executed successive leases over the property during 2005-09 but in October 2009 relocated its operations to University Hill.  The premises have been leased to Cabrini Health since 2011.

Proposal

It is proposed that Council officers commence the statutory processes required under the Local Government Act 1989 to sell Council’s industrial warehouse located at 30 Brand Drive, Thomastown.  The proposal will invite and consider public submissions received pursuant of Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 and all findings will be presented in a report to Council at its next available meeting.

Consultation

Council officers have previously advised Cabrini Health that a report will be presented to Council seeking approval to commence sale proceedings.  Should Council seek to commence sale proceedings, Cabrini Health will be notified that a public notice will be issued under the Local Government Act 1989.

INDUSTRIAL MARKET CONDITIONS

Property Specific Commentary

The subject property is a warehouse located within an established industrial estate of the outer northern suburb of Thomastown.  The Thomastown industrial area is identified within the Northern Industrial Precinct which is one of the three metropolitan areas identified as State significant industrial precincts.  The property has direct street frontage to Brand Drive which has excellent access to regional, metropolitan and national freeways and is located near major economic assets such as Melbourne Wholesale Fruit and Vegetable Markets, Melbourne Airport and a range of tertiary institutions such as RMIT and La Trobe University.

 

The subject property is currently under a lease agreement due to expire on 30 September 2018, with two further options of three years remaining. The Tenant has since agreed to exercise the first of the remaining two options, therefore, the property will be marketed on an investment basis.

 

Analysis of sales evidence and discussions with local agents suggest that owner occupiers and investors are equally participating in the market place with an increasing demand for functional warehouse/factory space.

Local Industrial Market Commentary

The industrial property market has picked up in the last 12 months due to the strength of the Victorian economy and strong annual population growth.  Increased infrastructure investment, especially in major transport infrastructure projects and a robust jobs market, including a low interest rate environment, are all factors that have contributed to a stronger demand for all types of industrial property. 

The demand is being generated from retailers as well as transport and logistics operators who are investing in new facilities to increase efficiency in their supply chains and distribution networks.

Currently there is limited industrial zoned land in the northern market, the Merrifield Business Park is driving supply as it is expected that it will deliver around 400,000m2 of industrial space in the next few years underpinned by the Dulex and Austrak developments.  The northern sub market is in demand due to the well-connected transport infrastructure, including the Hume Highway, the major freight corridor connecting Sydney and Melbourne and immediate access to the major arterial roads linking to the Tullamarine Airport and the Port of Melbourne.

Critical Dates

Council will invite public submissions under Section 189 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 with regard to the proposed sale of land.  An advertisement will be placed in the Whittlesea Leader newspaper and Council’s website on Tuesday 14 August 2018 requesting public submissions be received by Wednesday 12 September 2018 (12 noon).

Financial Implications

Due to commercial in confidence reasons confidential information is provided for Councillors consideration.  The first table provides an overview of the return on investment that Council has ‘realised’ following its purchase of 30 Brand Drive, Thomastown in 1998 (see confidential Attachment 3 - Actual IRR Cashflow).  Alternatively, the second table provides an overview on the return on investment that Council may have ‘realised’ had the funds been invested within the residential sector (see confidential Attachment 4 - Alternative IRR Cashflow)

Building condition & holding costs

By selling the asset, Council will not be required to make ongoing capital investment to bring it to a contemporary standard.  Planned maintenance works have been undertaken over successive years to improve accessibility, safety and functionality so that it conforms to building regulations and ensuring it is ‘fit for purpose’. 

Market Valuation

A market determination will be undertaken by Council’s Manager Property Rates & Valuations.  The valuation may also serve as the reserve price Council may wish to set should the property be listed on the open market (Confidential Attachment 5 – Certificate of Valuation).  

Appointment of marketing agent & associated costs

Selling fees are to be determined on agreement with selling agent.  The amount payable will include marketing expenses and commission based on the sale price.  Council officers will seek marketing campaigns and commission structures from a number of local and city based agents who specialise in the sale of industrial properties.

Property strategy

Council adopted the Property Strategy (following substantial internal consultation with both staff and Councillors) on 30 May 2017.

The purpose of the Property Strategy is to ensure that Council’s property portfolio is strategically aligned with its service delivery objectives and community expectations and to provide systems and processes that enable Council to make short, medium and long term decisions around the property portfolio in a fully informed manner. 

The aim of the Property Strategy is to establish an effective framework to manage Council’s property portfolio, as it expands the range and types of services and facilities it is expected to deliver to the community, in such a way as to support the financial sustainability of Council.

The key objectives related to this aim are:

1.       To facilitate the effective management of Council’s existing property portfolio.

2.       To set out where property should be held by Council, based on the principle of such property contributing to the delivery of services undertaken by Council to meet community expectations.

3.       To identify Council owned property having value of a 'strategic' nature, to ensure future development proposals optimise long-term financial benefits for Council.

4.       To identify property surplus to Council’s needs in the short to medium term (rolling five year timeframe).

5.       To identify potential development opportunities within Council’s property assets.

6.       To identify speculative purchasing opportunities to enable Council to fulfil its financial obligations as revenue stream for capital projects undertaken to meet the needs of its community.

7.       To continually meet the needs of an increasing population.

Property Strategy Framework Application

The Property Strategy methodology and assessment framework seeks to analyse a number of variables that will lead to the categorisation and treatment of land assets held by Council and establish whether they be retained by Council as ‘core assets’ or provide scope to potentially dispose of them as ‘non-core’ assets.  Scores will be applied within the matrix (see Attachment 6 – Framework Application) and enable a weighted average to be determined to assess risk and opportunity.

For example, assets with redevelopment/resale potential will retain favourable attributes such as:

·    A site location that captures the intended market and proximity to transport links

·    Minimal contractual arrangements tied to the property, i.e. mortgages/caveats

·    Opportunities to allow for socio economic uses such as affordable housing

·    Positive rates of financial returns on investment

·    A site/building envelope that is fully utilised and maintained in good condition

·    Rezoning and subdivision opportunities, resulting in the uplift in value and density

·    Retention of financial value and appeal to the intended market

·    Void of title encumbrances, heritage values and existing land contamination

·    Good building functionality.

The purpose of the matrix within the Property Strategy is to determine the significance of the property asset as “core/non-core”; measure the asset’s “opportunity assessment” and also measure the asset’s “risk assessment”.  The scoring within the matrix confirms that whilst the subject site is “core” it is a fair quality asset with limited development opportunity and therefore should be considered for possible disposal.

Open Space & Social Housing Policy

The property is not identified for retention under Council’s Open Space & Social Housing Policy, nor appropriate to support higher density social housing initiatives (given its zoning and present use).

Policy strategy and legislation

Council must seek public submissions on the proposed land sale under Section 189 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989.  Submissions will be invited for a period no less than 28 days and referred on to an appointed Committee of Council for consideration.  The appointed Committee will consider and report all findings to Council for its final recommendation at its next available meeting. 

The property will be sold at auction to ensure transparency and satisfy the State Government’s Local Government Best Practice Guideline for the Sale, Exchange, and Transfer of Land 2009.

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

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

To seek Council’s approval to commence the statutory processes required under the Local Government Act 1989 to sell Council’s industrial warehouse located at 30 Brand Drive, Thomastown.  The proposal will 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 at its next available meeting.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Commence the statutory processes required under the Local Government Act 1989 to sell Council’s industrial warehouse located at 30 Brand Drive, Thomastown.

2.       Invite and consider public submissions received pursuant of Section 189 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989.

3.       Establish an advisory Committee of Council comprising South-East Ward Councillors to consider any written submissions received on the proposal and make recommendations to Council on any such submissions.

4.       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.

5.       Receive a further report on the proposed sale of Council’s industrial warehouse located at 30 Brand Drive, Thomastown, following the close of the submission period.

 


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                                                  Tuesday 7 August 2018

 

6.4.2    CONTRACT FINALISATION REPORT - PRESENTED QUARTER 1, FY 2019

Attachments:                        1        Finalised contracts details - Confidential

Confidential in accordance with Section 89(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1989 as it contains details relating to contractual matters.    

Responsible Officer:           Director Corporate Services

Author: