Logo_Primary_BlackWhite%20(JPG)

Agenda

 

OF Ordinary
COUNCIL MEETING

HELD ON

Tuesday 2 June 2020

AT 3.00pm

summons

 

You are advised that a Meeting of Council has been called by the Acting Chief Executive Officer on Tuesday, 2 June 2020 in Council Chamber, 25 Ferres Boulevard, South Morang at 3.00pm for the transaction of the following business.

 

When attending a Council Meeting a condition of entry is to check-in upon arrival.  Staff are available to assist.

 

J CARBONE

ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

 

 

ADMINISTRATOR

 

LYDIA WILSON                           ADMINISTRATOR

 

 

 

SENIOR OFFICERS

 

 

JOE CARBONE                                  ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

BELGIN BESIM                                  DIRECTOR COMMUNITY SERVICES

HELEN SUI                                         DIRECTOR CITY TRANSPORT & PRESENTATION

AMY MONTALTI                                 DIRECTOR CORPORATE SERVICES

JULIAN EDWARDS                           DIRECTOR PARTNERSHIPS, PLANNING & ENGAGEMENT

MICHAEL TONTA                              MANAGER GOVERNANCE

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

 

ORDER OF BUSINESS

 

The Acting Chief Executive Officer submits the following business:

1.           Opening.. 11

1.1        MEETING OPENING AND PRAYER.. 11

1.2        ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF TRADITIONAL OWNERS STATEMENT. 11

1.3        Present. 11

2.           Apologies.. 11

3.           Declarations of Interest. 11

4.           Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meeting.. 11

5.           Questions, Petitions and Joint Letters.. 11

5.1        Questions To ADMINISTRATOR.. 11

5.2        Petitions.. 13

Nil Reports.. 13

5.3        Joint Letters.. 15

Nil Reports.. 15

6.           Officers' Reports.. 17

6.1        Partnerships, Planning & Engagement. 17

6.1.1      29 Old Plenty Road South Morang - Planning Permit Application No. 718069 - Construction of Eleven Dwellings.. 17

6.1.2      Commencement of Planning Scheme Amendment to apply Public Acquisition Overlay in Wollert PSP.. 49

6.1.3      Proposal to Amend the South Morang East Development Plan.. 65

6.1.4      1410A Plenty Road, Mernda - Planning Permit Application 719210 - Partial demolition and buildings and works to a building in a Heritage Overlay.. 87

6.1.5      Lehmanns Road Wollert - Planning Permit Application No. 719363 - Removal of Native Vegetation.. 153

6.1.6      Improving Community Safety: A Regulatory Compliance Framework.. 183

6.2        Community Services.. 199

6.2.1      Re-focusing Councils Grants Programs.. 199

6.3        City Transport and Presentation.. 207

6.3.1      2019-78 Supply of Asphalt Works Tender Evaluation.. 207

6.3.2      Miller Street, Epping - Road Safety Crash Counter Measure.. 211

6.3.3      Road Safety & Traffic Management:  Manor House Drive,  Epping North.. 221

6.3.4      2020-35 Microsoft Enterprise Licensing.. 233

6.3.5      2019/20 Third Quarter New Works Program Report. 237

6.4        Corporate Services.. 259

6.4.1      Quarterly Finance Performance Report for the period ended 31 March 2020. 259

6.4.2      Contract 2020-2 Facilities Management - Tender Evaluation.. 283

6.4.3      Procurement Policy Review... 289

6.4.4      Safety and Wellbeing report - June 2020 Quarterly Update.. 319

6.5        Executive Services.. 335

6.5.1      Assemblies of Councillors - 2 June 2020. 335

7.           Notices of Motion.. 339

Nil Reports.. 339

8.           Questions to Officers.. 339

9.           Urgent BusineSS.. 339

10.        Reports from Delegates Appointed BY Council TO Other Bodies.. 339

11.        Confidential Business.. 341

11.1      Partnerships, Planning & Engagement. 341

Nil Reports.. 341

11.2      Community Services.. 343

Nil Reports.. 343

11.3      City Transport and Presentation.. 345

11.3.1    Hanson Landfill Services Agreement 1986 (Amended) - Provision of Tip Vouchers - Contract Variation.. 345

11.4      Corporate Services.. 347

Nil Reports.. 347

 

11.5      Executive Services.. 349

Nil Reports.. 349

11.6      Notices of Motion.. 351

Nil Reports.. 351

12.        Closure.. 353

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

 

Note:

At the Administrator’s discretion, the meeting may be closed in accordance with Section 66(2)(a) of the Local Government Act 2020. 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, the Administrator will answer questions from residents and ratepayers. Questions should be submitted in writing no later than 3pm on the day of the ordinary Council 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. Refer: https://www.whittlesea.vic.gov.au/about-us/council/council-meetings/

 

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)      Council’s internet site – http://cam.whittlesea.vic.gov.au/

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

1.         Opening

1.1       MEETING OPENING AND PRAYER

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

 

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

 

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

 

Amen

 

1.2       ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF TRADITIONAL OWNERS STATEMENT

The Administrator 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.

 

I would also like to personally acknowledge Elders past, present and emerging.

 

1.3       Present

2.         Apologies

3.         Declarations of Interest

4.         Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meeting

Ordinary Meeting of Council held 5 May 2020.

5.         Questions, Petitions and Joint Letters

5.1       Questions To ADMINISTRATOR

5.2       Petitions

Nil Reports

5.3       Joint Letters

Nil Reports   


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

6.         Officers' Reports

6.1       Partnerships, Planning & Engagement

6.1.1      29 Old Plenty Road South Morang - Planning Permit Application No. 718069 - Construction of Eleven Dwellings

Attachments:                        1       Locality Maps

2       Development Plans   

Responsible Officer:            Director Partnerships, Planning & Engagement

Author:                                  Senior Planner   

APPLICANT:                          Buckmaster Town Planning Pty Ltd

COUNCIL POLICY:                22.01 – Environmentally Sustainable Design; and

                                                22.16 – Housing Diversity and Design           

ZONING:                                 General Residential Zone – Schedule 1

OVERLAY:                             Nil

REFERRAL:                           Vic Track

OBJECTIONS:                       One

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council resolve to approve Planning Permit Application No. 718069 and issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit for the construction of eleven dwellings at 29 Old Plenty Road, South Morang.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    It is proposed to construct eight double storey and three triple storey dwellings. 

·    Notification of the application was undertaken, and one objection and one submission have been received.  The main grounds of objection include; traffic impacts on the street, on-street car parking, bin storage on collection day and noise impacts.   

·    The site is appropriately located within a General Residential Zone and the proposal demonstrates compliance with the requirements of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, including Clause 55 – ResCode and therefore support is recommended subject to conditions.

 

Report

SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

The site is a residential property located on the north western side of Old Plenty Road in South Morang, 260m east of Middle Gorge train station (see Attachment 1)

The site contains an 18.3m frontage to Old Plenty Road, an average depth of 95.7m and a total site area of 2,165.1m².  The site contains a fall of 3.4m from the southern boundary corner to the northern boundary corner. 

The site currently does not contain any buildings or vegetation.  A single width crossover is present near the eastern side boundary. 

The surrounding area (to the north and east of Middle Gorge train station) is characterised by dwellings at a variety of densities.  The north western side of Old Plenty Road contains large vacant parcels, single dwelling developments as well as a two dwelling development, a four dwelling development and a seven dwelling development.  The south eastern side of Old Plenty Road is dominated by single dwelling developments, of varying densities, as well as a two dwelling development, a six dwelling development and a eleven dwelling development.  The character of the built form within the area is inconsistent, with dwellings varying in architectural styles, building materials and landscaping.

Directly to the north west of the site is open undeveloped land owned by Vic Track.  Directly to the north east of the site is a seven dwelling development.  Directly to the south east of the site is Old Plenty Road and single dwelling developments fronting Old Plenty Road.  Finally, directly to the south west of the site is a single dwelling development protected by a Heritage Overlay – Schedule 27.         

Medium density developments are located at; 18, 20-22, 25, 31, 39 and 50 Old Plenty Road.

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

·    Middle Gorge Train Station (260m west);

·    Bellevue Park (600m south);

·    San Carlo Homes for the Aged (700m north);

·    South Morang Reserve (800m south west);

·    Bushmans Way Park (900m east);  

·    Arilla Retirement Village (1.1kim north);

·    Stage Coach Park (1.1km south east);

·    Bushmans Wetlands (1.2km south east);

·    Plenty Valley Major Activity Centre (2.0km south west); and

·    Marymede Catholic College (2.1km west).  

restrictions and easements

The site is formally described as Lot No. 1 on Plan of Subdivision No. 039331. 

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

A 1.8m wide drainage and sewerage easement runs along the north western rear boundary of the site. 

Proposal

The application seeks approval for the construction of eleven dwellings (see Attachment 2).

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

7.7m front (south east)

4.9m side (north east)

1.0m side (south west)

27m²

Double Garage

Dwelling No. 2

Double Storey

2

5.0m side (north east)

5.2m side (south west)

47m²

Single Garage

Dwelling No. 3

Double Storey

2

5.2m side (north east)

5.2m side (south west)

54m²

Single Garage

Dwelling No. 4

Double Storey

2

5.4m side (north east)

5.0m side (south west)

54m²

Single Garage

Dwelling No. 5

Double Storey

3

6.2m side (north east)

5.0m side (south west)

49m²

Single Garage and Tandem Car Space

Dwelling No. 6

Double Storey

3

6.1m side (north east)

5.0m side (south west)

49m² 

Single Garage and Tandem Car Space

Dwelling No. 7

Double Storey

3

6.6m side (north east)

5.0m side (south west)

59m²

Single Garage and Tandem Car Space

Dwelling No. 8

Double Storey

2

3.7m rear (north west)

0m side (south west)

25m²

Single Garage

Dwelling No. 9

Triple Storey

3

2.6m rear (north west)

28m²

Single Garage

Dwelling No. 10

Triple Storey

2

4.4m rear (north west)

29m²

Single Garage

Dwelling No. 11

Triple Storey

3

6.0m rear (north west)

78m²

Single Garage

Public Notification

Advertising of the application has resulted in one objection and one submission being received. 

The grounds of objection can be summarised as follows:

1.       Traffic impacts on the street;

2.       On-street car parking;

3.       Bin storage on collection day; and

4.       Noise impacts. 

A submission was also received from Vic Track.  Vic Track offered no objection to the application and recommended two conditions to be included on any permit issued to ensure that there is no drainage, waste or any other materials either directed or stored onto the railway land.

A response to the grounds of objection and the Vic Track submission will be provided later in this report. 

It is noted that the original plans (the advertised plans) proposed the construction of twelve dwellings comprising eight double storey and four triple storey dwellings.  The applicant has since substituted the plans and has reduced the number of dwellings to a total of eleven dwellings comprising the construction of eight double storey dwellings and three triple storey dwellings.   This report is based on the substituted plans submitted to Council on 4 March 2020.

ASSESSMENT AGAINST CLAUSE 22.01 – ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

This Clause seeks to ensure development achieves best practice in environmentally sustainable development from the design stage through to construction and operation.  This Clause requires the provision of a Sustainability Management Plan (SMP) and a Green Travel Plan (GTP). 

A SMP was provided as part of the application.  The submitted SMP was referred to Council’s Environmentally Sustainable Development (ESD) Planner.  Council’s ESD Planner offered no objection to the proposed development, subject to some minor amendments to the SMP, which can be addressed as conditions on any permit issued.  Concerns were identified with the proposed stormwater management initiatives, which will be addressed later in this report.     

A GTP was not provided as part of the application, however can be addressed as a condition of any permit issued. 

ASSESSMENT AGAINST CLAUSE 22.16 – HOUSING DIVERSITY AND DESIGN

Relevant objectives of this Clause include:

·    Support the highest level of housing change in proximity to City of Whittlesea’s Principal Public Transport Network and Metropolitan Activity and Neighbourhood Activity Centres, to reduce car dependency;

·    Support the development of accessible and adaptable housing to accommodate residents with different abilities, including non-ambulant residents.  For the purpose of this Policy, accessible housing is defined as a dwelling containing a kitchen, bedroom, shower, toilet and wash basin at ground level that is usable by everyone regardless of their age and abilities;

·    Achieve preferred character and design objectives by encouraging generous landscaping and high quality design of multi-dwelling development; and

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

The proposal satisfies the Site Capacity and Housing Location policies of Clause 22.16 – Housing Diversity and Design, noting the site is located within the Principal Public Transport Network.  The number of dwellings on the site is considered acceptable.  

The proposal fails to satisfy parts of the Housing Diversity and Housing Design policies of Clause 22.16 – Housing Diversity and Design as detailed below:

·    The north east elevations of Dwelling Nos. 1 to 7 contain sheer double storey walls.  While it is noted sheer double storey walls are present on the abutting seven dwelling development, it is considered these walls are unacceptable and contrary to the recently introduced Clause 22.16 – Housing Diversity and Design, which specifically seeks to provide an articulated building form to avoid visual bulk. 

      The location of these sheer double storey walls are considered to likely cause visual bulk due to the lack of meaningful tall landscaping along the shared accessway to soften the built form. A condition should be placed on any permit issued requiring a varied first floor level for Dwelling Nos. 2 – 7 to provide a suitable transition and reduce the appearance of visual bulk.

·    The north east elevation of Dwelling Nos. 8 to 11 is also considered unacceptable.  It is considered the lack of variance in the material finish of the first floor of Dwelling No. 11 and the triple storey built form results in this elevation being visually obtrusive and unacceptable.  A condition should be placed on any permit issued requiring; the use of windows and greater variation in the external colours and materials for Dwelling No. 11 to reduce the dominance of the built form.  

ASSESSMENT AGAINST CLAUSE 55 - RESCODE OF THE WHITTLESEA PLANNING SCHEME

The following table provides details on whether the proposal complies with the requirements of Clause 55 - ResCode 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

P

Condition

The existing neighbourhood character includes; a variety of densities, a combination of single and double storey dwellings and a combination of detached and attached built form. 

The preferred neighbourhood character is that sought within Clause 22.16 – Housing Diversity and Design. 

Subject to amendments to the first floors of Dwelling Nos. 1 to 7 and the first and second floors of Dwelling No. 11, as discussed earlier in this report, it is considered the construction of eight double storey and three triple storey dwellings is acceptable. 

B2

Residential Policy

P

P

As discussed earlier in this report, the site is located within a General Residential Zone – Schedule 1 and is 260m from Middle Gorge train station.  The number of dwellings proposed is considered acceptable for the area. 

B3

Dwelling Diversity

P

P

  

B4

Infrastructure

P

Condition

The application was referred to Council’s Engineers who offered no objection to the proposal, subject to the submission of drainage computations to show the provision of a one-metre space between Unit 11 and the southern boundary to accommodate drainage pipe lines and also for overland flows in accordance with the Melbourne Water Drainage Scheme. The development has accommodated this one-metre space, however, engineering conditions requiring the submission of drainage plans and computations can be addressed via a condition on permit.

B5

Integration with the Street

P

P

 

B6

Street Setback

P

Condition

Standard B6 requires a street setback of 9.0m.  Dwelling No. 1 will be setback between 7.4m and 10.1m.  As the site abuts a Heritage Overlay – Schedule 27 and is within a General Residential Zone – Schedule 1 (compared to the more intense Residential Growth Zone), an increased street setback to a minimum 9.0m to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be provided, which can be addressed as a condition of any permit issued. 

B7

Building Height

P

P

 

B8

Site Coverage

P

P

 

B9

Permeability

P

P

 

B10

Energy Efficiency

P

Condition

The secluded private open spaces for Dwelling Nos. 1 to 7 are located on the south side of the respective dwellings.  Subject to satisfying Standard B29 – Solar Access to Open Space, which will be discussed later in this report, the proposal is considered acceptable.   

B11

Open Space

P

P

Dwelling Nos. 8 to 11 will overlook the abutting VicTrack land, which is considered acceptable. 

B12

Safety

P

P

 

B13

Landscaping

P

Condition

A Landscape plan should be submitted as a condition should a permit be issued. 

B14

Access

P

P

 

B15

Parking Location

P

P

 

B17

Side and Rear Setbacks

P

 

 

B18

Walls on Boundaries

P

P

 

B19

Daylight to Existing Windows

P

P

 

B20

North-facing Windows

P

P

 

B21

Overshadowing Open Space

P

P

 

B22

Overlooking

P

P

 

B23

Internal Views

P

P

 

B24

Noise Impacts

P

Condition

Dwelling Nos. 8 to 11 will be within 80m of the existing train tracks.  A condition should be placed on any permit issued to ensure measures are implemented to reduce noise levels.  As a guide, the requirements of Clause 58.04-3 – Noise Impacts (for apartments) should be provided.   

B25

Accessibility

P

 

 

B26

Dwelling Entry

P

Condition

Directional signage should be provided for Dwelling Nos. 8 to 11, which can be addressed as a condition of any permit issued. 

B27

Daylight to New Windows

P

P

 

B28

Private Open Space

P

P

 

B29

Solar Access to Open Space

P

Condition

The secluded private open spaces of Dwelling No. 2, 4 and 6 do not provide the required setback from the northern walls of the associated dwelling.  A condition should be placed on any permit issued to ensure the first floors are either recessed and or rearranged or the ground floor secluded private open space increased to comply with Standard B29. 

B30

Storage

P

P

 

B31

Design Detail

P

Condition

Subject to amendments to the first floors of Dwelling Nos. 1 to 7 and the first and second floors of Dwelling No. 11, as discussed earlier in this report, it is considered the construction of eight double storey and three triple storey dwellings is acceptable.

B32

Front Fences

P

P

 

B33

Common Property

P

P

 

B34

Site Services

P

P

 

ASSESSMENT AGAINST CLAUSE 52.06 – 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

2

1

1

Yes

2

2

1

1

Yes

3

2

1

1

Yes

4

2

1

1

Yes

5

3

2

2

Yes

6

3

2

2

Yes

7

3

2

2

Yes

8

2

1

1

Yes

9

3

2

2

Yes

10

2

1

1

Yes

11

3

2

2

Yes

It is also noted that the site is located within the Principal Public Transport Network, whereby no visitor car parking spaces are required. 

 

The proposal must also comply with the following Design Standards:

 

Requirements

Compliance

Comment

Number of Car Parking Spaces Required Under Table 1

P

Design Standard 1 – Accessways

P

 

Design Standard 2 – Car Parking Spaces (dimensions)

P

 

Design Standard 3 – Gradients

P

 

Design Standard 4 – Mechanical Parking

N/A

 

Design Standard 5 – Urban Design

P

 

Design Standard 6 – Safety

P

 

Design Standard 7 – Landscaping

P

 

ASSESSMENT AGAINST CLAUSE 53.18 – STORMWATER MANAGEMENT IN URBAN DEVELOPMENT

This Clause seeks to ensure that stormwater in urban development, including retention and reuse, is managed to mitigate the impacts of stormwater on the environment, property and public safety, and to provide cooling, local habitat and amenity benefits.

 

A STORM Rating Report was submitted as part of the application and must comply with the following objectives and standards. 

 

 

ü - Compliance
× -  Non compliance

Objectives

Standards

Comments

W2

Stormwater Management Objectives for Buildings and Works

P

Condition

The STORM Rating Report and associated plans indicate runoff from roofed areas will be directed into rain gardens, however the gradients required to satisfy Design Standard 3 – Gradients of Clause 52.06 – Car Parking are contrary to the STORM Rating Report and associated plans.  An alternative solution must be provided, which can be addressed as a condition of any permit issued.   

W3

Site Management Objectives

P

Condition

A Site Management Plan should form a condition of any permit issued.   

Comments on VICTRACK SUBMISSION

Notification of the application was given to Vic Track as an abutting landowner.  Vic Track offered no objection to the application and recommended two conditions be placed on any permit issued.  Vic Track requested a condition relating to boundary fencing being maintained at the owner’s expense.  It is considered boundary fencing is a civil matter, therefore this condition should not be included on any permit issued. 

All other conditions recommended by Vic Track to ensure that there is no drainage, waste or any other materials either directed or stored onto the railway land should be included on any permit issued.   

Comments on Grounds of Objection

1.   Traffic impacts on the street:

The application has been referred to Council’s Engineers.  It is considered the traffic likely to be generated by the proposal can be accommodated on Old Plenty Road. 

 

2.   On-street car parking:

The application satisfies the car parking requirements of Clause 52.06 – Car Parking as discussed earlier in this report.

 

3.   Bin storage on collection day:

Waste collection for the development will be undertaken by a Private Contractor and will not impact the existing collection arrangements on Old Plenty Road. 

 

4.   Noise impacts:

The anticipated noise generated by the proposed development is acceptable for a residential zoned 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

The application has been assessed against the Whittlesea Planning Scheme and in particular the objectives and standards of Clause 22.01 – Environmentally Sustainable Development, Clause 22.16 – Housing Diversity and Design, Clause 55 – ResCode, Clause 52.06 – Car Parking and Clause 53.18 – Stormwater Management in Urban Development.  The proposal demonstrates a satisfactory level of compliance, subject to modifications.  Accordingly, approval of the application is recommended.

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to approve Planning Permit Application No. 718069 and issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit, for the construction of eleven dwellings in accordance with the endorsed plans, at 29 Old Plenty Road South Morang, and subject to the following conditions:

Plans Required

1.       Before the development hereby permitted starts, a digital copy 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 20.02.2020 and prepared by 369 Building Design, but modified to show:

(a)     The street setback of Dwelling No. 1 a minimum 9m and appropriately stepped towards the land to the south at 27 Old Plenty Road.  The design is to maintain a suitable transition between ground and first floor levels;

(b)     The bin storage area positioned behind the building line of Dwelling No. 1;

(c)     A varied first floor level for Dwelling Nos. 2 – 7 to provide a suitable transition and reduce the appearance of visual bulk;

(d)     The use of windows and variation in external colours and materials to the north east elevation of Dwelling 11.  The placement of windows must be in accordance with Standard B22 – Overlooking;

(e)     Dwelling Nos. 2, 4 and 6 to comply with Standard B29 - Solar Access to Open Space of Clause 55 – ResCode;

(f)      Dwelling Nos. 8 – 11 fronting the railway track designed and constructed to achieve the following noise levels:

·     Not greater than 35dB(A) for bedrooms, assessed as an LAeq,8h from 10pm to 6am; and

·     Not greater than 40dB(A) for living areas, assessed LAeq,16h from 6am to 10pm.

(g)     The retaining wall and boundary fence abutting the Vic Track land to be to 1.8m in height;

(h)     Directional signage for the entries of Dwelling Nos. 8 – 11 to be placed on the north side of the shared accessway opposite Dwelling No. 7;

(i)      A Legal Point of Discharge and overland flow paths in accordance with the Melbourne Water Drainage Scheme; 

(j)      Landscaping as required by Condition No. 2 of this Permit;

(k)     Schedule of external materials, finishes and colours;

(l)      Requirements identified in the SMP and Stormwater Response as per Conditions No. 3 and No. 4 of this Permit; and

(m)    A revised Waste Management Plan as per Condition 3 of this Permit.

2.       Concurrent with the endorsement of plans under Condition No. 1 and before the development hereby permitted commences, a digital copy of a Landscape Plan, prepared by a suitably qualified (or experienced) Landscape Designer, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority.  When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of this Permit.  The Landscape Plan must show:

(a)     A survey of all existing vegetation and natural features;

(b)     The area or areas set aside for landscaping;

(c)     A schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs / small trees and ground cover;

(d)     The location of each species to be planted and the location of all areas to be covered by grass, lawn or other surface material;

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

(f)      Appropriate irrigation systems; and

(g)     The provision of canopy trees within the front and rear setbacks. 

 

 

Waste Management Plan

3.       Concurrent with the endorsement of plans under Condition No. 1 and before the development hereby permitted starts, a Waste Management Plan must be prepared to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Once satisfactory, such a plan will be endorsed and must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The Plan must provide the following details of a regular private waste (including recyclables) collection service for the subject land including:

(a)        The type/s and number of waste bins;

(b)       Screening of bins;

(c)        Type/size of trucks;

(d)       Frequency of waste collection;

(e)        The provision and use of a bin-tug.  The bin-tug must be maintained in an operational state at all times;

(f)        Hours of collection (to comply with EPA Regulations).  The hours of collection must be outside peak hours; and

(g)       Turn circles for collection trucks demonstrating ingress/egress can be undertaken in a forward direction.

To the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The endorsed Waste Management Plan must not be amended without prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

Environmentally Sustainable Design

4.       Before the development hereby permitted starts, a digital copy of amended SMP 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 SMP must show:

(a)     Include preliminary NatHERS reports for Dwelling Nos. 1, 4, 7, 8, 10 & 11 showing the improved thermal efficiency of the dwellings achieving a minimum average rating of 6.6 stars across the development;

(b)     Demonstrate through design changes and other means such as shading and insulation how the average 6.6 stars across the development is achieved;

(c)     The standard of heating / cooling systems for the dwellings is to be revised in an amended BESS Report to be within 1 star of best available; and

(d)     The rainwater tank provision of the SDA amended to accurately reflect that identified in the BESS Report.

5.       The Stormwater Management Response is to be altered:

(a)     The raingardens proposed to serve the 451sqm of shared accessway are to be replaced with an alternative design solution (such as permeable paving but not a proprietary stormwater system) to achieve a minimum STORM rating of 100%, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority; and

 

(b)     Specific design and construction details of the alternative stormwater solution that achieves a minimum 100% STORM rating and complies with Council engineering drainage requirements.

6.       Prior to the occupation of any building approved under this Permit, a compliance inspection and report from the author of the SMP & BESS Report or similarly qualified person or company, approved pursuant to this Permit, must be submitted to the Responsible Authority.

The compliance report must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and must confirm that all measures specified in the SMP & BESS Report have been implemented in accordance with the approved documentation.

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.

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

Landscaping

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

Actions Before Use Commences

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

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.

11.     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.

12.     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 shall be responsible for obtaining prior specific written approval for any works involving the alteration of Council or other Public Authority assets.

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

14.     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.

15.     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.

Infrastructure

16.     Before starting any buildings or works, engineering plans showing a properly prepared design (with computations) for the internal drainage and method of disposal of stormwater from all roofed and sealed areas, including the use of an on-site detention system (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.

Drainage computations must demonstrate that the overland flows (1 in 100 year ARI flows) from this development within the 1m passage (Between Unit 11 and southern boundary) meet free board requirements to Unit 11 and also adjoining property to the south.

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

This development requires an outfall drain to be provided in accordance with the Melbourne Water Drainage Scheme.  On site detention (OSD) may also be required depending on the design requirements for the scheme drain.  Refer to Melbourne Water for further information.

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

General Amenity – Construction Works

19.     Prior to commencement of any works, a Construction Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority.  The plan must include details in relation to:

(a)     Vehicle access to the site;

(b)     Parking of construction vehicles; and

(c)     Storage of materials / goods.

20.     Prior to commencement of any works, the permit holder must contact Council’s Infrastructure Protection Unit on 9401 5532 to arrange a site inspection to ensure all requirements of the Construction Management Plan have been completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

 

 

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

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

Vic Track Requirement

23.     The permit holder must not, at any time:

(a)     allow any drainage, effluent, waste, soil or other materials to enter or be directed to the railway land; or

(b)     store or deposit any waste, soil or other materials on the railway land.

Permit Expiry

24.     In accordance with the Planning and Environment Act 1987, a permit for the 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. 

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

Notes

Advanced Trees

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

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

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

Easements

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

 

 

Property Numbering

Please note that property addresses and numbering is allocated by Council.  This is usually formalised at the time of the subdivision, however it is Council’s intention to number the proposed dwellings as follows:-

Dwelling No. 1 - 1/29 Old Plenty Road South Morang

Dwelling No. 2 - 2/29 Old Plenty Road South Morang

Dwelling No. 3 - 3/29 Old Plenty Road South Morang

Dwelling No. 4 - 4/29 Old Plenty Road South Morang

Dwelling No. 5 - 5/29 Old Plenty Road South Morang

Dwelling No. 6 - 6/29 Old Plenty Road South Morang

Dwelling No. 7 - 7/29 Old Plenty Road South Morang

Dwelling No. 8 - 8/29 Old Plenty Road South Morang

Dwelling No. 9 - 9/29 Old Plenty Road South Morang

Dwelling No. 10 - 10/29 Old Plenty Road South Morang

Dwelling No. 11 - 11/29 Old Plenty Road South Morang

Please check with Council’s Subdivision Department to verify all street numberings.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 



 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

6.1.2      Commencement of Planning Scheme Amendment to apply Public Acquisition Overlay in Wollert PSP

Attachments:                        1       Context Plan

2       Proposed PAO

3       Epping Road and Boundary Road / Bridge Inn Road intersection plan

4       Planning Permit map Bodycoats Rd precinct   

Responsible Officer:            Director Partnerships, Planning & Engagement

Author:                                  Planning Officer   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

Council seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit an amendment to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, to apply the Public Acquisition Overlay to land required for the upgrade of the intersection Epping Road and Boundary Road/Bridge Inn Road and associated works in the Wollert Precinct Structure Plan area.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·      The Wollert Precinct Structure Plan (PSP) identifies the transport projects required to support the development of the precinct including IN-09 (Epping Road and Boundary Road) and RD06c (Boundary Road). The projects are funded by the Wollert Development Contributions Plan (DCP).

·      A number of developments in the northern part of the Wollert PSP area have had subdivision planning permits issued.

·      The current intersection at Epping Road and Boundary Road/Bridge Inn Road does not have the capacity to safely cater for significant new growth in the northern part of the PSP. This intersection is critical both in terms of servicing the precinct but also to the transport network for the broader Northern Growth Corridor.

·      The permits therefore include conditions that require the construction of intersection IN-09 (Epping Road and Boundary Road) and RD06c (Boundary Road) prior to a Statement of Compliance that creates the 901st lot within the precinct.

·      It is noted that this condition is the subject of a VCAT case P1591/2019. One of the key issues relates to access to the necessary land required to allow for the delivery of the intersection and associated works.

·    Both the land and construction component of the projects are funded by the DCP.

·    Commencing the planning scheme amendment process for the application of the Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO) over the land designated in the Wollert PSP and DCP will enable the future delivery of the intersections, which will both facilitate development and provide for a net community benefit.

·    An existing PAO applies to part of the Epping Road and Bridge Inn Road relating to the widening of Epping Road and the future E6 road reserve. Discussions are required with the Department of Transport to ensure that efforts to acquire the land are co-ordinated to ensure that the required works can be undertaken in a timely manner.

Report

INTRODUCTION

The Wollert Precinct Structure Plan (PSP) provides the overarching framework to guide the development of the Wollert precinct (refer to Attachment 1). The PSP and the Wollert Development Contributions Plan (DCP) include a number of infrastructure projects which are required to support the development of the precinct, including project IN-09 - Intersection of Epping Road and Boundary Road / Bridge Inn Road which requires upgrading (refer to Attachment 2 and Attachment 3). The construction of this intersection will also require works to Boundary Road between Andrew Road and Epping Road (project RD-06c and IN-26).

BACKGROUND

The Wollert PSP was approved as part of Amendment C187 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme on 23 February 2017. 

Since then development has commenced and a number of developments have had planning permits issued. Due to lack of sequencing requirements development is not occurring in an orderly manner and a number of out-of-sequence developments have been proposed in area known as the Bodycoats Road (Wollert Northern) Precinct (refer to Attachment 4).

The projects are considered out-of-sequence because the applications were lodged prior to key infrastructure being constructed. This infrastructure is key to facilitating the development of the precinct. Rather than refusing applications on this basis, multiple Planning Permits were issued requiring the implementation of key infrastructure projects, prior to the issuing of statement of compliance.

The planning permits include conditions that require the construction of intersection (IN-09 Epping Road and Boundary Road) prior to the lots obtaining a Statement of Compliance that creates the 901st lot within the Bodycoats Road Precinct.

It is noted that the condition requiring the upgrade of IN-09 (Epping Road and Boundary Road) is the subject of a VCAT case P1591/2019. This VCAT matter is yet to be resolved with one of the issues being access to the land required to deliver the intersection. Acquisition of the land will assist with enabling the delivery of the intersection and address some of the concerns relating to access to the land raised as part of VCAT proceedings.

The upgrade of the intersection of Boundary Road and Epping Road is therefore considered critical for the development of the precinct and for the transport network for the broader Northern Growth Corridor. The intersection at Boundary Road and Epping Road is already at capacity and will worsen as development occurs.  As a result, the subject intersection will no longer be satisfactory to service community need.

The upgrades cannot be accommodated within the existing road reserve and additional land is required which has been identified in the Wollert DCP for Council as the Delivery Agency to acquire. Given the critical nature of the land in order to deliver the upgraded intersections, it is recommended that Council commence the process to acquire the land as a matter of priority.

The first step in this process is to identify that the land is proposed to be acquired for public purposes through the application of the Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO) (refer to Attachment 2). Once the PAO has been applied, the land can be acquired either through negotiation or in accordance with the Wollert DCP and Land Acquisition and Compensation Act 1986.

 

 

 

It is noted that some of the land required for IN-09- Intersection of Boundary Road and Epping Road is already subject to a PAO relating to the widening of Epping Road and future E6 road reserve. Department of Transport is the designated acquiring agency. Council officers have been in discussions with Department of Transport in regard to the importance of them acquiring the land in a timely manner.

SUBJECT LAND

To deliver the upgraded intersection at Epping Road and Boundary Road / Bridge Inn Road, additional land is required (refer to Attachment 2 and 3). This also includes land further west along Boundary Road and part of the land required for the future Boundary Road and Andrews Road intersection.

Seven separate parcels are affected by the proposed PAO. These are:

·        480 Epping Road, Wollert.

·        490 Epping Road, Wollert.

·        495 Epping Road, Wollert.

·        30 Boundary Road, Wollert.

·        60 Boundary Road, Wollert.

·        70 Boundary Road, Wollert.

·        80 Boundary Road, Wollert.

PLANNING FRAMEWORK

The overarching strategic direction for the land is set by the Wollert PSP which is incorporated into the Whittlesea Planning Scheme and Schedule 5 of the Urban Growth Zone. The subject land is affected by the following planning controls:

·        Urban Growth Zone – Schedule 5.

·        Rural Conservation Zone.

·        Development Contributions Plan Overlay – Schedule 16.

·        Incorporated Plan Overlay – Schedule 4.

·        Public Acquisition Overlay – Schedule 2 (490 Boundary Road, Wollert – Wollert).

·        Wollert Precinct Structure Plan (PSP).

·        Wollert Development Contributions Plan (DCP).

All infrastructure projects (land and construction) forming part of this proposal are required by the PSP and identified and funded through the DCP.

AMENDMENT PROPOSAL

The Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO) is the planning tool which used to identify land which is proposed to be acquired for a public purpose. A planning scheme amendment is required to apply the PAO.

The proposed Planning Scheme Amendment seeks to apply the PAO to parts of the lots noted above and mapped in Attachment 2. 

Once the PAO has been applied, the land can be acquired either through negotiation or in accordance with Land Acquisition and Compensation Act 1986.

CONSULTATION AND NOTIFICATION

The proposed Amendment will be required to be exhibited in accordance with s19 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. The land owners will be notified of the proposed Amendment as part of the exhibition. Council officers will also make contact with landowners prior to exhibition of the amendment to discuss the proposal and acquisition of the land.

Consultation has also occurred with the Department of Transport who have provided their in-principle support for the acquisition of land. However, they have also stated that additional work is required to understand the cost of the infrastructure upgrade and how this will be shared by all parties.

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS

The Wollert DCP funds the land and construction of the projects. Under the DCP, Council is both the Collecting Agency responsible for the collecting the contributions and the Delivery Agency responsible for delivering the projects. This means it is important to facilitate the timely delivery of the projects to reduce risks with project cost escalations.

CRITICAL DATES

The table below identifies the key dates of approval of the Planning Scheme controls and the subsequent planning permits issued, including VCAT details for projects in the Bodycoats (Wollert Northern) Precinct.

Date

Event

23 February 2017

The Wollert PSP and Wollert DCP were introduced into the Whittlesea Planning Scheme via Planning Scheme Amendment C187.

26 June 2019

Planning Permit 717154 issued – 71, 71a, 75 and 85 Bodycoats Road, Wollert.

26 July 2019

Planning Permit 717751 issued - 80 Bodycoats Road, Wollert.

5 August 2019

Planning Permit 717880 issued – 90 Boundary Road, Wollert.

23 August 2019

Lodging of VCAT hearing P1591/2019. This VCAT review concerns Planning Permit 717154.

28 August 2019

Planning Permit 717081 issued – 40 and 60a Bodycoats Road, Wollert.

May 2020

Adjournment of VCAT hearing P1591/2019.

DISCUSSION

The upgrade to intersection IN-09 – Boundary Road and Epping Road has been identified as part of the Wollert PSP and the Wollert DCP. The Boundary Road and Epping Road intersection is of regional significance and one of the most critical intersections required to be upgraded to support the development of the precinct and the broader transport network. The intersection is at a key cross road for north-south movements along Epping Road and east-west movements along Bridge Inn Road. The intersection is already at capacity.

Council has issued planning permits for developments in the area which require the delivery of the necessary transport infrastructure at various lot milestones within the development area (refer to Attachment 4). This includes the delivery of IN-09. In order for the developments to deliver this intersection they require access to the land. One of the permits is subject to a VCAT hearing which the validity of the condition for the infrastructure projects is in dispute.

It is recognised that no matter the outcome of the VCAT hearing, the land will be required in order to deliver this critical infrastructure project.

Application of a PAO and subsequent acquisition of the land are the necessary precursors in this provision of this necessary infrastructure. Resolution of the “land” issue will reduce the risks associated with the future delivery/construction of these projects. Therefore, this process and subsequent land acquisition must commence.

NEXT STEPS

Subject to the adoption of the recommendation of this report the next steps are:

·        Formally request authorisation from the Planning Minister to prepare and exhibit the planning scheme amendment.

·        Upon receipt of approval from the Minister, undertake exhibition of the amendment.

·        If submissions are received, either resolve the submissions or request a Panel to resolve unresolved submissions.

·        Report back to Council for next steps at that time.

Policy strategy and legislation

Whittlesea 2040

Implements the following goals:

·        Goal 1: Connected community.

·        Goal 2: Liveable neighbourhoods.

·        Goal 3: Strong local economy.

Strategies and Plans

·        Plan Melbourne 2017 – 2050.

·        Northern Growth Corridor Plan.

·        Wollert Precinct Structure Plan, June 2017.

·        Wollert Development Contributions Plan, June 2017.

Planning Policy Framework

·        11.02 Managing Growth.

·        12.01-1S Protection of biodiversity.

·        12.05-1S Environmentally sensitive areas.

·        16.01 Residential development.

·        18.02 Movement networks.

·        19.03 Development infrastructure.

Local Planning Policy Framework

·        Clause 21.03 – Council Vision and Strategic Framework.

·        Clause 21.04 – Settlement.

·        Clause 21.05 – Environment and Landscape Values.

·        Clause 22.10 – River Red Gum Protection Policy.

·        Clause 22.11 – Development Contributions Policy.

link to strategic risks

Strategic Risk Service Delivery - Inability to plan for and provide critical community services and infrastructure impacting on community wellbeing

The commencement of the Planning Scheme Amendment to acquire the land required to deliver this intersection will help to mitigate this risk for a critical infrastructure project.

Strategic Risk

Community and Stakeholder Engagement - Ineffective stakeholder engagement resulting in compromised community outcomes and/or non-achievement of Council's strategic direction

The Amendment will include an exhibition which will involve notice being provided to affected parties including landowners and agencies. Consultation is occurring with the Department of Transport who are also a key stakeholder.

 

Links to whittlesea 2040 and the CoUNCIL Plan

Goal                              Liveable neighbourhoods

Key Direction               Smart, connected transport network

 

The proposal is important to facilitate the development of the precinct. Furthermore, as outlined above, the intersection is of regional significance. As it is already at capacity, it is reasonable to conclude that the upgrade will also facilitate economic growth in the wider northern growth corridor and deliver a connected transport network.

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

In summary, the application of the PAO is required to provide the transport infrastructure required by the Wollert PSP and the Northern Growth Corridor Plan. Currently, there is insufficient land to facilitate the upgrade. Additionally, the intersection is at capacity and is required to be upgraded to service the growing community.

Once the PAO has been applied to the relevant portion of the land, it will be able to be acquired in accordance with the Wollert DCP either through negotiation and Land Acquisition and Compensation Act 1986.

Therefore, it is recommended that Council resolve to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit an amendment to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, to apply the PAO to the subject land.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit an amendment to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, to apply the Public Acquisition Overlay as shown in Attachment 2, to the land required to upgrade the intersection at Epping Road and Boundary Road/Bridge Inn Road and associated works in the Wollert Precinct Structure Plan area.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

6.1.3      Proposal to Amend the South Morang East Development Plan

Attachments:                        1       Locality Plan

2       Approved South Morang East Development Plan (November 2018)

3       Amended South Morang East Development Plan (March 2020)

4       Post Exhibition - Amended South Morang East Development Plan Development Plan (April 2020)   

Responsible Officer:            Director Partnerships, Planning & Engagement

Author:                                  Strategic Planner   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council:

1.         Note the submission of the amended South Morang East Development Plan (dated April 2020) as suitable for approval under Schedule 6 to Clause 43.04 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

2.         Delegate to the Chief Executive Officer the power to approve the amended South Morang East Development Plan (dated April 2020) upon the execution of the Section 173 Agreement outlined in point 3.

3.         Enter into a Section 173 Agreement with the landowner of 975 and 985 Plenty Road, South Morang, for the delivery of the signalised fourth leg of the Plenty Road and Stagecoach Boulevard intersection.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·          The amended South Morang East Development Plan has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of Schedule 6 to the Development Plan Overlay (DPO6).

·          The proposed amendment to the Development Plan will allow for the properties at 33 - 37 Old Plenty Road and 955 – 975 Plenty Road to be developed for residential purposes and the property at 985 Plenty Road to be developed as a service station.

·          The Development Plan incorporates a road layout that responds to the existing road network to the east and south of the site and provides the opportunity for a direct link from Stagecoach Boulevard to Middle Gorge train station.

·          The precinct is reliant on the ultimate delivery of the signalised fourth leg of the Plenty Road and Stagecoach Boulevard intersection.

·          The proposed Development Plan was placed on non-statutory exhibition between 18 March 2020 and 15 April 2020. Four submissions were received during this time.

·          It is recommended that the amended South Morang East Development Plan (dated April 2020) be approved, subject to entering into a Section 173 Agreement with the landowner of 975 and 985 Plenty Road, for the delivery of the signalised fourth leg of the Plenty Road and Stagecoach Boulevard intersection.

 

Report

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this report is to consider the proposal to amend the South Morang East Development Plan (SMEDP), which was originally approved in November 2018. The amended Development Plan is dated April 2020 and prepared by Head and Humphreys Land Consultants.

The amended SMEDP has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of Schedule 6 to the Development Plan Overlay (DPO6). The amendments to the Development Plan include the designation of a service station at 985 Plenty Road, South Morang, along with updating the layout to be consistent with the approved development at 955 Plenty Road, South Morang (planning permit 718147).

SITE DESCRIPTION & CONTEXT

The SMEDP area incorporates five properties at; 33 Old Plenty Road, 37 Old Plenty Road, 955 Plenty Road, 975 Plenty Road and 985 Plenty Road, South Morang, which have a combined area of approximately 4.9 hectares. The subject site is surrounded by existing residential development to the south, is bound by Plenty Road to the east and the Mernda rail corridor to the west and narrows to the north as Plenty Road approaches the rail corridor. The Development Plan area and individual parcels can be viewed on the Locality Plan at Attachment 1.

The subject site is generally flat with a gradual slope to the south-eastern corner of the site. The area is largely vacant with limited vegetation considering parts of 975 and 985 Plenty Road were previously utilised as a temporary base for construction workers as part of the Mernda Railway Extension Project. 

The subject site is located in a predominantly residential area, where allotments are between 400-800m2, and generally contain single dwellings. The recent Mernda Railway Extension Project and the development of the Plenty Valley Town Centre to the south has resulted in higher densities being established (particularly along Old Plenty Road).

Immediately south-west of the precinct is the recently constructed Middle Gorge train station. The train station serves as the immediate transport hub for the area, servicing Marymede College, Fairview Manor Estate and the northern portion of the Plenty Valley Town Centre.

BACKGROUND

A planning application for residential development was lodged with Council in December 2011. The application was refused at this time, as Council considered that a considerable amount of work was required for the Development Plan to be prepared and provide for the strategic framework and certainty for the orderly development of the precinct.

Subsequently the planning application was reviewed by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) in the absence of a finalised Development Plan. In April 2012, VCAT affirmed Council’s decision to refuse the proposal, insisting that a Development Plan needs to be prepared and approved before development can be suitably considered.

Since the VCAT decision in April 2012, ongoing discussions between Council and the landowners has seen a number of iterations of the Development Plan. The commitment from the State Government to deliver the Mernda rail extension provided for longer term certainty for the area and a Development Plan prepared by Whiteman Property and Associates was submitted to Council for consideration. This Development Plan was approved by Council in November 2018.

 

Following the approval of the Development Plan, a planning application was lodged for a residential subdivision at 955 Plenty Road, South Morang. The critical issue forming part of this application was the delivery of the ultimate access point for the development and the precinct, being the signalised intersection of Plenty Road and Stagecoach Boulevard on the property directly to the north. The fragmented nature of this precinct enhances the importance for this ultimate access point to unlock this area for development. Council and VicRoads were both in opposition to accepting any temporary access arrangements to Plenty Road, that may impact on the timely delivery of Stagecoach Boulevard. It should be noted that this intersection does not form part of the Development Contributions Plan and is considered to be developer works.

Council officers have been in discussions with the landowners within the precinct with the purpose to coordinate a strategy for the delivery of Stagecoach Boulevard. In discussions with the landowner of 975 Plenty Road, South Morang which contains the land required for the Plenty Road and Stagecoach Boulevard signalised intersection, it was indicated that due to the significant infrastructure burden to solely deliver this intersection, it was not economically feasible to commence with the residential development at this time.  Furthermore, the landowner of 975 Plenty Road had previously proposed to deliver a service station development that was accessed from the fourth leg of the Stagecoach Boulevard intersection. This outcome was strongly opposed by Council officers as this land is central to the residential catchment of the Middle Gorge train station.

Upon further consideration of the officer feedback, the proponent revised the proposed location of the service station further north to the property at 985 Plenty Road. This property had also been secured by the same proponent. Council officers considered that due to the locational context of the land and its constraints (as depicted in Attachment 1) being directly adjacent to the rail corridor and Plenty Road - a highly trafficked arterial road, this location would be generally suitable to a service station, provided that the interface to the residential land immediately to the south is appropriately treated. It was further acknowledged that the irregular shape of the land at 985 Plenty Road would make it difficult to develop for residential purposes as originally depicted in the Development Plan.

Through these ongoing discussions, it was generally agreed that if the landowner was to deliver Stagecoach Boulevard prior to any residential subdivision or use and/or development occurring at both 975 and 985 Plenty Road, Council officers would be able to consider an amendment to the Development Plan in order to identify a service station at 985 Plenty Road, South Morang. A Section 173 Agreement has been drafted to this effect and has been reviewed by both parties. The drafting of the Agreement has been finalised and agreed upon. It is anticipated that the Agreement would be entered into prior to the formal approval of the amended South Morang East Development Plan. The proponent has also further advanced discussions with the landowner of 955 Plenty Road to enter into a cost sharing arrangement for the delivery of the intersection should the amended Development Plan be approved. This outcome would ensure the timely delivery of a critical piece of infrastructure to service the precinct.

STATUTORY FRAMEWORK

Zoning

The subject land is affected by the General Residential Zone – Schedule 1 (GRZ1) (Clause 32.01). The primary purpose of the zone is to provide a diversity of housing types and moderate housing growth in locations offering good access to services and transport.

Additionally, the land is adjacent to Plenty Road, a road in a Road Zone Category 1 (RDZ1) (Cause 36.04) and the Mernda Rail Corridor in a Public Use Zone 4 (PUZ4) (Clause 36.01).

There have been no changes to the zoning since the original Development Plan was approved.

 

Overlays

The subject land is affected by the following overlays:

·    Development Plan Overlay – Schedule 6 (DPO6) (Clause 43.04);

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

·    Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO2) (Clause 45.01).

The DPO6 outlines that, prior to any subdivision, use and development on the land, a Development Plan must be approved in accordance with the provisions of the DPO6.

The purpose of the VPO1 is to protect and retain native vegetation. A significant amount of the previously existing native vegetation has been impacted by the construction workers during the Mernda Rail Extension project.

The purpose of the PAO2 is for the acquisition of land by VicRoads for the Plenty Road widening.

Development Contributions are collected under the South Morang Local Structure Plan (SMLSP) at a rate of $42,566 per hectare.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROPOSAL

The proposed amendment to the SMEDP, which includes an overarching Development Concept Plan and accompanying supporting documentation, has been prepared in accordance with DPO6. A copy of the currently approved Development Plan and the draft amended Development Plan layout is attached to this report (see Attachment 2 and 3).

The proposed Development Plan is structured around the future signalised intersection of Stagecoach Boulevard that provides access from Plenty Road, and an internal road network connecting to the Middle Gorge train station to the south via Old Plenty Road.

Specifically, the amendments to the SMEDP include:

·    The designation of a service station at 985 Plenty Road, South Morang;

·    An additional left in left out access and egress to Plenty Road for the service station;

·    A landscape buffer to provide visual screening between the service station and residential development; and

·    Updating the layout to ensure it is consistent with the approved development at 955 Plenty Road, South Morang (planning permit 718147).

CONSULTATION AND NON-STATUTORY EXHIBITION

Since the original approval of the SMEDP prepared by Whiteman Property and Associates in November 2018, Council officers have been in discussions with the landowner of 955 Plenty Road and 975-985 Plenty Road regarding the delivery of the fourth leg of Plenty Road and Stagecoach Boulevard signalised intersection. As noted above, these discussions have resulted in an overall agreement for the fourth leg of the signalised intersection to be delivered at no cost to Council.

Prior to the formal submission of the amended Development Plan, it was the intention of the proponent to pursue a service station development at 975 Plenty Road. This location was not supported by Council officers due to its impact on the residential catchment of the Middle Gorge train station.

Acknowledging the significant financial burden to deliver Stagecoach Boulevard intersection, the revised proposal to locate this service station further north at 985 Plenty Road and provide the landowner financial certainty to deliver Stagecoach Boulevard upfront, was considered to be an acceptable outcome.

A proposal for an amended Development Plan was submitted to Council in January 2020. Feedback was provided to the proponent in order to ensure a minimum 10m landscape buffer was provided, separating the residential land from the proposed service station. The proposal was re-submitted to Council for consideration in March 2020.

Following this re-submission, the amended SMEDP (as shown in Attachment 3) was placed on non-statutory exhibition over a four week period between 18 March 2020 and 15 April 2020.

Whilst there is no statutory requirement to advertise the SMEDP document, in accordance with Council practice, a copy of the SMEDP land use plan was sent to all owners and occupiers of land adjacent to the subject site affected by the proposal, as well as relevant external authorities for comment.

At the conclusion of the exhibition period one landowner and three referral authority submissions were received. No submissions objected to the amended Development Plan.

SUBMISSIONS

Following the close of the exhibition period, Council Officers have reviewed each of the submissions. The following table details the submissions received, the officer responses to the submissions, and an officer recommendation to address the submission.

Submission Summary

Officer Response

1.         955 Plenty Road, South Morang

The submission requests that the land use at 955 Plenty Road retain the approved high density designation rather than the amended medium density designation considering the existing permit issued approves the construction of 71 dwellings across 1.92ha, equating to 36.98 dwellings per net developable hectare.

It is acknowledged that the approved density of 36.98 dwellings per developable hectare is considered to be high density development under the Victorian Planning Authority definitions.

Officer Recommendation

Amend the land use designation at 955 Plenty Road, South Morang to high density.

The submission requests that the development analysis table remove spatial quantum of the public open space considering this may be provided as a land or financial contribution to be determined as part of the planning application.

It is acknowledged that the public open space contribution may be provided as land or as a financial contribution to be determined at the planning application stage.

Officer Recommendation

Amend the development analysis table to refer to the public open space provision for each parcel as TBD.

The submission advises that Yarra Valley Water have recently constructed the sewer to service the Development Plan area and that the Sewer Pump Station is no longer required.

It is unclear whether the Sewer Pump Station will be required in the future to service other parcels within the precinct. This will be identified as part of the Servicing Reports provided for individual planning application for development of this land. Therefore, the designation of ‘future potential pump station’ should remain.

Officer Recommendation

No change recommended.

 

 

 

 

 

Submission Summary

Officer Response

The submission request that text within the ‘Detailed Site Analysis Section H – Existing Bus Routes’ be removed considering that the planning application determined that the road reservation width as depicted in the originally approved Development Plan may be reduced given that the road would not accommodate a bus route at this time.

 

In addition, the submission request that the Development Plan layout amend the internal access road reserve nomination from 21m to 17m consistent with the planning permit issued for the site.

 

Furthermore, the submission requests that the Cardno Traffic Assessment be updated in order to identify the north-south road as a 17m wide road reservation, consistent with the permit issued for residential development.

Whilst it is acknowledged that the road reservation was reduced as part of the planning application for permit No. 718147, the Department of Transport may still wish to explore bus route options within the approved road reservation in the future. Therefore, the wording within Section H will be required to be amended as follows:

 

As it currently stands, only one bus route passes the Development Plan area with the only bus stop being located on the opposite side of Plenty Road (Service 381 connecting to South Morang Train Station).

 

With the designation of a pedestrian underpass immediately south of the DP area, the Department of Transport may explore a potential bus route within the approved road reservations in the future.

 

In addition, it is acknowledged that the planning permit issued at 955 Plenty Road consents to a road reservation width of 17m. In order to ensure that the appropriate width can be determined as part of future planning applications, the reservation width for the internal access road should be removed from the Development Plan.

 

Furthermore, the Cardno Traffic Assessment is a supporting background report to inform the Development Plan. It is not considered necessary to update this report if the Development Plan layout has been updated to reflect the approved permit.

Officer Recommendation

Amend the wording within the ‘Detailed Site Analysis Section H – Existing Bus Routes’ as above.

 

Amend the Development Plan layout to remove the road reservation width for the internal access street, allowing this to be determined as part of the future planning application.

The submission notes that the legend on the Development Plan layout refers to the railway line along the western boundary as a ‘future railway line’ rather than ‘existing railway line.’

The reference to ‘future railway line’ appears to be a carry over from the previously approved Development Plan. This reference must be amended to the ‘existing railway line.’

Officer Recommendation

Amend the legend and the reference to ‘future railway line’ with ‘existing railway line.’

2.         Melbourne Water

Melbourne Water provided no objection to the proposed amendment to the Development Plan.

It is acknowledged that Melbourne Water have provided no comments or objection to the approval of the proposed amendment to the Development Plan.

Officer Recommendation

No change recommended.

Submission Summary

Officer Response

3.         Department of Transport

The Department of Transport informally responded via email and offered no objection to the proposed amendment to the Development Plan.

It is acknowledged that the Department of Transport have provided no comments or objection to the approval of the proposed amendment to the Development Plan.

Officer Recommendation

No change recommended.

4.         VicRoads

The submission requests that the Development Plan layout include an additional notation highlighting the need for the access arrangements of the service station to be designed to the satisfaction of the Department of Transport and any land required for the left turn deceleration lane and shared path be set aside and provided to the satisfaction of the Department of Transport.

It is acknowledged that the proposed access to Plenty Road will trigger the requirement for a planning permit for the creation/alteration of access to a road in a Road Zone Category 1. Therefore, this notation is appropriate.

Officer Recommendation

Include an additional notation on the Development Plan layout as follows:

 

The design of the access to the service station must be to the satisfaction of the Department of Transport and any land required for the left turn deceleration lane and shared path must be set aside and provided to the satisfaction of the Department of Transport.

 

 

Noting the officer recommendations on the submissions received as outlined in the table above, the proposal has been further revised post non-statutory exhibition in order to incorporate this feedback as part of the amended South Morang East Development Plan (dated April 2020). This amended submission is considered to be consistent with the officer recommendations and the requirements under DPO6. The Development Plan layout of this revised submission for approval can be viewed at Attachment 4.

DISCUSSION

This section provides a more detailed discussion on the key themes arising from the submissions, as well as other matters of clarity raised by Council Officers in finalising the SMEDP. These relate to the road network and Development Plan layout, the land use designations including the service station in the northern portion of the precinct, and the interface between the service station and residential land.

Road Network and Development Plan layout

Stagecoach Boulevard is the most significant piece of infrastructure in order to unlock the precinct and provide access to the Development Plan area. The existing three-leg intersection solely services the estates on the eastern side of Plenty Road. Without the construction of the fourth leg, Plenty Road creates a barrier for pedestrian and vehicle connectivity to the west towards Middle Gorge station.

This proposal affords the opportunity to secure the delivery of the signalised fourth leg of the intersection, providing safe and efficient access in a timeframe consistent with the surrounding development.

 

 

Acting as the ‘spine’ of the precinct, Stagecoach Boulevard will be required to draw traffic from the site and from Plenty Road (north of the site) and Fairview Manor Estate (east of the site) towards Middle Gorge station. Council and VicRoads have been unwilling to accept temporary alternative access arrangements in order to ensure the timely delivery of this ultimate infrastructure is not compromised.

Furthermore, in order to ensure that Stagecoach Boulevard maximises the opportunity afforded by the signalised intersection, the road network will be designed to provide a direct connection to Old Plenty Road which links to Middle Gorge train station. The Department of Transport may explore this as a potential bus route in the future.

Planning permit 718147 was issued for the subdivision of land at 955 Plenty Road, South Morang and allows for the road reservation of this internal access road to be reduced from 21m as previously depicted in the Development Plan to 17m. Any bus routes would therefore be required to be accommodated within the approved road reservation width. The Department of Transport did not object to the reduction of the road reservation as part of their referral response to the planning application. The Development Plan layout for the land at 955 Plenty Road, South Morang has been updated to be consistent with the layout approved under the planning permit.

Land Use Designations

The amendment to the Development Plan seeks to utilise the most northern parcel of land for a service station. The land at 985 Plenty Road is irregular in shape and relatively constrained due to the alignment of the rail corridor and Plenty Road on the western and eastern boundaries. As depicted in the Locality Plan (Attachment 1), the site narrows to the north, limiting the potential for conventional/medium density residential development.

A service station is identified as a Section 2 use under the General Residential Zone. The conditions as outlined in Clause 32.08-2 stipulate that the use must adjoin a commercial or industrial zone, or must adjoin a road in a Road Zone. In this case, the site directly adjoins and proposes access via Plenty Road which is a road in a Road Zone – Category 1. A notation has been included on the Development Plan layout to ensure that any access arrangements must be designed and constructed to the satisfaction of the Department of Transport.

In order to ensure that the service station interface with the residential land is sensitively treated, a minimum 10m landscape reserve is required. This landscape reserve will provide for visual screening as well as a physical separation between the land uses. A notation is included on the Development Plan layout to identify this requirement. In addition to the 10m landscape reserve, the perimeter road to the residential development will further separate any residential development from the service station.

The proposal to locate the service station in the most northern portion of the precinct at 985 Plenty Road, rather than centrally at 975 Plenty Road, is due to the objective of this Development Plan to deliver medium/high density development in proximity to Middle Gorge Station. The amended Development maintains the medium/high density development designation whilst nominating the service station on the parcel that is the furthest distance to the train station and is the most constrained for residential development.

Stagecoach Boulevard Delivery

Due to the fragmented nature of this precinct, the upfront delivery of ultimate infrastructure is critical to the timely delivery. Therefore, both Council and VicRoads have been unwilling to entertain alternative temporary access arrangements that may be to the detriment of the delivery of Stagecoach Boulevard.

As noted above, Council officers have been engaged in extensive discussions with the impacted landowners to secure the delivery of the fourth leg of this signalised intersection. As a result of these discussions, the proponent has advanced the amended Development Plan to nominate a service station at 985 Plenty Road, South Morang.

The proponent has also advanced a Section 173 Agreement for the delivery of the fourth leg of the Stagecoach Boulevard and Plenty Road signalised intersection. This Agreement will secure the timely delivery of a critical piece of infrastructure, at no cost to Council. The Agreement is to be executed with the proponent, who is the landowner of 975 Plenty Road and 985 Plenty Road. The Agreement requires the intersection to be constructed and completed prior to any subdivision, use and/or development commencing on these parcels of land.

It is understood that the landowner has also entered into a cost sharing arrangement with the landowner of 955 Plenty Road, who require this intersection to be delivered in order to provide access to the site to service their development.

The recommendation of this Council report is drafted to ensure that the Agreement is executed, prior to the formal approval of the Development Plan, securing the delivery of Stagecoach Boulevard prior to any future development commencing on this land and without the requirement of temporary access arrangements. Therefore, it is recommended that approval of the Development Plan be delegated to the Chief Executive Officer.

CRITICAL DATES

·    August 2011 – Application for 46 dwellings at 33 Old Plenty Road refused by Council.

·    April 2012 – The application for the 46 dwellings is reviewed by VCAT who determine the refusal of the application in the absence of an approved Development Plan.

·    August 2012 – Application for 32 dwellings, a medical centre and creation of an access to a Road Zone 1 at 985 Plenty Road is refused.

·    August 2013 – The application for 32 dwellings, a medical centre and creation of an access to a Road Zone 1 is reviewed by VCAT who affirms the refusal of the application in the absence of an approved Development Plan.

·    June 2014 – Revised South Morang East Development Plan submission received.

·    January 2015 – Applicant advised to consider the role of the future Mernda Railway Extension Project in the SMEDP layout.

·    May-September 2015 – Ongoing discussions with respect to the SMEDP undertaken with Vic Roads and Public Transport Victoria.

·    June 2017 – Revised SMEDP submitted by Whiteman Property & Associates.

·    March 2018 – SMEDP placed on Non-Statutory Exhibition.

·    July 2018 – Revised SMEDP taking into consideration submissions raised during the Non-Statutory Exhibition period prepared and submitted for Council consideration.

·    November 2018 – SMEDP formally approved by Council.

·    November 2018 – Planning application (718147) lodged for residential development at 955 Plenty Road, South Morang requesting temporary access via Plenty Road.

·    June 2019 – Commence discussions with the landowner of 975 Plenty Road and 985 Plenty Road regarding the delivery of Stagecoach Boulevard and Plenty Road intersection.

·    July 2019 – VicRoads referral response received outlining no interim or temporary access allowed from Plenty Road.

·    February 2020 – Planning Permit (718147) issued for residential development requiring ultimate access via Stagecoach Boulevard at 955 Plenty Road, South Morang.

 

·    March 2020 – Proposed Amendment to the South Morang East Development Plan to update the layout of 955 Plenty Road consistent with permit issued for residential development and to identify a service station on the most northern parcel within the precinct.

·    March 2020 – Non-statutory exhibition of the proposed amendment to the SMEDP.

STRATEGIC POLICY and legislation

Strategic Policy

The amended Development Plan appropriately implements the outcomes of Plan Melbourne 2017-2050, the updated metropolitan planning strategy. The following policies of Plan Melbourne 2017-2050 have been addressed:

·    Policy 2.2.5 Require development in growth areas to be sequenced and staged to better link infrastructure delivery to land release.

·    Policy 2.5.2 Provide a range of housing types in growth areas.

·    Policy 3.2.1 Improve roads in growth areas and outer suburbs.

·    Policy 5.1.1 Create mixed-use neighbourhoods at varying densities.

·    Policy 5.2.1 Improve neighbourhoods to enable walking and cycling as part of daily life.

Planning Policy Framework

It is considered that the amended SMEDP is generally consistent with the objectives and general provisions of the Planning Policy Framework as identified below:

·      Clause 11.03-6S – Regional and Local Places.

·      Clause 16.0 – Housing.

·      Clause 18 – Transport.

·      Clause 15.01 - Built Environment.

·      Clause 19.03 - Development infrastructure.

It is considered that the amended SMEDP is generally consistent with the objectives and general provisions of the Local Policies and Local Planning Policy Framework as identified below:

·   Whittlesea 2040 – A place for all (2018).

·   Whittlesea Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS).

·   Housing Diversity Strategy (2013-2033).

·   Clause 21.04-3 - Managing Growth in our Established Suburbs.

·   Clause 21.09 – Housing.

·   Clause 21.11 – Transport.

·   Clause 21.12 – Infrastructure.

·   Clause 22.11 – Development Contributions Plan Policy.

Incorporated Document

The subject site is affected by the South Morang Local Structure Plan (SMLSP) which is an incorporated document within the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, developed in 1997 to guide the future allocation of land uses and key infrastructure items within South Morang.

The SMLSP nominates all of the subject land for residential development. The SMLSP also provides for developer contribution towards infrastructure in the precinct.

link to strategic risks

Strategic Risk Community and Stakeholder Engagement - Ineffective stakeholder engagement resulting in compromised community outcomes and/or non-achievement of Council's strategic direction

Although there is no statutory requirement to advertise the Development Plan, the City of Whittlesea undertakes non-statutory exhibition to affected and adjoining properties. This is to ensure that any properties potentially impacted by the proposal have the opportunity to provide comment for Council consideration. Both the approved Development Plan and the draft amended Development Plan layout has been provided to affected and adjoining properties, in order to clearly demonstrate the proposed changes.

 

Links to whittlesea 2040 and the CoUNCIL Plan

Goal                              Liveable neighbourhoods

Key Direction               Housing for diverse needs

 

The proposed amendment to the SMEDP will secure the timely delivery of critical infrastructure and ensure that development of the land will be well designed and responsive. The development will help build connection to place and community through a number of key elements including a; permeable street network, cycle and pedestrian links to the Middle Gorge train station and contribution to community infrastructure and open space. The proposal will provide a dwelling diversity of medium and high density development in proximity to Middle Gorge Station, whilst the service station to the north of the precinct will address the site constraints and benefit from the exposure to Plenty Road and passing motorists.

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 amended South Morang East Development Plan (dated April 2020) has been the subject of a planning process which has resulted in refinements to a point that is considered appropriate for approval under Schedule 6 to Clause 43.04 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

The delivery of the Mernda Rail extension has provided the certainty for the precinct in the strategic intent to nominate medium and high density residential development in proximity to a major transport node in proximity to the Middle Gorge train station. The medium and high density residential development is consistent with the outcomes envisaged within the South Morang East Local Structure Plan.

 

 

 

The main amendment to the originally approved Development Plan is the nomination of a service station in the most northern parcel of the Development Plan area. In principle, this is considered to be an acceptable land use outcome given its locational context, being the most constrained parcel wedged in between the rail corridor and Plenty Road and its irregular shape. Additionally, the land is directly adjoining Plenty Road with is provided with an arterial road status.

Importantly, the proposed land use designation will greatly assist the land owner to deliver the upfront construction of the ultimate signalised intersection at no cost to Council.

The agreement with the landowner of 975 and 985 Plenty Road to construct the fourth leg of the Stagecoach Boulevard and Plenty Road signalised intersection will enhance the connectivity of the Middle Gorge train station with the broader South Morang East area. This outcome will provide much needed certainty for the delivery of a critical infrastructure link to service the precinct. Furthermore, the cost sharing arrangement that is understood to be progressed between the landowners reliant of the construction of Stagecoach Boulevard will provide Council with further assurance that it will be delivered in a timely manner.

Accordingly, it is recommended that upon entering into the abovementioned agreement, the amended South Morang East Development Plan (April 2020) as contained in Attachment 4 of this report be approved in accordance with Schedule 6 of the Development Plan Overlay (Clause 43.04) of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Note the submission of the amended South Morang East Development Plan (dated April 2020) as suitable for approval under Schedule 6 to Clause 43.04 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

2.       Delegate to the Chief Executive Officer the power to approve the amended South Morang East Development Plan (dated April 2020) upon the execution of the Section 173 Agreement outlined in point 3.

3.       Enter into a Section 173 Agreement with the landowner of 975 and 985 Plenty Road, South Morang, for the delivery of the signalised fourth leg of the Plenty Road and Stagecoach Boulevard intersection.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

6.1.4      1410A Plenty Road, Mernda - Planning Permit Application 719210 - Partial demolition and buildings and works to a building in a Heritage Overlay

Attachments:                        1       Locality Maps

2       Aerial Photograph

3       Photographs of heritage building

4       Plans   

Responsible Officer:            Director Partnerships, Planning & Engagement

Author:                                  Principal Planner   

APPLICANT:                          Head and Humphreys

COUNCIL POLICY:               22.06     Heritage Conservation Policy

ZONING:                                Comprehensive Development Zone, Schedule 1 (CDZ1)

OVERLAY:                            Development Contributions Plan Overlay, Schedule 9 (DCPO9)

Development Plan Overlay, Schedule 15 (DPO15)

Heritage Overlay, Schedule 19 (HO19)

Incorporated Plan Overlay, Schedule 1 (IPO1)

Public Acquisition Overlay, Schedule 2 (PAO2)

Vegetation Protection Overlay, Schedule 1 (VPO1)

Specific Controls Overlay (SCO9)

REFERRAL:                           Heritage Project Coordinator

OBJECTIONS:                       N/A – Advertising exempt and not undertaken

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council resolve to approve Planning Permit Application No. 719210 and issue a Planning Permit for the propping of walls and partial demolition of the Mayfield Farmhouse as a staged response to ‘Make Safe’ requirements.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    The applicant seeks to undertake Make Safe works to the Mayfield Farmhouse following a fire that occurred within the building in November 2019.  Since the fire event, the site has been secured to prevent public access.

·    The proposal requires a two-step approach. Stage 1 seeks to prop the walls and roof to ensure it is stable to be able to undertake a closer analysis of the structural elements damaged by the fire. Stage 2 seeks to partially demolish the farmhouse where it is deemed structurally unsafe.

·    A structural engineer’s report concludes that the farmhouse is able to be restored and that there are some elements that may need to be demolished to ensure its stability. The report acknowledges that further investigation is required to fully determine the impacts.

·    A heritage architectural assessment by Williams Boag Architects reviewed the engineering report and agreed in-principle with the required outcomes.

·    It is proposed that a thorough investigation of the damaged building and surrounds would be resolved in Stage 1 before approval was provided for any demolition works through Stage 2.

·    Notification of the application is exempt pursuant to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

·    The proposal demonstrates a satisfactory level of compliance with the Heritage Conservation Policy and Heritage Overlay of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme and it is therefore recommended the application be approved subject to conditions.

 

 

Report

SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

Mayfield farmhouse sits within a large heritage lot that includes a dairy and surrounding farm complex. The historic Berry Lane is located to the south of the site whilst the remainder of the land surrounding the site is a part of the future Mernda Town Centre.

The site is located on the eastern side of Plenty Road, 400m south of Bridge Inn Road (See Appendix 1). The farmhouse sits elevated to Plenty Road and is sited approximately 40m from the road verge.

The wider heritage allotment contains the Mayfield farmhouse, dairy, milking sheds and other outbuildings and bluestone laneway (See Appendix 2). This permit application relates to the farmhouse which was subject to a fire in November 2019. The site is currently secured with temporary fencing.

restrictions and easements

The site is legally described as Lot 2 on Plan of Subdivision PS629209R. The site is affected by Section 173 Agreement No. AR737084M and requires a Conservation Management Plan.

A Conservation Management Plan was prepared by Biosis on 2 March 2018. The permit applicant has an obligation through the Section 173 Agreement to ensure that all works identified in the plan as ‘immediate’ works are carried out.

The fire occurred in November 2019. The Conservation Management Plan will require amending to reflect the additional works that will be required as a result of the fire. This process will be considered separately to this application.

The remaining Section 173 Agreements are not relevant to this application.

Proposal

The proposal seeks to secure and make-safe the Mayfield farmhouse following a fire to the building in November 2019 (See Appendix 3).

A ‘Make Safe’ order has been issued by the City of Whittlesea Municipal Building Surveyor, who is satisfied that the site has been secured to prevent public access.

A permit is required through the provisions of the Heritage Overlay, to carry out any buildings or works to the site, including demolition.

The applicant requests that Council considers the application as a two-stage process. A suitably qualified heritage architect will be employed to oversee works through each stage.

The Stage 1 works (see Appendix 4) include:

·    Propping the external walls to enable a safe entry to the building to fully assess the damage inside.

·    Removing the damaged roofing. Roof sheeting will be securely stored offsite for later use in the restoration process.

·    Removing debris from within the building. All parts of the building or floor that are partially damaged and pose no immediate safety concern will be retained in situ.

 

At the completion of the Stage 1 works, further investigation of the building structure will be conducted that will provide a clear understanding of the extent of works that are required to make the building safe.  The applicant proposes that conditions on any permit issued will require the implementation of the Stage 2 investigation and works.

Stage 2 of the process will require the following:

·    William Boag Architects to prepare detailed architectural plans that will specify the works and methodology required, as identified through Stage 1.

·    Buildings and works, including partial demolition, to implement the findings of Stage 1 in accordance with plans endorsed through the process of Stage 2.

No vegetation is to be removed as a part of the make-safe works.

REFERRals

The application was referred to Council’s Heritage Coordinator for comment.  No objections were raised subject to the inclusion of conditions on any permit issued as detailed in the recommendation section of this report. 

Public Notification

Pursuant to Clause 43.01-4 of the Heritage Overlay, works in the form of repairs and routine maintenance, are exempt from the notice and review requirements of the Act.

ASSESSMENT AGAINST THE WHITTLESEA PLANNING SCHEME

Zone provisions

Comprehensive Development Zone, Schedule 1 (CDZ1)

A permit is not required for the proposed works pursuant to the CDZ.

Overlay Provisions

Development Contributions Plan Overlay, Schedule 9 (DCPO9)

Development contributions were provided as part of the subdivision of the parent site.

Development Plan Overlay, Schedule 15 (DPO15)

The site is a part of the Mernda Town Centre Development Plan. The retention of this site is in accordance with that plan.

 

Heritage Overlay, Schedule 19 (HO19)

 

A planning permit is required pursuant to the Heritage Overlay. This is further considered later in this report.

 

Incorporated Plan Overlay, Schedule 1 (IPO1)

 

The retention of the farmhouse is in accordance with the Mernda Strategy Plan.

 

Public Acquisition Overlay, Schedule 2 (PAO2)

 

The farmhouse is not directly affected by the widening of Plenty Road or Bridge Inn Road.  The requirements of this Overlay are therefore not applicable to this application.

Vegetation Protection Overlay, Schedule 1 (VPO1)

 

A permit is required to remove any mature trees surrounding the farm complex. The garden bed abutting the farmhouse is significant to the precinct. Conditions on any permit issued will require the protection of the vegetation during any works. 

 

Specific Controls Overlay, Schedule 9 (SCO9)

The SCO9 only affects the northern and eastern boundaries of the site.  The Bridge Inn Road upgrade does not affect the position of the farmhouse on this site.

Planning Policy Framework

The following sections of the Planning Policy Framework are relevant to this application:

Clause 15.03-1S – Heritage Conservation seeks to ensure the conservation of places of heritage significance.

Clause 21.08-4 – Heritage Conservation seeks to identify, protect and enhance the City’s Aboriginal and European heritage.

Clause 22.04 – Heritage Conservation Policy seeks to:-

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

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

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

The proposal is generally in accordance with the objectives and strategies of the planning Policy Framework, including Clause 22.04.

The make-safe works are required following the outcomes of the fire in November 2019.

The structural engineer’s report and William Boag Architect report both acknowledge that the building can be restored. There are discrepancies between the reports regarding what elements must be retained and what will need to be demolished.

To resolve this, it is proposed to undertake the works in two stages. Stage 1 will allow for the walls to be propped and the roof removed. Following the successful propping of the walls, the heritage architect will be able to further investigate the roof space and building. This will enable a more complete assessment of the damage occurred to the building. It is expected that a detailed assessment of works required will result at the conclusion of Stage 1.

Stage 2 will involve a second set of detailed plans. These plans will need to demonstrate the methodology proposed to undertake necessary works, including demolition.

The applicant has requested that any suitable materials salvaged from the building, including the roof, be stored in a location to be determined by the heritage architect. The applicant anticipates it may be more appropriate to store materials onsite and would like to be able to have that option if the heritage architect considers it more appropriate than an offsite location. A permit condition should include that any storage of materials must be in a safe and secure area protected from the elements.

No vegetation is proposed to be removed as a part of the make-safe works. The propping of walls and subsequent partial demolition or make-safe works are to occur within close proximity of significant garden beds. A condition on any permit issued will include the requirement for fencing around significant vegetation and garden areas.

Overlay Provisions

Heritage Overlay – HO19

A permit is required pursuant to the Heritage Overlay.

The proposal is generally in accordance with the purposes of the Heritage Overlay.  Subject to conditions, the proposed works will enable works to ensure that no further disrepair will occur to the building and that it will be secured with all weather protection until full restoration can occur. 

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 proposal is considered generally in accordance with the Planning Policy Framework, including Clause 22.04 – Heritage Conservation Policy and the Heritage Overlay HO19. The make safe works include Stage 1 as the initial propping of walls and removal of roof to allow further investigation and assessment of the damage to the building. Stage 2 will allow the preparation of more detailed plans that provide a clear understanding of the buildings and works to occur, including partial demolition, and the methodology to be undertaken. All works are to be supervised by a qualified heritage architect through William Boag Architects.

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to approve Planning Application No. 719210 and issue a Planning Permit for the propping of walls and partial demolition of the Mayfield farmhouse as a staged response to ‘Make Safe’ requirements in accordance with the endorsed plans and subject to the following conditions:

1.       Prior to the commencement of any demolition, buildings or works for any stage, a sequential Staging Plan showing the order of development and corresponding timing of works must be submitted to and endorsed by the Responsible Authority.  The Staging Plan must show all buildings and works carried out in two stages as follows:

a.      Stage 1 – external walls to be propped in accordance with Plan a050 dated March 2020;

b.      Stage 1 – removal of roofing sheets in accordance with Plan a051 dated March 2020; and

c.      Stage 2 – buildings and works and partial demolition in accordance with revised plans detailed through the results of Stage 1 assessment as required by Condition No. 4 of this planning permit.

All to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

2.       The development must proceed in the order of stages as shown on the endorsed plans unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the Responsible Authority. 

3.       The endorsed plans for Stage 1 including Plan Numbers a050, a051, a200 and a201, prepared by William Boag dated March 2020 and Plan Numbers S01 (Rev C) and S02 (Rev B) prepared by Baigents dated December 2019 must not be amended for any reason without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

4.       Upon completion of the Stage 1 works, and prior to the commencement of Stage 2, a detailed report and assessment of the condition of Mayfield Farmhouse must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority.  The report must be prepared by a qualified heritage architect and structural engineer and submitted to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed to form part of this permit.  The report must include:

a.      A detailed assessment of the structural integrity and condition of the heritage fabric; and

b.      Detail recommendations for the make safe of the heritage building as part of Stage 2 of the development, including the provision for all weather protection.

5.       Prior to the commencement of any demolition, buildings or other works for Stage 2, plans are to be submitted and endorsed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The plans must be in accordance with the recommendations detailed in the report endorsed under Condition No. 4 of this permit and must include the methodology to be undertaken to make safe the Mayfield farmhouse, including floor plans, roof plan, elevations and schedule of colours and materials.

6.       Prior to commencement of any demolition, buildings and works for any stage of the development, a Vegetation Management Plan prepared by a suitably qualified or experienced Arborist must be submitted to be endorsed by the Responsible Authority.  The Vegetation Management Plan must detail:

a.      Structural root zones and tree protection zones for all vegetation on the site;

b.      All tree protection fenced off areas and areas where ground protection systems will be used; 

c.      All garden fenced off areas abutting the farmhouse;

d.      The type of footings within the tree protection zones, if applicable; 

e.      All services to be located within the tree protection zone and a notation to state that all services will either be located outside of the tree protection zone or bored under the tree protection zone;

f.       Specific details on what actions are required within the tree protection zone; 

g.      How the structural root zone within the tree protection zone will be managed throughout the project;

h.      All remedial pruning works that are required to be performed on the tree development of the site; 

 

i.       Fixed signs are to be provided on all visible sides of the Tree Protection Fencing, stating “Tree Protection Zone – No entry without permission from the City of Whittlesea”;

j.       The area must be irrigated during the summer months with 1 litre of clean water for every 1cm of trunk girth measured at the soil / trunk interface on a weekly basis; 

k.      No storage of material, equipment or temporary building is to take place within the Tree Protection Zone or garden area; and 

l.       Nothing whatsoever, including temporary services wires, nails, screws or any other fixing device, is to be attached to any tree.

 

The recommendations contained in the endorsed Vegetation Management Plan must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

7.       Prior to commencement of any demolition, buildings and works, tree protection zone and garden area fencing must be constructed to the following requirements:

a.      Ring lock wire mesh approximately 1.8m high; 

b.      Main posts 100mm treated pine (TP); 

c.      Intermediate posts steel star pickets (SP); 

d.      The corner posts must be TP with TP stays; 

e.      Every third post must be TP; 

f.       SP to be placed intermediately between the TP posts at 3.0m 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 used to secure posts as this will affect ph. levels); and

i.       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.

8.       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 written consent of the Responsible Authority.

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

10.     All stages of the development must be supervised by a qualified heritage architect.

11.     All materials and roof sheeting removed from the farmhouse must be suitably stored in a secure and undercover location for future use in the restoration of the property, in accordance with the recommendations from the heritage architect and to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

12.     No vegetation, shall be destroyed, felled, lopped, ring barked or uprooted, without the consent of the Responsible Authority.

 

13.     The development hereby permitted must be managed so that the amenity of the area is not detrimentally affected through the:- 

a.      Transport of materials, good or commodities to or from the land;

b.      Appearance of any building, works or materials;

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

d.      Presence of vermin.

14.     In accordance with the Planning and Environment Act 1987, a permit expires if:-

a.      The approved works for Stage 1 do not start within 6 months of the date of this Permit;

b.      The approved works for Stage 1 are not completed within 1 year of the date of this Permit;

c.      The approved works for Stage 2 do not start within 18 months of the date of this Permit; or

d.      The approved works for Stage 2 are not completed within 2 years of the date of this Permit.

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

Notes

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

A Consent to Disturb archaeological remains associated with the Heritage Place may be required from Heritage Victoria and must be obtained before works commence.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

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


 

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


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 


 


 


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

6.1.5      Lehmanns Road Wollert - Planning Permit Application No. 719363 - Removal of Native Vegetation

Attachments:                        1       Locality Maps

2       Tree Table

3       Tree Photos

4       TPZ Plan

5       TPZ Assessment Plan   

Responsible Officer:            Director Partnerships, Planning & Engagement

Author:                                  Principal Planner   

APPLICANT:                          Urbis Pty Ltd

COUNCIL POLICY:               22.10    River Redgum Protection Policy

ZONING:                                General Residential Zone

OVERLAY:                            Development Contributions Plan Overlay

Development Plan Overlay

Vegetation Protection Overlay

REFERRAL:                           Parks and Open Space

                                                Sustainability Planning

                                                Development Engineering

OBJECTIONS:                       N/A – Advertising exempt and not undertaken

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council resolve to approve Planning Permit Application No. 719363 and issue a Planning Permit for tree removal on Lehmanns Road, subject to conditions.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    The site is located in the Epping North East Development Plan (ENEDP) area and the Epping North East Local Strategy Plan (ENELSP) area.

·    The proposal involves the removal of planted River Red Gums within the Lehmanns Road road reserve between Saltlake Boulevard and Bindts Road to allow for the upgrade of the road for access to a future estate to be developed within the Quarry Hills Precinct Structure Plan to the east of the site.  These trees are protected under the Vegetation Protection Overlay.

·    The design of the road has been considered extensively by Council officers with the overall works package designed to minimise the extent of the trees to be removed and to prevent the removal of a significant dry-stone wall along the northern boundary of the road.

 

 

·    The specific number of trees to be removed or lopped can only be finalised with the detailed design of the road and it is noted that Functional Layout Plans are close to being finalised with detailed design drawings to follow. Council Officers will continue to work with the developer of the land to minimise the number of trees needing to be removed as a result of the road construction. However, there is a level of satisfaction that a reasonable attempt has been made to reduce the extent of tree loss.   As such, it is recommended that the trees cannot be removed until detailed design drawings are provided to the satisfaction of Council showing the minimum extent of tree loss necessary to facilitate the upgrade of Lehmanns Road.   This will be imposed as a Condition of permit.

 

Report

SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

The subject site forms part of the Lehmanns Road road reserve, which is located immediately to the north of the Eucalypt Estate (see Attachment 1). Lehmanns Road forms the fourth leg of the intersection of Craigieburn Road and Epping Road in Wollert.

 

Lehmanns Road has been upgraded to an urban standard from the intersection at Craigieburn Road and up to Saltlake Boulevard. This includes (but is not limited to) the installation of kerb and channel, turning lanes and linemarking. Lehmanns Rd between Saltlake Boulevard and Bindts Road is unsealed and is of a rural standard with no kerb and channel.

 

The Eucalypt Estate has been developed to the south of Lehmanns Road between Epping Road and Bindts Road. The area to the north of Lehmanns Road up to Bindts Road is part of the Wollert Precinct Structure Plan area and will be developed in the future for commercial purposes.

restrictions and easements

As the application proposes to remove trees within a road reserve, there are no easements or restrictions applicable.

BACKGROUND

The Eucalypt Estate defines the eastern boundary of the Epping North East Local Structure Plan (ENELSP) area.  The ENELSP was the subject of a comprehensive strategic planning investigation that culminated in approval of Amendment C81 (Part 1) on 26 June 2008.  The Epping North East Development Plan (ENEDP) was adopted by Council at its meeting of 26 August 2008. The ENEDP implements the objectives of the ENELSP and guides development on the land and surrounding landholdings. 

The ENEDP defines Lehmanns Road as a form of arterial road with no direct access from lots permitted. Limited road access in the form of service roads, along with the intersection of Saltlake Boulevard has been provided.

The area to the east of Bindts Road forms part of the Quarry Hills Precinct Structure Plan (QHPSP) area. The QHPSP and the associated Quarry Hills Development Contributions Plan was introduced to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme through Amendment C188 and gazetted on 20 October 2016.

Planning Permit No. 717388 was approved for a multi lot subdivision, creation of restrictions, associated buildings and works in accordance with the endorsed plans for 150-152 Bindts Road, Wollert on 20 December 2019. This permit site forms part of a larger estate which will be known as ‘Riverhills’ and will be constructed by one developer.

Condition No. 39 of Planning Permit 717388 requires Lehmanns Road (between Saltlake Boulevard and the edge of the property boundary, which is Bindts Road) to be upgraded prior to Statement of Compliance for any stage of the subdivision. The developer is currently working with Council to determine the appropriate design for this upgrade which allows for the installation of all relevant utilities to service the Riverhills Estate, as well as constructing the road to an urban standard. This has been done cooperatively while also working to retain as many trees in the road reserve as possible.

It must be acknowledged that all works are to be undertaken within the existing 20 metre road reserve as no road widening was planned for within the ENEDP or ENELSP.

 

Proposal

The applicant proposes to remove planted River Red Gums from the northern side of Lehmanns Road between Saltlake Boulevard and Bindts Road. As outlined in earlier sections of the report, this part of Lehmanns Road needs to be upgraded in order to provide suitable access into the new estate which forms part of the Quarry Hills Precinct Structure Plan area. 

 

There are sixty-seven (67) tree features (as defined by the submitted Arborist report) in this area consisting of sixty-six (66) individual trees and a tree group consisting of twenty-one (21) small trees.  Sixty-three (63) of the sixty-six (66) trees were identified as River Red Gums, with the remaining trees being exotic deciduous trees (Narrow leaved Ash and an apple tree). The group of small trees were identified as Hawthorn trees, which are exotic deciduous weed trees. Given that the permit trigger under the Vegetation Protection Overlay only applies to the removal of native trees (planted or remnant), the assessment will focus on the River Red Gum trees only.

 

The River Red Gums are planted specimens of approximately 50-60 years of age.  The arborist confirms this was verified by an adjoining landowner. These trees are in a single line and regularly spaced.  The location of the stand, the stem spacing and regular alignment and evidence of tree protection indicates that the entire stand was planted as a windrow. Given the extensive number of trees identified, a separate table has been provided in Attachment 2. This table outlines the details of the trees, their diameter at breast height (DBH) and their overall condition. Pictures of the trees are provided in Attachment 3. The removal of the planted River Red Gums triggers a planning permit under the Vegetation Protection Overlay Schedule 2 (Clause 3.0 within 42.02-S2 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme).

 

As outlined already in the report, the number of trees to be removed cannot be specified as part of this assessment as the retention/removal is subject to further detailed design. The layout of the trees along the existing road reserve, along with their Tree Protection Zones (TPZs) is provided as Attachment 4.

 

The following is a guide only as to how the trees are being affected by the proposed works:

·    There are 23 trees shown for retention on site; and

·    Out of the 40 trees to be removed/ affected by works, Council’s Parks and Open Space Department believe that 28 of these can be shown as ‘potential for retention’ subject to the works on site.

 

As a ‘best case scenario’ 53 of the 63 trees could be retained on site, however that should be taken as an estimate only. Professional advice provided by Council’s Parks and Open Space department has indicated that a TPZ encroachment over 30% significantly affects the tree and decreases its chances of withstanding and surviving the proposed road works.

 

It is emphasised that Council officers and a professional arborist will supervise these works to ensure that all measures are undertaken to give the trees the best case chance of being retained.

Public Notification

Pursuant to Clause 43.04-2 an application under any provision of this scheme which is generally in accordance with the Development Plan is exempt from the notice of requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d), the decision requirements of Section 64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of Section 82(1) of the Act.

 

The application was not required to be advertised as the vegetation removal is considered to be generally in accordance with the approved Development Plan, which is the primary Strategic Planning document applicable to this part of Lehmanns Road.  The application was not required to be referred to any external agencies.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

State Planning Policy Framework

Clause 12.01-1S - Protection of biodiversity

 

This clause has the objective to assist the protection and conservation of Victoria’s biodiversity, including important habitat for Victoria’s flora and fauna and other strategically valuable biodiversity sites.

 

Clause 12.01-2S - Native Vegetation Management

 

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

 

The proposal is being considered in the context of the identified upgrade for Lehmanns Road as per the ENEDP and its conditional requirement in Planning Permit No.  717388. It is noted that since the trees were planted, there are no offsets required under the Guidelines for the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation.

 

Local Planning Policy Framework

 

Clause 22.10 - River Red Gum Protection Policy

 

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

 

The proposal is considered consistent with the objectives and guidelines of this policy.

 

ZONE AND OVERLAY DECISION GUIDELINES

 

The subject site is located within the General Residential Zone.  The land is also affected by the Vegetation Protection Overlay.

 

Pursuant to Clause 32.01 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, a planning permit is not required to remove native vegetation from land within a Residential 1 Zone.

 

Of particular relevance to this application is the Vegetation Protection Overlay.  Clause 42.02 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme requires a planning permit for the removal, destruction and lopping of native vegetation on land affected by the overlay.  Schedule 2 of this overlay relates to the River Red Gum Grassy Woodland region within which the site is located. 

 

An arboricultural report has been prepared identifying the health and condition of the trees.

 

It is noted that since the vegetation is planted, Clause 52.17 of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme does not apply to this proposal.

Referrals

The application was referred internally to the Parks and Open Space Department and the Sustainability Planning Unit.

All departments have been working together to determine a cross section which is appropriate for the overall functionality of the road whilst retaining the maximum amount of trees.

The application did not trigger any referrals to any external authorities.

Planning Comments

Council acknowledges the importance of native vegetation, and in particular River Red Gum trees, as a visual and environmental feature within the municipality.

 

In this instance, the request to remove the River Red Gums is necessary in order to allow for the upgrade of Lehmanns Road as identified within the ENEDP and as required by a permit condition on Planning Permit No. 717388.

 

Whilst the ENEDP identified a specific cross section for Lehmanns Road, the application of this cross section is not practical now given the approval of the QHPSP further east of the site. The QHPSP has a different design philosophy in relation to shared path and bicycle lanes, particularly relating to path widths and design. For example, Lehmanns Road in ENEDP has an on-road bicycle lane, however QHPSP shows the bicycle lanes off road. The current plan shows a transition from an on road bicycle lane to an off road bicycle lane as part of the transition near Saltlake Boulevard.

 

Lehmanns Road is required to transition from the existing cross section into that identified within the QHPSP. It is also noted that these works are an interim design, with the ultimate cross section to be finalised once the commercial land within the Wollert Precinct Structure Plan to the north is developed.

 

It is noted that as part of this report, a definitive number of trees to be removed could not be provided. The retention and potential for trees to survive works is dependent on a number of different factors, as follows:

·        It is acknowledged that there are trees which are guaranteed to be removed due to unavoidable drainage infrastructure.

·        Council’s Parks and Open Space Department has indicated that since the trees are young for their species, they will tolerate a higher level of disturbance to their TPZ. This increases the chances of more trees surviving after works are completed.

·        The Australian Standard for Tree Protection Zones allow for encroachment of works into a TPZ subject to appropriate design and supervision by a qualified arborist. This will happen as part of the overall supervision of works on site.

·        Other trees will require clearance pruning to accommodate the bicycle path. 

·        The cross section has been designed to provide most services on the south side of the road, which minimises the extent of trenching needed on the north side, therefore protecting the tree roots of the existing trees.

·        Particular construction measures such as water digging allows an opportunity for works to be undertaken rather than condemning trees from the outset.

 

Whilst the final works are yet to be specified, an indication of the TPZ encroachment has been provided in Attachment 5. The areas in yellow indicate where TPZs are being protected, where those areas in red are where works are likely to impact TPZs.

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 proposal has been assessed against the relevant policies and provisions of the Whittlesea Planning Scheme, including Clauses 22.10 (River Red Gum Protection Policy) and 52.17 (Native Vegetation Removal), as well as applicable zone and overlays. 

A planning permit is required for the removal of the planted River Red Gums on site. Significant work and negotiation has allowed for the retention of these trees on site whilst still providing a functional upgrade of Lehmanns Road.

As the detailed design will provide for the final figure of trees which are to be retained and which are to be removed and/ or pruned, it is recommended that a specific number of trees to be removed is not specified within the permit, and that a planning permit is issued for the ‘removal of native vegetation in accordance with the endorsed plans’.

Accordingly, it is recommended that the proposal be supported subject to appropriate conditions.

 

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to approve Planning Application No. 719363 and issue a Planning Permit for the removal of native vegetation in accordance with the endorsed plans within the Lehmanns Road road reserve and subject to the following conditions:

1.       Prior to works commencing on site, detailed design drawings are to be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The drawings are to show the final design of the road which has minimised the extent of tree loss necessary to facilitate the upgrade of Lehmmans Road to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

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

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

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

5.       The applicant must contact Council’s Parks and Open Space Department to arrange for an appropriate officer to be present on site to supervise the removal of the trees.

6.       The project manager is to locate all services either above or below ground prior to the commencement of any works.

7.       Stumps and any surface roots are to be ground down below ground level. Ground and chipped material to a depth of 50mm is to be removed from site at the direction of the project manager. The project manager must supply and replace suitable topsoil and seed the area making certain that the reinstated ground surface is level, even and safe.

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

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

10.     All timber greater than 300mm in diameter that cannot be reused as habitat, furniture or another use determined as appropriate by the Responsible Authority shall be hammer milled and shredded for reuse as mulch within the subject site.

11.     All timber less than 300mm in diameter and branch/leaf material shall be shredded for re-use as mulch within the subject site.

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

13.     No buildings or works, including loading and unloading, storage of materials, dumping of waste, vehicle access, parking and other construction activity is to occur within a tree protection zone without the written consent of and to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

14.     The permit for tree removal expires if it is not commenced and completed within two years after the issue of the permit.  Before the permit expires or within three months afterwards, the owner or occupier of the land to which it applies may ask the responsible authority for an extension of time. The Responsible Authority may extend the time within which the use or development or any stage of it may be started or any stage of it is to be completed.

Notes:

Prior to the removal of the tree, the permit holder must notify all adjacent landholders that the tree is to be removed with Council consent.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 



 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

6.1.6      Improving Community Safety: A Regulatory Compliance Framework

Attachments:                        1       Improving Community Safety: A Regulatory Compliance Framework   

Responsible Officer:            Director Partnerships, Planning & Engagement

Author:                                  Manager City Safety & Amenity   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council resolve to:

1.      Adopt the Improving Community Safety: A Regulatory Compliance Framework; and

2.      Implement a communications plan to increase community awareness and understanding of Council’s responsibilities and approach to compliance-related matters.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

As part of the 2019/20 Council Action Plan, the Improving Community Safety: A Regulatory Compliance Framework (the ‘framework’) has been developed to improve safety outcomes and provide clarity to the community about how Council will respond to various compliance matters.

·    The aim of the framework (attachment 1) is to deliver a transparent, consistent and proportionate approach and response to compliance issues.

·    The framework outlines Council’s guiding elements for decision making and educating the community about compliance-related responsibilities, what discretionary factors will and will not be considered when determining appropriate outcomes, and outlines a risk based approach and proportionate responses to various levels of non-compliance.

·    The framework will not change the type of matters Council enforces or the options available to achieve compliance. Instead, the framework aims to document Council’s approach and responses to compliance-related matters.

·    The framework has been developed through a collaboration of Council’s compliance-based departments to ensure a standardised approach to regulatory matters.

·    The framework does not cover instances where there is a legislative requirement for Council to take a specific enforcement action.

 

Report

Background

All Victorian councils have a legal obligation to ensure that the community is complying with various State and Local laws, which contributes to the overall health, safety, amenity and enjoyment of our community.

Council’s aim is always to achieve voluntary compliance through engagement, education and providing sufficient information and guidance to enable community members to become compliant, therefore reducing reliance on enforcement action.

However, compliance is not always achievable through education which necessitates enforcement.

Ultimately, the framework aims to provide a transparent basis for compliance matters that is clear, risk-based and effective.

Proposal

The proposal seeks Council adoption of the Improving Community Safety: A Regulatory Compliance Framework.

Consultation

The framework was developed by multiple Council departments who are responsible for ensuring compliance with various pieces of legislation.

Community consultation was planned to guide the framework, however COVID-19 hindered these efforts. Instead, the community will be informed of the new framework via Council’s website, social media channels, print publications and e-newsletters.

The framework’s effectiveness will be monitored over the next 12 months and if issues are identified, community consultation can be undertaken to help resolve any issues after this time.

Critical Dates

The Framework is a Council Action Plan item and therefore completion prior to 30 June 2020 is a preferred outcome, albeit noting implications caused by COVID-19.

Financial Implications

The framework does not seek to change, rather formalise Council’s approach to compliance matters. Therefore, the cost of implementing the framework is covered within the recurrent budget.

Policy strategy and legislation

The framework provides an overview for how Council will approach its various legal obligations under several Victorian Acts of Parliament and local laws.

link to strategic risks

Strategic Risk Health, Safety and Welfare - Failure of safety and risk management systems resulting in serious injury or harm to staff or member of public

The framework provides a transparent and risk-based approach to how Council will respond to compliance-related matters, ultimately promoting the health, safety and welfare of our community.

 

Links to whittlesea 2040 and the CoUNCIL Plan

Goal                              Connected community

Key Direction               A healthy and safe community

 

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

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

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

Conclusion

The Improving Community Safety: A Regulatory Compliance Framework does not change the type of matters Council enforces or the options available to achieve compliance, however it does provide greater transparency about Council’s approach and responses to
compliance-related matters.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Adopt the Improving Community Safety: A Regulatory Compliance Framework; and

2.       Implement a communications plan to increase community awareness and understanding of Council’s responsibilities and approach to compliance-related matters.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

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 2 June 2020

 

6.2       Community Services

6.2.1      Re-focusing Councils Grants Programs

Attachments:                        1       Proposed COVID Response Grants

2       Current City of Whittlesea Grant Programs   

Responsible Officer:            Director Community Services

Author:                                  Manager Community Cultural Development   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council resolve to restructure Council’s community grant programs to better serve the community in recovering from the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic by establishing four new COVID-19 Response Grant Programs for a minimum period of 12 months.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    Council has a long history of supporting local community groups through various funding programs. This support enables community to use their own voice, driving their own projects to deliver the outcomes they need.

·    Council currently offers ten grant programs to not-for-profit groups, individual young people and small businesses within the municipality.

·    Most Council grant programs require successful applicants to deliver a project, activity, event for community members.

·    COVID-19 restrictions have made the usual delivery of community projects and activities very difficult and often impossible.

·    In response to the current restrictions, and the upcoming easing of restrictions, grant programs have been reviewed and refocused on community activities which will aid community relief and recovery; Resourcing, Venue Hire Subsidy, Reactivation and Reconnection (see Attachment 1).

 

Report

Background

In response to the COVID19 pandemic all grant programs have been reviewed in order to refocus on community activities which will aid community relief and recovery.

The City of Whittlesea offers ten grant programs (Attachment 2). The total value of these grant programs over the 2019/20 period is $514,000 and $533,421 is the proposed figure in the 20/21 draft budget, currently out for community consultation.

Grant programs contribute to achieving Whittlesea 2040: A Place for All by offering financial support for community-led initiatives that address local need, growing community skills, connecting neighbours and improving the quality of life and wellbeing for City of Whittlesea residents.

Of the ten programs on offer:

·    Four require successful applicants to deliver a project, event or activity which is open to the wider community.

·    Two provide funding for groups to deliver projects, activities for their club’s members.

·    One provides funding for individual young people to participate in arts, cultural or sporting events outside of the City of Whittlesea municipality.

·    One provides funds for rural landowners to undertake sustainable land management projects.

·    One supports social enterprise and home-based business operators to work to develop their business.

·    One provides financial assistance to community groups who are in the process of becoming established.

Activities and events are currently non-essential activities and contradict COVID-19 physical distancing restrictions. Longer lasting restrictions may mean that the delivery of public events are limited for some time.

Rather than providing new projects, activities and events community members are more likely to require:

·    Support to re-establish previous activities.

·    Support to connect with others once restrictions are eased.

·    Mental health and wellbeing support.

·    Financial relief due to increased financial stress caused by COVID-19.

Proposal

The Council grant programs play a critical role in responding to community needs in the relief and recovery phases of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Following a review of grant programs, it is proposed that programs be simplified to ensure greater accessibility and that a suite of COVID Response Grant Programs be established with the following elements: Resourcing; Venue Hire subsidy; Reactivation and Reconnection, refer to Attachment 1.

 

The following 6 grant programs will be ‘rolled-up’ into the proposed program:

·    Arts, Cultural and Sporting Grants

·    Youth Participation Grants

·    Cultural Community Development Event Funding

Festivals and Events Grants

Neighbourhood Events Grants

·    Community Development Grants

·    Cultural Heritage Grants

·    New and Emerging Groups Grants

The three programs listed below will continue with little to no changes. The scope of these particular programs are flexible enough to serve the community recovering from the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.

·    Senior Citizens Club Grants

·    Economic Development Grants

·    Environmental Works Grants

 

Female Inclusion in Sport Grants are co-funded by DPV Health and the use of these grants will be determined once consultation is completed. 

Consultation

Internally, Grant Administrators from affected grant programs have been consulted on the proposed changes. DPV Health co-funds the grant program Female Inclusion in Sport and consultation around this grant program is ongoing. Community members will have an opportunity to provide input on the development of the program implementation guidelines.

Critical Dates

COVID Response grants would be in place for a minimum of 12 months with the potential to extend depending on how long the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions and relief and recovery phases last.

The proposed COVID Response grants program will be launched July 2020. As per the Grant Administration Guidelines, individual grant programs would be reviewed at the end of the grant round. A full review of Council’s grant programs will be undertaken annually to ensure they continue to respond to community needs through and beyond the recovery phase.

It is expected that the first grant program launched would be Resourcing Grants. Other grant programs would be launched in line with restrictions being eased (e.g. allowing group gatherings and non-essential outings). 

Financial Implications

The proposed grant programs have been designed to work within existing grant allocations. Additional COVID response funding would be easily integrated into existing grant processes.

Policy strategy and legislation

COVID Response grants align with Whittlesea 2040: A Place for All Goal 1: Connected Community. All grant programs are administered in line with the Grants Policy and Grant Administration Guidelines.

link to strategic risks

Strategic Risk Community and Stakeholder Engagement - Ineffective stakeholder engagement resulting in compromised community outcomes and/or non-achievement of Council's strategic direction

Community will be given the opportunity to inform COVID Response grants to ensure they meet community needs and that acceptance of Council funds does not become onerous on the successful applicants.

 

Links to whittlesea 2040 and the CoUNCIL Plan

Goal                              Connected community

Key Direction               A participating community

 

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

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

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

Conclusion

The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and physical distancing restrictions have impacted the community’s ability to deliver new projects, activities and events which are accessible to the wider community. Changes to current grant programs are required to ensure they remain responsive to community needs during the relief and recovery phases of the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to restructure Council’s community grant programs to better serve the community in recovering from the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic by establishing four new COVID-19 Response Grant Programs for a minimum period of 12 months.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

6.3       City Transport and Presentation

6.3.1      2019-78 Supply of Asphalt Works Tender Evaluation

Attachments:                        1       Attachment 1 - 2019-78 Confidential Attachment - Confidential

This Attachment has been designated as confidential information under section 66(5) of the Local Government Act 2020 on the grounds that it contains private commercial information, being information provided by a business, commercial or financial undertaking that relates to trade secrets or, if released, would unreasonably expose the business, commercial or financial undertaking to disadvantage.  The attachment specifically contains details regarding tender amounts submitted by businesses which were provided to Council in confidence and which would unreasonably expose the businesses to disadvantage if made public or disclosed to competitors.   

2       Attachment 2 - Boral - Confidential

This Attachment has been designated as confidential information under section 66(5) of the Local Government Act 2020 on the grounds that it contains private commercial information, being information provided by a business, commercial or financial undertaking that relates to trade secrets or, if released, would unreasonably expose the business, commercial or financial undertaking to disadvantage.  The attachment contains a schedule of prices submitted by one of the tenderers which includes hourly rates and the material and overhead component of the rates. This information was provided to Council in confidence and would unreasonably expose the business to disadvantage if made public or disclosed to competitors.    

3       Attachment 3 - RABS - Confidential

This Attachment has been designated as confidential information under section 66(5) of the Local Government Act 2020 on the grounds that it contains private commercial information, being information provided by a business, commercial or financial undertaking that relates to trade secrets or, if released, would unreasonably expose the business, commercial or financial undertaking to disadvantage.  The attachment contains a schedule of prices submitted by one of the tenderers which includes hourly rates and the material and overhead component of the rates. This information was provided to Council in confidence and would unreasonably expose the business to disadvantage if made public or disclosed to competitors.    

4       Attachment 4 - Asphaltech - Confidential

This Attachment has been designated as confidential information under section 66(5) of the Local Government Act 2020 on the grounds that it contains private commercial information, being information provided by a business, commercial or financial undertaking that relates to trade secrets or, if released, would unreasonably expose the business, commercial or financial undertaking to disadvantage.  The attachment contains a schedule of prices submitted by one of the tenderers which includes hourly rates and the material and overhead component of the rates. This information was provided to Council in confidence and would unreasonably expose the business to disadvantage if made public or disclosed to competitors.      

Responsible Officer:            Director City Transport and Presentation

Author:                                  Project Manager   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

It is recommended that contract number 2019-78 Supply of Asphalt Works:

·    Is awarded to Boral Resources Vic, RABS Paving Services and Asphaltech Victoria;

·    Supply of asphalt materials for minor road maintenance activities is awarded to Asphaltech Victoria and Boral Resources Vic;

·    For the tendered schedule of rates with total expenditure limited to $37 Million (excluding GST); and

·    For a term from 1 July 2020 to 30 June 2023 with extension options to 30 June 2025.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

The tender evaluation panel advises that:

·    Nine tenders were received;

·    Project Works, for the delivery of Council’s annual road resealing (resurfacing) program, in accordance with the asset management strategy, be awarded to a panel of contractors which will consist of Boral Resources, RABS Paving Services and Asphaltech Victoria; and

·    Supply of asphalt materials for minor road maintenance is awarded to Asphaltech Victoria and Boral Resources Vic.

 

Report

Background

The purpose of this contract is to award a panel of contractors for Council’s annual road resurfacing program works and the supply of asphalt materials for the minor maintenance activities to ensure that Council’s road asset management plan can be delivered efficiently.

Tender for the contract closed on 29 January 2020.  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 and 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

60 %

Capability

20 %

Capacity

10 %

Impact

10 %

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
RABS

Yes

Yes

87.2

3

Tenderer B

Asphaltech

Yes

Yes

87.4

2

Tenderer E

Boral

Yes

Yes

88.4

1

Tenderer C

Yes

Yes

84.0

4

Tenderer D

Yes

Yes

81.6

5

Tenderer F

Yes

Yes

81.2

6

Tenderer G

Yes

 No

N/A

 

Tenderer H

Yes

No

N/A

 

Tenderer I

No

 

N/A

 

The tenders from Boral, Asphaltech and RABS have been determined to be best value for the road resurfacing works component of this contract and it is considered that these companies can perform the contract to the required standards.

The supply of asphalt materials component of this contract has been evaluated on the supply of asphalt price alone. Following an assessment of prices the TEP recommends awarding the supply of asphalt for minor road maintenance activities to Asphaltech and Boral.

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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Council provides budgets for Road Resurfacing works through its New Works budget allocations that align with Council’s asset management strategy for the sustainable long-term management of our road assets.  The extent of works carried out is managed within these budgets.

link to strategic risks

Strategic Risk Life Cycle Asset Management - Failure to effectively plan for the construction, on-going maintenance and renewal of Council’s assets

The establishment of this panel contract allows Council to effectively and efficiently deliver on Council’s road asset management strategy as intended for the benefit of the community.

Links to whittlesea 2040 and the CoUNCIL Plan

Goal                              High-performing organisation

Key Direction               More cost-effective investment through better return on investment, efficiency and an engaged workforce

 

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 tenders from Boral, Asphaltech and RABS have been determined to be best value for this contract and it is considered that these companies can perform the works to the required standards. The supply of asphalt materials for Councils road maintenance activities can be undertaken by Asphaltech or Boral. 

 

 

 

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve in relation to Contract 2019-78 - Supply of Asphalt Works:

1.         Accept the Schedule of Rates as attached from the following companies to form a panel of contractors for the delivery of Council’s asphalt road resealing works for the period from 1 July 2020 to 30 June 2023 with an option to extend up to a further two years from:

·   Boral Resources Victoria.

·   RABS Paving Service.

·   Asphaltech Victoria.

a)    Accept the Schedule of Rates as attached from the following companies to form a panel of contractors for the supply of asphalt materials for the period from 1 July 2020 to 30 June 2023 with an option to extend up to a further two years from:

·    Boral Resources Victoria.

·    Asphaltech Victoria.

b)    Contractor to provide proof of currency of insurance cover as required in the tender documentation.

2.         Confirm that price variations will be in accordance with the provisions as set out in the tender documents.

3.         Sign the Contract documents.

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

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

6.3.2      Miller Street, Epping - Road Safety Crash Counter Measure

Attachments:                        1       Locality Map

2       Crash Summary   

Responsible Officer:            Director City Transport and Presentation

Author:                                  Team Leader Transport Engineering   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

1.   Seek Department and Transport approval to reduce the speed limit from 60km/h to 50km/h on Miller Street, Epping.

2.   Communicate the speed reduction and road safety reasoning to the community, at least two weeks prior to installation of the speed limit signs.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    Miller Street in Epping currently has a poor crash record, experiencing 17 casualty crashes in the past five years.

·    A major contributing factor to the high crash rate is the very high traffic volume currently on Miller Street, being approximately 22,000 vehicles per day which is double the traffic volume expected for Miller Street.

·    The very high traffic volume is a result of the inadequate arterial road network in the Epping – Epping North area, which in turn results in rat-running traffic in Miller Street to avoid congestion on the arterial roads.

·    Even though the traffic volume on Miller Street can be expected to be reduced by approximately 50%, following the completion of arterial road upgrades currently underway, high traffic volumes will remain and crashes are still likely to occur.

·    Immediate options available to Council to address the poor crash record are limited.

Report

Introduction

This report discusses road safety in Miller Street in Epping and recommends reducing the speed limit from 60km/h to 50km/h.

Background

The speed limit in Miller Street is 60km/h; this has applied since the mid-1970’s when the default urban speed of 60km/h was introduced.

In mid-2000, as part of the urban speed limit review, VicRoads, now the Department of Transport (DoT), announced that the default urban speed limit would be reduced to 50km/h.

Council was provided the opportunity to nominate local roads to remain at 60km/h.  A report on this matter was considered at the Council meeting of 20 June 2000; Council resolved that the speed limit on Miller Street was to remain at 60km/h.

DISCUSSION

Road Network and Land Use Development

Miller Street is a north-south collector road between Cooper Street and O’Herns Road, it is approximately 1.6km in length, the alignment is straight and flat (Attachment 1), and it transects precincts 2, 8 & 9 of the Epping Central Structure Plan area, the objective of which is to set out a policy, development and implementation framework for the future development of Epping Central.

Properties either side of Miller Street have predominately light to medium industrial businesses, service industries, auto repairs, building supplies, as well as two sports and leisure facilities and a cultural place of assembly. Residential properties are located in some sections directly adjacent to the east.

Miller Street presently operates as an arterial road during peak times due to north-south rat running traffic between the residential area in the north and the arterial road network in the south.  This is primarily a result of peak period traffic congestion on Epping Road/High Street, and the lack of alternate north-south roads arterial roads for commuters.

Alternative arterial road projects currently in progress are:

·      Edgars Road extension from Cooper Street to O’Herns Road (by delivered by the development sector).

·      O’Herns Road duplication and the O’Herns Road/Hume Freeway interchange (being delivered by the State Government).

These projects are scheduled to be completed mid-2021, and when completed will provide much needed alternatives for commuters forecast to result in a reduction in traffic on Miller Street.

Traffic Conditions

Traffic conditions have changed significantly over the 20 years since the Council resolution.  This is particularly the case with traffic volumes which have increased from an estimated 1,000 vehicles per day (vpd) in the early 1970’s to over 22,000 vpd in 2019.

Traffic speeds along the street vary.  Speeds are generally lower at the southern (Cooper Street) end, and in the middle section (near Houston Street), with higher speeds at the northern end (closer to O’Herns Road).  This is attributed to the greater level of traffic congestion and interaction between abutting properties and side streets in the southern and middle sections, compared to less traffic congestion and interaction at the northern end.

There is a high level of morning peak traffic on Miller Street exiting the Epping North residential area onto the arterial road network with significant queuing traffic at the Cooper Street traffic signals. 

A summary of the most recent traffic survey results is contained in the below table:

Section

Date

Volume
(vpd)

Speed (km/h)

Average (km/hr)

85th%ile1 (km/hr)

Over 50

Over 60

Max.

Northern

Feb 2019

21,714

54

60

15,8511
(73%)

2,282
(13%)

145

Middle

Feb 2019

22,492

48

55

8,322
(37%)

900
(4%)

155

Southern

Nov 2017

20,883

48

54

6265
(30%)

625
(3%)

121

1.   The 85th%ile speed is the speed at which 85% percentage of drivers travel at or below, and is a factor used in determining the safe operating speed of a road.

Traffic speeds recorded are what would normally be expected in a street with a 60 km/h speed limit. Although it is acknowledged that there are several exceptionally high speeds recorded.

Traffic volumes at over 22,000 vpd are more than double the design volume for Miller Street.  This increases the risk of a motor vehicle crash occurring.  Research by Australian and international road safety practitioners have recognised that when the traffic volume on a road exceeds the design volume the risk of a casualty collision increases.

Road Safety

Miller Street has a poor road safety record with the Department of Transport (DoT) CrashStats listing 17 casualty crashes in the past five years (Attachment 2).  This high crash rate places Miller Street in the Accident Black Length category, as per the DoT definition, and for this reason a detailed review of the crashes has been conducted.  

The review of crash details indicated that there is no overwhelming or consistent cause of the crashes and therefore it is not possible to identify any specific crash countermeasures, apart from measures to reduce traffic speeds. 

As it is not possible to identify any specific crash countermeasures, an engineering infrastructure investment submission has not been prepared for Transport Accident Commission (TAC), DoT or Federal road safety funding.

As mentioned, the State Government and the Australian and international road safety practitioners have recognised that crash rates and severities are exponentially proportional to the speed of traffic.  This formed the basis of the much-publicised TAC Wipe Off 5 campaign. Therefore, the option to reduce traffic speeds is a worthy consideration in this case.

The following options were explored in more detail for the purposes of determining the most appropriate action for Miller Street:

·    Reducing the speed limit on Miller Street from 60 km/h to 50 km/h, in line with all other local roads, and / or

·    Introducing traffic calming, speed deterrent devices, such as flat-top raised pavements.

Speed Reduction Measures

 

Reduced Speed Limit

A 50km/h speed limit is likely to result in drivers reducing their speed by 5km/h.

A reduction of the speed limit on Miller Street from 60km/h to 50km/h has a known crash reduction factor of 20%, providing significant road safety benefits to the community.

Ongoing motor vehicle commuting concern for any speed reduction is the that average travel times along Miller Street will increase. Further analysis indicates that this loss is minimal.  This is because “best” unimpeded travel times between Cooper Street and O’Herns Road are 1:36 (min:sec) at 60km/h and 1:55 (min:sec) and 50km/h respectively, a 19 second difference.  These times assume unimpeded, free flowing traffic, which is rare as most drivers do not get an opportunity to travel at these speeds.  Actual average speeds are between 48km/h to 54km/h, and this corresponds to 2:00 (at 60 km/hr) and 1:47 (at 50km/hr) travel times, thereby only providing a 13 second travel time loss.

Raised Pavements (Speed humps)

The installation of raised pavements is an effecting engineering intervention to reduce speeds in most local road environments, however, is not considered appropriate in industrial areas, such as Miller Street, due to the higher frequency of trucks and movement of freight and goods. This option is therefore not recommended at this time.

Consultation & Engagement

A community consultation and engagement process has been undertaken to get an understanding of community views on a 50km/h speed limit on Miller Street.

A total of 184 circular letters were sent to businesses in Miller Street and the surrounding area inviting the community to provide feedback on the proposed speed limit reduction
by completing and returning a questionnaire. Community feedback was also sought via the City of Whittlesea website, social media, deployment of variable message sign trailers in Miller Street and City of Whittlesea on-line Have Your Say survey portal.

 

A summary of responses received is shown below:

 

 

Responses

Mailout

On-line survey

Social Media

Support

16 (61.5%)

39 (9.9%)

9 (7.4%)

No Support

10 (38.5%)

354 (90.9%)

20 (16.5%)

Non-committal

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

121 (76.1%)1

Total Responses

26

393

121

Note 1.  These responses raised other matters, and have been taken off-line, and where appropriate they will be investigated and considered separately.

The wider community generally is not supportive of the 50km/h speed limit due to a perception of a significant increase in travel time, which is only in the order of 13 seconds during rare free flowing traffic conditions. The road safety benefits and crash reduction resulting from a speed limit reduction far outweigh the broader community’s perception of a significant increase in travel time, that is not supported by the travel time data.

 

The majority of the Miller Street business community, who are directly affected by this proposal are in support of the 50km/h speed limit.

 

Dyson Bus Company and Victoria Police have indicated support a 50kmh speed limit.

 

If Council agrees to the 50km/h speed limit in Miller Street, a submission will need to be made to the Department of Transport for approval to install the 50km/h signs, as speed reduction is classified as a major traffic control device.

 

If DoT agrees to the 50km/h speed limit in Miller Street, a communications strategy will be prepared to advise the community of the road safety trauma reduction reasoning for Council’s and DoT’s decision on this matter.

Financial Implications

The cost of changing speed limit signs on Miller Street would be approximately $1,500; this can be funded through current operational budgets.

Reducing the speed limit on Miller Street will have a known community benefit value associated with the reduction of serious injury accident costs to the community of approximately $750,000 over five years.  This benefit is a function of a forecast known crash reduction rate of approximately 20% that is corelated to reducing speeds by 10 km/hr (as advised by DoT) and the resulting reduction of community injury ad trauma associated with the crash counter measures being introduced.

Policy strategy and legislation

City of Whittlesea Road Safety Strategy (2017):

Address the 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.

link to strategic risks

Strategic Risk Service Delivery - Inability to plan for and provide critical community services and infrastructure impacting on community wellbeing

 

Links to whittlesea 2040 and the CoUNCIL Plan

Goal                              Connected community

Key Direction               A healthy and safe community

 

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

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

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

Conclusion

Miller Street has a poor road safety record.

There are tangible road safety benefits to be achieved through reducing the speed limit on Miller Street from 60km/h to 50km/h.

Dyson Bus Company, Victoria Police, and the majority of the Miller Street business community are supportive of a 50kmh speed limit, however the overall community is not supportive of a 50km/h speed limit due to a perceived significant increase in travel time.

The road safety benefit of a 50km/h speed limit to the broader community has a value of approximately $750,000 over five years due to a 20% reduction in road trama.  These benefits far outweigh concerns raised by members of the community who are not supportive of a 50km/h speed limit.

A 50km/h speed limit in Miller Street is the appropriate road safety response to address the poor road safety road.

If Council agrees to the 50km/h speed limit in Miller Street, a submission will need to be made to the Department of Transport (DoT) for approval.

Communication on the road safety reasoning and community benefits to reduce the speed limit to the community will occur at a minimum two weeks prior to installation of new speed limit signs.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Seek Department and Transport approval to reduce the speed limit from 60km/h to 50km/h on Miller Street, Epping.

2.       Communicate the road safety reasoning for this decision to the broader community at least two weeks prior to installing new 50km/h signs. 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

6.3.3      Road Safety & Traffic Management:  Manor House Drive,  Epping North

Attachments:                        1       Locality Plan

2       Summary of Traffic Conditions

3       Road Safety & Traffic Management Plan   

Responsible Officer:            Director City Transport and Presentation

Author:                                  Team Leader Transport Engineering   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

1.      Endorse the road safety and traffic management plan consisting of raised pavements, pedestrian crossings, traffic islands and green bicycle lane pavement markings in Manor House Drive in Epping North.

2.      Consult with owners and occupiers of all Manor House Drive properties on the detail design of the road safety and traffic management measures, prior to delivery of the road safety and traffic management plan. 

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    Manor House Drive, Epping has a history of community concern related to traffic management and road safety.

·    The road safety record, traffic volumes and speeds in Manor House Drive are now higher than desirable and require intervention.

·    A road safety and traffic management plan has been prepared and will be a major step in addressing concerns regarding the road safety and traffic conditions.

·    Council agreement to the Manor House Drive road safety and traffic management plan will enhance the success for State Government for funding to implement the plan.

 

 

Report

Background

Manor House Drive, Epping has a history of community concern related to traffic management and road safety. A petition to install raised pavements (road humps) in Manor House Drive, was received by Council and considered at the Council Meeting of April 2012, where it resolved to:

1.       Not install any raised pavements in Manor House Drive, Epping.

2.       Install advance warning signs and centre lines through the curved sections in Manor House Drive, Epping.

3.       Conduct a driver safety awareness campaign involving:

(a)     Installation of 50km/h Bin Stickers in the immediate area.

(b)     Deployment of Council’s speed observation trailers in Manor House Drive.

4.       Refer the matter of ‘hoon’ driver behaviour to the Victoria Police.

5.       Monitor traffic conditions over the next 24 months in Manor House Drive to determine if traffic conditions change and some traffic management is needed in the future.

6.       Advise the head petitioner of Council’s decision on this matter.

These resolutions were all actioned and in accordance with item #5, road safety and traffic conditions in Manor House Drive have been regularly monitored.

The most recent monitoring results and data now indicate that in 2020, the current road safety and traffic conditions are such that a review of item #1 and other relevant road safety treatments are warranted and will be discussed within this report.

Discussion

Road Network and Surrounding Land Use

Manor House Drive is a 50km/h collector road.  It commences at a T-intersection at
O’Herns Road (in the south) and terminates at a crossroad intersection at Harvest Home Road (in the north).  North of Lyndarum Drive, Manor House Drive changes name to Greenfields Drive, but to all intent and purpose it provides a continuous link between
O’Herns Road and Harvest Home Road (Attachment 1).

 

The road is generally flat and relatively straight with an approximately 13.0m wide carriageway, which include 2 x 3.0m traffic lanes, 1.5m bicycle lanes and 2.0m indented parking lanes on both sides.

 

The surrounding land has residential development, except for a developing business, industrial area on the south side of O’Herns Road

 

Major Road Projects Victoria (MRPV) are currently upgrading O’Herns Road between Redding Rise and the Hume Freeway, and constructing an interchange at the Freeway.  The road network in the area is expected to be fully developed by 2022.

 

 

 

Traffic Conditions

A number of traffic surveys have been conducted in Manor House Drive, these indicate:

·          Current traffic volumes on Manor House Drive are 10,000 to 11,000 vehicles per day (vpd).  This is double the early 2000’s forecast volumes for Manor House Drive at completion of the road network in Epping North.  This current excess traffic is due to the incomplete road network and current road upgrades underway.

·          Traffic speeds in Manor House Drive are 48km/h to 50km/h (average) and 55km/h to 57km/h (85th percentile)  The 85th percentile speed is the speed at which 85% of traffic is travelling at or below, and is a factor used in determining the safe operating speed of a road).

The 85th percentile speed is higher than desirable, and whilst it is encouraging to note that speeds have progressively decreased since 2012, some form of intervention will be required by Council if road safety is to be improved and speeds are to be reduced to a level expected by residents.

A full summary of traffic conditions is detailed in Attachment 2.

Road Safety

A review of the Department of Transport (DoT), formerly VicRoads, crash data indicates that in the past five years of available data (1 June 2014 to 1 June 2019), there has been five casualty crashes in Manor House Drive.  These crashes resulted in a cyclist, a pedestrian or vehicle occupants incurring injuries.

Due this poor safety record, a submission for road safety funding has been put to DoT for funding to implement road safety improvement measures as shown on the Road Safety Traffic Management Plan (RSTMP) (Attachment 3), and includes, flat-top raised pavements, pedestrian refuge islands, pedestrian crossings and green bicycle lane treatments.  

Collector Road Priority Ranking

Given the poor road safety record in Manor House Drive, the traffic conditions and the nature and function of the road, Manor House Dive is currently ranked No. 5 of collector roads throughout the municipality for road safety and traffic management improvements.

Consultation

Council officers have prepared the Road Safety Traffic Management Plan (RSTMP) in collaboration with, and input from DoT, Dysons Bus Company and Victoria Police.

Given the current poor safety record, previous known history of community concern related to traffic management and safety resulting in a petition to install raised pavements (road humps) in Manor House Drive (April 2012) and the Council resolution to monitor the situation for residents, no further community consultation has been conducted at this stage.   However, all owners and occupiers of Manor House Drive properties will be consulted on the detail design of any approved road safety and traffic management measures well in advance and prior delivery of works.

Critical Dates

DoT has indicated that if Council is successful with its submission works can be delivered by 31 December 2020.

There are no other critical dates associated with this matter. 

Financial Implications

The estimated cost to implement the proposed Road Safety Traffic Management Plan (RSTMP) is $200,000.  If the submission for funding is successful, there will be no financial implication to Council.

In the event that the submission is not successful, the RSTMP will be delivered through existing capital budgets.  Given that this site is ranked number 5 in the collector road priority list, it is forecast to be delivered in 2020/2021 financial year.

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.

link to strategic risks

Strategic Risks

Service Delivery - Inability to plan for and provide critical community services and infrastructure impacting on community wellbeing.

Health, Safety and Welfare - Failure of safety and risk management systems resulting in serious injury or harm to staff or member of public.

Links to whittlesea 2040 and the CoUNCIL Plan

Goal                              Liveable neighbourhoods

Key Direction               Smart, connected transport network

 

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

Manor House Drive has a poor road safety record, with crashes, injuries, vehicle volumes and speeds that are higher than desirable.  The combination of these factors results in Manor House Drive being ranked number #5 on the collector road priority list.

A road safety and traffic management plan (RSTMP) to address these matters has been prepared.  The cost estimate to implement the plan is $200,000.

A funding submission for $200,000 has been put to the Department of Transport (DoT).  For this submission to be successful, Council will need to agree to the RSTMP.

In the event that the submission to DoT is not successful, it is forecast that the RSTMP can be delivered through existing capital budgets in 2020/2021.

Many residents of Manor House Drive have indicated concerns regarding the safety and operation of the road.  Notwithstanding, owners and occupiers of all Manor House Drive properties will be consulted on the detail of the road safety and traffic management measures, prior to the approved delivery of works. 

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Endorse the Road Safety and Traffic Management Plan for Manor House Drive, Epping North.

2.       Consult with owners and occupiers of all Manor House Drive properties on the detail design of the road safety and management measures, prior to delivery of the works. 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

6.3.4      2020-35 Microsoft Enterprise Licensing

Attachments:                        1       2020-35 Microsoft Enterprise Licensing - Confidential - Confidential

This Attachment has been designated as confidential information under section 66(5) of the Local Government Act 2020 on the grounds that it contains private commercial information, being information provided by a business, commercial or financial undertaking that relates to trade secrets or, if released, would unreasonably expose the business, commercial or financial undertaking to disadvantage.  The attachment specifically contains details relating to tender amounts submitted by tenderers and tender evaluation scoring. This information was provided to Council in confidence and would unreasonably expose the tenderers to disadvantage if made public or disclosed to competitors.      

Responsible Officer:            Director City Transport and Presentation

Author:                                  Contracts Officer    

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

It is recommended that contract number 2020-35 for the provision of Microsoft Enterprise Licensing:

·    is awarded to Winc Australia Pty Ltd;

·    for the lump sum price of $3,709,930 (excl. GST);

·    for a term from 1 July 2020 to 27 March 2022; and

·    and approval to extend the contract in line with any extensions granted to Winc Australia Pty Ltd by MAV Procurement, until 27 March 2025.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

The tender evaluation panel advises that:

·    Seven tenders were received; and

·    the recommended tender was the highest ranked and is considered best value because they meet all contractual expectations in price, capacity and this was a collaborative tender with MAV (Municipal Association of Victoria) Procurement and WALGA (Western Australian Local Government Agency) Procurement.

Report

Background

Council uses several Microsoft products which are all covered by this agreement, the products range from desktop software such as Word, Outlook, Excel etc... to backend server and database software and services. 

 

Council appointed MAV Procurement to act as an agent of the City of Whittlesea for the purpose of seeking tenders for the Victorian Local Government Microsoft Licensing Solution Partner Panel pursuant to the provisions of section 186 of the Victorian Local Government Act. 

 

Joint procurement contracts of this type aim to facilitate a contract that will deliver value for money through a combined national expenditure arrangement for participant Councils.  The tender process, as conducted by the joint tender procurement agent, establishes a panel of recommended contractors via a competitive process in accordance with all relevant legislation, procurement procedures and policies. 

 

Tenders for the contract closed on 28 April 2020.  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.

 

Tenders were sought by public advertisement via MAV Procurement RFT.  Only tenders received in accordance with the requirements of MAV Procurement Conditions of Tender were evaluated. 

 

A tender evaluation report was prepared by MAV Procurement.  The report identified and appointed a Panel of Preferred Suppliers for the delivery of Microsoft software licensing and associated services which was evaluated by Council’s tender evaluation panel. The evaluation involved scoring of conforming and competitive tenders according to these pre-determined criteria and weightings: 

 

Criteria 

Weighting 

Organisation Details 

5% 

Added Value 

10% 

Sustainability 

10% 

Cat 1 – Enterprise Agreement 

15% 

Cat 2 – Open Licenses 

15% 

Cat 3 – Cloud Solution Providers 

15% 

Cat 4 – Microsoft Products & Services 

15% 

Cat 5 – Academic License Program 

15% 

 

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. 

The evaluation outcome was as follows:

TENDERER

CONFORMING

COMPETITIVE

SCORE

RANK

Tenderer A
Winc Australia

Yes

Yes

71.04

1

Tenderer B

Yes

Yes

58.28

3

Tenderer C

Yes

Yes

51.02

4

Tenderer D

Yes

Yes

58.40

2

Tenderer E

Yes

Yes

44.68

5

Tenderer F

No

N/A

N/A

N/A

Tenderer G

No

N/A

N/A

N/A

Submissions from tenderer F and G were evaluated as non-conforming and put aside from further evaluation. 

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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Sufficient funding for this contract is available in the budget for Information Services Department’s recurrent budget. 

link to strategic risks

Strategic Risk Information Management - Failure to effectively manage Council’s information and records, including IT systems

Without this contract, City of Whittlesea would be unable to maintain licences for Microsoft systems and cloud services.

Links to WHITTLESEA 2040 AND the CoUNCIL Plan

Goal                                                 High-performing organisation

Key Direction                                 Driving better community outcomes through improved service access, satisfaction and advocacy

This Contract supports Council in maintaining Microsoft licence usage compliance and access to the latest technologies including cloud services and enhanced mobility solutions. 

 

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 Winc Australia 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 approves the initial 21-month term and pre-approve the three-year extension period on the provision that MAV also approves to extend the Contract. 

 

Recommendation

THAT Council resolve to:

1.         Accept the tender submitted by Winc Australia Pty Ltd for the sum of $3,372,664 (excluding GST) for the following contract:

Number:    2020-35

Title:          Microsoft Enterprise Licence Agreement

Term:         1 July 2020 to 27 March 2022

Pre-approved Extension:     Term extensions up to 27 March 2025

subject to the following conditions:

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

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

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

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

6.3.5      2019/20 Third Quarter New Works Program Report

Attachments:                        1       Financial Summary

2       Project Progress Report

3       Project Status Photos

4       Grant Status Report

5       Project Adjustments   

Responsible Officer:            Director City Transport and Presentation

Author:                                  Team Leader Business Support   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

1.      Approve the adjustments to the 2019/20 New Works Program (as contained in Attachment 5);

2.      Note the 2019/20 Third Quarter New Works Program progress report.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

This report provides an overview of the financial performance and status of the New Works Program at the end of the third quarter of the 2019/20 financial year with the following key points:

·    The annual approved budget for 2019/20 (including carry forwards) is $89,516,480 representing a total of 117 projects.

·    The value of work completed is $42,815,506 compared to the year to date planned budget of $57,564,029.  This represents a year to date variance of $14,748,523 behind the planned budget.

·    There are contracts and purchase orders committing another $36,973,987 as at the 31 March 2020, which shows a good level of delivery preparedness for the remainder of the financial year.

·    Project adjustments are fully offset from within the existing 2019/20 budget or have received unbudgeted external funding.

·    $12,858,513 of new infrastructure grant applications have been submitted since 1 July 2019.  Applications totalling $8,581,700 have been successful to date.

 

Report

Introduction

This report provides an overview of the financial performance and status of the New Works Program at the end of the third quarter of the 2019/20 financial year.

The value of work completed for the third quarter is $42,815,506 compared to the year to date budget of $57,564,029.  This is due to a number of projects being behind planned schedule in some cases due to COVID-19.

In addition, there are contract and purchase orders committing another $36,973,987. which indicates a good level of delivery preparedness for the remainder of the financial year.
Refer to Attachment 1.

The following projects have made significant progress in the third quarter of 2019/20:

·    Project ID 0118 - Renewal of playgrounds and general landscape improvements

·    Project ID 0304 – Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) Schemes various treatments

·    Project ID 1462 - Upgrade pavilion - Duffy Street Reserve, Epping

·    Project ID 2188 - Construct Kindergarten - Thomastown Primary School

·    Project ID 2247 - Pathways to Stations

A total of 23 projects have been fully completed.  For a detailed progress report on all projects refer to Attachment 2.  Progress photos on a sample of projects are included in Attachment 3.

Background

Council adopted the 2019/20 New Works Program on 6 June 2019 with a budget of $72,659,135 plus $16,857,345 carry forward, providing a total budget of $89,516,480.

Consultation

The New Works Program is a component of the Council budget which undergoes statutory community engagement as part of the annual budget cycle.  Additionally, specific external and internal stakeholder consultation is undertaken for individual projects and programs.

Financial Implications

A summary of the program performance by group can be found below.  A list of all projects with their current status has been included in Attachment 2.

Financial Status of the New Works Program by Group:

Group

Year To Date Actuals

Year To Date Budgets

Year To Date Variance

Annual Budget   

Revised Budget post Q2

Program Status

Buildings

14,987,855

20,049,433

5,061,578

31,569,613

30,986,864

Behind planned budget

Drains

324,406

275,000

(49,406)

 

275,000

375,000

Ahead of planned budget

Feasibility & Planning

242,986

260,000

17,014

500,000

500,000

Behind planned budget

Open Space

6,098,326

8,435,342

2,337,016

14,170,596

13,115,974

Behind planned budget

Plant & Equipment

2,227,366

2,709,942

482,576

3,421,033

3,521,033

Behind planned budget

Roads & Paths

12,745,451

16,645,681

3,900,230

28,458,474

28,426,674

Behind planned budget

Transport

6,189,115

9,188,631

2,999,516

11,121,764

11,121,764

Behind planned budget

Total

42,815,506

57,564,029

14,748,523

89,516,480

88,047,309

 

The key projects contributing to the variances are:

·    Project ID 1589 - Redevelop Mill Park Leisure Centre - project has been delayed due to latent conditions found onsite including rock excavation and deficiencies with the existing structure.  There has also been a delay in delivery of materials from overseas and social distancing measures on site due to COVID-19.

·    Project ID 1698 - Main Street Reserve Pavilion Upgrade, Thomastown – demolition of the old pavilion was delayed due to power authority lead times on service disconnections. This has now been resolved however, due to COVID-19 restrictions deliveries of equipment have been delayed and contractor availability has decreased.

·    Project ID 1915 - Stage 2 of Refurbishment of Whittlesea Swim Centre - behind planned budget due to re-tendering of the splash pad.

COVID 19 Impacts

The implications of the COVID-19 are having an impact on some projects mainly through the delays of specific materials that are sourced from overseas and interstate, contractor restrictions and availability and social distancing requirements.  Regular discussions with contractors and suppliers have identified key projects that have had timing and delay risks to projects.  There is approximately a $2.5 million direct impact to projects in the 2019/20 New Works Program.  These projects include:

·    PID 0118 – Renewal of Playgrounds – delay in supply of materials;

·    PID 0369 – Furniture and Fittings for Halls and CACs – delay in supply of materials;

·    PID 1589 – Mill Park Leisure Centre Redevelopment – delay in supply of polycarbonate windows, furniture, pool tiles and pool blankets;

·    PID 2072 – Lalor Streetscape Improvement Works (Stage 2) – contractor availability;

·    PID 2119 – Street Light Bulk Replacement Program – delay in supply of lights;

·    PID 2192 - All Abilities Playspace, Mill Park – delay in supply of materials;

·    PID 2205 - Sycamore BMX Track Lighting, Mill Park – contractor restrictions and social distancing requirements;

·    PID 3039 - RGC Cook Reserve Lighting Installation – delay in supply of light poles; and

·    PID 3043 – Laurimar Reserve Cricket Nets – delay in supply of materials.

In addition to the direct impacts of COVID-19, there are also some indirect impacts as a result of general work disruptions in the normal planning, tendering and construction activities both within Council, approval and service authorities.  It is difficult to quantify this accurately at this stage, however, is expected to be at least $2M at this point in time.

In total, the 2019/20 New Works Program could be impacted by up to $4.5M in delays expenditure, which is about 5% of the approved $89.5M New Works Program.  The COVID-19 impact to the 2019/20 New Works Program will be regularly monitored and reported to Council where the changes are material.

The second quarter project Carry Forward forecast for the 2019/20 New Works Program into 2020/21 was reported to be $9.7M.  Considering the above project issues and the COVID-19 pandemic, this is expected to increase by at least 50%. 

Project Adjustments

A number of minor changes to the New Works Program are proposed in the third quarter.  These adjustments fall into the following categories;

·    Projects with offsets identified;

·    Projects with unbudgeted external funding;

·    Projects with savings identified to offset overspend in 2018/19 (multi-year projects); and

·    Projects to be offset by savings derived from the 2019/20 program.

The proposed project adjustments (including Q3 adjustments) result in a reduction to the adopted budget of $2,068,471 giving a revised budget following the third quarter of $87,448,009.

This reflects the adjustments as listed in Attachment 5.

Forecast

Progress of works is expected to accelerate in the fourth quarter whilst the weather is conducive to outdoor construction work and where works are indoors and not impacted by inclement weather.  At the time of this report being prepared (mid May) the actual year-to-date expenditure was approximately $51.0m.

Infrastructure Grants

A total of $12,858,513 grant applications has been submitted since 1 July 2019.

Successful applications totalling $8,581,700 have been announced since the 1 July 2019.

Refer to Attachment 4 for a detailed list of successful and pending applications.

Policy strategy and legislation

The business case associated with individual projects identifies the respective policy to which they relate.

Lessons learnt and continuous improvement plans are implemented to enhance systems, processes and practices to improve the planning and delivery of the New Works Program.

link to strategic risks

Strategic Risk Life Cycle Asset Management - Failure to effectively plan for the construction, on-going maintenance and renewal of Council’s assets

Council prepares a 4/15 Year New Works Program to plan for future new infrastructure and renewal needs. Failure to address community needs will result in inadequate infrastructure and services being provided.

 

Links to whittlesea 2040 and the CoUNCIL Plan

Goal                              High-performing organisation

Key Direction               More cost-effective investment through better return on investment, efficiency and an engaged workforce

 

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 provides a summary of the status of the 2019/20 New Works Program at the end of the third quarter.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to:

1.       Approve the adjustments to the 2019/20 New Works Program (as contained in Attachment 5).

2.       Note the 2019/20 Third Quarter New Works Program progress report.

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

6.4       Corporate Services

6.4.1      Quarterly Finance Performance Report for the period ended 31 March 2020

Attachments:                        1       Financial Performance Report for the period ended 31 March 2020   

Responsible Officer:            Director Corporate Services

Author:                                  Coordinator Finance Operations   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

Note the Financial Performance Report for the period ended 31 March 2020.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

The quarterly Financial Performance Report for the year to date period ended 31 March 2020 is presented to Council for noting. The period covered by this report did not reflect any material impact from the global COVID-19 public health pandemic and the financial results at this time tracked expectedly against the then stable budgetary conditions.

·    The income statement as at 31 March 2020 reported a favourability of $7.49 million against Council’s underlying surplus.

·    Favourable income variances were achieved in rates and charges ($2.81 million), monetary contributions ($3.25 million), and other income ($1.90 million).

·    Favourable expenditure variations were achieved against employee benefits ($0.82 million) and materials and services ($1.08 million).

The financial impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic are now starting to be felt.  These impacts are being captured and assessed whilst the focus of the organisation continues to be on service delivery and supporting our community at this difficult time.

A preliminary estimate of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic for the 2019-20 financial year stands at approximately $1.0 million of impost to date.

 

 

Report

Background

The Financial Performance Report for the period ended 31 March 2020 includes the following financial statements:

•           Comprehensive income statement;

•           Balance sheet;

•           Statement of cash flows; and

•           Statement of capital works.

A detailed analysis of income and expenditure in the comprehensive income statement is included in the report.  The statement shows a favourable year to date variance of Council’s underlying surplus of $7.49 million. 

Favourable income variances have occurred in rates and charges ($2.81 million), monetary contributions ($3.25 million), and other income ($1.90 million); favourable expenditure variation is predominately in employee benefits ($0.82 million) and materials and services ($1.07 million).

Proposal

That Council note the Financial Performance Report for the period ended 31 March 2020. (Attachment 1), which is presented for consideration by Council in accordance with the Local Government Act 1989.

Consultation

Engagement with the various departments of Council has been undertaken in preparation of this report.

Financial Implications

The financial implications as were relevant at 31 March 2020 are detailed in the report.

Policy strategy and legislation

Section 138 of the Local Government Act 1989 provides that at least every three months, the Chief Executive Officer must ensure that a statement comparing the budgeted revenue and expenditure for the financial year, with the actual revenue and expenditure to date, is presented to Council.

link to strategic risks

Strategic Risk Financial Sustainability - Inability to meet current and future expenditure

This report provides the oversight of Council’s key financial information to enable regular monitoring and to ensure that Council’s financial position remains sustainable.

 

Links to whittlesea 2040 and the CoUNCIL Plan

Goal                              High-performing organisation

Key Direction               More cost-effective investment through better return on investment, efficiency and an engaged workforce

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

For the nine-month period ending 31 March 2020, Council’s underlying surplus showed a favourable year to date variance of $7.49 million against budget, noting that this result was achieved prior to the subsequent impact of COVID-19, which will take several more months of experience to determine detailed financial implications.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolves to note the Financial Performance Report for the period ended 31 March 2020.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

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 2 June 2020

 

6.4.2      Contract 2020-2 Facilities Management - Tender Evaluation

Attachments:                        1       Tender Evaluation Summary - Confidential

This Attachment has been designated as containing confidential information under section 66(5) of the Local Government Act 2020 on the grounds that it contains private commercial information, being information provided by a business, commercial or financial undertaking that relates to trade secrets or, if released, would unreasonably expose the business, commercial or financial undertaking to disadvantage.  The attachment contains tender amounts submitted by tenderers and tender evaluation scoring prepared by Council officers.  It also contains details of credit and reference checks with regard to the tenderers that was provided to Council in confidence and which would unreasonably expose the tenderers to disadvantage if made public.

Responsible Officer:            Director Corporate Services

Author:                                  Manager Rates, Property and Facilities Management   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

It is recommended that contract number 2020-2 for Facilities Management:

·    Is awarded to Platinum FM Pty Ltd;

·    For the lump sum price of $11,159,653 (excluding GST); and

·    For a term of four years from 1 October 2020 to 30 September 2024, with extension options to 30 September 2028.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

·    Three tenders were received for these services for an initial term of four years and an option term of up to four years and all were subjected to a very complex and sophisticated pre-agreed evaluation process.

·    The recommended tenders are considered the best value combination when taking into account all of the relevant factors including risks and references.

·    Additional conditions have been included in the recommendations to manage risk and ensure Council is kept adequately informed of performance under the contracts.

The tender evaluation panel advises that the recommended tender was the highest ranked and is considered best value due to the tenderer’s high level of understanding of Council and community needs in relation to the facilities management service.  The company is a medium size organisation, supported by a comprehensive platform; with a solid track record in facilities management, is well resourced to meet Council requirements and has provided an efficient and cost effective tender.

 

Report

Background

The purpose of this contract is to provide a management service that oversees effective building maintenance and asset management of Council facilities.

The Facilities Management function of Council comprises two operational elements; a management service function, and the delivery of direct building maintenance works by sub-contractors. This tender relates to the first element and consequently the outsourcing of this currently in-house management function.

Tenders for the contract closed on 5 February 2020.  The tendered prices and a summary of the evaluation are detailed in the confidential attachment.

The City of Whittlesea Facilities Management (FM) Service is delivered across 156 facilities (expected to increase over time) by 18 full-time staff members who support the delivery of reactive maintenance tasks, planned projects and routine maintenance services.  The FM team currently administers 16 contracts. 

Asset management has been identified as one of the strategic risks for Council, requiring more comprehensive data about the condition of our buildings in order that they be managed effectively. As part of Council’s rolling service review program, the FM Service underwent a review during 2018/19. Service reviews involve analysis of operations and systems together with industry benchmarking and research.

After extensive research, consultation and deliberation, the service review recommended that Council move to a “fully outsourced” operation as the preferred FM service delivery model. It was assessed that a “fully outsourced” model would best realise efficiencies and introduce contemporary facilities management practices by drawing on specialist industry expertise and advanced asset maintenance information systems and practices from proven private sector providers.  Identified benefits of adopting this model include:

·    Application of well refined systems and processes to drive service effectiveness and customer satisfaction;

·    A comprehensive approach to long-term asset management of Council's building portfolio;

·    An agile service that can respond to growth and industry innovation;

·    A more robust building portfolio, with stronger emphasis on proactive rather than reactive building maintenance; and

·    Delivering the most cost-effective service.

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

45%

Capability

25%

Capacity

13%

Impact

17%

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
Platinum FM Pty Ltd

Yes

Yes

85.1

1

Tenderer B

Yes

Yes

78.8

2

Tenderer C

Yes

No

NA

N/A

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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Since the decision was made to move towards a “fully outsourced” model, Council has also realised savings of in excess of $3.0 million for newly contracted sub-contractor services for security, cleaning and trades services.

One of the objectives of this tender is to realise savings in management costs. Based on the management fee structure of the preferred tenderer (Platinum FM Pty Ltd), savings against current operating budget are estimated at $10.2 million over eight years. 

Sufficient funding for this contract is available in the Facilities Management recurrent budget.

link to strategic risks

Strategic Risk  

Service improvement - More robust processes to ensure effective management and timely completion of reactive and planned works, reducing facility down time.  Learnings and innovation from a broad client base to improve the customer experience. 

Strategic Risk Life Cycle Asset Management - Failure to effectively plan for the construction, on-going maintenance and renewal of Council’s assets

 

 

A more robust process to manage assets (asset planning, replacement and operation) improving asset optimisation.  Established and mature systems that will add strategic capability as they are superior to Council developed systems. More advanced technology and data management to provide systematic records regarding building maintenance history, allowing more reliable input into short, medium and long term building management requirements. An important step to move from reactive to proactive

Links to WHITTLESEA 2040 AND the CoUNCIL Plan

Goal                                                 High-performing organisation

Key Direction                                 More cost-effective investment through better return on investment, efficiency and an engaged workforce

This contract will provide a more cost-effective service to Council and the community; allowing Council to leverage on the experience of an established FM firm to implement efficient and contemporary FM practices; improve service effectiveness and customer satisfaction; allow a comprehensive approach to long-term asset management of Council's building portfolio and facilitate an agile and innovative service with stronger emphasis on proactive rather than reactive building maintenance.

 

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 Platinum FM 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 Platinum FM Pty Ltd for the lump sum of $11,159,653 (excluding GST) for the following contract:

Number:    2020-2

Title:          Facilities Management

Term:         1/10/2020 to 30/9/2024

Options:    Term extensions up to 30/9/2028 (only to be exercised if separately approved by Council)

subject to the following conditions:

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

 

 

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

c)    Tenderer to provide contract security as required in the tender documents.

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

3.         Note the CEO will sign the contract.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

6.4.3      Procurement Policy Review

Attachments:                        1       Procurement Policy 2020   

Responsible Officer:            Director Corporate Services

Author:                                  Team Leader Procurement   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council resolve to adopt the revised Procurement Policy (Attachment 1).

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

Following consultation with staff, the Council Administrator and the Audit and Risk Committee, the following changes are proposed to the Procurement Policy:

·    Improve relevance and transparency of procurement related reporting:

Cease reporting of contract finalisations; and

Commence providing annual memorandum to the Audit & Risk Committee and the Council detailing outcomes against the performance indicators listed in the policy.

·    Update quotation requirements:

Managers may waive the requirement for requesting three quotes;

Quotations for purchases under $5,000 may be verbal or written; and

Must request at least three quotes for purchases valued from $25,000.

·    Update references and definitions:

Reference to ‘Council Plan (Whittlesea 2025)’ is now updated to ‘Council and Community vision (Whittlesea 2040 – A place for all)’; and

Definition of ‘Council’ now includes appointed Administrator(s).

·    Mandatory referral of compliance matters to the Audit & Risk Committee and Council.

·    Strengthen support for Indigenous businesses and elimination of modern slavery:

Expanded commitment to eliminate human rights abuses and added a modern slavery social procurement criterion;

Indigenous businesses to automatically receive a 5% price or evaluation score preference; and

Indigenous business identified as an example of a minority business that offers diversity.

 

o      Report

Background

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

This current review will be the last one conducted under the existing legislative requirements.  The Local Government Act 2020 has now received royal assent and there is a phased introduction schedule which overlaps with the repeal of the Local Government Act 1989.  The updated procurement related legislation in the new Act will come into effect between 1 July 2021 and 1 January 2022.  It is therefore planned that a comprehensive re-write of the Procurement Policy will take place in 2021 to align it with the requirements of the new Act.

All figures in this report include GST unless otherwise specified.

ProposalS

Significant consultation, benchmarking and review activities have been conducted to determine the changes that are required to ensure the policy remains up to date and effectively supports the efficient achievement of Council’s goals.  The following changes are proposed:

1.   Cease contract finalisation reports – Provide annual KPI memorandum to Council instead

The finalisation of contracts is a routine administrative process that is directly managed by Council’s Procurement Team.  The process is conducted via the contract management system to ensure all outstanding matters are completed before a contract record is closed.  There is no value in escalating finalisation approval beyond departmental Manager level.

Best practice is to manage such processes at middle management level as it does not involve the approval of any additional expenditure.  It is therefore proposed to delete the four references to the finalisation process from the policy and cease the practice of bulk reporting finalised contracts to Council each 6-months.  This better aligns with existing delegations.

Instead of bulk finalisation reports, an annual memorandum will be submitted to the Audit & Risk Committee and the Council. The memorandum will detail performance in the previous year against the updated performance indicators detailed in section 4.3 of the Procurement Policy.  They are:

·    Extent of contracts delivered on time and on budget (Note: this is the key metric relating to contract finalisations);

·    New collaborative procurement contracts;

·    New preferred supplier (panel) contracts;

·    The number of local suppliers and proportion of local spend;

·    Value of savings and benefits achieved;

·    Level of compliance with the Procurement Policy;

·    Annual spend on sustainable goods and services; and

·    The return on procurement investment.

Transparent reporting against the KPIs detailed in the policy will give Council and the Audit & Risk Committee better oversight of performance of procurement activity which will in turn enhance Council’s ability to maintain high standards of financial and corporate governance.

2.   Update quotation requirements

There are two policy requirements that cause of significant administrative effort but result in little value for money benefit:

1.   The requirement to obtain written quotes for all purchases, regardless of how low the value is; and

2.   The requirement to obtain three quotes for purchases valued greater than $15,000.

The bureaucracy associated with these requirements often results in delays as approval from a Director or the CEO is necessary to waive these requirements.  Such approval is routinely granted, for example when:

·    It is impractical to obtain a written quote (e.g. a minor over-the-counter purchase);

·    Three or more quotes were requested but only one or two suppliers responded;

·    There is a clear benefit to using a particular supplier (e.g. familiarity with a project); and

·    Only a sole supplier exists (e.g. proprietary licencing/support for installed software).

City of Whittlesea’s threshold for requiring three quotes is currently $15,000.  Benchmarking was conducted against the thresholds set by the Victorian Government Purchasing Board (VGPB) as well as the seven Victorian councils in the Northern Region and the ten Victorian Interface Councils.  Comparative recurrent expenditure of councils was obtained for the 2018/19 financial year from https://knowyourcouncil.vic.gov.au/.  The key findings were:

·    The VGPB (the body that regulates procurement by Victorian State Government departments) has prescribed a three-quote threshold for public construction procurements of $50,000.

·    The average Northern Region and/or Interface Council Shire has a three-quote threshold of $11,000 and a recurrent expenditure of $133 million.

·    The average Northern Region and/or Interface Council City has a three-quote threshold of $25,000 and a recurrent expenditure of $220 million.

·    Of the seven Northern Region councils, Whittlesea has the second highest recurrent expenditure, yet its three-quote threshold is ranked fifth.

·    Of the ten Interface Councils, Whittlesea has the fifth highest recurrent expenditure, yet its three-quote threshold is ranked eighth.

As a Northern Region and Interface Council with a recurrent expenditure of $202 million, in was concluded that the City of Whittlesea’s $15,000 three-quote threshold is currently well below the $25,000 average of its regional and interface counterparts (i.e. it is more closely aligned to that of smaller Shires than comparable larger Cities).

Analysis was conducted on City of Whittlesea purchase orders raised in the range of $15,000 to $50,000.  While those valued in the range of $15,000 to $25,000 comprise of almost half of them, the average value was near the bottom end of that range (see table below). 

 

This indicates that raising the three-quote threshold from $15,000 to $25,000 will have relatively little effect on value for money achieved while:

·    Reducing administrative burden to staff;

·    Reducing barriers to small businesses seeking higher value engagements; and

·    Increasing opportunities to directly engage local business / social enterprises.

NON-CONTRACT PURCHASE ORDERS (PERIOD 5 MAY 2019 TO 4 MAY 2020)

Value range

No. of orders

% of orders

Average order value

Total order value

$15K to <$25K

144

48%

$18,500

$2.67M

$25K to <$50K

159

52%

$35,000

$5.57M

ALL ($15K to <$50K)

303

100%

$27,000

8.24M

The Procurement Team is currently evaluating expressions of interest received from software developers for a system to better manage the quotation process.  A new system will improve governance over contestable spend but will increase associated administration.  Increasing the three-quote threshold to $25,000 will offset the impact of implementing that system.

It is proposed to streamline the quotation process by amending section 2.3.1 of the policy by:

a)   Amending the last paragraph in section 2.3 (Procurement Thresholds and Competition) such that a Department Manager may waive the requirement to request three quotes;

b)   Adding a new paragraph allowing verbal quotations for procurements valued below $5,000; and

c)   Changing the three-quote threshold to $25,000 and altering the wording so the requirement is to request (as opposed to obtain) a minimum of three quotes.

3.   Update references and definitions

The reference to ‘Council Plan (Whittlesea 2025)’ in section 3.1 (Integration with Council Strategy) has been updated to Council and Community Vision (Whittlesea 2040 – A place for all).

The definition of Council has been broadened to include Administrator(s) appointed to act in the capacity of elected representatives.

4.   Mandatory referral of compliance matters to the Audit & Risk Committee and Council

In accordance with section 4.4 of the policy (Managing Compliance) all serious or repeated compliance issues are recorded and referred to Directors and/or the CEO for resolution.  Currently this section states “If necessary, the CEO will refer compliance matters to the Audit and Risk Committee and advise Council.”

At the request of the Audit and Risk Committee the words “If Necessary” have been deleted.  This has the effect of making referral and notification of these matters mandatory.

 

5.   Strengthen support for Indigenous businesses and elimination of modern slavery

The Audit and Risk Committee has also requested that the policy addresses Council’s commitment to help eliminate modern slavery.  To this end a new paragraph has been inserted into section 3.4.3 (Social Sustainability) to expand on the existing commitment to human rights by stating:

“Council staff will take appropriate steps to help ensure that our supply chain is free of modern slavery.  This is our contribution to the global effort to eliminate human rights exploitation such as forced labour, debt bondage, human trafficking, deceptive recruitment and child labour.”

The criterion of ‘Compliance with obligations under the Modern Slavery Act 2018 has been added as one of the social procurement criteria that Whittlesea will consider in procurement.

Section 3.4.3.1 of the policy (Equality and Diversity) refers to Council’s commitment to stimulate Aboriginal entrepreneurship, business development and employment by providing Indigenous businesses with more opportunities to participate in the economy.  The policy links to Council's Stretch Reconciliation Action Plan 2017-2020.

To enhance support for Aboriginal businesses the following changes are proposed:

a)   Introduce a definition of an Indigenous business (as per Supply Nation’s definition) as one that is at least 50% owned by an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islands person(s);

b)   Amend section 3.4.5 (Development and Evaluation of Tenders) such that tenders from any Indigenous business automatically receive a 5% price or evaluation score preference (currently that preference only applies to local businesses); and

c)   Amend section 5.2 (Supply Market Development) to identify Indigenous Business as an example of a minority business that offers diversity.

Furthermore, the proposal detailed above to remove the requirement for written quotes for low value procurements was also a move that was recommended by Council’s Multicultural & Aboriginal Strategic Planner to help remove barriers to Aboriginal businesses.

Consultation

The Procurement Policy is publicly available via Council’s website.  Submissions were invited from the Council Administrator and staff involved with procurement activity. All feedback received was carefully considered, along with suggestions received from the Audit and Risk Committee.  Amendments have been proposed to ensure the Policy remains relevant, effective and up to date.

Critical Dates

The revision of the Procurement Policy has been completed within this financial year in accordance with the requirements of Section 186A (7) of the Local Government Act 1989.

Financial Implications

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

Policy strategy and legislation

The Procurement Policy has key linkages with legislation and a range of internal and external strategies and policies.  Refer to pages 4 and 5 of the attached policy for further details.

link to strategic risks

Strategic Risk Financial Sustainability - Inability to meet current and future expenditure

The effective management of strategic procurement is evidenced by amendments relating to a regional collaboration policy and the setting of performance targets.  The maximisation of savings and sustainable procurement spend is a key action in the mitigation of financial sustainability risks.

 

Links to whittlesea 2040 and the CoUNCIL Plan

Goal                              High-performing organisation

Key Direction               More cost-effective investment through better return on investment, efficiency and an engaged workforce

 

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

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

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

Conclusion

The proposed changes to the Procurement Policy should are recommended because they improve transparency, probity and efficiency and support the principles of good governance and the delivery of Whittlesea 2040 priorities.

 

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council resolve to adopt the revised Procurement Policy (Attachment 1).

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

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


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

6.4.4    Safety and Wellbeing report - June 2020 Quarterly Update

Attachments:                        1       City of Whittlesea Wellbeing Policy

2       2020/21 Wellbeing Plan Action Plan   

Responsible Officer:            Director Corporate Services

Author:                                  Manager Corporate Accountability and Performance   

 

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

That Council note the report.

KEY FACTS AND / OR ISSUES

This is a quarterly report to Council providing an overview of Council’s Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) performance.

·        The new City of Whittlesea OHS policy, renamed Wellbeing Policy, has been updated and endorsed by the Executive Leadership Team (see Attachment 1).

·        The Wellbeing Plan 2020/21 is being implemented. Circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the delivery timeframe of a number of key actions in the 2020/21 Wellbeing Plan.  These actions and their timeframes are being reviewed in considering the current circumstances and restrictions in place. (see Attachment 2).

·        There has been significant focus on supporting safety and wellbeing of staff in relation to the recent changes in working from home; ensuring safe systems of work and personal protective equipment for staff working in the community.

·        A recent COVID-19 staff survey has confirmed that the vast majority of staff have felt safe (90%) and supported (87%) during the pandemic.

·             Maturing safety leadership and practice has resulted in Council’s Lost Time Injury Frequency rate (LTIFR) dropping to 13.0 (the lowest since April 2019). This result is slightly higher than our original target set in January 2018 of reducing LTIFR by 20% per annum.  LTIFR is the nationally recognised measure for safety performance and the target to reduce LTIFR by 20% per annum is in line with Safe Work Australia’s Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy 2012-2022.

 

 


 

Introduction

Council has over 1,200 employees undertaking a diverse range of roles in various locations.  This includes staff working in the community in such areas as aged services, maternal and child health, youth, community development, roads, parks, school crossings, local laws as well as office-based staff.  Council has a duty of care to comply with legislation and to take reasonable steps to provide a safe environment for Councillors, staff, contractors, volunteers and members of the public.

As ‘Officers’ under the OHS Act 2004, Council has a responsibility to take reasonable steps to acquire knowledge, make decisions and verify performance to be assured that Council is meeting OHS responsibilities.

Quarterly reports to Council provide an overview of Council’s safety performance and initiatives to build a wellbeing culture and effectively manage safety risks.

Proposal

For Council to note the information in this report in relation to safety and wellbeing management at Council.

2020/21 Wellbeing Plan

Council has an Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) management system, policy, procedures and guidelines in place to meet the requirements of the OHS Act 2004.  A proactive approach to managing safety and reducing hazards and risks has been implemented through Council’s 2020/21 Wellbeing Plan.  This plan supports the People Strategy (developed 2017) which identifies ‘Wellbeing’ as one of five key focus areas. 

Progress of the 2020/21 Wellbeing Plan is reported quarterly, see attached Progress Chart (Attachment 1). Seventeen actions are currently on track or have been achieved. Five actions have been impacted due to COVID-19 due to either reduction in consultation, workplace inspections or reprioritisation of work. Twelve actions are not yet scheduled to start. The actions which have been impacted by COVID-19 are being reviewed in considering the current circumstances and restrictions in place.

Staff safety

A recent staff survey on COVID-19 response had 90 percent of staff stating they agreed or strongly agreed that they felt safe carrying out their role during this pandemic.  87 percent of staff also agreed or strongly agreed that they felt supported by their supervisor and colleagues during this time.  

The quarterly Pulse survey asks staff if they work in a safe environment. The responses to this question had remained constant in quarter four (Q4) of 2018/19 and quarter one (Q1) of 2019/20 with results of 81.5% and 81.3% respectively, however in quarter 2 (Q2) of 2019/20 this dropped significantly to 70.8% due to increase in exposure to psychological stress factors reported by staff relating to Councillor behaviour and decisions including the decision to terminate the employment of the former Chief Executive Officer. The response to if staff work in a safe environment increased to 78.5% in quarter 3 (Q3) which is once again above the local government benchmark of 76.3%, however not as high as 2019 results.   

The net promoter score dropped from +17 (Q1) to -16 (Q2) and has now increased to +2 (Q3). A positive result is considered good and a negative result demonstrates employee lack of confidence in recommending the organisation to others.  The Local Government benchmark net promoter score is -2.

 

Lost time injuries (LTI)

Lost Time Injury Frequency Rate (LTIFR) is a nationally recognised measure for safety performance.  LTIFR refers to the number of lost time injuries within a 12-month period relative to the number of hours worked in that period. 

Strong safety performance has been maintained into 2020 allowing Council to maintain its downward trend in LTIs and its LTIFR.

A focus of the 2020/21 Wellbeing Plan is to maintain Council’s commitment to reducing its LTIFR by 20% each year in line with Safe Work Australia’s Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy 2012-2022. Council’s current LTIFR is declining and is currently 13.0 which is slightly higher than the initial three-year target set in 2018 and well above the revised target set in January 2019. 

The graph below shows a clear downward trend since July 2019, attributable to maturing safety practices and leadership focus on safety and wellbeing.

Graph 1 – LTIFR trend analysis – actual vs target.

Consultation

Staff were consulted in the development of the 2020/21 Wellbeing Plan. Consultation occurs every quarter with staff through the pulse survey which includes feedback on their perception of safety.  The COVID19 staff survey was also recently conducted with 430 staff completing this survey.

Monthly reporting is provided to the Executive Leadership Team. City of Whittlesea has a Corporate OHS Committee which meets quarterly to review all safety data and the 2020/21 Wellbeing Plan implementation. Consultation occurs with staff and health and safety representatives through regular OHS meetings at team, Department, Directorate and Executive meetings. 

Critical Dates

The 2020/21 Wellbeing Plan will be reviewed quarterly and updated annually.

Financial Implications

WorkCover premium costs are allocated in the budget.  Good OHS practices can lead to reduced absenteeism and reduced lost time injuries resulting in a reduced WorkCover premium.  The improved safety performance of Council over the past two years is having a positive financial impact from 2019/20 with a reduction in Council’s WorkCover premium. 

Policy strategy and legislation

Safety and wellbeing of staff is directly linked with Council’s People Plan key focus area of ‘Wellbeing’ and Council’s Value of ‘Wellbeing’.

link to strategic risks

Strategic Risk Health, Safety and Welfare - Failure of safety management or controls resulting in serious injury or harm to staff or member of public.

Council has a responsibility under the OHS Act to provide a safe working environment so far as reasonably practicable. The OHS Management System and Wellbeing Plan are critical for Council to manage this risk effectively and reduce the safety risk to staff and others.

 

Links to whittlesea 2040 and the CoUNCIL Plan

Goal                              Connected community

Key Direction               A healthy and safe community

 

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

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

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

Conclusion

Safety and wellbeing are a priority as outlined in the People Plan and Council values. The Wellbeing Plan is being implemented, however there has been an impact on a number of initiatives due to COVID-19.  There has been increased focus on supporting staff working safely from home and with appropriate safe systems of work and personal protective equipment if working in the community.

 

RECOMMENDATION

That Council note the report.

 

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

6.5       Executive Services

6.5.1      Assemblies of Councillors - 2 June 2020  

Responsible Officer:            Manager Governance

Author:                                  Governance Officer   

 

recommendation summary

That Council note the record of the Assemblies of Councillors meetings as set out in the table in the report.

key facts and/or issues

·      Section 80A(2) of the Local Government Act 1989 requires that records of Assemblies of Councillors be reported to Council.

·      The Local Government (Whittlesea City Council) Act 2020 dismissed all Councillors from the City of Whittlesea effective Saturday 21 March 2020 and provides for Administrators to be appointed and for them to undertake the duties of Councillors under the Local Government Act.

·      Ms Lydia Wilson was appointed Administrator for a three month period commencing on 21 March 2020.

·      Ms Wilson will carry out the role, responsibilities and functions of a Councillor as set out in Section 231(1)(a) of the Local Government Act 2020 until her appointment ends.

 


 

Report

Background

The Local Government Act 1989 requires records relating to the Assemblies of Councillors to be reported to an ordinary Council meeting and recorded in the minutes of that meeting.

The Local Government (Whittlesea City Council) Act 2020 dismissed all Councillors from the City of Whittlesea effective Saturday 21 March 2020. Ms Lydia Wilson was appointed Administrator for a three month period commencing on 21 March 2020. Ms Wilson will carry out the role, responsibilities and functions of a Councillor as set out in Section 231(1)(a) of the Local Government Act 2020 until her appointment ends.

A meeting is an assembly of the Councillors if it considers matters that are likely to be the subject of a Council decision or the exercise of a Council delegation and the meeting is:

·    A planned or scheduled meeting that includes the Administrator and a member of Council staff; or

·    An advisory committee of Council where the Administrator is present.

A record must be kept regarding an assembly of Councillors which lists the Administrator and members of Council staff attending, the matters discussed, disclosures of conflict of interest and whether the Administrator left the meeting after making a disclosure.

Proposal

Assemblies of Councillors records not previously reported to Council are detailed in the following table:-

Assembly Details

Councillor attendee

Officer attendees

Matters discussed

Administrator Briefing

3 April 2020

Lydia Wilson

(Administrator)

CEO-A

DCS

DCRS

DCTP

DPPE

MCAP

MG

MSPD

SSP

TLP

 

1.    Overview of Statutory and Strategic Planning Framework at the City of Whittlesea.
External in attendance for this item:
Terry Montebello, Partner, Maddocks Lawyers

2.    Overview of Procurement Policy and Practices at the City of Whittlesea.

Nil disclosures

Administrator Briefing

14 April 2020

Lydia Wilson

(Administrator)

CEO-A

DCS

DCRS

DCTP

DPPE

MFA - A

MCAP

MMP

TLCPI

 

1.     Draft Council Plan 2017-2021 (Update 2020) including Draft Council Action Plan 2020-2021.

2.     Proposed Annual Budget 2020-21 and Proposed Strategic Resource Plan 2020-24.

 

Nil disclosures

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrator Briefing

21 April 2020

Lydia Wilson

(Administrator)

CEO-A

DCS

DCRS

DCTP

DPPE

MG

MPUD

SAA

1.     Parks Maintenance Contract 2016-201.

2.     Advocacy Priorities Update.

3.     2019-20 Q3 ELT Performance Report – Council Action Plan – Further Report.

Nil disclosures

 

 

 

Administrator Briefing

28 April 2020

Lydia Wilson

(Administrator)

CEO-A

DCS

DCRS

DCTP

DPPE

MC

MG

MPUD

DPE

MCP-A

ULEO

MSPD

TLSPP

 

1.     Greening Whittlesea City Forest Strategy Draft.

2.     Waste and Recycling Update.

3.     Housing Diversity Strategy Implementation.

4.     Heritage at the City of Whittlesea.

Nil disclosures

The table below represents an Index of Officer titles:

Initials

Title of Officer

Initials

Title of Officer

CEO-A

Acting Chief Executive Officer – Joe Carbone

MG

Manager Governance – Michael Tonta

DCS

Director Community Services – Belgin Besim

MMP

Manager Major Projects – Nick Mazzarella

DCRS

Director Corporate Services – Amy Montalti

MPUD

Manager Parks & Urban Design – Susan Hecker

DCTP

Director City Transport and Presentation– Helen Sui

MSPD

Manager Strategic Planning and Design – George Saisanas

DPE

Directorate Projects Executive – Jack Jansen

SAA

Senior Advocacy Adviser – Michele Purtle

DPPE

Director Partnerships, Planning and Engagement – Julian Edwards

SSP

Senior Strategic Planner – Liam Wilkinson

MC

Manager Communications – Kristi High

TLCPI

Team Leader Corporate Planning and Improvement – Robert Kisgen

MCAP

Manager Corporate Accountability and Performance – Frank Joyce

TLP

Team Leader Procurement – Tom Masters

MCP-A

Acting Manager City Presentation – Anthony Kyrkou

TLSPP

Team Leader Strategic Planning Policy – Denise Turner

MFA-A

Acting Manager Finance and Assets – Nicole Montague

ULEO

Unit Leader Environmental Operations – Brad Byrne

Consultation

Consultation has taken place with internal Council Officer representatives of each of the meetings and committees that qualify as an Assembly of Councillors.

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications as a result of this report.

Policy Strategy and Legislation

Section 3C(2)(g) of the Local Government Act 1989 provides that one of Council’s facilitating objectives is to have regard to ensuring transparency and accountability in Council decision making.

Accordingly, section 80A of the Local Government Act 1989 requires that the Chief Executive Officer must ensure that the written record of an assembly of Councillors is, as soon as practicable:-

    (a)        reported at an ordinary meeting of the Council; and

    (b)        incorporated in the minutes of that Council meeting.

link to strategic risks

Strategic Risk Governance - Management - Ineffective governance of Council’s operations and activities by Management resulting in either a legislative or policy breach

Reporting assemblies of Councillors meetings is a legislative requirement which promotes open and transparent decision making.

Links to whittlesea 2040 and the CoUNCIL Plan

Goal                                                 Enabling the vision

Key Direction                                 Making it happen

The provision of this report is in line with Whittlesea 2040 and the Council Plan by ensuring Council monitors and evaluates all of its operations.

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

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

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

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that the report containing details of the business transacted at recent Assemblies of Councillors meetings be noted.

 

Recommendation

THAT Council note the record of the Assemblies of Councillors meetings in the table set out in the report.

 

  


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

7.         Notices of Motion

Nil Reports 

8.         Questions to Officers

9.         Urgent BusineSS

10.       Reports from Delegates Appointed BY Council TO Other Bodies


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

11.       Confidential Business

11.1     Partnerships, Planning & Engagement

Nil Reports

11.2     Community Services

Nil Reports


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

11.3     City Transport and Presentation

11.3.1  Hanson Landfill Services Agreement 1986 (Amended) - Provision of Tip Vouchers - Contract Variation

File No:                                 

Responsible Officer:            Director City Transport and Presentation

Author:                                  Acting Manager City Presentation

Report

It is proposed that this item be considered in closed session.

 

Recommendation

 

 

THAT Council resolve to close the meeting to members of the public under Section 66(2)(a) of the Local Government Act 2020 to consider confidential information on the grounds that the report contains Council business information that would prejudice the Council's position in commercial negotiations if prematurely released.  The report specifically contains financial information relating to a proposed variation to the tip voucher provisions of the Hanson Landfill Services Agreement that would compromise Council’s negotiating position if made public.

  


Ordinary Council Agenda                                Tuesday 2 June 2020

 

11.4     Corporate Services

Nil Reports

11.5     Executive Services

Nil Reports

11.6     Notices of Motion

Nil Reports

12.       Closure