Banyule City Council 15 December 2014 Agenda by Banyule City Council

Ordinary Meeting of Council Council Chambers, Service Centre 275 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe 15 December 2014 commencing at 7.45pm Following the public forum commencing at approximately 7.30pm and may be extended to 8pm if necessary.

AGENDA

The Mayor’s Acknowledgement of the Wurundjeri People “Our Meeting is being held on the traditional lands (country) of the Wurundjeri people and I wish to acknowledge them as the traditional owners and pay my respects to their Elders.” Apologies and Leave of Absence Nil Confirmation of Minutes Ordinary Meeting of Council held 1 December 2014 Disclosure of Interests Nil 1. Petitions Nil REPORTS: 2. People – Community Strengthening and Support 2.1 Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure Successful Funding ............................................................................................... 5 2.2 Disability and Inclusion Advisory Group Members .................................................. 8 2.3 Multicultural Advisory Committee Membership...................................................... 11 3. Planet – Environmental Sustainability Nil 4. Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment 4.1 Watsonia Neighbourhood Activity Centre - Trader and Volunteer Parking Permits .................................................................................................... 15

AGENDA (Contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d) 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6

Proposed Multi Dwelling Development at 9 Alandale Road, Eaglemont ............................................................................................................ 19 A Final Vision for Watsonia Village ....................................................................... 34 Car Parking Reductions and Contributions - Review of Practice ........................... 38 Proposed Multi Dwelling Development and Subdivision at 52 Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights (former Haig Street Primary School) ........................... 43 Formal Naming of Small Park Located at Corner of McKenzie Court and Plenty Lane Greensborough ................................................................. 70

5. Participation â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Community Involvement in Community Life 5.1 Simms Road Portables Relocation........................................................................ 75 5.2 Inclusion Access and Equity Framework ............................................................... 79 5.3 Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex (LGBTI) Advisory Committee Membership ........................................................................................ 86 6. Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely 6.1 Administration of Residential Parking Permit Scheme........................................... 89 6.2 Rear of 1045-1059 Heidelberg Road Ivanhoe - Proposed Road Discontinuance and Sale of Land.......................................................................... 97 6.3 Assembly of Councillors ...................................................................................... 104 6.4 29 Alamein Road Heidelberg West - Proposed sale of land Commence statutory procedures ....................................................................... 107 6.5 1 & 2 Orr Lane Montmorency - Sale of Land ....................................................... 112 6.6 Councillor Motions - Status Update ..................................................................... 115 7. Sealing of Documents 7.1 Sealing of Documents ......................................................................................... 119 8. Notices of Motion 8.1 Grimshaw Street / Flintoff Street Greensborough - Pedestrian Safety ................................................................................................................. 121 8.2 Public Transport Victoria Bus Review ................................................................. 122 8.3 Encouraging Participation of Women in Business and Government .................... 123 8.4 Education Facilities in the Olympia Ward ............................................................ 124 9. General Business 10. Urgent Business Closure of Meeting to the Public That in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989, Council close the Meeting to members of the public and adjourn for five minutes to allow the public to leave the Chamber prior to considering the following confidential matter 11. Confidential Matters 11.1 contractual matters 11.2 contractual matters

Matters Discussed in Camera That all confidential matters and reports related to the above items remain confidential unless otherwise specified.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 2

AGENDA (Contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d) Closure of Meeting

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 3

2.1

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, PLANNING AND LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE SUCCESSFUL FUNDING

Author:

Melinda Ramsay - Team Leader Leisure Services, Community Programs

File:

F2014/300

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Victorian State Government funding under the Community Facility Funding Program helps provide high-quality and accessible community sport and recreation facilities across Victoria. Applications were made by Council and two (2) projects that were successful in receiving State funding were: 1. Anthony Beale Reserve Regional Playground Stage 1 ($100,000) 2. Cartledge Reserve Sports Field Lighting ($75,000) Council was successful under the Minor Facilities Category for both projects which include funds up to $175,000 matched dollar for dollar by Council. Council’s matching contribution, in the 2015/2016 financial year, towards the two (2) projects totals $450,000. Council will need to reconfirm allocating $450,000 in 2015/16 Budget as per previous resolution. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLANThis report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “promote and support health and wellbeing”. BACKGROUND The Community Facility Funding Program helps provide high-quality and accessible community sport and recreation facilities across Victoria by encouraging:      

Increased sport & recreation participation Increased access to sport and recreation opportunities Better planning of sport & recreation facilities Innovative sport & recreation facilities Environmentally sustainable facilities Universally designed facilities

In 2014 Council applied for Victorian State Government funding under the Community Facility Funding Program (across two (2) stages) by Sport and

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 5

2.1

People – Community Strengthening and Support

People â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Community Strengthening and Support

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, PLANNING AND LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE SUCCESSFUL FUNDING contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d

2.1

Recreation Victoria for financial contribution towards seven (7) projects as per a Council resolution. The two (2) projects that went to full application were for Anthony Beale Reserve Regional Playground Stage 1 and Cartledge Reserve Sports Field Lighting. Council allocated $125,000 to the Anthony Beale Reserve Regional Playground Stage 1 in the 2014/2015 financial year for design. ADVOCACY This report advocates on behalf of the community for improved community sport & recreation facilities. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human rights established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. CURRENT SITUATION Both applications were successful in receiving funding under the Minor Facilities Category. These projects were: Anthony Beale Reserve Regional Playground (Stage 1) This project will be the fourth regional play ground in Banyule and provides for the north eastern corner of the City as well as residents in adjacent suburbs. A regional playground or family activity centre has a primary objective to provide a range of experiences and facilitate families up to half a day at a location. Component Playground

Organisation Banyule City Council 2014/2015 Budget Banyule City Council 2015/2016 Budget Sport and Recreation Victoria (DTPLI) Total Project Cost

Funding $125,000 $275,000 $100,000 $500,000

Status Confirmed TBC Confirmed

Cartledge Reserve Sports Field Lighting This project has been recommended as part of the precinct upgrade at Cartledge Reserve. Council has committed to supporting the pavilion redevelopment and this project ensures the lighting meets Australian Standards and allows the club to increase training with improved lighting on both pitches. The project has funding from three tiers of government. Component Sports Field Lighting

Organisation Banyule City Council 2015/2016 Budget Sport and Recreation Victoria (DTPLI) Australian Federal Government (DIRD) Total Project Cost

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Funding $175,000 $75,000 $50,000 $300,000

Status TBC Confirmed Confirmed

Page 6

People – Community Strengthening and Support

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, PLANNING AND LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE SUCCESSFUL FUNDING cont’d

Council was successful under the Minor Facilities Category for both projects which include funds up to $175,000 for two (2) projects matched $1:$1 by Council. Council’s matching contribution, in the 2015/2016 financial year, towards the two (2) projects totals $450,000. Council’s total contribution to these two projects over the 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 financial year is $575,000. TIMELINES These projects would commence in the 2015/2016 financial year. CONCLUSION Council applied to the Victorian State Government for funding to support projects in Council’s Capital Works Plan. Council was successful in receiving $175,000 for two projects. The two projects are Anthony Beale Reserve Regional Playground ($100,000) and Cartledge Reserve Sports Field Lighting ($75,000). These projects require matching funds and a total Council contribution of $450,000 in the 2015/2016 financial year for the projects to proceed. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Reaffirm its allocation of $450,000 as part of the 2015/16 Budget for the matching funding requirement for Anthony Beale Reserve Regional Playground ($275,000) and the Cartledge Reserve Sports Field Lighting ($175,000).

Notifies the users of Anthony Beale Reserve of the successful funding allocation to the Anthony Beale Reserve Regional Playground (Stage 1).

Notifies the Heidelberg Stars Soccer Club of the successful funding allocation to the Cartledge Reserve Sports Field Lighting Project

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 7

2.1

FUNDING IMPLICATIONS

2.2

DISABILITY AND INCLUSION ADVISORY GROUP MEMBERS

Author:

Helen Parker - Community and Social Planner, Community Programs

File:

F2014/316

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The aim of the Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee is to provide Council with advice on disability and inclusion issues, to assist with the implementation of the Disability Action Plan 2014-15 and with the development of Council’s Disability Action Plan 2015-2017 and the Inclusion, Access and Equity (IAE) Framework. Council resolved to establish a Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee with membership consisting of Councillors, residents and community groups. Expressions of interest have been sought and seventeen (17) expressions have been received which were then assessed against a selection criteria. The terms of reference allow for fifteen (15) positions on the Committee from residents and community groups. The membership is initially for one year. A list of names for the Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee is to be presented for Council consideration. For those people who are not selected for the Committee, opportunities will be offered by Council to support the implementation of the Disability Action Plan, such as through working groups and focus groups. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction of “engage meaningfully with our community”.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 8

2.2

People – Community Strengthening and Support

DISABILITY AND INCLUSION ADVISORY GROUP MEMBERS cont’d

Council’s previous Disability Policy and Action Plan (DAP) 2009-2013 has expired and a twelve (12) month DAP has been developed 2014-15. Council previously had a Disability Advisory Group which then ceased. During 2014 Council resolved to reestablish an Advisory Committee to assist Council to work more effectively with Council’s disability communities. Council resolved to appoint Cr Mulholland as the lead delegate and Cr Langdon as the substitute delegate for Council’s Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee. The DAP responds to Council’s obligations to support the inclusion of people with a disability as required by the Disability Discrimination Act 1992, the Victorian Disability Act 2006 and the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities 2006. The Disability Action Plan works towards: 1.

Reducing barriers to persons with a disability accessing goods, services and facilities

Reducing barriers to persons with a disability obtaining and maintaining employment

Promoting inclusion and participation in the community of persons with a disability

Achieving tangible changes in attitudes and practices which discriminate against persons with a disability

Council’s Inclusion, Access and Equity Framework is currently being finalised. The framework will guide Council’s work in supporting our diverse communities, including people with a disability, their families and carers. The Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee will play a key role in guiding the development of the Disability Action Plan 2015-2017. Council’s advisory committees have an advisory role and do not hold any authority to make decisions or commitments on behalf of Council. The minutes of Committee meetings are presented to Council for information after each meeting. Recommendations and requests arising from committee meetings are presented to Council for consideration as required. Responses to recommendations are determined based on Council’s legislative role, stated commitments in Council’s policies and plans, and budgetary processes. It should be acknowledged that while the Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee forms an important part of Council’s engagement with disability communities, they are not the only avenue for consultation and engagement. It should be noted that other networks, groups and individuals who are not involved as formal Advisory Committee members will also be involved in Council’s work on inclusion, access and equity. For example, Banyule City Council actively supports International Day of People with Disability (IDPwD). It is a United Nations sanctioned day on 3 December each year that aims to promote an understanding of people with disability and encourage support for their dignity, rights and well-being. The theme for the 2014 is, ‘Sustainable Development: The Promise of Technology’. It is acknowledged that

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 9

2.2

BACKGROUND

People – Community Strengthening and Support

DISABILITY AND INCLUSION ADVISORY GROUP MEMBERS cont’d

2.2

rapidly developing technology has changed the way people with disability can access entertainment, work, communication and basic information seeking. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any negative human rights issues. The nature of the Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee enhances Council’s advocacy function in affirming the individuals’ rights to freedom of expression especially in underrepresented groups in our community. The Advisory Committee also enhances the individual’s rights to Freedom of Expression as contained in section 15 of the Charter. CURRENT SITUATION The Terms of Reference for the Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee provides for up to 15 community members to be represented on the committee. Council has received 17 formal expressions of interest. See Attachment 1 for the Terms of Reference for the Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee. CONCLUSION Council’s Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee will play an important role in assisting Council to closely engage with members of its disability communities and better understand their needs. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Endorse the Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Terms of Reference

Appoint the following persons (Names will be provided at the Council Meeting) to the Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Terms of Reference

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 126

Page 10

2.3

MULTICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

Author:

India Mortlock - Community & Social Planner, Community Programs

File:

F2014/316

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The aim of the Banyule Multicultural Advisory Committee is to provide Council with advice on multicultural issues and on the development and implementation of Council’s Multicultural Plan 2014-2017 and the Inclusion, Access and Equity (IAE) Framework. The Committee held its first meeting in March 2014 and has met on four subsequent occasions. The terms of reference allow for fifteen positions on the Committee, of which fourteen are currently filled. Council sought an application from Banyule Community Health to fill the remaining position given its work with people from diverse cultural backgrounds. This report considers the appointment of a representative from Banyule Community Health to Council’s Multicultural Advisory Committee.

OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “engage meaningfully with our community”. BACKGROUND During 2013 Council resolved to establish an Advisory Committee to assist Council to work more effectively with Council’s Multicultural communities. In October 2014 Council resolved to re-appoint Cr Garotti as the lead delegate and Cr Di Pasquale as the substitute delegate for Council’s Multicultural Advisory Committee. The first meeting of the Multicultural Advisory Committee was held on 20 March 2014 and there have been subsequent meetings on 29 May, 31 July, 2 October and 20 November.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 11

2.3

People – Community Strengthening and Support

MULTICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP cont’d

2.3

Council is finalising its Inclusion, Access and Equity Framework and Multicultural Plan 2014-2017. The framework and plan will guide Council’s work in supporting multicultural communities. The Multicultural Advisory Committee plays a key role in guiding the development and implementation of the Multicultural Plan 2014-2017. Council’s advisory committees have an advisory role and do not hold any authority to make decisions or commitments on behalf of Council. The minutes of committee meetings are presented to Council for information after each meeting. Recommendations and requests arising from committee meetings are presented to Council for consideration as required. Responses to recommendations are determined based on Council’s legislative role, stated commitments in Council’s Policies and Plans, and budgetary processes. It should be acknowledged that while the Multicultural Advisory Committee forms an important part of Council’s engagement with multicultural communities, they are not the only avenue for consultation and engagement. It should be noted that other networks, groups and individuals who are not involved as formal Advisory Committee members will also be involved in Council’s work on inclusion, access and equity. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any negative human rights issues. The nature of the Multicultural Advisory Committee in fact enhances Council’s advocacy function in affirming the individuals’ rights to freedom of expression especially in underrepresented groups in our community. It is considered that the Advisory Committees enhances individual’s rights to Freedom of Expression as contained in section 15 of the Charter. CURRENT SITUATION The Terms of Reference for the Multicultural Advisory Committee provide for up to 15 members to be represented on the committee. There are currently fourteen members on the Multicultural Advisory Committee. Council has recently sought an application from Banyule Community Health to fill the remaining position because it works closely with people from many different cultural backgrounds and would make a valuable contribution. The Banyule Community Health Centre has agreed to provide a representative on the Committee. CONCLUSION Council’s Multicultural Advisory Committee plays an important role in assisting Council to closely engage with members of its multicultural community. The Committee currently has one vacancy. Banyule Community Health Centre has applied to join the Committee and fill the remaining position.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 12

People – Community Strengthening and Support

MULTICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP cont’d RECOMMENDATION

2.3

That Council appoint (Name will be provided at the Council Meeting) to the Multicultural Advisory Committee.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 13

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

WATSONIA NEIGHBOURHOOD ACTIVITY CENTRE - TRADER AND VOLUNTEER PARKING PERMITS

Author:

Bailey Byrnes - Transport Planning Team Leader, City Development

Ward:

Grimshaw

File:

F2013/617

4.1

Previous Items Council on 18 August 2014 (Item 8.3 - Watsonia RSL - Volunteer car parking) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report responds to Council’s resolution to investigate parking options including a parking permit scheme for volunteers working at the Watsonia RSL. Site inspections demonstrated a moderate level of on-street parking occurring within the unrestricted parking areas in the Watsonia Neighbourhood Activity Centre. The introduction of permit parking for volunteers and staff has been considered but would be inconsistent with Council’s Activity Centre Parking Policy. In consideration of the range of users accessing the centre, it is proposed that 1-hour parking restrictions, operating from 7am-10am be introduced outside Nos.14-Nos.22 Morwell Avenue, Watsonia.. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “support sustainable transport”. BACKGROUND The Watsonia Returned & Services League (RSL) has approached Council with a request for parking permits for their volunteer staff members. At its meeting of 18 August 2014, Council considered a Notice of Motion in regard to this matter and resolved: ‘That Council officers investigate and report on parking options for Watsonia RSL Committee Volunteers including consideration of a car parking permit scheme having regard to Council policy for activity centre car parking.’ In addition, Watsonia Red Cross Retail Shop has submitted a separate request to Council for parking permits for their staff and volunteer members.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 15

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

WATSONIA NEIGHBOURHOOD ACTIVITY CENTRE - TRADER AND VOLUNTEER PARKING PERMITS cont’d

4.1

This report considers the suitability of providing parking permits to any traders, staff or volunteers associated with non-residential land use in the Watsonia Neighbourhood Activity Centre, and more generally across the municipality. CURRENT SITUATION The Watsonia RSL and Red Cross are located within the Watsonia shopping precinct and close to the Watsonia Railway Station. There are 104 off-street parking spaces in the car park opposite the RSL and the car park on Grace Street, and a further 73 in the off-street parking area at 103-105 Watsonia Road, which are all heavily utilised by visitors to the shopping precinct. While there are time restricted on-street car parking spaces in adjacent streets to the Watsonia RSL and Red Cross, unrestricted parking is readily available within a 5-minute walk from the sites, as shown in Figure 1. Public Transport, including the nearby Watsonia Railway Station and neighbourhood bus routes are also nearby.

Figure 1: Watsonia Shopping Precinct – On Street Parking Restrictions

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 16

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

The parking spaces at above the shops at 103-105 Watsonia Road are required to remain open to the general public for use as part of a Planning Permit for a retail development issued in 1989 by the then Shire of Diamond Valley. These parking spaces are available during normal business hours. Over the years our planning investigations staff have reminded the proprietors that this car park is to remain open to the public during operating hours as there have been occassions when access to the car park has been restricted. Observations of parking within the unrestricted parking areas to the north-west of the area demonstrated high levels of long-term parking along Morewell Avenue towards the activity centre. However, unrestricted on-street parking remains available in the surrounding streets within a five (5) minute walk to the activity centre. The long-term parking demand is attributed to commuters accessing the Watsonia Railway Station, and trader parking demand generated by the activity centre. DISCUSSION The Banyule Activity Centre Car Parking Policy (ACCPP) adopted in 2010 provides direction on how to best manage on-street parking around activity centres. The ACCPP acknowledges car parking as a ‘valued and finite commodity’, and aims to manage parking in a way that promotes high parking turnover at the core of activity centres in order to increase parking opportunities for visitors. This is achieved through the articulation of a number of zones around each Activity Centre where residents have priority for all-day parking and non-residents compete for access to shorter term (two to four hour) on-street parking. The closer a zone is to the Activity Centre, there is more demand for parking for all users. This demand is managed by providing timed parking restrictions. In line with this, long term on-street parking, including trader, employee and volunteer parking, is not considered appropriate within the core area of Activity Centres, as each parking space used by employees potentially offsets up to eight short term customers and visitors. Off-street car parking areas are considered more appropriate to accommodate longer stay parking. On-street parking within activity centres needs to be balanced across the needs of a variety of road users, including traders, staff, short and long term visitors and commuters. The introduction of permit parking for the Watsonia RSL and Red Cross would provide convenient parking for staff close to the activity centre. However, the provision of exclusive on-street parking for traders, volunteers and staff is inconsistent with Council’s Activity Centre Parking Policy and is not considered appropriate. Notwithstanding, it is recognised there is a need for some longer term parking in the area for longer term users. In consideration of the range of road users, it is proposed to introduce 1-hour parking restrictions, operating 7am – 10am Monday to Friday, along Morwell Avenue to the north west of the Watsonia RSL which will accommodate approximately six (6) parked cars. This will provide short-term parking during the morning peak period, and allow all-day parking after 9am on weekdays. It is noted that in accordance with Council’s Residential Parking Permit Scheme residents with a valid permit would be exempt from these restrictions where they are

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 17

4.1

WATSONIA NEIGHBOURHOOD ACTIVITY CENTRE - TRADER AND VOLUNTEER PARKING PERMITS cont’d

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.1

WATSONIA NEIGHBOURHOOD ACTIVITY CENTRE - TRADER AND VOLUNTEER PARKING PERMITS cont’d abutting residential property. A review of this Scheme is proposed for the 2015/16 financial year. There is also an opportunity to convert some of the 4-hour parking spaces in the Morwell Avenue median to 5-hour restrictions to accommodate a slightly longer stay of visitors to the area. There are 74 spaces with 4-hour restrictions and a nominal 13 of these spaces could be converted to 5-hour at the north western end of the car park. CONCLUSION The Watsonia RSL and Red Cross are located within the Watsonia Neighbourhood Activity Centre close to residential properties. The shopping precinct relies on high parking turnover to increase visitors’ convenience. The introduction of permit parking for the Watsonia RSL and Red Cross within the Watsonia Neighbourhood Activity Centre would provide convenient parking for staff close to the centre. However, the introduction of exclusive on-street parking for volunteers and staff is inconsistent with Council’s Activity Centre Parking Policy. In consideration of the range of long term users accessing the centre, it is proposed to introduce six 1-hour parking restrictions, operating 7am-10am Monday to Friday outside Nos.14 – Nos.22 Morwell Avenue Watsonia and convert 13 spaces with 4hour to 5-hour parking restrictions in the Morwell Avenue median. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Determines not to provide parking permits for the staff and volunteers of the Watsonia RSL or the Watsonia Red Cross Retail Shop.

Introduces one-hour parking restrictions, operating 7am-10am Monday to Friday, across six parking spaces on Morwell Avenue Watsonia to the north west of the Watsonia RSL.

Informs the residents of Nos.14 - Nos.22 Morwell Avenue Watsonia of the changes to the parking restrictions in front of their properties.

Convert 13 spaces at the north western end of the Morwell Avenue Watsonia median from 4-hour to 5-hour parking restrictions.

Undertakes a review of the changed parking restrictions in six (6) months.

Informs the Watsonia RSL and the Watsonia Red Cross Retail Shop accordingly. 7.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 18

4.2

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AT 9 ALANDALE ROAD, EAGLEMONT

Author:

Nick Helliwell - Major Developments Planner, City Development

Ward:

Griffin

File:

P1242/2013

4.2

Place â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposal is for a two storey town house development comprising five dwellings, associated vegetation removal and waiver of one on site visitor car parking space. The application is a resubmission following both Council and Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal decisions to refuse planning permission for a three storey apartment building on the site. The current proposal is considered to be consistent with the State and Local planning policy framework of the Banyule Planning Scheme and responds positively to the guiding decision for the development of the site provided by VCAT. Approval is recommended.

Planning Permit Application:

P1242/2013

Development Planner:

Mr Nicholas Helliwell

Address:

9 Alandale Road EAGLEMONT

Proposal:

Two storey town house development, associated vegetation removal and waiver of one on site visitor car parking space

Existing Use/Development:

Single storey dwelling

Applicant:

Marc Dixon Architects

Zoning:

Neighbourhood Residential Zone - Schedule 3

Overlays:

Vegetation Protection Overlay - Schedule 3

Notification (Advertising):

Notice in local paper, three site notices and letters to abutting and opposite owner/occupiers

Objections Received:

Four

Ward:

Griffin

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 19

Place â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AT 9 ALANDALE ROAD, EAGLEMONT contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d

4.2

The plans assessed in this report are the advertised plans (Drawings prepared by Marc Dixon Architect, received by Council and date stamped 28 Apr 2014). Details of the proposed dwellings are as follows:

Dwelling 1 Dwelling 2 Dwelling 3 Dwelling 4 Dwelling 5

Open space 90m2 and 3.5m2 balcony 27m2 and 8.1m2 balcony 27m2 and 8.0m2 balcony 27m2 and 8.3m2 balcony 10m2 and 8m2 balcony

Dwelling Density Site Coverage Impervious Site Coverage

Car parking provision One single carport (and one tandem car space) One single carport

Bedrooms Two

One single carport

Two

One single carport

Two

One single carport (and one tandem car space)

Two

1: 132.4 m2 62% 74%

A copy of the advertised plans are located in Attachment 1 to this report. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. BACKGROUND/HISTORY Planning application P327/2012 for the construction of a three storey plus basement apartment building comprising 7 x two bedroom and 3 x one bedroom was refused by the Responsible Authority under delegation and upheld by the Tribunal (VCAT Reference P3564/2012). It is noted that the application was refused primarily on visual bulk, lack of graduation of the continuous built form and stepping of the building down the slope of the site and lack of landscaping opportunities. Importantly, the VCAT decision provides key guidance to assist in the formulation and assessment of any future design response for the application site. This is discussed in detail in the assessment section of this report. Planning permit P1173/13 allowed the removal of three trees from the subject site. This permit has been acted upon.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 20

Place â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AT 9 ALANDALE ROAD, EAGLEMONT contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

Northern boundary Southern boundary Eastern boundary Western boundary Site area 662m2

4.2

The subject site is located on the western side of Alandale Road. It is irregular in shape and has the following dimensions: 38.99m 51.16m 15.25m 18.70m

The site slopes at a gradient of 7% from the east to the west. The north and west property boundaries of the site have abuttals with a ROW, a partly unsealed laneway which provides rear access to tenancies of the Eaglemont Shopping Centre to the north and west. The subject site currently contains a detached dwelling with associated outbuildings. Vehicular access to the site is currently provided form Alandale Road. The surrounding area is characterised by predominantly single and double storey detached dwellings. Land to the east and south of the subject site are part of the Ivanhoe Views Estate. Surrounding land (except No.7 Alandale Road and the subject site) are part of the Ivanhoe Views Estate heritage precinct. The character of the broader area is relatively consistent and comprises single or double storey early 20th century or inter-war dwellings or duplexes within established gardens and well developed street trees. There are some unit developments further to the south-west closer to the railway line. Within this strong residential setting sits the Eaglemont Shopping Centre, with its single and double storey shops clustered around the railway station, which maintains its heritage scale and form. Eaglemont train station is located approximately 100 metres to the west of the subject site.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 21

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AT 9 ALANDALE ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d

4.2

Subject site

Figure 1 – Locality Plan Site area Subject to flooding?

662 sqm Yes - part of north eastern corner

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION It was considered that the proposal may have the potential to cause material detriment to surrounding properties, and as such public notification was conducted by means of erecting a sign on the site, placing a notice in the local paper and posting notices to the owners and occupiers of surrounding properties. Four objections have been received with material grounds of objection summarised as follows:            

The laneway will not be able to accommodate the increase in traffic generated by this proposal Location of bins - 12 bins along Alandale Road on rubbish collection days will be unsightly Overlooking Not in keeping with the neighbourhood character/overdevelopment in context with the single storey environment Intensity of the development is high, minimal opportunities for landscaping Obscured entrances of dwellings/lacks integration with the street Insufficient onsite car parking provided Trees on site removed prior to approval Setbacks do not comply (policy does not support reduced setback in limited changes areas) Site coverage appears to be incorrect VCAT alluded to the site being suitable for medium density, not high density Location of bins, clothes line and air-conditioning units not shown

Consultation No public consultation meeting has been undertaken as it is considered unlikely that it would result in a resolution between parties.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 22

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AT 9 ALANDALE ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d

Referrals were made to Council’s Arborist, Heritage Adviser and Engineering Services. As outlined in the responses, all referral considerations can be addressed through permit conditions. A summary of the referral responses is provided in Attachment 2 to this report PLANNING CONTROLS The planning controls applicable to the site are outlined in Table 1 below: Table 1: Applicable Planning Controls Control Neighbourhood Residential Zone – Schedule 3 Vegetation Protection Overlay – Schedule 5 (VPO5) Car Parking requirements

Clause 32.09 42.02 52.06

Permit Triggered Yes No Yes

TRANSITIONARY PROVISIONS Prior to the introduction of the Neighbourhood Residential Zone on 24 July 2014 the site was affected by the General Residential Zone. The transitionary provisions of the Neighbourhood Residential Zone provide that the provisions of the General Residential Zone with respect to building height and dwelling numbers apply where an application was received by Council prior to that date. The proposed construction of more than two dwellings is therefore permissible in this instance. POLICIES CONSIDERED Relevant policies considered in the assessment of this proposal are outlined in Table 2 below: Table 2: Relevant Planning Scheme Policy Policy State Planning Policy Framework Settlement Built Environment and Heritage (including sub clauses) Housing (including sub clauses) Local Planning Policy Framework Land Use Natural Environment Built Environment (Accessible area) Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy – Garden Suburban Precinct 2. Safer Design Policy

Clause 11 15 16 21.04 21.05 21.06 22.02 22.03

Planning controls are identified in Attachment 2 to this report. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION The following assessment comprises a technical consideration of the proposal.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 23

4.2

REFERRAL COMMENTS

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AT 9 ALANDALE ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d

4.2

RESPONSE TO POLICY FRAMEWORK The proposed development is consistent with State and Local Planning Policies seeking urban consolidation and housing diversity in appropriate locations. Both levels of policy also require an appropriate response to neighbourhood character and residential amenity. In determining the previous apartment proposal, the Tribunal agreed that the subject site is a potential medium density development site. In terms of preferred built form, it noted that given that the site is located neither in the Ivanhoe Views Estate or Eaglemont Village heritage overlays, any development proposed on the site does not have to meet the requirements of the heritage overlay. It was noted however that the heritage context and limited change area designation provided an expectation that neighbourhood character will not be subject to significant change. The previous apartment proposal for this site was considered to erode the strong open and landscaped backyard garden character of the area and the distinct existing and preferred well landscaped single and double storey detached built form neighbourhood character of the area. In addition, the Tribunal stated that whilst Alandale Road has a strong residential interface to the east side, this is not mirrored beyond the subject site on the west side as the road runs along the railway line. Furthermore, the emerging built form at the rear of the commercial area is clearly more substantial than the traditional outbuildings and commercial service yards located to the rear of the shops. As such, the built form and amenity on the subject site, given its interface with the Neighbourhood Activity Centre, is expected to be different to the surrounding residential setting. As such, the proposed building typology and scale is considered to represent an appropriate response to the policy framework that balances development, character, amenity and landscape considerations. It should also be noted that since the previous Tribunal determination, the zoning of the land has changed from Residential 1 to Neighbourhood Residential – Schedule 3. The proposal is considered to strike an appropriate outcome against the purpose of the new zone as: 

The strategic context of the site abutting an activity centre.



The proposed development is no more than two storeys is height.



The site is a limited opportunity for increased residential development being one of only two parcels of land unencumbered by the two heritage overlays affecting surrounding land.



The proposal pays due regard to the identified neighbourhood character, heritage, environmental and landscape characteristics.



The proposal reasonably implements neighbourhood character policy and adopted neighbourhood character guidelines.



The application was well progressed prior to the introduction of the new zone.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 24

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AT 9 ALANDALE ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d

RESCODE - CLAUSE 55 A detailed assessment against the provisions of Clause 55 of the Banyule Planning Scheme has been undertaken and is annexed to this report at Attachment 3. The proposal complies with all of the Objectives of the Clause, subject to conditions. The proposal incorporates variations to the Standards of the Clause in relation to Street Setback and Site Coverage, which are detailed in the attachment and also in relation to Neighbourhood Character. NEIGHBOURHOOD CHARACTER The proposal generally meets the objectives of Council’s Neighbourhood Character Policy. A detailed assessment of the proposal against this policy is annexed to this report at Attachment 4. A variation to a number of design responses is proposed and considered acceptable, as detailed in the attachment. In summary, the site has a unique location at the interface to the Eaglemont Neighbourhood Activity Centre adjacent to a laneway and between two surrounding heritage overlays affecting neighbouring land. This provides an opportunity for any development on the site to make a transition in built form and design from the shopping centre to the more traditional residential built form character of the area. The terraced built form of the development reflects the built form of the commercial premises to the north. Whilst site coverage will exceed 40%, this is considered to be acceptable in this instance given the unique location of the site between the commercial area and the dwelling to the south. It is considered that the front setback of the proposed development makes a suitable transition between the supermarket with a zero setback to Alandale Road on one side of the site and the adjacent dwelling on the other with a setback to Alandale Road of 15 metres. Whilst the development will comprise a row of two storey terraced houses, the maximum height of the development will be 8 metres. The built form also follows the slope of the land from west to east. The proposed development will also be set in sufficiently from the joint boundary with the neighbouring dwelling to the south to allow for the provision of ground level secluded private open space and planting areas. At least one large tree within the front setback of Dwelling 1 and one medium tree each within the rear yards of Dwellings 2, 3 and 4 and two small trees within the laneway setback of Dwelling 5 can be provided. The built form of the development, combined with these setbacks and landscape outcomes, is considered to provide an appropriate transition from the dense site coverage and built form of the activity centre and the neighbouring residences to the east and south. The proposed development is also considered to respond to good urban design principles by offering a design response that will activate the secluded laneway and increase passive surveillance and pedestrian safety of the lane. In determining the proposal, it is also important to recognise that Council’s heritage adviser has assessed the project. This assessment considers that the appearance of

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 25

4.2

For the reasons outlined below, the proposal is considered to respond appropriately to the guiding decision from the Tribunal and strike an appropriate balance with planning policy.

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.2

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AT 9 ALANDALE ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d the proposed development is in keeping with the residential character of Alandale Road. The scale of buildings within the nearby heritage precincts is predominantly a mix of single and double-storey structures. The scale of the proposed development is considered in keeping with this character. Roof forms of the buildings within the nearby heritage precincts are predominantly a mix of hips and gables. The series of staggered gabled roof forms incorporated in the design are in keeping with this character. It is also noted that given the two-storey scale of the development, any existing significant views within either of the adjacent heritage precincts will not be affected. CAR PARKING/ACCESS Pursuant to Clause 52.06-5 of the Banyule Planning Scheme, a total of six car spaces are required to be provided (one space per dwelling and one visitor car space). Each dwelling will be provided with one single carport. No visitor car spaces are proposed which means that a permit is required to waive one on site visitor car parking space. This is considered to be satisfactory in this instance as the site is located within 100m of Eaglemont train station. In addition, Council data and empirical evidence indicates some availability of short term parking in the area, and reasonable access to public transport facilities. As such, a waiving of the visitor parking space can be accepted for this development. In terms of functionality of car spaces and access ways, this has been assessed as acceptable subject to the driveway of Dwelling 5 having a minimum width of 3 metres. This will be required as a permit condition. Council’s engineering section has indicated that the existing right of way should be resurfaced in order for it to be used for access to Dwellings 2, 3, 4 and 5. The road construction proposed should consider the heritage status of adjacent buildings and Council's right of way guidelines. Any blue-stone pitchers that are removed from the site during the road construction process will remain the property of Council and must be returned to Council's Depot for recycling. It should also be noted that the Tribunal found the use of the laneway for access to be acceptable. OBJECTORS’ CONCERNS The majority of objectors’ concerns have been addressed in the attached ResCode and Neighbourhood Character Policy assessments, however the following matters require further discussion: Trees on site removed prior to approval It is noted that a previous permit allowed the removal of three trees in December 2013. One additional tree was removed due to the poor health of the tree. However, an assessment of this tree is contained within the arborist report and considered during the assessment of this application.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 26

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AT 9 ALANDALE ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d

Site coverage is proposed as 38% in the applicant’s planning report which accompanied the application. However, it is considered that site coverage is in fact closer to 62%. The acceptability of the proposed site coverage is addressed in the Clause 55 assessment referred in the technical assessment section of this report. VCAT alluded to the site being suitable for medium density, not high density Both the previous and current proposals fall within the definition of medium density development. At five dwellings, the current proposal is half the density of the previous proposal and is therefore a lower density proposal. The proposal is considered to be consistent with what both Council officers and VCAT envisaged could be an acceptable design response for the site. CONCLUSION The site is considered appropriate for a medium density housing project. The scale and modulation of the built form of the design, combined with the architectural detailing, materials and landscaping, will result in a development that strikes an appropriate balance of achieving urban consolidation in a manner which is respectful of the existing and emerging character of the area and the amenity of neighbouring residences. Approval of the application is recommended. RECOMMENDATION That Council having complied with Section 52, 58, 60, 61 and 62 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, resolves that a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit be issued in respect of Application No. P1242/2013 for the construction of a Two storey town house development, associated vegetation removal and waiver of one on site visitor car parking space at 9 Alandale Road, EAGLEMONT subject to the following conditions: Plans 1.

Before the development permitted by this permit starts, 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 the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the advertised plans submitted with the application but modified to show: (a)

The finished floor level of all habitable areas of Dwellings 4 and 5 identified as being liable to overland stormwater flows either increased to a minimum of 47.2 AHD or located beyond the flow area. This is to be achieved without any increase in building height or reduction in building setback to site boundaries.

(b)

The front door of Dwelling 1 relocated to face Alandale Road.

(c)

The correct site coverage of the development.

(d)

The driveway of Dwelling 5 with a minimum width of 3 metres.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 27

4.2

Site coverage appears to be incorrect

Place â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.2

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AT 9 ALANDALE ROAD, EAGLEMONT contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d (e)

The south-eastern first floor kitchen window of Dwelling 4 screened to minimise potential of overlooking of the rear garden of 7 Alandale Road overlooking in accordance with Standard B22 of ResCode.

(f)

The details of the southern boundary fence treatment shown on the Ground Floor plan.

(g)

Additional under stair storage areas for Dwellings 2,3,4 and 5.

(h)

The location of the clothesline for each dwelling.

(i)

Any plant, equipment, services or architectural features proposed to be located on the roof.

(j)

Bin areas for each dwelling screened from view.

(k)

Engineering plans showing a properly prepared design with computations for the internal drainage and method of disposal of stormwater from all roofed areas and sealed areas including: i.

The use of an On-site Stormwater Detention (OSD) system;

ii. The connection to the Council nominated legal point of discharge; iii. The outfall drainage works necessary to connect the subject site to the Council nominated Legal Point of Discharge; Please note the Engineering plans must show all protected and/or retained trees on the development site, on adjoining properties where tree canopies encroach the development site and along proposed outfall drainage and roadway alignments (where applicable) and every effort must be made to locate services away from the canopy drip line of trees and where unavoidable, details of hand work or trenchless installation must be provided.

(l)

Landscaping as required by Condition No. 2 of this permit, including within the front setback of Dwelling 2;

(m)

All boundary and internal fencing within flood prone areas of the site designed to be permeable to overland stormwater flows;

(n)

Site coverage figure confirmed in the development summary on Drawing No. TP01.

The development permitted by this permit must not be commenced until a satisfactory revised detailed landscaping plan is submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. Such plan must be prepared by a person suitably qualified or experienced in landscape design and shall include: (a)

Details of planting within the site, including within the front setback of Dwelling 2;

(b)

The identification of existing vegetation (which is not intended to be removed), and nomination of vegetation for removal throughout the site;

(c)

Provision of formed garden beds with edging around the landscape zone within the front setback to prevent cars parking within those areas

(d)

Planting adjacent to driveways and within landscaping zones to consist of varying heights and species;

(e)

Provision of replacement planting for vegetation that is to be removed

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 28

Place â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

including a minimum of one large canopy tree (mature height of at least 15m) planted at a semi-advanced state (minimum pot size 40 litre) within the front setback of Dwelling 1 and one medium tree (mature height of at least 8m) at a semi-advanced state (minimum pot size 16 litre) planted within each of the rear yards of Dwellings 2, 3 and 4 and two small trees within the front setback of Dwelling 5. (f)

An indigenous and/or drought tolerant planting theme;

(g)

A schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground cover, which includes the location and size at maturity of all plants, the botanical names of such plants and the location of all areas to be covered by grass, lawn or other surface material as specified;

(h)

Location and details of paving, steps, retaining walls, water tanks, clotheslines, fence design details and other landscape works including cut and fill.

General 3.

The development as shown on the endorsed plans or described in the endorsed documents must not be altered or modified except with the written consent of the Responsible Authority.

Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority the development permitted by this permit must not be occupied until the development has been completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority in accordance with the permit and endorsed plans (including, but not limited to built form and layout, parking, landscaping, drainage, street numbering etc).

Amenity 5.

Outdoor lighting must not be used on the subject land other than that which is normal to a private dwelling.

Urban Design / External Appearance 6.

No plant, equipment, services or architectural features other than those shown on the endorsed plans are permitted above the roof level of the building(s) without the written consent of the Responsible Authority.

Car Parking / Access 7.

Areas set aside for the parking of vehicles together with the aisles and access lanes must be properly formed to such levels that they can be utilised in accordance with the endorsed plans and must be drained and provided with an all weather seal coat. The areas must be constructed, drained and maintained in a continuously useable condition to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Areas set aside for the parking and movement of vehicles as shown on the endorsed plan(s) must be made available for such use and must not be used for any other purpose.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 29

4.2

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AT 9 ALANDALE ROAD, EAGLEMONT contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AT 9 ALANDALE ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d Vehicular access or egress to the subject land from any roadway or service lane 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 use the crossing(s). The location, design and construction of the vehicle crossing(s) must be approved by the Responsible Authority. Any existing unused crossing(s) must be removed and replaced with concrete kerb, channel and nature strip to the satisfaction of the Council prior to occupation of the building. All vehicle crossing works are to be carried out with Council Supervision under a Memorandum of Consent for Works which must be obtained prior to commencement of works.

10.

No alteration to the existing topography within the existing stormwater drainage easement or stormwater overland flow path is permitted unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the Responsible Authority.

11.

All boundary and internal fencing within flood prone areas of the site must be permeable to overland stormwater flows. The extent of permeable fence sections is to be determined by Flood Level through an application to the Responsible Authority.

12.

All proposed building and laneway works must allow for and not restrict or impede the free passage of overland stormwater flows, so that it does not cause higher flood levels or faster flows to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

13.

The existing right of way must be resurfaced in order for it to be used as access to Dwellings 2, 3, 4 and 5. The road construction proposed should consider the heritage status of adjacent buildings and Council's right of way guidelines. Any blue-stone pitchers that are removed from the site during the road construction process will remain the property of Council and must be returned to Council's Depot for recycling. The reconstructed/surfaced laneway should take into account potential flood impacts from higher land to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

4.2

Waste 14.

The waste bin areas for each dwelling must be provided prior to the occupation of the development and thereafter maintained and used to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Construction Management Plan 15.

Before the development starts, a construction management plan must be prepared and submitted to the Responsible Authority for approval. The plan must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Once approved, the plan must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The plan must address the following issues: (a) (b) (c)

measures to control noise, dust and water runoff; prevention of silt or other pollutants from entering into the Council’s underground drainage system or road network; the location of where building materials are to be kept during construction;

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 30

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

(d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j)

site security; maintenance of safe movements of vehicles to and from the site during the construction phase; on-site parking of vehicles associated with construction of the development; wash down areas for trucks and vehicles associated with construction activities; cleaning and maintaining surrounding road surfaces; measures to maintain right of access over the laneway for other users of the laneway during construction; a requirement that construction works must only be carried out during the following hours: • Monday to Friday (inclusive) – 7.00am to 6.00pm; • Saturday – 9.00am to 1.00pm; • Saturday – 1.00pm to 5.00pm (Only activities associated with the erection of buildings. This does not include excavation or the use of heavy machinery.)

Graffiti prevention measures 16.

Any walls or spaces accessible to the public must be treated in accordance with Safer Design and CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) Principles. Where appropriate the following measures must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e)

(f) (g)

textured or rough services that make it difficult to apply graffiti; permeable fencing instead of solid walls; buildings with high-density, low absorbency materials; anti-graffiti coating to protect the surface when building or revitalising the walls (including façade); sensor lighting and/or enhanced surveillance to deter graffitists; textured or rough services that make it difficult to apply graffiti; permeable fencing instead of solid walls; the break up of large surfaces to minimise the canvas available for graffitists; and measures to make surfaces less liable to graffiti.

Maintenance of property 17.

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

Time Limits 18.

In accordance with section 68 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, this permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies: (a)

The development is not commenced within two years of the date of this permit;

(b)

The development is not completed within four years of the date of this

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 31

4.2

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AT 9 ALANDALE ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AT 9 ALANDALE ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d permit.

4.2

In accordance with section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing: (a)

Before the permit expires, or

(b)

Within six months afterwards, or

(c)

Within 12 months afterwards if the development started lawfully before the permit expired.

PERMIT NOTES

Expiry of Permit In the event that this permit expires or the subject land is proposed to be used or developed for purposes different from those for which this permit is granted, there is no guarantee that a new permit will be granted. If a permit is granted then the permit conditions may vary from those included on this permit having regard to changes that might occur to circumstances, planning scheme provisions or policy.

Building Permit Required Building Permit must be obtained prior to the commencement of any works associated with the proposed development.

Completion of Development Immediately upon completion of the development permitted by this permit, the owner or developer of the subject land must notify Council’s Development Planning Section that the development is complete and complies with all requirements of the permit. The development will then be inspected to ensure compliance. An early inspection process will ensure that the subdivision approvals including the Statement of Compliance can be issued without delay.

Memorandum of Consent for Works Council’s Construction Department must supervise all works undertaken on Council assets within private property, Council Reserves, easements, drainage reserves and/or road reserves, including connection of the internal drainage system to the existing Council assets. Prior to the commencement of any works, an application must be made and a permit received for:  A “Memorandum of Consent for Works” for any works within the road reserve; and/or  A “Drainage Connection Permit” for any works other than within a road reserve.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 32

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AT 9 ALANDALE ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d Asset Inspection Fee Prior to the commencement of building works on site in accordance with Local Law 1, a non-refundable Asset Inspection Fee is payable to Council for the inspection of existing Council assets. For further information in relation to this process and the relevant fee please contact Council’s Construction Department on 9490 4222.

4.2

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Plans

131

Planning policy & Referrals

153

Clause 55 assessment

155

Neighbourhood Character Assessment

159

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page

Page 33

4.3

A FINAL VISION FOR WATSONIA VILLAGE

Author:

Klover Apostola - Strategic Planner, City Development

Ward:

Grimshaw

File:

F2014/504

4.3

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

Previous Items Council on 15 September 2014 (Item 4.1 - A Draft Vision for Watsonia Village) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Since approving the draft vision document ‘Picture Watsonia: A Vision for Watsonia Village’, Council has undertaken further consultation to confirm that the final document clearly reflects stakeholder input. The feedback received has informed the preparation of a final ‘Picture Watsonia’ for Council adoption. It includes a refined vision statement to describe the way the place will look, feel and function in the future, which can be summarised as ‘the best of the country meets the best of the city in the suburbs’. It also provides a list of objectives to inform decisions so that they will achieve the vision, as well as many ideas that could lead to real change in Watsonia Village or protect it’s valued aspects. The final ‘Picture Watsonia’ is presented for adoption and will position Council to lead on shaping Watsonia’s future in line with local community aspirations. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “maintain and improve Banyule as a great place to live”. BACKGROUND At the Council meeting on 15 September 2014, Council received a draft vision for Watsonia Village called ‘Picture Watsonia: A Vision for Watsonia Village’. The focus for the project was Watsonia’s shopping centre, shown in Figure 1 below. The draft was prepared with the assistance of city strategists Hello City, in consultation with the local community and other key stakeholders. It was prepared in response to an initiative in Council’s current City Plan 2013-2017, to give direction to future change at Watsonia’s shopping street, railway station area and surrounds. At its 15 September 2014 meeting, Council approved the draft ‘Picture Watsonia’ document for further consultation, to check that the final version clearly reflects what people have said.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 34

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.3

A FINAL VISION FOR WATSONIA VILLAGE cont’d

Figure 1: Study Area for the Watsonia Vision HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. CONSULTATION ON THE DRAFT VISION Consultation on the draft was undertaken from 24 September 2014 to 24 October 2014. This included:    

A notice in the local paper to invite feedback Updates on Council’s facebook page and on Councils website with a copy of the draft ‘Picture Watsonia’ and an online feedback form. Displays at Council’s Service centre and Watsonia Library. Continued discussions with the Watsonia Traders Association.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 35

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

A FINAL VISION FOR WATSONIA VILLAGE cont’d

4.3

  

Distribution of the draft document to key stakeholders and other interested parties. Letters to all land holders and occupiers within the study area. An information session with those within the study area.

The feedback received has generally been very positive. People have said that they like the way the document has been presented, and that it’s ideas have led them to think about what is possible for the future of Watsonia Village. Some responses have included a list of additional ideas for the future, while others have given suggestions on refining some existing ideas to be more unique to Watsonia. Some have also given feedback on the ‘Opportunities Map’ in the draft document and have requested more clarity on the future potential of certain areas, including the southern precinct, and the large car park at the train station. Other feedback has also lead to the inclusion of a section for the Watsonia Community Hub, as it’s proposed services will support Watsonia and surrounding areas. All responses have helped to inform the final version of the vision document for adoption that is now given in Attachment 1. A summary of the consultation process and the feedback received is given in Attachment 2. THE FINAL VISION: ‘PICTURE WATSONIA’ The final ‘Picture Watsonia’ has been developed in response to the further consultation. It is driven by a refined vision statement that articulates the aspirations of the community, and describes what is possible for the future. This vision statement, on page 35 of the document, describes a future Watsonia Village that is thriving, bustling, friendly, and easy to move through. It describes it as a place that provides gathering spaces, community services and activities, and a variety of shops. The vision statement can be summarised as ‘the best of the country meets the best of the city in the suburbs’. Seven objectives are also provided to inform decisions so they achieve the vision. The final ‘Picture Watsonia’ also gives a list of more clearly described ideas that will help Watsonia Village achieve the key objectives for its future. These ideas will build upon the key initiatives that Council is already progressing in the centre, to address challenges for a growing and changing population while strengthening and celebrating the character of Watsonia Village. NEXT STEPS Council’s commitment to the area is already being realised in the current initiatives and funding commitments for: • • • •

A further stage of the streetscape upgrades. A future shared trail along the powerline easement. Further refurbishments of the Watsonia library. Continuing traffic and engineering analysis.

Council’s adoption of the vision will give direction to future management and improvements to public spaces and places that are described in ‘Picture Watsonia’. Once adopted, the vision will give all relevant Council work areas a context for

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 36

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

shaping the area’s future. It can be used to guide all future projects and programs within the study area that Council may choose to consider in future annual budgeting. After the vision has been adopted, a concise summary brochure will be scoped and prepared. This brochure is expected to be a very concise document for limited printing and distribution. It will be made available from Council’s website. Limited 2014/15 funding capacity means this product’s final design, printing and distribution may require further budget approval by Council.

4.3

A FINAL VISION FOR WATSONIA VILLAGE cont’d

One idea for a future project that has been strongly supported by participants in the development of ‘Picture Watsonia’, is the temporary closure of the south west end of Ibbotson Street. This would lead to the simplification of the roundabout on Watsonia Road, which would improve vehicle and pedestrian access along the street. It would also provide the opportunity to create of a temporary town square in the area between the church and the library. This opportunity could be explored in the 2015/16 budget for a transport planning and road remodelling project. CONCLUSION The final ‘Picture Watsonia: A Vision for Watsonia Village’ has been prepared in response to further community consultation on the draft document. The final document will position Council to lead on shaping Watsonia’s future in line with local community aspirations. It can help inform and give direction to all Council activities within the study area, and help shape future programs and projects so they contribute to achieving the vision. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Adopt the final ‘Picture Watsonia: A Vision for Watsonia Village’ and its appendices, in attachments 1 and 2.

Prepare a concise summary brochure for the adopted vision, with final design, printing and distribution subject to available budgets.

Use ‘Picture Watsonia: A Vision for Watsonia Village’ to inform and give direction to future Council projects and programs in the study area, including any priorities for future resource allocations.

In the 2015/16 financial year, consider funding for a transport planning and road remodelling project to investigate the opportunity to temporarily close the south west end of Ibbotson Street and create space for a town square.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Final 'Picture Watsonia: A Vision for Watsonia Village'

164

Appendices: Summary & Analysis of the Watsonia 2050 Engagement Process

234

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page

Page 37

4.4

CAR PARKING REDUCTIONS AND CONTRIBUTIONS - REVIEW OF PRACTICE

Author:

Joel Elbourne - Manager of Urban Planning & Buildling, City Development

File:

F2014/1388

4.4

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Two existing resolutions of Council require officers to facilitate meetings between land owners and interested Councillors when a planning permit application seeks certain reductions to the standard parking rates set out in the Banyule Planning Scheme. The meetings consider whether a financial contribution is appropriate having regard to parking reduction sought. This report provides an update and commentary in relation to the outcomes of these meetings. Following a briefing of Council in relation to the current resolutions, this report also considers:  The implications of new policy in relation to this practice.  Whether this informal approach to car parking contributions is a fair and appropriate approach for Council to take.  An amendment to the current practice based on discussions with Councillors which would replace the two existing resolutions. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “plan and manage the systems and assets that support Council’s service delivery”. BACKGROUND There are two resolutions of Council (14 December 2009 and 21 March 2011) that are relevant to planning applications which seek a reduction in the standard car parking requirements set out in the Planning Scheme. These are outlined as follows: 

That officers, the Ward Councillor and any interested Councillors meet with the applicant/developer for any proposed planning application in the West Heidelberg industrial estate which includes a car parking dispensation to discuss and consider car parking issues.



That Council’s position when considering planning applications be that it requires new developments and changes of use application to comply with the

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 38

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

standard planning scheme requirements or current parking study/strategy currently being currently being used for car parking. Where car parking on site cannot be accommodated (for more than three spaces) a meeting be arranged with the owner/applicant, interested Councillors and appropriate officers to discuss the shortfall of car parking and to establish whether agreement can be reached for alternative arrangements to the benefit of the overall activity centre and community. If no agreement can be reached, Council is to consider the planning application at a Council Meeting to determine the matter. It is noted that the resolution of 21 March 2011 also required that a report be submitted to Council on the effectiveness of this policy and any suggested amendments which may include guidelines currently in practice and at other Councils. A third resolution of Council also relates to planning applications which seek a reduction in the standard car parking rates associated with medical offices/centres. A briefing note was prepared and separate briefing sessions were held with Councillors on 14 July 2014 and 24 November 2014 in relation to the options for alterations to the current Councillor practice in relation to applications for reductions to car parking and the meetings being requested with land owners. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. CURRENT SITUATION Meetings are facilitated by the Manager Urban Planning and Building who introduces the proposal and indicates both the statutory and empirical shortfall in car parking included in the planning application. Typically, the empirical car parking shortfall (the real impact of on street car parking demand generated by the proposal) is used as a basis for Council to put forward an appropriate contribution toward the development of future car parking in the area. In the West Heidelberg Industrial Estate, consideration is also given to existing work that has identified opportunities to augment existing on street parking. Meetings are attended by the owner and applicant as well as any interested Councillor. Meeting outcomes include:  An agreement on an appropriate contribution in lieu of the provision of car parking on the subject site; or  Acceptance of the reduction to the car parking proposed (on the basis that this is supported by officers); or  No agreement is reached and the application is put to a Council meeting if the planning officers consider that the reduction to car parking is appropriate. If the

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 39

4.4

CAR PARKING REDUCTIONS AND CONTRIBUTIONS - REVIEW OF PRACTICE cont’d

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

CAR PARKING REDUCTIONS AND CONTRIBUTIONS - REVIEW OF PRACTICE cont’d officers do not support the parking reduction, the application would normally be refused under delegation.

4.4

DISCUSSION Councillors have been briefed in relation to an analysis on contributions agreed (up to 8 April 2014). The analysis included:     

Attendance at the meetings. The value of contributions agreed to and locations where this is occurring. The number of spaces sought to be reduced. Resource implications. Amount held in trust to date

Observations in relation to the process and outcomes are as follows: 

While the contributions per space relate to statutory and not empirical shortfalls, the average contribution is $2,640 per space and the median $1,136.



There are resource implications in the administration and attendance at the meetings with only a small number of the meetings resulting in contributions. There are also resource implications for the development planning team in tracking and chasing up small contributions.



There is concern that the resolution creates uncertainty for potential businesses which, in turn, impacts upon the economic development of some centres.

VicSmart implications for shortfalls of 5 spaces or less On 18 June 2014, The Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure announced that the VicSmart planning provisions will be introduced in September 2014. Applications that seek to reduce the standard car parking requirements by no more than five spaces will be subject to the new Vic Smart provisions such that:  The assessment time frame is 10 business days 

Only the Chief Executive Officer of the council or a delegate can decide on the application.



Council will not be able to ‘call in’ an application where a contribution agreement cannot be reached with the land owner.

Amendments to current practice Based on the feedback provided by Councillors at the briefing sessions, it is suggested that Council consider:  Increasing the threshold for parking meetings from more than three spaces to six or more spaces (one space or more within the West Heidelberg Industrial Estate) having regard to the new VicSmart planning provisions where Council is no longer the Responsible Authority for applications for waivers of five or less spaces.  Recognising the implications of the parking meetings and contributions for small businesses seeking to establish cafes and restaurants within existing buildings without increasing floor space.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 40

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

CAR PARKING REDUCTIONS AND CONTRIBUTIONS - REVIEW OF PRACTICE cont’d The Ward Councillor determining whether the meeting should proceed based on a briefing of the statutory and empirical car parking shortfall including any existing deficiency with the current land use.

Notwithstanding the above suggestion, it is considered that there are concerns with the informal approach to car parking contributions and a contribution framework should stem from a Parking Overlay in the Banyule Planning Scheme. The process to develop an overlay is underway for the Heidelberg Activity Centre. In relation to the West Heidelberg Industrial Estate, given the low threshold of one car parking space and the VicSmart provisions, a special charge scheme or formal contribution framework is recommended in lieu of the current process. CONCLUSION The value of contribution agreements as a result of car parking meetings is considerable. However, the practice of seeking parking contributions should be through the inclusion of a Parking Overlay in the Banyule Planning Scheme. Should Council agree that this practice continue, the amendments to current practice considered in this report will provide for a more efficient approach. RECOMMENDATION That: 1.

The Council Resolutions FPOC.70 Proposed Additional Car Parking Opportunities in West Heidelberg Industrial Estate (14 December 2009) and CO2011/52 Consideration for Planning Applications – New Developments for Car Parking Accommodation (21 March 2011) be revoked.

The Council practice be to require new developments and changes of use applications to comply with the standard planning scheme requirements or current parking study/strategy currently being used for car parking. If the required statutory rate cannot be met, the Ward Councillor must be consulted as to whether a meeting should be arranged with the owner/applicant, interested Councillors and appropriate officers when:  A reduction of 10 or more statutory spaces is requested.  A reduction of 6 or more spaces is requested within the West Heidelberg Industrial Estate. A meeting will not be required when a parking reduction is sought in association with a proposed/existing café or restaurant activity within where there is no increase to commercial floor space and the number of seats proposed is no greater than 40. If no agreement can be reached, Council is to consider the planning application at a Council Meeting to determine the matter.

A report be submitted to Council within 2 years on appropriateness and the effectiveness of this practice and any suggested amendments.

Council write to the property owners within the core of Major Activity Centres

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 41

4.4



Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

CAR PARKING REDUCTIONS AND CONTRIBUTIONS - REVIEW OF PRACTICE cont’d

4.4

(Heidelberg, Ivanhoe and Greensborough) to inform them of this new position in relation to car parking reductions and meetings, as well as convey the importance of setting appropriate rental yields to minimise commercial vacancies. ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 42

4.5

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL)

Author:

Jackie Bernoth - Co-ordinator Development Planner , City Development

Ward:

Olympia

File:

P1096/14

4.5

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposal seeks approval for the construction of 118 double storey dwellings on the former Haig Street Primary School site. A 119 lot subdivision is also proposed, with the additional lot being proposed as a 2470 m2 area of public open space. The proposed dwellings are contemporary in nature, with the majority being attached to one another and with flat roof forms. An assessment of the proposal against the provisions of ResCode and the Development Guidelines for the site and a review of objections received reveal that the key issues for consideration are: 

The impact of the proposal upon surrounding roadways with respect to traffic and parking;



The tree removal proposed in association with the development;



The proposed dwelling style and layout;



The level of amenity afforded to existing and proposed dwellings.

The proposal achieves a high level of compliance with both ResCode and the Development Guidelines for the site. Approval is recommended, subject to conditions which will improve the amount of landscaping retained on site, on-street parking provision, and future resident amenity.

Planning Permit Application:

P1096/2014

Development Planner:

Mrs Jackie Bernoth

Address:

52 Haig Street HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS

Proposal:

Multi dwelling development (118 double storey dwellings) and associated subdivision, reduction in the standard visitor parking requirement by four spaces and removal of easements

Existing Use/Development:

Vacant

Applicant:

Metricon Homes Pty Ltd

Notification (Advertising):

Notice in newspaper Five signs on site Notices to surrounding properties

Objections Received:

Sixteen (16)

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 43

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d

4.5

Ward:

Olympia

The proposal incorporates the construction of 118 dwellings, with variations of eight different dwelling designs utilised across the site. The following bedroom and parking configurations are provided:

No. of Bedrooms 2 3 4

Car parking provision Single garage

Single garage, tandem space

Double garage

Double garage, tandem space

14 -

42 -

35 1

16 10

The proposed public open space is located opposite the north and south sections of Elliott Street, and is an elongated cross shape. The open space will be accessible from both Haig and Bonar Street, as well as by internal pathways which run east and west across the site. Conceptual plans supplied indicate that it is proposed that this area will be developed with pathways, a lawn area, tree planting and a ‘natural play area’, including seating. Access to the majority of dwellings will be provided by way of common property driveways, with two U-shaped internal accessways and two dead-end accessways proposed off Bonar Street. These will service a total of 57 dwellings, with 10 of these having their primary pedestrian access (ie. front door) facing the proposed public open space. Three dead-end laneways with access off Haig Street are proposed, and will service a total of 29 dwellings. Fourteen of these dwellings will have their primary pedestrian access from the public open space, with the remaining fifteen having their primary pedestrian access from walkways which connect the U-shaped accessways with Haig Street. A smaller number of dwellings will be arranged to face the existing roadways, with 18 having frontage to Haig Street, eight to Law Street and six to Bonar Street. Each dwelling will be provided with either a single or double garage, with many also having a parking space in tandem. A total of 19 designated visitor parking spaces are provided within the internal accessways on site. Detailed plans are contained in Attachment 1 to this report. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 44

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter.

The subject site, plus that occupied by the Austin Health Recovery House on the corner of Bonar Street and Law Street was formerly used and developed as the Haig Street Primary School. The site was purchased by Council in 2013 following closure of the school by the State Government. All previously existing buildings and structures were removed from the site toward the end of 2013. A stormwater drain which traversed the site in a north-south direction was also removed at that time, and is to be reinstated by Council. The planning application has been lodged by Metricon Homes, who have entered into a contract to purchase the land from Council. At its meeting on 16 December 2013, Council resolved, amongst other things, to: 

Utilise the land set aside for the Elliott Street extension (1459m²) and an adjoining area of developable land (941m²) to the east to provide a total open space area of 2400m² on the site.



Establish the public open as soon as possible with design and layout to be prepared prior to June 30th, 2014.



Confirm that the future zoning be residential growth zone.



Prepare a detail design of traffic management treatment incorporating traffic calming devises and beautification of the area in front of the shops on Haig Street prior to June 30th 2014.



Consider further traffic management options in adjoining streets to the former school site in response to the proposed residential redevelopment of the site.



Ensure that the guidelines for the future development of the land consider a transition in heights from the development to 2 storeys immediately adjoining the existing adjoining dwellings to the East.



Consider an allocation in the 2014/15 Budget process for the construction of the public open space and traffic management treatments.

As reported to council at its meeting on 7 July 2014, following the Request for Tender process for the sale of the site: 

The successful purchaser is a syndicate led by interests associated with Metricon Homes (Metricon syndicate).



Council will retain 2400m² of public open space which is to be established by the Metricon syndicate.



The proposed development is for 118 two-storey homes and based on the attached concept site consistent with Development Guidelines established by Council. The height and number of dwellings proposed is within the guidance provided by Council of 80-140.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 45

4.5

BACKGROUND/HISTORY

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.5

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d 

Community information sessions are proposed to explain the concept before a planning application is lodged.



A planning application is anticipated to be lodged in October 2014.



Development across the site is expected in four stages.

SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA The subject site’s size, at 3.24 hectares, is indicative of its former use as a primary school. It is, however, comprised of a number of residential-sized allotments. Each allotment is affected by a single dwelling covenant which seeks to prevent use of the land for quarrying. The proposal is not contrary to these covenants.

Figure 1: Locality plan The site has three street frontages, and abuts three properties, as follows: Northern boundary:

313.3m frontage to Bonar Street, and a 37.2m shared boundary with 22-24 Law Street (the Austin Health Recovery House). Bonar Street is developed with primarily single storey detached dwellings with hipped or gabled roof forms. On the site, there are a number of trees which contribute significantly to the character of Bonar Street, including a row of Spotted Gums in the western half of the site, and a group of Yellow Gums and River Red Gums toward the eastern end. The school car park was formerly accessed from this roadway.

Eastern boundary:

The site abuts two residential properties at 31 Bonar Street and 32 Haig Street. Both properties are developed with detached single storey dwellings with well-established gardens. There is a markedly more garden character to land to the east of the site than land opposite on any of the road frontages.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 46

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

Southern boundary:

The site has a frontage of 350.5m to Haig Street. Properties opposite and on the eastern side of Elliott Street are varied in character, including single and double storey forms in a variety of architectural styles. Dwellings opposite and west of Elliott Street are more consistent in form, and like those opposite in Bonar Street are generally single storey with hipped or gabled roof forms. On the site, the existing large trees (particularly in the eastern portion of the site) contribute to the treed character of the area.

Western boundary:

63.7m frontage to Law Street, and a 32m shared boundary with 22-24 Law Street (the Austin Health Recovery House). Law Street is developed with primarily single storey detached dwellings with hipped or gabled roof forms.

The surrounding area experiences varying levels of demand for on-street parking, with significant, but intermittent, demand from the Mosque located in Lloyd Street. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION There was significant public notification and consultation surrounding Council’s purchase and sale of the site, including: 

Direct mail to in excess of 500 residents on six occasions since August 2013;



Community information sessions in October 2013 (two sessions);



A meeting between the Ward Councillor and residents in November 2013 in relation to the inclusion of open space in the redevelopment;



Hand delivery of letters by the Ward Councillor in relation to Council’s resolution of December 2013 to allocate land to public open space rather than a reinstatement of Elliott Street;



Advice that Metricon had been appointed as the preferred tender, and details of their concept plan in the August 2014 Olympia Ward newsletter (delivered to approximately 5000 residents);



A pre-lodgement drop-in information session in September 2014;



An update in the September/October Banyule Banner (distributed municipalitywide);



A page on Council’s website giving details and updates on the process;



Two drop-in sessions during public notification of the planning application (in excess of 440 invitations sent).

A design for proposed traffic calming and beautification works was prepared as resolved by Council, and the proposed works were discussed in the pre-lodgement and public notification drop-in information sessions.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 47

4.5

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.5

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d The planning application was advertised by means of erecting five signs on the site (two on each long street frontage and one on the Law Street frontage), a notice in the Heidelberg Leader, and notices to the owners and occupiers of abutting and surrounding properties. A total of sixteen objections have been received in response to public notification, with grounds of objection summarised as follows: RELATED TO THE PROPOSAL Amenity 

Units will overshadow each other;



Noise will impact negatively on the area;



Overlooking of 12 Law Street from Dwelling 9;



Roadway directly opposite the driveway to 54 Bonar Street will result in additional noise to the dwellings at No. 54, and difficulty exiting from their driveway;



Headlights shining into the living room of 1/54 Bonar Street will reduce the privacy in that dwelling;

Traffic, Roads and Infrastructure 

Vehicles parked on the north side of Haig Street would restrict access and exit from the garage of 12 Law Street (opposite Dwelling 9);



The park should be designed to allow children to play in it, including the provision of formal play equipment;



Will overload existing roads and infrastructure;



Will cause traffic chaos;



Will overload parking in the area and exacerbate existing railway station parking issues;



The traffic report did not include reference to increased bicycle use and provision for bicycle safety;



The community would benefit from increased bicycle infrastructure in the area



The proposed development does not meet the recommended 100% STORM rating, and should be modified to do so;



The site is not appropriately located in terms of access to a railway station, and Council should work in conjunction with the State Government and Metro Trains to provide additional car and bike parking at Rosanna and Heidelberg Stations;



It should be a condition of planning approval that parking in the adjoining streets be progressively restricted so that they can remain safe and passable for vehicle and bicycle traffic;



On-street parking in Bonar and Haig Streets makes it difficult for cars to pass one another, resulting in queuing;



Truck traffic during construction;

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 48

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d 

The planned provision of a single parking space for 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings is inadequate, and two parking spaces should be provided for residents;

4.5

Trees and landscaping 

Inadequate backyard space and communal space;



The value of trees will be negated by the amount of concrete proposed;



Too many trees, including trees of high and medium retention value, are proposed to be removed;



The original plan had the clusters of trees being kept, and this should be maintained;



Loss of neighbourhood character and bird habitat due to loss of trees;



Many trees close the Haig Street footpath could be kept rather than removed as proposed;



Lack of established trees in the open space area;



Open space area planting should include native plants and spaces for children to explore;



Careful thought should be given to the planting of the open space area;



The proposal will make a dramatic change to the local neighbourhood and landscape, and the impact should be softened as much as possible;



The Oak Tree at the south-eastern corner of the site (Tree 144) has not been appropriately protected;



The Oak tree which is to be retained (Tree 144) should be available to be climbed and enjoyed, rather than pruned to fit into a small back yard;



The proposed open space landscaping is inadequate;



New trees will take years to provide the same aesthetic value as established trees, and there should be a mixture of both in the development;



The new landscaping appears to mostly include deciduous trees – winter time greenery should also be included;

Style and extent of development 

Disagree with Council’s decision that medium/high density is appropriate for this area – there are not adequate school options or railway station parking;



Inappropriate in an area of traditional housing;



The proposal is an overdevelopment and inconsistent with existing housing standards;



The proposal is at the upper end of the dwelling density range outlined to the residents during earlier consultation;



Too many dwellings;

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 49

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d

4.5

Other 

Will exacerbate youth unemployment rates;



The long construction process will be an intrusion into residents’ use and enjoyment of their properties, and no information is given as to how this impact is to be mitigated. Measures to address dust, debris, noise and construction hours should be provided.



Hours of work should be restricted during construction. Suggestions include no weekend work and no work on Sundays or Saturday afternoons.



Pollution and noise during the building phase;



Inadequate thought has been given to the northern orientation of dwellings;



Would like to see solar panels, water tanks, native and indigenous plants, etc. in the new dwellings;



Would like to see high quality dwellings that will be durable;

RELATED TO THE PROPOSED/CURRENTLY REQUIRED TRAFFIC TREATMENTS 

Support the proposed traffic calming designs for Haig Street and the Haig Street/Monash Street intersection;



Disagree with the proposed parking restriction on Haig Street as this would prevent existing residents and their visitors from parking outside their own homes;



Agree with the proposed indented parking spaces on Haig Street;



Council should take action to reduce the speed of vehicles using the streets, to allow for greater social interaction within front yards and within the road reservation;



The speed limit should be reduced to 40km/h and ‘traditional’ speed humps (rather than raised sections of road) should be installed;



Speed humps should be extended into the surrounding streets;



Law Street is too narrow to allow small trucks through if there is a car parked on each side, resulting in vehicle damage;



Parking has been an issue in the area since the opening of the facility at 22-24 Law Street;



There is significant parking each afternoon associated with the Mosque, which is exacerbated by the loss of the school car park, which was used by attendees also;



Making Haig and Bonar Streets ‘no stopping’ would shift congestion to Elliott and Lloyd Streets;



The indented parking proposed on Bonar Street does not increase parking for the development;



The parking survey conducted was inadequate in its extent;

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 50

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d



The closure of schools in the area was not appropriate;



The land should be set aside for future educational use;



Concern that the Haig Street site is being utilised to fund the retention of the basketball stadium on the former Banksia Secondary College site, to the detriment of Heidelberg Heights residents.

REFERRAL COMMENTS The application has been referred to servicing authorities and Public Transport Victoria as required by the Planning Scheme. Details of their responses are contained in Attachment 2 to this report. PLANNING CONTROLS The site is located within a Residential Growth Zone, within which the Neighbourhood Character Policy does not apply. Part of the site is also affected by the Vegetation Protection Overlay. In addition, Council has prepared specific Development Guidelines for the site. Details are contained in Attachment 2 of this report. Control

Permit triggered?

Residential Growth Zone Schedule 2 Vegetation Protection Overlay (VPO5) – applicable to the former Elliott Street road reservation only Clause 52.06: Car parking Clause 52.17: Native Vegetation Clause 52.36: Integrated public transport planning

Yes Yes Yes No No (requires PTV referral)

TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION A detailed assessment of the proposal against the provisions of ResCode as they relate to multi dwelling development (Clause 55) and subdivision (Clause 56) are included in Attachments 3 and 4. However, the key issues which arise from these assessments are as follows: 

The impact of the proposal upon surrounding roadways with respect to traffic and parking;



The tree removal proposed in association with the development;



The proposed dwelling style and layout;



The level of amenity afforded to existing and proposed dwellings.

An assessment of the proposal against Council’s Development Guidelines for the site is also included in the attachment, with the proposal meeting the requirements of this document.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 51

4.5

RELATED TO THE SCHOOL CLOSURE AND SALE PROCESS

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d

4.5

CAR PARKING AND TRAFFIC The proposal will result in an increase in traffic relative to the existing situation, however it is noted that the previous use as a primary school also generated both traffic movement and parking demand in the local area. Council’s Traffic Engineers have advised that the level of traffic generated by the proposal in both the adjoining streets and in the broader area, is acceptable, and within the capacity of those roads. It is also considered that the proposal provides appropriate parking opportunities for residents and visitors generally. However minor modifications can be carried out which would improve the availability of on-street parking surrounding the development. Details of the initial comments of Council’s Traffic Engineers with respect to this matter are contained in Attachment 2, however following discussions in relation to the impact of other required changes (as detailed below and in the attached Clause 55 assessment) and upon trees, the following modifications are considered to be appropriate: 

A relocation of Dwelling 9 to the east and re-orientation of its driveway, so as to allow it to share a double vehicular crossing with Dwelling 10;



Dwellings 14, 16, 18 and 116 to be mirror-imaged, with the provision of double vehicular crossings to the pairs of dwellings created;



Garage 40 to be reoriented to have its access from the west (windows should be provided to give articulation to the Bonar Street façade of the garage)

Modification is also required to the visitor parking spaces adjacent to Dwelling 28 to allow exit in a forwards direction. This, and an increase in landscaping to this laneway, can be achieved by relocating the spaces to the southern end of this laneway, with an appropriate turning bay to the east. The majority of the area currently designated for visitor parking spaces could then be utilised for landscaping. TREE REMOVAL, RETENTION AND REPLANTING The proposal incorporates the removal of 93 trees from the site and two from the Bonar Street nature strip. A total of 26 trees are intended to be retained on site, in addition to six of the existing street trees. Details of the quality of existing trees on and abutting the site are as follows: Retention value High Moderate

Trees to be retained 21, 23, 67, 116, 119, 140, 144 10, 14, 24, 27, 28, 29, 31, 34, 37, 42, 44, 45, 46, 50, 51, 85, 102, 120, 124, 135, 137, 171

Low

20, 26, 43, 54, 103

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Trees to be removed 104, 162 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 15, 16, 18, 22, 25, 30, 32, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 40, 41, 60, 62, 63, 65, 68, 76, 77, 88, 91, 95, 96, 97, 98, 107, 123, 125, 129, 130, 134, 138, 139, 142, 148, 149, 151, 156, 160, 163, 167, 170, 172 11, 12, 19, 49, 52, 53, 55,

Page 52

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

56, 57, 58, 59, 61, 64, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 78, 92, 94, 101, 106, 108, 109, 110, 126, 127, 128, 133, 136, 143, 158, 159, 164 Tree 172 is the only tree for which a planning permit is required for removal. This tree is a Melaleuca linariifolia (Snow in Summer) which is identified as being of moderate retention value, and its removal is considered to be acceptable. Council’s Development Planning Arborist has reviewed the proposal and the arboricultural comments received, and details are contained in Attachment 2. The primary outcome of this advice is a recognition that the limited space available for the planting of large canopy trees on the site emphasises the need to maintain better quality existing trees. Whilst the proposal incorporates retention of several of the high value trees in appropriate locations, the proposal does not ensure that Tree 144 (an Oak in the south-eastern corner of the site) is appropriately protected both during construction and on an ongoing basis. In addition Tree 162 (an Oak further west along the Haig Street frontage) could be retained with some modification to the proposal. The Oak trees are not specifically protected by a Vegetation Protection Overlay, however they contribute to the character of the broader area, and the retention of Tree 144 should be included in any development of the site. Trees 104 and 162 have previously been identified as being removed from the site as part of the redevelopment, and on this basis the loss of both trees has already been accepted ‘in principle’. Both trees are of high retention value, and Council has an option to seek the retention of Tree 162 by permit conditions. Modifications necessary to keep the trees are as follows: Tree 144

The deletion of Dwelling 118, with the private open space of Dwelling 105 to be extended to the southern side of the canopy of Tree 144 (reducing the impact of boundary fencing on the tree). This would result in the provision of a communal landscape setback between the boundary fence and Haig Street. Whilst the loss of one dwelling is anticipated as being necessary, consideration of a redesign of dwellings in the vicinity of the tree which enables its retention but does not result in the loss of dwellings will also be considered.

Tree 162

Dwellings 85 and 86 could be replaced with a single “Magnus” dwelling (or similar), with a 4m setback from the common property walkway, and the garage to be located adjacent to the eastern side of the canopy as indicated on the site plans. It would be appropriate for the tree to then be located within a communal landscape area between Dwelling 87 and Haig Street, although the open space of that dwelling could be extended slightly south. However, as indicated, all plans submitted to date have indicated the removal of this tree and therefore the loss of this tree is accepted.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 53

4.5

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d

4.5

Tree 104

The retention of Tree 104 would require a significantly greater level of redesign of the proposal, and it is considered that its removal is acceptable, having regard to this fact, and the level of tree retention and planting throughout the site.

DWELLING STYLE AND LAYOUT The subject site is significantly larger than surrounding land holdings, and whilst ResCode outlines that any proposed development should respect the existing neighbourhood character or contribute to a preferred neighbourhood character, the size of the allotment means that the latter is more applicable. The Residential Growth Zone also differs from other Residential Zones, in that its purposes emphasise redevelopment and increased dwelling density, rather than neighbourhood character. In this context, it is noted that: 

The proposal will largely set its own character, however the use of double storey built form is appropriate in this setting.



There is also precedent for the attached form in the wider area.



The use of flat roof forms to the majority of dwellings is uncommon in the area, however there are some examples of similar approaches within the immediate area, and it is considered that the proposal will lead to a change in the character of the surrounding area over time. This is considered to be acceptable given the designation of the area as an area of significant redevelopment as part of the State Government’s Plan Melbourne policy.



The ability to provide appropriate vegetation on the site will be a key component of its success in neighbourhood character terms in the longer-term. The modifications to retain existing vegetation, as detailed above, will improve this aspect of the proposal, and when combined with the proposed tree retention and space for planting, will ensure that the site contributes positively to the landscape character of the area on an ongoing basis.

AMENITY CONSIDERATIONS The site’s layout means that there are few adjoining properties potentially affected by overlooking or overshadowing from the proposal. It is considered that the layout of the proposal and use of appropriate window treatments ensures that the privacy of each of the adjoining properties is appropriately protected. Whilst some objectors have expressed concern in relation to the potential for overlooking to dwellings across the road, any such overlooking would be at some distance, and is considered to be reasonable. The layout of the site and design of the proposal also ensures that there will not be unacceptable levels of shade cast to the adjoining properties. It is considered, however, that the following matters should be addressed by means of permit condition: 

The eastern arm of the eastern U-shaped accessway includes two street lights which have proximity to 31 Bonar Street. Any such lights should be designed and baffled to prevent light spill to the adjoining property.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 54

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment



The proposal incorporates extensive use of highlight windows and obscure glazing at the upper level to restrict overlooking within the development. This has a detrimental impact upon the amenity of future residents, and is not necessary in all instances. Alternative screening measures, such as the relocation of windows, use of pergolas at ground floor level and appropriate boundary fencing should be utilised wherever possible to minimise the use of obscure glazing in particular.



The layout of Dwellings 54-57 results in amenity impacts for future residents with respect to daylight, private open space, privacy and car parking. Reconsideration of the layout of these dwellings is recommended. The dwellings’ central location means that any redesign will not have amenity or streetscape implications beyond the site.



The ‘Cubo’ dwelling design does not provide an appropriate level of visual connection with the street, or with internal accessways, and dwellings with this design should be modified to include greater window numbers or area within the front façade.

4.5

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d

CONCLUSION The proposal for redevelopment of the former Haig Street Primary School is largely an appropriate response for the site and surroundings. Pedestrian and vehicular movement through the site is resolved appropriately, and the provision of a central public open space reservation is appropriate. Whilst the proposal incorporates the retention of a number of trees from the site, and space for some re-planting, it is considered there is opportunity for modifications to provide greater protection for one tree marked for retention and possibly the retention of an additional high retentionvalue tree. It is recommended that the application be approved, subject to appropriate conditions. RECOMMENDATION That Council having complied with Section 52, 58, 60, 61 and 62 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, resolves that a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit be issued in respect of Application No. P1096/2014 for Multi dwelling development and associated Staged subdivision, reduction in the standard visitor parking requirement by four spaces and removal of easements at 52 Haig Street HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS subject to the following conditions: PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT 1.

Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority the development permitted by this permit must not be commenced until:(a)

The amended plans required by Condition 2 have been submitted and approved;

(b)

The Section 173 Agreement required by Condition 3 has been entered into and registered on title;

(c)

The tree protection measures required by Condition 4 have been installed;

(d)

The necessary approvals and associated fee for the removal and replacement of

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 55

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d

4.5

the existing street tree(s) within Stage 1 which are shown on the plans to be removed, has been obtained and paid to the Responsible Authority (Banyule Tree Care Department). to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Amended plans 2.

Details of measures to allow for appropriate tree protection on the site, including: (i)

Fencing adjacent to Trees 21, 23 and 24 modified to increase the separation between the trees and fencing. This may include construction of fencing to the rear boundaries of Lots 49 and 71;

(ii)

The deletion of Dwelling 118, with the private open space of Dwelling 105 to be extended to the southern side of the canopy of Tree 144, and the creation of a communal landscape setback between the boundary fence and Haig Street. An alternative design approach to dwellings in the vicinity of Tree 144 without a reduction in the number of dwellings may be considered as an alternative if achievable.

(iii)

The pathway adjacent to Tree 171 relocated to increase the separation between it and this tree.

(iv)

The retention of Tree 170;

(v)

The Tree Preservation Fencing in accordance with Condition 3 of this permit;

(vi)

Details of the proposed servicing locations, which are to be designed and installed in a manner to ensure protection of those trees nominated for retention.

(vii) Landscape and tree zones beneath high retention value trees to be clearly marked with hatching, colour coding or similar and distinguished from useable open space areas; (viii) A plan notation indicating that no building works or facilities are to be provided within the dedicated landscape areas (b)

Layout, car parking and vehicular crossing modifications including: (i)

Modifications to Dwelling 9 to include relocation of the dwelling to the east by approximately 1m, and elevations which correspond with the floor plan of the dwelling.

(ii)

Dwellings 14, 16, 18 and 116 to be mirror imaged, with Dwellings 14, 16 and 18 sharing a double vehicular crossing with the adjoining dwelling;

(iii)

Garage 140 modified to be provided with access from the west, with the Bonar Street façade of the structure to include windows or other measures to provide visual interest;

(iv)

Single vehicular crossings indicated as being 3m wide and double vehicular crossings indicated as being no more than 6.0m wide;

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 56

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d

(c)

(d)

The visitor parking spaces located west of Dwelling 28 to be relocated to the southern end of the laneway servicing Dwellings 29-33, with a turning area to be provided adjacent to Dwelling 28 and the provision of a landscape strip, including tree planting, in the area previously nominated for car parking.

An improvement in the streetscape presentation of the proposed dwellings, as follows:

4.5

(v)

(i)

Dwellings 4-7 and 29-34 modified to include greater potential for surveillance of the street or internal roadway from the front façade;

(ii)

Altering the ‘tower’ element (Living Room and Bedroom 1) of Dwellings 60, 61, 71, 72 and 85 to include additional windows so that these present as having their primary elevation to the existing street; and

(iii)

Dwelling 14 to be mirror-imaged, as detailed in Condition 1(b).

Details of measures to improve the amenity of future residents of the site, including: (i)

Use of alternative screening measures to restrict overlooking from the upper levels of dwellings, as follows: Dwelling 1 Orient the Bedroom 3 window to face north, with either the deletion of the east facing window or its retention with a sill height of 1.7m. Dwellings 1–3, 60, 72 and 79-84 The provision of a 2.4m deep pergola to the east of the dwelling at ground floor level and deletion of screening measures to upper level east facing windows generally Dwellings 5 & 6, 30 & 31, 32 & 33, and 34 & 35 Modification to dwelling and/or window layouts to restrict overlooking between these pairs of dwellings. Dwelling 7 Clear glazing to the two western-most south-facing windows of Bedroom 1. Dwellings 8, 14, 103 and 104 Deletion of the proposed screening measures to upper level bedroom windows Dwelling 9 Clarification that any west facing windows to Bedrooms 2 and 3 are to have sill heights of 1.7m. Dwellings 21–28 and 106-109 The provision of a 2.4m deep pergola to the south of the dwelling at ground floor level and deletion of screening measures to upper level south facing windows generally Dwellings 29–33, 61-64, 69-71 and 85-88 The provision of a 2.4m deep pergola to the west of the dwelling at ground floor level and deletion of screening measures to upper level west facing windows generally Dwellings 65 & 66 The provision of appropriate screening measures to restrict between the west facing bedroom windows of these dwellings and the open space of Dwellings 54-56. Dwelling 75 The provision of appropriate screening measures to restrict overlooking from the proposed Kitchen/Living area windows into Lot 74. Dwellings 90 & 91 the provision of appropriate screening measures to restrict overlooking between these dwellings. Dwelling 92 Deletion of the proposed screening measures to the north

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 57

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d

4.5

facing windows of this dwelling. Dwelling 93 Relocate Bedroom 3 window to face west. Dwelling 98–102 The provision of appropriate measures to restrict overlooking from the upper level windows of these dwellings to the ground level open space areas of the adjoining dwellings. Dwelling 102 The provision of appropriate screening measures to the Bedroom 2 window of Dwelling 102. This may include a relocation of the window to the northern wall of this room. Dwelling 106 The provision of appropriate screening measures to restrict overlooking to the east Dwelling 109 The provision of appropriate screening measures to restrict overlooking to the west Alternative screening measures may also be considered for Dwellings 10 – 12, 40–42, 45–48, 94-97,110 and 115. (ii)

Dwellings 54-57 redesigned to improve the level of daylight access, privacy and the parking layout. This is to include compliance with the relevant Standards of Clause 55.

(iii)

The provision of appropriate daylight access to the north facing Bedroom of Dwelling 58 by means of replacing or supplementing the existing window with an east facing window.

(iv)

The provision of a fence on the southern side of Dwelling 8 to provide additional open space to the dwelling and privacy to its living areas.

(e)

Details of the proposed electrical substations, including associated screen fencing and landscaping.

(f)

The plan of subdivision modified to reflect changes outlined in the remainder of Condition 1, and to increase the width of the drainage easement through the public open space area from 2.5m to 3m wide.

(g)

The proposed Staging of the development and subdivision in three residential Stages plus the Public Open Space;

(h)

Engineering plans showing a properly prepared design with computations for the internal drainage and method for of disposal of stormwater from all roofed areas and sealed areas including: (i)

The use of an On-site Stormwater Detention (OSD) system;

(ii)

The connection to the Council nominated legal point of discharge;

(iii)

The outfall drainage works necessary to connect the subject site to the Council nominated Legal Point of Discharge;

(iv)

The integration, details and connections of all Water Sensitive Urban Design features in accordance with the endorsed ESD Management Plan and STORM report and include drainage details as a result of landscaping.

Please note the Engineering plans must show all protected and/or retained trees on the development site, on adjoining properties where tree canopies encroach the development site and along proposed outfall drainage and roadway alignments (where applicable) and every effort must be made to locate services away from the canopy drip line of trees and where unavoidable, details of hand work or trenchless installation must be provided.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 58

Place â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d A schedule of external building materials and colours, including details of cladding and roofing materials; the schedule should be presented on a separate sheet and must include colour samples.

(j)

All sustainable design features indicated in the submitted Sustainable Design Assessment (SDA)/Sustainable Management Plan (SMP). Where sustainable design features outlined in the SDA/SMP cannot be visually shown, include a notes table providing details of the requirements (i.e. energy and water efficiency ratings for heating/cooling systems and plumbing fittings and fixtures, etc)

(k)

Details of proposed common property facilities, including:

4.5

(i)

The location of service conduits, which shall be designed having regard to the location of existing and proposed trees, and to maximise the use of shared trenches;

(ii)

The location and details of lighting of the common property areas. Lighting shall be designed to ensure that no light spill occurs to neighbouring properties;

(iii)

The location of fire hydrants if required;

(iv)

Measures to restrict vehicular movement over landscape areas.

Section 173 Agreement 3.

Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, the owner/s of the land must enter into an Agreement under section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 with the Responsible Authority which requires the owners of the common property, shown on the plan of subdivision, to provide for: (a)

Common Property Requirements (i)

The erection and maintenance of signs on the private roads set aside as common property on the plan of subdivision;

(ii)

The care and management of the private roads, car parking areas, landscaping and other common areas;

(iii)

The rights of the Banyule City Council and other servicing authorities to enter the land for the purposes of providing municipal and like services to the land;

(iv)

The maintenance of suitable public liability insurance;

(v)

The provision of releases and indemnity to the Banyule City Council and other servicing authorities in connection with entry on to the land;

(vi)

The acknowledgement that the Banyule City Council may withdraw the provision of municipal services to or from the land if the private roads become unsafe for vehicular traffic;

(vii) Immediately following the registration of the Plan of Subdivision, the registration of this Agreement in relation to the common property land. (b)

Tree Protection Requirements No vegetation or tree shown for retention on the endorsed plans accompanying Planning Permit No. P1096/2014 is to be removed, lopped, pruned or destroyed without the further written consent and approval of the Responsible Authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority any request for

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 59

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d

4.5

such consent is to be accompanied by the report of a suitably qualified arborist to assist the Responsible Authority in determining whether to allow the removal, lopping, pruning or destruction of vegetation. (c)

(d)

Public Open Space requirements (i)

Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Responsible Authority, the Public Open Space area identified on the plans endorsed pursuant to Planning Permit P1096/2014 is to be transferred to the Banyule City Council immediately upon registration of the Plan of Subdivision.

(ii)

Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Responsible Authority, all landscaping and associated works within the public open space area is to be installed prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance for Stage 3 of the subdivision, or occupation of any dwelling within that Stage of the Development, whichever is the sooner.

(iii)

Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Responsible Authority, all landscaping and associated works required by the landscaping plan must be maintained for a minimum period of two full summers from the completion of the works to the satisfaction of and at no cost to the Responsible Authority.

Construction requirements (i)

Each lot and Common Property forming part of the site shall only be developed in accordance with the conditions and endorsed plans pursuant to Planning Permit P1096/2014, unless otherwise approved by the Responsible Authority in limited circumstances (see note below).

(ii)

Prior to the occupation of any dwelling, the common property roadway and pedestrian walkway servicing that dwelling must be constructed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority;

(iii)

Prior to the occupation of any dwelling, the dwelling must be numbered in accordance with Council’s allocation of street numbers.

(iv)

Immediately upon completion of each Stage of the development permitted by Planning Permit P1096/2014, the owner or developer of the subject land must notify Council’s Development Planning Section that the development is complete and complies with all requirements of the permit. The development will then be inspected to ensure compliance.

A memorandum of the Agreement is to be entered on title and the cost of the preparation and execution of the Agreement and entry of the memorandum on title is to be paid by the owner. Note: In determining whether an Agreement is required pursuant to this Condition or parts thereof, Council will have regard to other Agreement/s which may be in place, the necessity for individual components of the Agreement to be imposed at that point in time, and whether alternative mechanisms may be utilised in place of the Agreement. Where Council allows the subdivision of land prior to development and a Section 173 Agreement is entered into as outlined above, it is expected that the subsequent lots be developed in accordance with the conditions and endorsed plans of Planning Permit P1096/2014. On this basis, alternative development on

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 60

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d

4.5

the subsequent lots may not be supported and it should not be assumed that Council will support alternative proposals. Variations of approved plans will only be possible in limited circumstances. Tree protection measures 4.

Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, prior to the commencement of works (including vegetation clearance) on the site Tree Preservation Zones must be established around the trees nominated as being retained on the site. You must contact Council’s Development Planning Arborist on 9457 9878 once the Tree Preservation Fencing is erected so that an inspection of the fencing can be carried out. Once installed and inspected the Tree Preservation Zones must be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, and meet the following requirements: (a)

Extent Tree Preservation Zones shall be provided to the extent of the canopy dripline, or the tree protection zone, whichever is the larger area.

(b)

Duration Tree Preservation Zones shall be established prior to the commencement of works on the site. Unless otherwise agreed or required in writing by the Responsible Authority the Zones shall remain in place until development of the Stage within which they are located has been completed, inclusive of all construction and earthworks, but exclusive of planting.

(c)

Weed control Any weeds located within the Tree Preservation Zone are to be removed and the area mulched with 100mm of composted coarse grade woodchips

(d)

(e)

Fencing (i)

Vegetation Preservation fences with a minimum height of 1.2 to 1.5 metres and of chain mesh or like fence with 1.8 metre posts (e.g. treated pine) or like support every 3-4 metres and a top line of high visibility plastic hazard tape must be erected around the perimeter of the zone.

(ii)

The posts must be strong enough to sustain knocks from on site excavation equipment.

(iii)

The fences must not be removed or relocated without the prior consent of the Responsible Authority.

Signage Fixed signs are to be provided on all visible sides of the Tree Preservation Fencing, stating “Tree Preservation Zone – No entry without permission from the City of Banyule”.

(f)

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

(g)

Access to Tree Preservation Zone (i)

No persons, vehicles or machinery are to enter the Vegetation Protection Zone except with the consent of the Responsible Authority;

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 61

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.5

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d (ii)

No fuel, oil dumps or chemicals are allowed to be used or stored within the Vegetation Preservation Zone and the servicing and re-fuelling of equipment and vehicles must be carried out away from the root zones;

(iii)

No storage of material, equipment or temporary building is to take place within the Vegetation Preservation Zone;

(iv)

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

NOTE: Requests for consent of the Responsible Authority (City of Banyule) pursuant to this Condition should be directed to Council’s Arborist – Development Planning on 9457 9878. Consent for the conduct of works within the Tree Protection Zone, where granted, may be subject to conditions. Such conditions may include a requirement that: 

Any underground service installations within the Tree Protection Zone be bored to a depth of 1.5 metres;



All root excavation be carried out by hand digging or with the use of ‘AirExcavation’ techniques;



Roots required to be cut are to be severed by saw cutting and undertaken by a qualified arborist.

Or other conditions, as relevant, to ensure the ongoing health and stability of the subject tree/s. PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF EACH STAGE Landscape Plan 5.

Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, no Stage of the development permitted by this permit may be commenced until a satisfactory detailed landscaping plan is submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority for that Stage. Such plan must be prepared by a person suitably qualified or experienced in landscape design and shall include: (a)

Details of planting throughout the land forming part of that Stage;

(b)

Landscaping designed to discourage active use of the land beneath Tree 144 and to allow for the ongoing health of the tree. This may include the use of nonvegetated ground covers;

(c)

Details of proposed street tree planting;

(d)

The provision of a small-medium canopy tree (mature height of at least 5-10m) planted at a semi-advanced state (minimum pot size 16 litre) within the frontage setback of each dwelling to an existing street or proposed roadway;

(e)

The provision of a small canopy tree (mature height of at least 5-8m) to the private open space area of each dwelling;

(f)

The identification of existing vegetation (which is not intended to be removed), and nomination of vegetation for removal throughout and immediately abutting the Stage;

(g)

Provision of formed garden beds with edging around the landscape zones within

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 62

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d the front setback areas and adjacent to common property driveways to prevent cars parking within those areas; Planting adjacent to driveways and within landscaping zones to consist of varying heights and species;

(i)

An indigenous and/or drought tolerant planting theme;

(j)

(k)

Location and details of paving, steps, retaining walls, water tanks, clotheslines, fence design details and other landscape works including cut and fill.

4.5

(h)

Public Open Space Plan 6.

Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, Stage 2 of the development permitted by this permit may not be commenced until a satisfactory detailed landscaping plan for the public open space forming part of the development is submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. Such plan must be prepared by a person suitably qualified or experienced in landscape design and shall include as appropriate: (a)

Lighting, seating, drinking fountain, children’s playground and shade structure to Australian design standards;

(b)

A relocation of the path adjacent to Tree 171 to provide greater clearance to the tree;

(c)

Concrete construction for pedestrian paths;

(d)

Facilities that are to be contained within it must comply with the Disability Discrimination Act. The public open space must be designed for open public access with no restricted access areas included;

(e)

The provision of lighting for the safety and security of open space users. Lighting must be designed to avoid the creation of excessive light spillage that could cause a nuisance to adjacent residents;

(f)

The identification of existing vegetation (which is not intended to be removed), and nomination of vegetation for removal;

(g)

An indigenous and/or drought tolerant planting theme;

(h)

DURING CONSTRUCTION 7.

Unless otherwise agreed in writing, prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a detailed Construction Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plan must provide for: (a)

An Environmental Management Plan (which must include measures to be taken to minimise the waste generated during construction of the building and any recycling of materials);

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 63

Place â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.5

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d (b)

An operational site management plan;

(c)

A Site Access and Delivery Management Plan;

(d)

An Asset Protection Plan;

(e)

A Site Security Plan;

(f)

A Construction Phase Parking Plan that addresses parking and traffic arrangements associated with construction vehicles

Once approved, this management plan will be endorsed to be read in conjunction with all other endorsed documents and must be adhered to by the owner(s), permit holder(s) and operator(s) at all times unless otherwise approved by the Responsible Authority. PRIOR TO OCCUPATION 8.

Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority the proposed dwelling(s) permitted by this permit must not be occupied until the development the Stage within it is located has been completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority in accordance with the permit and endorsed plans (including, but not limited to built form and layout, parking, landscaping, drainage, street numbering, replacement of street trees).

PRIOR TO STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE FOR EACH STAGE 9.

Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance for each Stage of the subdivision: (a)

All drainage works required to connect Lots and common property to the legal point of discharge as determined by Council in accordance with the endorsed plans pursuant to Planning Permit P1096/2014;

(b)

All common property infrastructure, including roadways, pedestrian walkways, associated landscaping, lighting and other infrastructure required for or within that Stage is to be completed;

(c)

Boundary fences are to be installed to all Lots within the Stage;

to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority ONGOING REQUIREMENTS Compliance with endorsed plans and documents 10.

The development as shown on the endorsed plans or described in the endorsed documents must not be altered or modified except with the written consent of the Responsible Authority.

11.

The subdivision as shown on the endorsed plan shall not be altered or modified (whether or not in order to comply with any statute, Statutory Rule or By-Law or for any other reason) without the consent of the Responsible Authority.

Amenity 12.

Outdoor lighting must be designed, baffled and located to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority such that no direct light is emitted outside the boundaries of the subject land.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 64

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d

13.

The walls of the development on the boundary of adjoining properties and proposed allotments must be cleaned and finished in a manner to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Car Parking / Access

4.5

Urban Design / External Appearance

14.

15.

Areas set aside for the parking and movement of vehicles as shown on the endorsed plan(s) must be made available for such use and must not be used for any other purpose.

16.

Vehicular access or egress to the subject land from any roadway or service lane 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 use the crossing(s). The location, design and construction of the vehicle crossing(s) must be approved by the Responsible Authority. Any existing unused crossing(s) must be removed and replaced with concrete kerb, channel and naturestrip to the satisfaction of the Council prior to occupation of the building. All vehicle crossing works are to be carried out with Council Supervision under a Memorandum of Consent for Works which must be obtained prior to commencement of works.

Tree Protection / Landscaping 17.

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

18.

Except with the further written consent of the Responsible Authority, no vegetation (other than that indicated on the endorsed plan, or exempt from planning permission under the provisions of the Banyule Planning Scheme) shall be damaged, removed, destroyed or lopped.

19.

All tree pruning is to be carried out by a trained and competent arborist who has a thorough knowledge of tree physiology and pruning methods. Pruning must be carried out in accordance with Australian Standard AS4373 Pruning of Amenity Trees. Tree pruning is to be restricted to the removal of no greater than 15% of the total live canopy of individual trees.

Rubbish Collection 20.

No receptacles for any form of rubbish or refuse (other than public waste bins) may be placed or allowed to remain in view from a public road or thoroughfare and odour must not be emitted from any such receptacle(s) so as to cause offence to any person(s) outside the subject land.

SERVICE AUTHORITY REQUIREMENTS

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 65

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d Telecommunications

4.5

21.

22.

The owner of the land must enter into an agreement with: (a)

A telecommunications network or service provider for the provision of telecommunication services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time; and

(b)

A suitably qualified person for the provision of fibre ready telecommunication facilities to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.

Before the issue of a Statement of Compliance for any stage of the subdivision under the Subdivision Act 1988, the owner of the land must provide written confirmation from: (a)

A telecommunications network or service provider that all lots are connected to or are ready for connection to telecommunications services in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time; and

(b)

A suitably qualified person that fibre ready telecommunication facilities have been provided in accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.

Yarra Valley Water 23.

The owner of the subject land must enter into an agreement with Yarra Valley Water for the provision of water services.

24.

The owner of the subject land must enter into an agreement with Yarra Valley Water for the provision of sewerage services.

Melbourne Water 25.

Pollution and sediment laden runoff shall not be discharged directly or indirectly into Melbourne Water’s drains or waterways.

26.

Prior to Certification, the Plan of Subdivision must be referred to Melbourne Water, in accordance with Section 8 of the Subdivision Act 1988.

Jemena Electricity 27.

The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act 1988 shall be referred to Jemena Electricity Networks (Vic) Ltd in accordance with Section 8 of that Act.

28.

The applicant shall: (a)

Enter into an agreement for the extension, upgrading or re-arrangement of the electricity supply to lots on the plan of subdivision as required by Jemena Electricity Networks (Vic) Ltd. (A payment to cover the cost of such work will be required and easements internal and external to the subdivision and provision of sites for substations may also be required).

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 66

Place â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d Where buildings or other installations exist on the land to be subdivided and are connected to the electricity supply, they shall be brought into compliance with the Supply and Installation Rules issued by the Local Government Electricity Supply Association (Vic) and Distribution Authorities to the extent determined by Jemena Electricity Networks (Vic) Ltd.

4.5

(b)

TIME LIMITS 29.

In accordance with section 68 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, this permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies: (a)

The development is not commenced within two years of the date of this permit;

(b)

The development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit;

(c)

The plan of subdivision for Stage 1 is not certified within two years of the date of this permit;

(d)

Any subsequent stage is not certified within two years of the previous stage being certified;

(e)

The registration of the relevant stage of subdivision is not completed within five years from the date of certification of the plan of subdivision.

The Responsible Authority may extend the permit if a request is made in writing in accordance with, and within the timeframes specified, in Section 69 of Planning and Environment Act 1987.

PERMIT NOTES A.

Additional approvals required Building Permit Required A Building Permit must be obtained prior to the commencement of any works associated with the proposed development. Building over Easements No structure (including but not limited to sheds, retaining walls, eaves, water tanks, paving and landings) shall be built over any easement on the subject land except with the consent of the relevant Responsible Authority. Access to Council Reserve No permission can be granted either temporary or otherwise by Council and/or its employees with respect to access to the adjacent Council owned land (including the road reserve) for any purposes relating to the proposal (eg. parking of surplus vehicles, delivery of materials etc.), without application being made for the requisite permit (ie.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 67

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d Local Law Permit). Supervision of works undertaken on Council Assets

4.5

Council’s Construction Department must supervise all works undertaken on Council assets within private property, Council Reserves, easements, drainage reserves and/or road reserves, including connection of the internal drainage system to the existing Council assets. Prior to the commencement of any works, an application must be made and a permit received for:  A “Memorandum of Consent for Works” for any works within the road reserve; and/or  A “Drainage Connection Permit” for any works other than within a road reserve. . Asset Inspection Fee Prior to the commencement of building works on site in accordance with Local Law 1, a non-refundable Asset Inspection Fee is payable to Council for the inspection of existing Council assets. For further information in relation to this process and the relevant fee please contact Council’s Construction Department on 9490 4222. Removal of Street Tree For the required process and any information concerning the removal of a street tree, enquiries should be directed to Banyule Tree Care Department. C.

During construction Building Site Code of Practice All construction works must comply with the requirements of the ‘Building Site Code of Practice – Banyule City Council’. A copy of the Code is available on the Banyule City Council website or at Council Service Centres.

Service authority requirements Melbourne Water If further information is required in relation to Melbourne Water’s permit conditions shown above, please contact Melbourne Water on telephone 9679 7517, quoting Melbourne Water’s reference 245495. Jemena It is recommended that, at an early date, the applicant commences negotiations for supply of electricity in order that supply arrangements can be worked out in detail, so prescribed information can be issued without delay (the release to the municipality enabling a Statement of Compliance with the conditions to be issued). Further inquiries regarding the above should be directed to Mr Leonard Meader on 9351 2061 Fax 9351 2062 34 King William Street, Broadmeadows 3047. Arrangements for supply will be subject to obtaining the agreement of other Authorities and any landowners affected by routes of the electric lines required to supply the lots, and planning permits for any tree clearing.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 68

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED MULTI DWELLING DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION AT 52 HAIG STREET, HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS (FORMER HAIG STREET PRIMARY SCHOOL) cont’d E.

Action on/for completion Completion of Development

4.5

Immediately upon completion of the development permitted by this permit, the owner or developer of the subject land must notify Council’s Development Planning Section that the development is complete and complies with all requirements of the permit. The development will then be inspected to ensure compliance. An early inspection process will ensure that the subdivision approvals including the Statement of Compliance can be issued without delay. Street Numbering

Please note that property addresses are allocated by Council. This is usually formalised at the time of the issue of a certified plan.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1 2

Advertised Plans Background information

261 275

Clause 55 Assessment

288

Clause 56 Assessment

298

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page

Page 69

4.6

FORMAL NAMING OF SMALL PARK LOCATED AT CORNER OF MCKENZIE COURT AND PLENTY LANE GREENSBOROUGH

Author:

Noel Gately - Strategic Property Projects Officer, City Development

Ward:

Bakewell

File:

F2014/368

Previous Items Council on 5 May 2014 (Item 4.1 - 1-3 McKenzie Court, Greensborough, & 3 Somerleigh Crescent, Greensborough - Proposed Sale of Land) Council on 7 July 2014 (Item 1.1 - Petition to rezone and name the land at 1-3 McKenzie Court Greensborough) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council resolved at its Ordinary Meeting of 7 July 2014 to retain ownership and name the small park at the corner of McKenzie Court and Plenty Lane Greensborough. It also resolved to retain the land as Residential 1 Zone until a review of Council’s Public Open Space Strategy has been completed. This report provides Council with an overview of consultation undertaken to name the small Council owned park. It recommends formal adoption of the name most supported by the community, which is “Barclay Park”. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “enhance Banyule’s public and open spaces”. BACKGROUND The Council owned land at the corner of McKenzie Court and Plenty Lane, shown in the map over page, is known on Council’s databases as “McKenzie Court Reserve” but it is not signed or publicly known by a name. The land currently comprises a grassed area, perimeter plantings, mature trees and play equipment. Council had previously sought to sell this land, however community feedback resulted in Council resolving to retain ownership and name the small park with community input. This land was purchased in 1960 by the City of Heidelberg for use as public open space. Following the resolution to retain ownership and name the small park, Council was subsequently requested to rezone the land to public open space.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 70

4.6

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

FORMAL NAMING OF SMALL PARK LOCATED AT CORNER OF MCKENZIE COURT AND PLENTY LANE GREENSBOROUGH cont’d

4.6

Rezoning can be considered at the completion of the Open Space Strategy currently being prepared by Council’s Parks Department and scheduled for presentation to Council in mid-2015. Locality Plan

Figure 1: Location Map – Small park at corner of McKenzie Court and Plenty Lane, Greensborough

CURRENT SITUATION During the past month Council has sought community comment on three naming options for this small park: 

Barclay Park



Burchardia Park



McKenzie Park

The three naming options were chosen for the following reasons. Henry Barwell Barclay was an early land owner in this part of Greensborough. Attachment 1 contains history on his connections with the area. His name was suggested by the Greensborough Historical Society after they were invited to assist Council’s research on naming options for the small park. The proposal to recognise an early land owner is in keeping with the naming of a number of streets in this area for example Nell, Amiet and Kell. The second naming option references Burchardia umbellata (pronounced bur-CARDee-ah) an indigenous flowering perennial grass that is found in Banyule, and other areas.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 71

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

FORMAL NAMING OF SMALL PARK LOCATED AT CORNER OF MCKENZIE COURT AND PLENTY LANE GREENSBOROUGH cont’d

4.6

The final option, McKenzie, recognises the location of the small park. No historical records could be identified to assist in understanding how McKenzie Court received its name. LEGAL CONSIDERATION Under the Geographic Place Names Act 1998, Council is a naming authority responsible for the development of proposals to name or rename any feature, road or locality within Council jurisdiction. Council must consult with the community on any naming proposal. For a feature such as a park, consultation must include not only the immediate community, but also the extended community, that is those who may be affected by or have an interest in the proposal. The Registrar of the Office of Geographic Names (OGN) has the authority to approve, defer or reject naming proposals for entry in VICNAMES, the online register of Geographic Names. OGN has provided in principle support for Council adopting either of the three proposed naming options. CONSULTATION To secure community and stakeholder comment on the three naming options for the small park, the following communication has been undertaken: Table 1: Summary of public notice and consultation: Date 7 November 2014

Action Letter sent to 192 households/property owners in the surrounding streets and those petitioners residing in Greensborough inviting them to nominate their preference from three naming options. (Reply paid envelope included along with web address for online survey). Responses received until 11 December 2014. 69 survey responses (see table 2 for results)

10 November 2014

‘Name your Park’ web page and online survey posted on Banyule City Council’s website. Survey closed 11 December 2014. 49 online survey responses received (see table 2 for results)

11 November 2014

Letters sent to Grace Park Pre-School Committee of Management, President Greensborough Historical Society and Colin Brooks MLA for Bundoora advising each stakeholder that Council was seeking comment on naming options until 11 December 2014. (Letters included web address for online survey.)

12 November 2014

Public Notice – Diamond Valley Leader inviting community comment on naming options by written or online response.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 72

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

FORMAL NAMING OF SMALL PARK LOCATED AT CORNER OF MCKENZIE COURT AND PLENTY LANE GREENSBOROUGH cont’d

The composition of responses was as follows: 

A third of those households who received direct mail notification of the naming proposal have responded. A number of these respondents thanked Council for retaining and seeking to name the small park.



Two written responses were received from non-resident property owners.



The option of responding online proved popular. Over half of these 49 respondents live outside the Municipality. All of the non-Banyule respondents supported the name Barclay (the naming option which was proposed by the Greensborough Historical Society).

After review of all survey results, and in consideration of the purpose of the small park which is to serve local needs, it is considered that Council should only accept survey responses from residents/property owners in Banyule. Applying this approach, the naming option that is most supported is Barclay Park with 48 nominations compared with 36 nominations for McKenzie Park. Table 2 (over page) provides detail on responses received by the due date for submissions. Table 2: Survey responses: Naming option: Barclay

Burchardia

McKenzie

Hard copy responses

On line responses

VALID SUBMISSIONS:

Ineligible nominations (mix of online and hardcopy responses either unnamed or from residents outside of Municipality)

CONCLUSION Council has completed comprehensive consultation with the extended community to secure feedback on the preferred name for this small park. Consultation included: 

Direct mail to residents and property owners living in the vicinity of the small park, and those residents living in the municipality who completed the petitions initiated by the State MLA Colin Brooks in respect to retention and naming of the park;



Direct mail to Grace Park Pre-School who are occasional users of the small park;



Engaging the broader community via public notice in the Diamond Valley Leader; and

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 73

4.6

Council received a total of 119 responses nominating their preferred name for this small park from the three options proposed. Two respondents wrote proposing alternative names.

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

FORMAL NAMING OF SMALL PARK LOCATED AT CORNER OF MCKENZIE COURT AND PLENTY LANE GREENSBOROUGH cont’d

4.6



Engaging with the Greensborough Historical Society.

Council is therefore in a position to resolve on the naming of the small park at the corner of McKenzie Court and Plenty Lane. RECOMMENDATION That Council 1.

Assign the name “Barclay Park” to the small park at the corner of McKenzie Court and Plenty Lane, Greensborough.

Lodge the necessary submissions to the Office of Geographic Names (OGN).

Upon the outcome of the submissions to the OGN, thank all persons and community groups involved in the consultation, notifying them of Council’s decision and the result of the OGN submission.

Where required, advise relevant authorities of the naming of the small park; and

Erect appropriate signage.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Naming options for small park located at 1-3 McKenzie Court, Greensborough

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 303

Page 74

5.1

SIMMS ROAD PORTABLES RELOCATION

Author:

Brett Jose - Sports & Community Liaison Officer, Community Programs

Ward:

Beale

File:

F2014/41102

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The sporting facilities at Simms Road Oval have recently been expanded and the portable change facilities are no longer required at this location. The Bundoora United Cricket Club and the Watsonia Baseball Club are allocated to Loyola Reserve for training and game day sporting activities. The Loyola Reserve Pavilion does not currently have any change facilities. The two recently decommissioned portables at Simms Road are suitable for use at Loyola Reserve. To relocate and install the two Simms Road Oval portables at Loyola Reserve would cost approximately $26,400. An allocation of $10,000 to decommission the portables is included within the Simms Road project budget. The Bundoora United Cricket Club and the Watsonia Baseball Club have expressed an interest in assisting Council to relocate the portables. The two portables would accommodate the needs of the sports clubs in the short term while the Loyola Reserve Feasibility Study is completed and funding for a new fit for purpose community facility and additional car parking is confirmed. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “promote and support health and wellbeing”. BACKGROUND As part of the new pavilion development at Simms Road Oval in Montmorency, the current portable change rooms previously utilised by the Montmorency Junior Football Club are no longer required and can now be decommissioned. Officers have identified a need for temporary change rooms at Loyola Reserve. Loyola Reserve currently has two tenants being the Watsonia Baseball Club and the Bundoora United Cricket Club and one sports pavilion shared by male and female members of all ages. This sports pavilion has no change facilities. This issue results in both the senior and junior members of the clubs changing in the social room or their cars.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 75

5.1

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

Participation â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Community Involvement in Community Life

SIMMS ROAD PORTABLES RELOCATION contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d

5.1

Officers have been working with the local sporting clubs and The Concord School to finalise a Feasibility Study for a new fit for purpose community facility and additional car parking at Loyola Reserve. Locality Plan

HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. CURRENT SITUATION Council is working with the clubs to determine a longer term solution and have funded a feasibility study to determine costs to construct a new multi purpose community facility which will address the clubs long term needs. The peak sporting bodies, Diamond Valley Cricket Association and Baseball Victoria, have also identified an urgent need for change rooms at the Reserve, as the Watsonia Baseball Club has high junior female participation and the Bundoora United Cricket Club have been promoted to Barclay Shield (first division) requiring a certain standard of facilities. It has been confirmed no planning permits are required to relocate the portables to Loyola Reserve however a building permit will be required. Quotes have been sourced to decommission the portables at Simms Road Oval and relocate them to Loyola Reserve per the clubs requirements. Two separate quotations were sourced for the relocation and installation of a single and both

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 76

Participation â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Community Involvement in Community Life

SIMMS ROAD PORTABLES RELOCATION contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d

The Watsonia Baseball Club and the Bundoora United Cricket Club have been working with officers to determine how the clubs could contribute to the portables relocation. The Clubs have verbally indicated they could provide $5,000 towards the project. The Clubs also expressed an interest in providing in-kind services and material to assist with the relocation, however given the facility will be a public building, a registered commercial builder is required to manage the project to ensure the appropriate insurances are in place during and post relocation. The club have indicated they do not have access to a registered commercial builder therefore inkind service and materials from the Clubs are not appropriate for this project. FUNDING IMPLICATIONS The total estimated cost to relocate the portable from Simms Road Oval to Loyola Reserve is $26,400 (which includes a 10% contingency and excludes GST). Council has $10,000 to contribute to the decommissioning and removal of the portable change rooms. The Clubs previously verbally indicated they could provide $5,000 towards the project. To install the two portables at Loyola Reserve a further funding allocation of $11,400 is required. CONSULTATION Consultation with both sporting clubs and contractors has determined a suitable location for the temporary change rooms, the associated internal infrastructure, the service connections required and also how the clubs can assist in this idea. DISCUSSION If the clubs only receive funding for one portable the home club would continue to use the social room or their cars for changing while the away teams would make use of the temporary change room. Two change rooms would eliminate this issue in the short term and it is cost effective to do so. TIMELINES The two portables could be installed at Loyola Reserve in early 2015. CONCLUSION The relocation of the two portables from Simms Road to Loyola Reserve would address the clubs immediate needs and provide a short term solution while the Loyola Reserve Feasibility Study is completed and funding for a new fit for purpose community facility and additional car parking is confirmed. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Approve the relocation of the Simms Road Oval portables to Loyola Reserve using the $10,000 allocation from the Simms Road project.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 77

5.1

portables. The quotes for one portable is $21,000 (exc GST) and for two portables $24,000 (exc GST). It should be noted these quotes do not include a project contingency.

Participation â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Community Involvement in Community Life

5.1

SIMMS ROAD PORTABLES RELOCATION contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d 2.

Invoice the Bundoora United Cricket Club and the Watsonia Baseball Club for their financial commitment to the portable relocation project totalling $5,000 of combined funding.

Make a further allocation of $11,400 to allow the portables to be connected and in working order for club use at Loyola Reserve, as an approved over expenditure to the Simms Road Redevelopment budget.

Continue to work with the Clubs and The Concord School to finalise the Loyola Reserve Feasibility Study and advocate for funding from the State Government for a new fit for purpose multi purpose community facility and additional car parking at Loyola Reserve.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 78

5.2

INCLUSION ACCESS AND EQUITY FRAMEWORK

Author:

Theonie Tacticos - Team Leader Community & Social Planning, Community Programs

File:

F2014/316

5.2

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Inclusion, Access and Equity Framework (IAEF) expresses Banyule City Council’s commitment to its diverse communities and allows Council to work in a coordinated and consistent way, while still engaging with the individual issues that are presented in particular communities. The IAEF is used to guide four plans: 1. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Plan 2014 - 2017 2. Multicultural Plan 2014 - 2017 3. Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (LGBTI) Plan 2014 - 2017 4. Disability Plan 2014 - 2015. A twelve (12) month Disability Plan was adopted by Council in September 2014. This report presents the other three plans for consideration, together with the IAE Framework. Work has been underway throughout 2014 to develop and implement these plans which have included the establishment of Advisory Committees. These Advisory Committees include residents and representatives of community and partner organisations who have been active in:   

providing advice to Council; developing the plans; and implementing actions.

This report presents to Council the culmination of efforts in 2014 on the three plans. The plans are for the period of 2014-2017 and outline strategies for the next three years. An action plan will be developed each year, and a report card of progress will be reported to Council and the community. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 79

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

INCLUSION ACCESS AND EQUITY FRAMEWORK cont’d CITY PLAN

5.2

This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “engage meaningfully with our community”. BACKGROUND Banyule is a diverse community, made up of people from many different cultures, beliefs, abilities and identities. This diversity enriches and improves the Banyule community. The Inclusion, Access and Equity Framework (IAEF) expresses Council’s commitment to its diverse communities, and provides a framework to guide the way that Council works to promote and foster inclusion, access and equity. The advantages of being inclusive and providing equity are well researched and documented across many different disciplines. For Council as an organisation, being inclusive contributes to greater staff satisfaction, positive public image and reputation and being an employer of choice. In relation to policy and service planning, it contributes to better designed services, improved uptake of Council services and programs by people that need them, greater creativity in service design and delivery and greater reach into the community. Most importantly, at a community level greater equity and inclusion has improved community indicators on health, safety, customer satisfaction rating, creative city status, improved community relations and community cohesion, reductions in crime, improved prosperity, improved employment and housing and empowered groups able to advocate on their own behalf. Banyule City Council has a strong history of inclusive planning through previous Social Inclusion Plans, Disability Action Plans, Cultural and Linguistically Diverse Communications Strategy, Reconciliation Plan and numerous projects that have focused on providing more inclusive services or responding to community concerns around exclusion or discrimination. Previously these plans have tended to be discrete in their focus on particular communities, and provide separate objectives and actions to improve inclusion and equity. This has resulted in a range of successful projects and outcomes including:  the establishment of a Japanese library story time,  multilingual information on Council services,  increased events that celebrate diversity,  access works being completed as part of capital works and ongoing maintenance to Council facilities  the establishment of Council’s Liveable Housing Project to improve residential housing accessibility. Council has the responsibility and desire to ensure that the services we provide, and the culture of our organisation, supports and is inclusive of people regardless of their background. Council also desires that the services, opportunities and communities that exist within Banyule are inclusive and accessible to all members of the community, and that opportunities to participate in all aspects of community life are available.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 80

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

INCLUSION ACCESS AND EQUITY FRAMEWORK cont’d

The IAEF does not replace existing action plans that focus on particular communities such as the Disability Plan. Rather, the IAEF provides a framework that coordinates Council’s efforts to support the specific needs of individual communities. This response allows Council to work in a coordinated and consistent way, while still engaging with the individual issues and opportunities that are present in particular communities.

5.2

Council recognises that the needs of particular communities are often different and the issues affecting one community may not be relevant to another. It is important to be able to capture and be mindful of specific issues and work to address them.

HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any negative human rights issues. The nature of the Inclusion Access and Equity Framework and the four plans enhance Council’s advocacy function in affirming the individuals’ rights to freedom of expression especially in underrepresented groups in our community. The Advisory Committee also enhances the individual’s rights to Freedom of Expression as contained in section 15 of the Charter. DISCUSSION Local government has a legislative role in providing opportunities for all to achieve maximum health and wellbeing. Banyule City Council acknowledges that the wellbeing of certain groups is impacted more than others, and requires a greater level of attention. Banyule City Council believes in the benefits of diversity and the rights of all people to be free from discrimination and have opportunities to participate in all aspects of community life. The IAEF is Council’s statement of commitment and structure to achieve this. The IAEF framework guides the development of plans to strengthen Council’s efforts to include the participation and meet the needs of these communities at risk of exclusion: 1. 2. 3. 4.

People with a disability and their families; People from Multicultural Communities; Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islanders; and People from the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender & Intersex (LGBTI) community.

In the future, the IAEF could be used to address people in particular life stages and other social issues. The development of the IAEF and the accompanying plans has involved: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Review of Council’s principles, Review of the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities, Consideration of relevant theories including the social determinants of health, Consultation with Council staff and other community stakeholders and Attention to the practical application of this tool.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 81

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

INCLUSION ACCESS AND EQUITY FRAMEWORK cont’d

5.2

The outcome of this process was the establishment of three goals which are the building blocks of the IAEF. The three goals are: 1. 2. 3.

Health and Wellbeing Community Participation Economic Participation

The IAEF then uses three strategies to describe the type of work Council will do to achieve the three goals. These strategies are: 1.

Being an accessible and equitable organisation that provides inclusive services and practices - This approach focuses on how we work with our own staff and improve our own services to respond to the needs of diverse communities. It is Council’s desire that the services we provide and the way we work as an organisation recognises and responds to the diverse needs of our community.

Supporting local services to be available and inclusive, and advocating on issues of importance to diverse communities. This approach focuses on how we work with other key service providers to try and make sure our diverse community has good access to relevant services that are inclusive. This area also focuses on how we advocate for issues beyond Council or the local community’s direct control.

Contributing to building inclusive and equitable communities. This priority focuses on how we increase support and develop wider community understanding, appreciation and pride regarding our diversity.

Inclusion, Access & Equity Framework

Health and Wellbeing

GOALS

STRATEGIES

Inclusive service delivery and development

PLANS

Community Participation

Economic Participation

Support of local services and advocacy

Community engagement, celebration of diversity.

Plans and Actions

Refer to (Attachment 1) Inclusion, Access and Equity Framework (IAEF). Refer to (Attachment 2) Multicultural Plan 2014-2017. Refer to (Attachment 3) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Plan 2014-2017.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 82

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

INCLUSION ACCESS AND EQUITY FRAMEWORK cont’d

Please note that the Disability Action Plan 2014-2015, a twelve (12) month interim plan, was adopted by Council in September 2014. Work is currently underway to develop the longer term Disability Action Plan, including the establishment of an Advisory Group. FUNDING IMPLICATIONS The implementation of the Plans under the Inclusion Access and Equity Framework will be funded from within Council’s existing resources. Some actions may require Council’s consideration for funding within the development of each annual budget planning cycle, and these possible funding decisions will be made by Council in consideration of all priorities. CONSULTATION There has been extensive consultation within Council and with other partners and stakeholders in the community regarding the plans. In particular, the plans have been developed in consultation with their respective Advisory Committees. In late 2013, Council resolved to establish a Multicultural Advisory Committee and an LGBTI Advisory Committee. These two Advisory Committees were established and have been meeting since March 2014. In addition, in October the draft plans were posted on the Council website and emailed to community and partner organisations for comment. Council does not have a separate Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee. Instead Council works with the Babarrbunin Beek Committee who act as the Advisory Group for Council. Babarrbunin Beek is a gathering place for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living in and around Banyule. Babarrbunin Beek is a joint project between the local Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community, Banyule Community Health and Banyule City Council to have a dedicated space where people can come together. In response to feedback received during the consultation period the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (GLBTI) Advisory Committee agreed to change the name of both the plan and the Advisory Committee from GLBTI to LGBTI, as LGBTI (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex) is now more commonly used. The Multicultural Advisory Committee also recommended two changes to the Multicultural Plan:  acknowledgment of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture and identity as Australia’s First peoples  acknowledgment of the Anglo-Celtic culture within Australia’s multicultural landscape

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 83

5.2

Refer to (Attachment 4) Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender & Intersex (LGBTI) Plan 2014-2017.

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

INCLUSION ACCESS AND EQUITY FRAMEWORK cont’d The plans have been amended accordingly to reflect these changes.

5.2

CONCLUSION The Inclusion, Access and Equity Framework (IAEF) expresses Council’s commitment to its diverse communities and allows Council to work in a coordinated and consistent way, while still engaging with the individual issues that are presented in particular communities. The IAEF is used to guide four plans: 1. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Plan 2014-2017 2. Multicultural Plan 2014-2017 3. Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (LGBTI) Plan 2014-2017 4. Disability Plan 2014-2015. This report presents to Council the culmination of efforts in 2014 on the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Plan, Multicultural Plan and LGBTI Plan. The plans are for 2014-2017 and outline strategies for the next three years. An annual action plan will be developed each year, and a report card of progress will be presented to Council and the community. Please note that the Disability Action Plan 2014-2015, is a twelve(12) month12 month interim plan and was adopted by Council in September 2014. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Adopt the use of the Inclusion Access and Equity Framework (IAEF) in the development of social strategic plans.

Adopt the Multicultural Plan 2014-2017.

Adopt the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Plan 2014-2017.

Adopt the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (LGBTI) Plan 2014-17.

Continue to work with the relevant Advisory Committees and thank them for their input into the development of the plans.

Receive future reports on the annual action plan and achievements of the various plans.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Inclusion Access and Equity Framework

304

Mutlicultural Plan 2014-17

315

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Plan 2014-17

335

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (LGBTI) Plan 2014-17

355

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page

Page 84

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.2

INCLUSION ACCESS AND EQUITY FRAMEWORK cont’d

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 85

5.3

LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANSGENDER, INTERSEX (LGBTI) ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

Author:

India Mortlock - Community & Social Planner, Community Programs

File:

F2014/316

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The aim of the Banyule Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex (LGBTI) Advisory Committee is to provide Council with advice on issues affecting the LGBTI community and on the development and implementation of Council’s LGBTI Plan 2014-2017 and the Inclusion, Access and Equity (IAE) Framework. The Committee held its first meeting in March and has met on four subsequent occasions. The terms of reference allow for fifteen positions on the Committee, of which seven are currently filled. Council has called for expressions of interest to fill the remaining positions. Five expressions of interest have been received. This report considers the appointment of additional members to Council’s LGBTI Advisory Committee. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “engage meaningfully with our community”. BACKGROUND During 2013 Council resolved to establish an Advisory Committee to assist Council to work more effectively with Council’s LGBTI communities. In November 2014 Council resolved to re-appoint Cr Jenny Mulholland as the lead delegate and Cr Craig Langdon as the substitute delegate for Council’s LGBTI Advisory Committee. The first meeting of the LGBTI Advisory Committee was held on 18 March 2014 and there have been subsequent meetings on 1 April, 5 August, 7 October and 25 November.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 86

5.3

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANSGENDER, INTERSEX (LGBTI) ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP cont’d

The LGBTI Advisory Committee plays a key role in guiding the development and implementation of the LGBTI Plan 2014-2017. Council’s advisory committees have an advisory role and do not hold any authority to make decisions or commitments on behalf of Council. The minutes of committee meetings are presented to Council for information after each meeting. Recommendations and requests arising from committee meetings are presented to Council for consideration as required. Responses to recommendations are determined based on Council’s legislative role, stated commitments in Council’s Policies and Plans, and budgetary processes. It should be acknowledged that while the LGBTI advisory committees form an important part of Council’s engagement with LGBTI communities, they are not the only avenue for consultation and engagement. It should be noted that other networks, groups and individuals who are not involved as formal advisory committee members will also be involved in Council’s work on inclusion, access and equity. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any negative human rights issues. The nature of the LGBTI Advisory Committee in fact enhances Council’s advocacy function in affirming the individual’s rights to freedom of expression especially in underrepresented groups in our community. It is considered that the Advisory Committees enhances individual’s rights to Freedom of Expression as contained in section 15 of the Charter. CURRENT SITUATION The Terms of Reference for the LGBTI committee provide for up to 15 members on the committee. Seven members were originally appointed to the committee, which leaves eight positions still to be filled. Council has called for Expressions of Interest to fill the remaining positions. Council has received five expressions of interest. CONCLUSION Council’s LGBTI Advisory Committee plays an important role in assisting Council to closely engage with members of its LGBTI community. The Committee currently has eight vacancies. Council received five expressions of interest to join the LGBTI Committee.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 87

5.3

Council is finalising its Inclusion, Access and Equity Framework and the LGBTI Plan 2014-2017. The framework and plan will guide Council’s work in supporting LGBTI communities.

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANSGENDER, INTERSEX (LGBTI) ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP cont’d

5.3

RECOMMENDATION That Council appoint the following persons (Names will be provided at the Council Meeting) to the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex (LGBTI) Advisory Committee.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 88

6.1

ADMINISTRATION OF RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT SCHEME

Author:

Bailey Byrnes - Transport Planning Team Leader, City Development

File:

F2013/168

Previous Items Council on 18 August 2014 (Item 8.1 - Review of Residential Parking Permits) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Consistent with the Council resolution of 18 March 2014, an investigation has been undertaken into the administration of the Residential Parking Permit Scheme. The investigation identified 3,240 residential properties that are eligible for inclusion in the scheme, with 17% of these properties holding parking permits. The highest take-up of permits is within the Heidelberg and Ivanhoe Activity Centres, consistent with the demand for on-street car parking. Approximately 1,100 residential and visitor parking permits are currently issued across the municipality. A total of 1,530 properties built after November 2010 as higher density development are not eligible for parking permits. The current eligibility requirements within the Residential Parking Permit Scheme were developed through extensive community consultation, and align with the objectives of the Activity Centre Car Parking Policy. Any changes to these requirements should be considered as part of the review of the Residential Parking Permit Policy, which will occur in the 2015/16 financial year. The current administrative cost of implementing the scheme is currently recovered through the permit fees. This ensures that properties that are not eligible for parking permits do not subsidise the cost for those that may require a parking permit. The comparison between the existing permit fee structure and number of alternative arrangements, including the provision of one or more free permits, indicated a high cost of introducing an alternative fee structure. Free permits would need to be subsidised by properties that do not obtain a benefit of the system. It is recommended that the current Residential Parking Permit Fees be reviewed as part of the 2015/16 budget process. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “maintain and improve Banyule as a great place to live”.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 89

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ADMINISTRATION OF RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT SCHEME cont’d BACKGROUND

6.1

At its Meeting on 18 August 2014, Council considered a Notice of Motion regarding residential parking permits and resolved: “That a report be presented to Council which investigates and considers future options for the administration and allocation of parking permits through Banyule’s residential parking permit scheme. The report should consider:  The allocation of residential parking permits;  Options for waiving fees for Banyule residents, keeping the scheme as is, or increasing the fees;  Current indicative costs of administering the scheme;  Implications of changing the fee structure and allocation of permits through the scheme; and  Benchmarking the fees charged by comparative and neighbouring Councils.” Banyule's Activity Centre Car Parking Policy (ACCPP) was adopted by Council in 2010 following extensive consultation with the community. The ACCPP was introduced to guide the management of car parking in and around Activity Centres. During the development of the ACCPP, the community raised concern about higher density developments impacting the availability of on-street parking in existing residential areas. To address this, a specific section relating to residential car parking was included in the ACCPP. The purpose of this section is to help “protect residential areas close to Activity Centres from intrusion of car parking associated with commercial and higher density residential uses”. The Banyule Residential Parking Permit Policy (RPPP) was adopted in August 2011. This policy includes provisions to assist in managing the availability of on-street parking spaces in a given street or area through a residential parking permit scheme. The parking permit scheme prioritises parking for residents and their visitors in identified streets, in accordance with the key directions set out by the RPPP. The Residential Parking Permit Scheme (RPPS) applies to all residential properties in Banyule. These properties may be eligible for inclusion in the scheme provided: -

There are timed restrictions of 1 hour or greater close to the residential property; The ground floor of the building is residential in nature (i.e. not commercial); and For multi-unit developments, the occupancy permit was issued prior to 8 November 2010.

Residents whose properties meet the above criteria may purchase up to four parking permits, comprising of up to two residential parking permits, and up to two visitor parking permits. Residents whose properties are adjacent to No Stopping restrictions rather than timed parking restrictions, and meet the other requirements specified above, are eligible to purchase up to two visitor parking permits. Residential parking permit fees are currently set at $25 for the first residential parking permit, and $40 for the second residential permit. The fees for the visitor parking

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 90

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ADMINISTRATION OF RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT SCHEME contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d

The RPPP and the RPPS are planned to be reviewed in 2015/16 following the completion of the Banyule Integrated Transport Plan. This report has been prepared to consider the future administration and allocation of parking permits as implemented through the Residential Parking Permit Policy. INVESTIGATION This administrative review of the RPPS has considered the current distribution of parking permits, parking permit fees, administration costs associated with the scheme, the existing eligibility requirements and the implications of any alterations to the scheme. Allocation of Parking Permits There are currently 3,240 residential properties in Banyule that are eligible for parking permits, and are included in the scheme. This represents approximately 7% of all residential properties in Banyule. Furthermore, there are currently 1,530 dwellings that were built as part of a multi-unit development after November 2010 that are ineligible for parking permits. This represents 3% of all residential properties in Banyule. Of the properties that are currently eligible for parking permits, 607 have purchased one or more parking permits and approximately 1100 residential and visitor parking permits have been issued across the municipality. Table 1 details the current allocation of parking permits. Table 1 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Residential Parking Permit Distribution Number of Parking Permits Issued

Number of Properties

Number of Permits

1 Permit Issued (i.e. One Residential or One Visitor permit only)

286

2 Permits Issued (i.e. Two Residential, Two Visitor or One Residential plus One Visitor)

189

378

3 Permits Issued (i.e. Two Residential plus One Visitor, or One Residential plus Two Visitor)

273

4 Permits Issued (i.e. Two Residential and Two Visitor permits issued)

164

607

1101

TOTAL

The data indicates a low uptake of residential parking permits, with 17% of eligible properties across the municipality purchasing parking permits. The majority of properties that purchase parking permits apply for one or two parking permits, with a small percentage (7%) purchasing four permits. The highest concentration of parking permits occurs around the Heidelberg and Ivanhoe Activity Centres, consistent with the areas of the highest on-street parking demand. Outside of these areas, take-up of parking permits is sparse, with a small

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 91

6.1

permits are set as $40 and $60 for the first and second permit respectively.

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ADMINISTRATION OF RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT SCHEME contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d

6.1

number of residential properties within the Greensborough Activity Centre, and the Neighbourhood Activity Centres (Watsonia, Rosanna, Montmorency etc.). Feedback received from residents during the consultation process for the installation of new parking restrictions in residential areas indicates that the cost of permits is a likely factor in the low uptake of parking permits. Eligibility Requirements The current eligibility requirements, including the exclusion of parking permits for new multi-dwelling developments, resulted from extensive community consultation during the development of the ACCPP and the RPPP. These requirements help to provide residents with first priority for all-day parking in their local street and help parking in residential areas remain protected from higher density development and any impact on parking in residential streets. The requirements encourage all new developments to provide their own off-street parking in an effort to reduce demand for on-street parking. In the longer term, this is anticipated to reduce reliance on cars, and encourage the use of sustainable transport modes. The RPPP is to be reviewed in the 2015/16 financial year following completion of the Banyule Integrated Transport Plan (ITP). The eligibility requirements for the scheme will be reviewed as this time, to ensure alignment with the future of the ITP. Costs of Implementing the Scheme The administrative cost associated with implementing the residential parking permit scheme is approximately $27.50 per permit. This reflects the cost of the permit, postage, and associated administration and customer service staff costs. It does not include enforcement activities associated with the parking permit scheme, or the engineering assessment of customer requests for permits. The total administrative cost of the permits issued in this financial year is approximately $30,300. The revenue generated from the current permit fee structure, based on the number of permits currently issued, is $35,800. Overall, this represents approximately $5,500 of net revenue to Council. The cost will increase as more parking restrictions are introduced, and the uptake of residential and visitor parking permits increases. Permit Fee Structure Parking permit fees are set each year as part of the annual budget process. The current permit fee structure is a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;user paysâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; system to offset the costs of implementing the parking permit scheme, including recovering the administration cost of the permit. The fee structure has been in place since 2010. A comparison between the existing fee structure, and a number of alternative arrangements, including the provision of one or more free permits, is considered in Table 2. This comparison considers the uptake of permits based on the current number of eligible properties, and the uptake of additional permits where appropriate. It should be noted that this analysis does not differentiate between permit type (i.e. permits may be either residential or visitor). Where free ($0 fee) permits are considered, it is anticipated residents will likely obtain a parking permit regardless of need. In these scenarios, the uptake of the free permit could be around 80% of eligible properties for the first permit, and 50%-80% of

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 92

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ADMINISTRATION OF RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT SCHEME cont’d

The comparison indicates that the administrative costs are currently covered by the existing fee structure. However, due to the likely increase in the number of permits issued, Council would be unable to recover these costs should a low cost or free permit system be introduced. Table 2 – Parking Permit Fee Comparison

Scenario A) Existing Parking Permit Fee Structure Existing fee structure used (i.e. $25/$40/$40/$60). Number of permits based on existing permits issued) B) Free First Permit 1st Permit free ($0), subsequent permits at existing fee structure. 80% uptake on first permit from eligible properties and existing uptake on additional permits assumed C) All Permits Free All permits are free ($0). 80% uptake on first permit from eligible properties, and 50% uptake on additional permits assumed. D) Two Permit System - All Permits Free All permits free ($0). 80% uptake on 1st permit from eligible properties, and 50% uptake on additional permits assumed. E) Low Cost 1st Permit Low cost first permit, subsequent permits with existing fees (i.e. $10/$40/$40/$60). 40% uptake on first permit from eligible properties and existing uptake on additional permits assumed. F) Low Cost 1st Permit, Higher additional permits Low cost first permit, subsequent permits with higher fees (i.e. $10/$45/$95/$145). 40% uptake on first permit from eligible properties and existing uptake on additional permits assumed.

Total Permits Issued

1,101

3,086

7,452

4,212

1,790

Admin. Cost

$ 30,300

$ 84,900

$ 205,000

$ 115,900

$ 49,300

Permit Revenue

$35,800

$20,600

Council Revenue $5,500 Cost to Council -$64,300

Cost to Council -$205,000 Cost to Council -$115,900

$33,540

Cost to Council -$15,800

$45,890

Cost to Council -$3,400

Benchmarking Banyule’s existing permit structure, including the number of permits, permit fees and the eligibility of multi-unit developments, has been benchmarked across other metropolitan Councils. This information is provided in Table 3. With regards to fee structure, half of the Councils considered have a free permit system in some format, where one or more residential permits are free. Where a fee

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 93

6.1

additional permits. For low cost permits, it is anticipated that residents would only purchase a permit if they need one (i.e. if they are situated in an area where all the available on-street parking is timed). A 40% uptake has been assumed in this scenario.

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ADMINISTRATION OF RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT SCHEME contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d

6.1

is charged for the use of a permit, a sliding fee scale is common. While not noted in the table, concession card holders in most Councils have a reduced permit fee for the first permit, where a permit fee exists. However, with regards to eligibility, the data indicates Banyule is not unique in restricting new developments from accessing residential parking permit schemes. The majority of Councils considered in Table 3 restrict some or all higher density residential developments from accessing a parking permit. Table 3 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Permit System Comparison Municipality

Number of Permits

Permit Fee

Banyule

Two Residential Permits Two Visitor Permits Three Residential Permits One Visitor Permit

$25 / $40 $40 / $60 Free $61

Up to Three Permits total (Inclusive of up to two visitor) Two Residential Permits No Visitor Permit Scheme

Free

Up to Three Permits total (residential and visitor combined) Up to two residential permit

Free

Two Residential Permits No Visitor Permit Scheme Up to four permits depending on zoning and dwelling type Two visitor permits Up to Two Permits total (Inclusive of up to one visitor) Two Residential Permits No Visitor Permit Scheme

Free

Two Residential Permits Two Visitor Permits Up to Three Permits total (Inclusive of up to two visitor)

Free $0 / $63 $69 /$90 /$128 $98 (Visitor Permits)

Up to Two Permits total (Inclusive of up to one visitor) Up to Three Permits total (Inclusive of up to two visitor) Up to Three Permits total (Inclusive of up to one visitor)

Free

Bayside

Boroondara

Darebin

Glen Eria

Kingston

Manningham Maribyrnong

Melbourne

Monash

Moonee Valley Port Philip

Stonnington

Whitehouse

Yarra

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

$30 / $50

Free

$0/$20/$30/$50 $20/40 $20 / $80

Free

$10/$65/$175/

$32.70/$84/$158

Multi-unit Developments Eligible for Permits?? No if built after November 2010 No multi-unit developments are eligible No multi-unit developments are eligible No multi-unit developments are eligible Some are excluded from Scheme No multi-unit developments are eligible Eligible for one per dwelling Some multi-unit developments are eligible Some multi-unit developments are eligible No multi-unit developments are eligible No if built after 2006 Some multi-unit developments built after 1997, and all multi-unit developments after 2002 No multi-unit developments are eligible No multi-unit developments are eligible No if built after December 2003

Page 94

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ADMINISTRATION OF RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT SCHEME contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d

The demand for on-street parking is greater than the number of parking spaces available in some areas of the municipality, particularly around the Heidelberg and Ivanhoe activity centres. In order to manage this demand, a strategic approach is needed by Council to manage road space and encourage better use of the available parking. The existing eligibility requirements, including not allowing residents of new higher density developments access to the parking permit scheme, were developed with extensive community consultation during the development of the Activity Centre Car Parking Policy. This ensures existing residential areas are protected from any future parking demand generated by the new higher density developments. Furthermore, reduced access to on-street parking encourages new developments to utilise the parking provided onsite, or use alternate modes of transport. The concept of restricting residents of new developments access to the Residential Parking Permit Scheme is not unique to Banyule. The majority of metropolitan municipalities, where a residential parking scheme is in operation, restrict access to parking permits for some or all new higher density residential developments. Eligibility requirements will be considered as part of the overall review of the Residential Parking Permit Policy and associated scheme in 2015/16 financial year following the completion of the Banyule Integrated Transport Plan. With regards to the cost of parking permits, the current â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;user paysâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; approach ensures that residents who are not eligible for parking permits do not subsidise the cost for those that may require a parking permit. The introduction of a free parking permit scheme is likely to significantly increase the number of permits requested, with eligible residents expected to take up the permits regardless of need. Due to the administrative costs in implementing the scheme, a free permit scheme would be a significant cost to Council. As only 7% of residential properties are currently eligible for parking permits, the administrative cost of a fee permit system would need to be subsidised by those who do not require, or are ineligible for, parking permits It is likely that parking demand will increase across Banyule, and in turn demand for parking restrictions to protect residential amenity and parking permits will increase. However, it is considered unlikely that parking demand will increase across all areas of Banyule to a level where the majority of residential properties will require a permit within the foreseeable future. It is recognised that the current cost of parking permits is a barrier for a number of residents who may require a parking permit. A reduced fee parking permit could be considered as part of any future alterations to the scheme. The parking permit fees are considered in the annual budget process which will commence for 2015/16 early next year. Any future alteration to the parking permit fee structure should ensure that those who do not require a parking permit are not unfairly charged.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 95

6.1

DISCUSSION

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ADMINISTRATION OF RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT SCHEME contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d

6.1

CONCLUSION The review of the Residential Parking Permit Scheme highlighted a low take-up of residential parking permits across Banyule, with the highest occurrence of permits within the Heidelberg and Ivanhoe Activity Centres. The majority of properties that purchase parking permits apply for one or two permits. The current eligibility requirements within the Residential Parking Permit Scheme were developed with extensive consultation with the community, and align with the objectives of ACCPP. Any changes to these requirements should be considered as part of the review of the Residential Parking Permit Policy, which will occur in the 2015/16 financial year. The current administrative cost of implementing the scheme is currently recovered through the permit fees. The current approach ensures that properties that do not require permits, or the properties that are currently ineligible for parking permits, do not subsidise the cost for those who require a parking permit. The introduction of free or low cost parking permits is likely to increase the number of parking permits issued by Council, and would be at a significant cost. Furthermore, these permits would need to be subsidised by residents who are not eligible for free permits. It is recommended that the current Residential Parking Permit Fees be reviewed as part of the 2015/16 budget process RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Consider the current Residential Parking Permit Fees as part of the 2015/16 budget process.

Review the Residential Parking Permit Policy in the 2015/16 financial year.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 96

6.2

REAR OF 1045-1059 HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE - PROPOSED ROAD DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE OF LAND

Author:

Lorraine James - Property Officer, City Development

Ward:

Griffin

File:

F2013/421

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

Previous Items Council on 23 June 2014 (Item 4.5 - Rear of 1045-1059 Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe Proposed discontinuance and sale of unused 'road' and drainage reserve) Council on 1 December 2014 (Item 6.7 - Rear of 1045-1059 Heidelberg Road Ivanhoe - Proposed Road Discontinuance and Sale of Land - Hearing of Submissions) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A section of unused ‘road’ known as RW437 on Council’s Road Register, at the rear and enclosed within the fence line of 1045-1059 Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe (unused ‘road’), has never been constructed as a ‘road’. It has an area of 145m2. Immediately adjacent to the unused ‘road’, and also enclosed within the fence line of the 10451059 Heidelberg Road (adjacent property), is 54m2 of land set aside as a reserve on LP6670 (reserve land). A request to purchase the unused ‘road’ was received, from the owner of the adjacent property. At its Ordinary Meeting of 23 June 2014 (Item CO2014/161), Council directed that the statutory procedures be commenced to vest the reserve in Council’s name and remove the reserve status, give public notice of Council’s intention to discontinue the unused ‘road’ and sell the land from the unused ‘road’ and the reserve land. Pursuant to Part 4 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and Section 24A of the Subdivision Act 1988, Permit No. P1236/2014 has been issued to vest that part of the reserve land, enclosed within the fence line of the adjacent property (known as 1023A Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe) in Council’s name and remove the reserve status. This report seeks to determine whether or not to discontinue and sell the unused ‘road’ and sell the former reserve land. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 97

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

REAR OF 1045-1059 HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE - PROPOSED ROAD DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE OF LAND cont’d CITY PLAN

6.2

This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “develop and deliver best value services and facilities”. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way, limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. Section 20 provides that “A person must not be deprived or his or her property other than in accordance with law”. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. Council has the legislative power to discontinue or remove ‘road’ status and sell land. Sections 207A (a) and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) provides that a person may make a submission in respect of a proposal to discontinue a ‘road’ and section 189 of the Act provides that a person may make a submission under section 223 of the Act in respect the sale of Council land. BACKGROUND The land proposed to be sold comprises 145m2 of unused ‘road’, shown crosshatched and 54m2 of reserve land, shown hatched in Figure 1 below. The unused ‘road’ and reserve land are included within the fence line of 1045-1059 Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe (adjacent property).

Figure 1: Land proposed to be sold The unused ‘road’ is currently listed as RW437 in Council’s Road Register and is recorded as unformed.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 98

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

REAR OF 1045-1059 HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE - PROPOSED ROAD DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE OF LAND cont’d

There have been a number of complaints in relation to the unsightly nature of the land from the general public, in particular, railway commuters. The unused ‘road’ does not portray the physical characteristics of a ‘road’ as shown in the photographs in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2: Physical Characteristics of the Unused ‘Road’ and Reserve land

At its Ordinary Meeting of 23 June 2014 (Item CO2014/161), Council directed the carrying out of the statutory procedures pursuant to Part 4 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and Section 24A of the Subdivision Act 1988. Permit No 1236/2014 has now issued to vest the reserve land in Council’s name and to remove the reserve status. Pursuant to Clause 3 of Schedule 10, and Sections 189 and 223 of the Act, public notice of Council’s intention to sell the unused ‘road’ and the reserve land was given in the “Heidelberg Leader” on 30 September 2014, inviting submissions from the public. The submission period closed on 28 October 2014. One submission was received. At its Ordinary Meeting of 1 December 2014 (Item CO2014/434), Council considered the submission. An application for a Planning Permit (P220/2014), seeking to use and develop the adjacent property to accommodate a four storey building and two levels of basement car parking was lodged with Council. The application was refused by Council on the grounds that, among other things, apartment balconies or decks encroached into the airspace of the unused ‘road’. The development proposal also failed to provide an

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 99

6.2

A request was received from the owner of 1045-1059 Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe (the applicant), for Council to consider a proposal to sell that part of the unused ‘road’ currently enclosed within the fence line of the property.

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

REAR OF 1045-1059 HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE - PROPOSED ROAD DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE OF LAND cont’d effective landscape buffer to soften and screen the rail corridor and visibility of the development. The application also triggered the applicant’s interest in the land.

6.2

CURRENT SITUATION As a result of Council’s refusal to issue a planning permit for the proposed development at 1045-1059 Heidelberg Road, VCAT subsequently directed Council to issue a planning permit on 5 September 2014. The Planning Permit (P220/2014) allows for a five storey building and two levels of basement car parking, comprising 39 dwellings, food and drink premises (café) and convenience shop. The purpose of this report is for Council to decide whether or not to sell, to the applicant, the land from the unused ‘road’ and the former reserve land which is currently enclosed within the fence line of 1045-1059 Heidelberg Road. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION SERVICE AUTHORITY CONSIDERATIONS Consultation with the relevant service authorities reveal that there are no assets contained within the unused ‘road’ and reserve land. ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS Council’s engineers have advised that the unused ‘road’ and reserve land do not contain drainage assets nor will the land be required for future drainage purposes. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS The Banyule Planning Scheme governs the use and development of land within the municipality and the Banyule City Council is the responsible authority administering the scheme. The land, under the planning scheme, is included in the General Residential Zone 1 (GRZ1) zone and affected by a Design and Development Overlay 11 (DDO11) and a Vegetation Protection Overlay (VPO3). The unused ‘road’ and reserve land are located in Precinct 1 - Darebin Station Precinct of the Ivanhoe Structure Plan. The unused ‘road’ and reserve land are currently affected by a Design and Development Overlay Schedule 11 (DDO11) which is a temporary control that is due to expire on 31 May 2015. The Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C93 seeks to implement the DDO11 on a permanent basis. The interim DDO11 imposed a landscape setback from the railway line in Precinct 1 (Setback Standard 4). This means that any landowners wanting to develop land along this section of Heidelberg Road must achieve the setbacks outlined in the DDO11. The Planning Panel reviewed this setback and recommended that it be removed from some properties along the railway line. At its meeting on 18 August 2014 Council resolved to accept this Panel Recommendation and resolved to remove Setback Standard 4 from the following properties:    

1075-1091 Heidelberg Road 1045-1047 Heidelberg Road 1023-1041 Heidelberg Road 979-1011 Heidelberg Road

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 100

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

REAR OF 1045-1059 HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE - PROPOSED ROAD DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE OF LAND cont’d

Submissions to Amendment C93 were heard by an independent Planning Panel on 13 and 14 May 2014 and made some recommendations about changes to the Amendment documents. Council adopted a revised Structure Plan and Amendment documents at its meeting on 1 December 2014 which have now been forwarded to the Minister for Planning for approval. If approved by the Minister, the adjacent property, the unused ‘road’ and the reserve land will be re-zoned from GRZ1 to a Mixed Use (MUZ) zone. The proposal to vest and remove the reserve status from the reserve land, discontinue the unused ‘road’ and sell the unused ‘road’ and reserve land, does not impact on the intent of Council’s Ivanhoe Structure Plan and DD011 in the Banyule Planning Scheme. This Design Development Overlay gives guidance for the setting back and height of buildings and other planning permit requirements. Banyule’s Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy at Clause 22.02 of the Banyule Planning Scheme includes the area within its Garden Suburban (GS3) precinct. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS Environmental Services advised there is a Eucalyptus species on the reserve land but was unable to verify its species, or that of other shrubs present, due to the inability to access the site. The shrubs would appear to be weed species; one most likely Pittosporum undulatum. These could be removed but the retention of the Eucalyptus sp. is important. It is a well formed, mature Gum tree with good life expectancy and carrying capacity for local wildlife. LEGAL CONSIDERATION LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1989 Prior to selling land, the Act provides that Council must give public notice of its intention to do so and invite submissions from the public. Council must also obtain a valuation not more than six (6) months prior to the date of sale. PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice of Council’s intention to discontinue and sell the unused ‘road’ and land was given in the “Heidelberg Leader’ on 30 September 2014. SUBMISSION RECEIVED One submission was received from Public Transport Victoria (PTV), the responsible authority for the Darebin Railway Station known as 1043 Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe. DISCUSSION The current proposal is to discontinue and sell the land from the unused ‘road and sell the reserve land to an abutting owner.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 101

6.2

It is now proposed to replace this Setback with Setback Standard A (Laneway & Upper Level Amenity Setback) which allows buildings to be constructed to the property boundary.

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

REAR OF 1045-1059 HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE - PROPOSED ROAD DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE OF LAND cont’d

6.2

The discontinuance and sale of the unused ‘road’ and the reserve land will not compromise access to PTV land. To date, plans required to be endorsed under condition 1 of P220/2014 have not been submitted to Council. Nor has the applicant pursued its initial request to purchase. Consequently, it is not presently known whether the applicant will amend the plans so that the development no longer encroaches into the airspace over the unused ‘road’ (to comply with Amendment C93) or will remain reliant on the ownership of the unused ‘road’ for the proposed development. If the land from the unused ‘road’ and reserve land are not sold to an abutting owner at this time it must be retained by Council for future sale. Conversely, if Council considers the land should be retained for municipal purposes then public notice would be required to be given of its intention to do so. It should be noted that if the applicants do not proceed with the purchase at this time, the discontinuance of the unused ‘road’ and the vesting of the reserve in Council’s name will prevent any future claim for adverse possession. CONCLUSION The unused ‘road’ does not portray the physical characteristics of a ‘road’ and the reserve land is not required for the purposes for which it is currently reserved, having been enclosed within the fence line of 1045-1059 Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe for many years. In isolation, the 199m2 of land, comprising the unused road and the reserve land, may have limited value other than to an abutting owner. There is no strategic or long term purpose to retain the unused ‘road’ or reserve status on the land. It does not fulfil any useful Council or community function nor does it support “best practice” service delivery. On the basis that there appears to be no impediment to Council forming the view that the unused ‘road’ and the reserve land are no longer required for public use, the proposal to offer the land from the unused ‘road’ and reserve land for sale, to the applicants, should be supported. Accordingly, the unused ‘road’ should be removed from Council’s Road Register. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

In accordance with sections 207A(a) and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989, having given notice of Council’s intention to discontinue and sell 145m2 of unused ‘road’ and 54m2 of reserve land at the rear of 1045-1059 Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe, and having received no submissions on the proposal, forms the view that the unused ‘road’ is no longer reasonably required as a ‘road’ for public use for the following reasons: a) the unused ‘road’ does not portray the physical characteristics of a ‘road’; b) the unused ‘road’ is not currently used by the public as a means of vehicular access; c) the unused ‘road’ and the reserve land are currently enclosed within the

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 102

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

REAR OF 1045-1059 HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE - PROPOSED ROAD DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE OF LAND cont’d

Now directs that the unused ‘road’ be discontinued and sold together with the reserve land to an abutting owner by private treaty.

Authorises the publication of its resolution in Victoria Government Gazette.

Acknowledges that upon publication of the resolution in the Victoria Government Gazette the unused ‘road’ is discontinued and the land thereafter vests in Council for sale to an abutting owner.

Authorises the amendment of Council’s Road Register to reflect the discontinuance of the section of unused ‘road’, following publication of the resolution in the Victoria Government Gazette.

Authorises the signing and sealing of the necessary documentation to obtain title and effect transfer of the land referred to in Item 1.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 103

6.2

fence line of 1045-1059 Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe; d) the proposal will not impact on the movement of pedestrians or vehicles within the vicinity of the unused ‘road’; and e) the proposal will not involve the destruction or removal of native vegetation;

6.3

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS

Author:

Cindy Ho - Governance Officer, Corporate Services

File:

F2014/337

6.3

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Under the Local Government Act 1989 an Assembly of Councillors is defined as: A meeting of an advisory committee of the Council, if at least one Councillor is present or; A planned or scheduled meeting of at least half of the Councillors and one member of Council staff which considers matters that are intended or likely to be: a) b)

the subject of a decision of the Council or; subject to the exercise of a function, duty or power of the Council that has been delegated to a person or committee.

In accordance with Section 80A of the Local Government Act 1989 Council is required to report as soon as possible to an Ordinary Meeting of Council a record of any assemblies of Councillors held. Below is the latest listing of notified assemblies of Councillors held at Banyule City Council. RECORD OF ASSEMBLIES 1

Date of Assembly:

1 December 2014

Type of Meeting:

Councillor Briefing

Matters Considered:

Items on the Council Agenda for the Ordinary Meeting of 1 December 2014 (excluding confidential items) as listed below: 1.1 1-5 Westley Avenue, Ivanhoe & 2 Ivanhoe Parade, Ivanhoe 3.1 The 2013-2014 State of the Environment Report 3.2 The Environmental Stewardship Plan 2014 -2017 3.3 Biodiversity Plan 2014-17 4.1 Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C93 - Adoption of Amendment 4.2 Introducing a new Special Building Overlay schedule into the planning scheme 4.3 Proposal to amend a Section 173 Agreement at 7 Edward Court, Ivanhoe 4.4 Ivanhoe Primary School - Parking and Traffic Issues 4.5 Formal naming of two unnamed right of ways (laneways) in Heidelberg Heights and Ivanhoe 5.1 Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Meeting Membership 5.2 Banyule Youth Summit 5.3 Macleod Recreation and Fitness Master Plan 6.1 14 Scotts Parade Ivanhoe - Proposed Sale

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 104

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

of Land 6.2 27A Cherry Street Macleod - Proposed Sale of Land 6.3 Assembly of Councillors 6.4 169 Liberty Parade Heidelberg West (north of Bell Street) - Proposed Licence Use of Helipad 6.5 1 Stradbroke Avenue Heidelberg - Future use of site 6.6 9-13 Flintoff Street Greensborough Proposed Sale of Land 6.7 Rear of 1045-1059 Heidelberg Road Ivanhoe - Proposed Road Discontinuance and Sale of Land - Hearing of Submissions 6.8 Contract for Provision of Mobile Garbage Bins 7.1 Sealing of Documents Councillors Present:

Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Craig Langdon Jenny Mulholland Wayne Phillips Tom Melican

Staff Present:

Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Allison Beckwith – Director Community Programs Scott Walker – Director City Development Geoff Glynn – Director Assets and City Services Gina Burden – Manager Governance and Communication Daniel Kollmorgen – Manager Transport, Sustainability and Laws Emily Outlaw – Council Governance Liaison Officer John Milkins – Coordinator Environmental Sustainability Jim Mead – Environmental Sustainability Education Officer Peter Utri – Manager Organisational Systems Joel Elbourne –Manager Urban Planning and Building

Others Present:

Nil

Conflict of Interest:

Nil

The following two assemblies were omitted from a previous Council report in May 2014. 2

Date of Assembly:

12 May 2014

Type of Meeting:

Councillor Briefing

Matters Considered:

 Draft Banyule Urban Forest Plan  Strategic Planning work Programming  Outdoor Advertising Policy

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 105

6.3

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d

Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Wayne Phillips

Staff Present:

Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Allison Beckwith – Director Community Programs Geoff Glynn – Director Assets and City Services Daniel Kollmorgen – Manager Transport, Sustainability and Laws Joel Elbourne –Manager Urban Planning and Building Garry Berry – Coordinator Tree Care Peter Benazic – Manager Parks & Gardens David Cox – Coordinator Strategic Planning

Others Present:

Nil

Conflict of Interest:

Nil

Date of Assembly:

12 May 2014

Type of Meeting:

Confidential Councillor Briefing

Matters Considered:

Proposed Developments

Councillors Present:

Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Rick Garotti Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Wayne Phillips

Staff Present:

Others Present:

Scott Clayton

Conflict of Interest:

Nil

6.3

Councillors Present:

RECOMMENDATION That the Assembly of Councillors report be received. ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 106

6.4

29 ALAMEIN ROAD HEIDELBERG WEST PROPOSED SALE OF LAND - COMMENCE STATUTORY PROCEDURES

Author:

Jeanette Kringle - Property Co-ordinator, City Development

Ward:

Olympia

File:

F2014/4533

6.4

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

Previous Items Council on 18 March 2013 (Item 8.1 - Sealing of Documents) Council on 4 August 2014 (Item 11.1 - Award of Contract for the Construction of the Olympic Village Learning Hub, Child and Family Centre – Morobe Street, Heidelberg West) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council is the owner of the land and improvements known as 29 Alamein Road Heidelberg West (subject land). The subject land is currently occupied by the Olympic Village Preschool (Preschool). In about July 2015 the Preschool is to be relocated into the new Olympic Village Learning Hub, Child and Family Centre currently being constructed at the Olympic Village Primary School. On completion of the construction of the hub, the subject land will be surplus to Council’s and the community needs. This report considers the proposal to sell the subject land. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “develop and deliver best value services and facilities”. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. Section 20 of the Charter provides that “A person must not be deprived of his or her property other than in accordance with law.”

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 107

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

29 ALAMEIN ROAD HEIDELBERG WEST - PROPOSED SALE OF LAND COMMENCE STATUTORY PROCEDURES contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d

6.4

It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues because the power to sell land is conferred on Council pursuant to section 189 of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act). BACKGROUND Council is the owner of the land and improvements known as 29 Alamein Road Heidelberg West (the subject land), identified in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Site The Olympic Village Pre-School currently operates two 4-year old funded Kindergarten programs from the subject land. FUNDING IMPLICATIONS In 2012 Council was successful in obtaining $1.34M grant funding from the Victorian Government. The grant, together with $750,000 of Council funds committed in the 2014/2015 Capital Works Program, will enable the construction and development of the Child and Family Centre at the Olympic Village Learning Hub within the grounds of the Olympic Village Primary School. The $1.34M State Government funding is in addition to the $750,000 committed to the project by Council. Council funding will be off-set through the sale of the subject land.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 108

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

29 ALAMEIN ROAD HEIDELBERG WEST - PROPOSED SALE OF LAND COMMENCE STATUTORY PROCEDURES cont’d POLICY CONSIDERATIONS

The Guidelines for the Sale and Exchange of Council Land, adopted by Council in April 2009, provide that the sale of Council-owned land should be conducted through a public process, unless circumstances justify an alternative method of sale. The Guidelines acknowledge that in some circumstances it may be more advantageous for the sale of the property to be negotiated with one party. The Local Government Act 1989 does not restrict Council from selling or exchanging Councilowned land by private treaty. Generally it will be:    

the nature of the Council-owned land that is proposed to be sold or exchanged; and or how the proposed sale of exchange of council-owned land is initiated, e.g. often it is an external person who has initiated discussions with Council with regard to the sale or exchange of the Council-owned land; when the price offered is substantially more than the valuation; or it is evident that there is likely to be only one purchaser for the Council-owned land;

that will determine whether the sale or exchange of Council-owned land by private treaty is appropriate. Nevertheless, any sale of Council-owned land should be in the best interest of the community and provide the best result, both financial and non-financial for Council and the community. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS Legal advice has previously been obtained from Maddocks lawyers regarding the most appropriate process for Council to undertake to sell its landholdings. The options contemplated include: 1.

Sale by public auction.

Sale by private treaty.

Expression of Interest (EOI).

Request for Quotations (RFQ) and Request for Proposals (RFP).

In providing advice, Maddocks recommend that Council should consider which of the above methods of sale is likely to achieve the best outcome, having regard to Council’s financial and non-financial objectives. It is considered that an EOI process is a preferable method for the sale of the Council-owned land in many situations, as it would satisfy the Council’s responsibility to undertake a public process, enable Council to specify objectives, yet remain flexible enough for Council to negotiate an acceptable outcome with a preferred purchaser. However, in this instance the sale of the land at public auction is likely to achieve the best overall outcome.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 109

6.4

GUIDELINES FOR THE SALE AND EXCHANGE OF COUNCIL LAND

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

29 ALAMEIN ROAD HEIDELBERG WEST - PROPOSED SALE OF LAND COMMENCE STATUTORY PROCEDURES cont’d

6.4

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1989 - STATUTORY PROCEDURES Prior to selling land section 189 of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) provides that Council must give public notice of its intention to do so and obtain a valuation. Section 223(1)(b) of the Act provides that a person may, within 28 days of the date of publication of the public notice, lodge a written submission regarding the proposal to sell land. Where a person has made a written submission to Council requesting that he or she be heard in support of the written submission, Council must permit that person to be heard before a meeting of Council, giving reasonable notice of the day, time and place of the meeting. PUBLIC NOTICE

Council’s Official Newspaper Policy provides as follows: “The Heidelberg Leader and/or Diamond Valley Leader and/or the Heidelberg and Valley Weekly, where appropriate be appointed as Council’s official newspapers for the purpose of providing public notice except where circumstances may be deemed appropriate to use The Age and/or the Herald Sun for particular public notices.” For the purpose of giving public notice for this proposal it is noted that the “Heidelberg Leader” is the newspaper that is generally circulated in the Heidelberg area. TIMELINES Building works are well advanced with a completion date anticipated to be at the end of March 2015. However the transition for the commencement of the kindergarten programs in the new building are not likely to commence until July 2015 to align with the commencement of term three. DISCUSSION On completion of the construction of the hub the subject land would be surplus to Council’s and the community needs. It is therefore the right time to consider the commencement of the statutory procedures to sell the subject land. The giving of public notice does not compel Council to sell the subject land. Council is merely complying with its statutory obligations under the Act to give public notice and to hear and consider written submissions on such a proposal before deciding, at a future meeting of the Council, whether or not to sell the subject land. CONCLUSION It is appropriate for Council to give consideration to the sale of the subject land at this time. The building works are progressing on schedule and the subject land is anticipated to be vacant from around July 2015. However, prior to the sale of land, Council must give public notice of its intention to sell. Accordingly, authorisation to commence the statutory procedures to give public notice of its Council’s intention to sell the subject land should be supported.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 110

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

29 ALAMEIN ROAD HEIDELBERG WEST - PROPOSED SALE OF LAND COMMENCE STATUTORY PROCEDURES cont’d RECOMMENDATION

In accordance with sections 189 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act), authorise the commencement of the statutory procedures relating to Council’s intention to sell the Council-owned land and improvements known as 29 Alamein Road Heidelberg West (subject land) by giving public notice and inviting written submissions on the proposal in the “Heidelberg Leader” on 20 January 2015.

Receive written submissions and hear submissions on the proposal to sell the subject land from persons who have made a written request to be heard in person or by a party representing them as specified in their submission and in accordance with the Act, at its Ordinary Meeting of Council on 2 March 2015 beginning at 7.45pm to be held in the Council Chambers, 275 Upper Heidelberg Road Ivanhoe.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 111

6.4

That Council:

6.5

1 & 2 ORR LANE MONTMORENCY - SALE OF LAND

Author:

Jeanette Kringle - Property Co-ordinator, City Development

Ward:

Hawdon

File:

F2013/958

Previous Items Council on 10 November 2014 (Item 11.1 - 1 and 2 Orr Lane Montmorency Proposed Sale of Land) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At its Ordinary Meeting of 21 October 2013 (CO2013/362) Council considered a proposal to sell the Council-owned vacant land known as 1 Orr Lane Montmorency and the land and improvements known as 2 Orr Lane Montmorency, the method of sale and conditions to be imposed. Council resolved that valuations be obtained and the parcels of land be offered for sale separately at public auction, subject to any future purchaser being obliged to enter into an agreement pursuant to section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to be registered on title which would restrict development on the vacant land to one (1) dwelling and development on the improved property to a maximum of two (2) dwellings. At its Ordinary Meeting of 10 November 2014 (CO2014/397) Council considered the valuations and set the reserve price for 1 Orr Lane at $250,000 and the reserve price for 2 Orr Lane at $500,000. The purpose of this report is to advise that the properties were offered for sale at public auction held on 22 November 2014. Both properties were “passed in”, but subsequently sold after auction. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “provide responsible financial management and business planning processes”. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 112

6.5

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

1 & 2 ORR LANE MONTMORENCY - SALE OF LAND cont’d

Section 20 of the Charter provides that “A person must not be deprived of his or her property other than in accordance with law”. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues because the power to sell land is conferred on Council by section 189 of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act). In this instance Council has heard and considered submissions received in accordance with section 223 of the Act. BACKGROUND The Council-owned land known as 1 Orr Lane Montmorency is a vacant parcel, having a land area of 419m2, it comprises the whole of the land in proposed Plan of Consolidation PC372898F, as shown in Figure 1 below, being the whole of the land in certificate of title volume 11533 folio 688. The Council-owned land and improvements known as 2 Orr Lane Montmorency has a land area of 851m2. It comprises Lot 1 on Plan of Subdivision PS712879E, as shown in Figure 1 below, being the whole of the land in certificate of title volume 11516 folio 748. The improvements include a modest single level three bedroom brick veneer dwelling and a double carport.

Figure 1: Location of Land At its Ordinary Meeting of 21 October 2013 (CO2013/362) Council considered the proposal to sell the Council-owned vacant land known as 1 Orr Lane Montmorency and the land and improvements known as 2 Orr Lane Montmorency, the method of sale and conditions to be imposed. Council resolved that valuations be obtained and the parcels of land be offered for sale separately at public auction. The sale condition imposed that any future purchaser would be obliged to enter into an agreement pursuant to section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 which would be

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 113

6.5

Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report.

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

1 & 2 ORR LANE MONTMORENCY - SALE OF LAND contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d

6.5

registered on title and would restrict development on the vacant land to one (1) dwelling and development on the improved property to a maximum of two (2) dwellings. At its Ordinary Meeting of 10 November 2014 (CO2014/397) Council considered the valuations and set the reserve price for 1 Orr Lane at $250,000 and the reserve price for 2 Orr Lane at $500,000. Council authorised that in the event that reserve prices are not reached at public auction the properties were to be listed on the open market for sale at the reserve price. The properties were offered for sale by public auction on 22 November 2014, but failed to sell. CONCLUSION Subsequent to the auction, both properties sold for the reserve prices. RECOMMENDATION That Council records that the Council-owned vacant land known as 1 Orr Lane Montmorency and the land and improvements known as 2 Orr Lane Montmorency were sold post auction for the respective reserve prices of $250,000 and $500,000.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 114

6.6

COUNCILLOR MOTIONS - STATUS UPDATE

Author:

Emily Outlaw - Council Governance Liaison Officer, Corporate Services

File:

F2014/439

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Councillors wishing to raise a matter before Council currently have three options including: 1. 2. 3.

Notice of Motion (Council report and forms part of the Agenda paper) General Business Urgent Business

A Council resolution is required for both Notices of Motions (NOM) and Urgent Business items. The report includes a status of whether the item has been completed or in progress, a short explanation and if the item is scheduled to come back to Council for consideration. This report provides the current status of Councillor initiated motions. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “enable good governance and accountability with minimal risk”. BACKGROUND Resolution (CO2013/17) Council at its meeting on 4th February 2013 resolved the following Notice of Motion: “That 1. a report be submitted every two months at a Council meeting regarding the current status of Councillor initiated Motions. 2. This report to include:

  

date of approved motion; a summary of the motion; action taken by officers regarding the motion and date of action taken. (this includes letters sent);

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 115

6.6

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

COUNCILLOR MOTIONS - STATUS UPDATE cont’d

6.6



feedback regarding the motion.(particularly if referred to State or Federal MP’s).”

The latest status report is attached (Attachment 1). This report provides the status update of Councillor motions from the commencement of the new Council term (November 2012) to the 1 December 2014. The report includes a status of whether the item has been completed or in progress, a short explanation and if the item is scheduled to come back to Council for consideration. The Council recently resolved for the Councillor motions report to be presented to Council every three months to allow for better reporting. ADVOCACY Many of the Councillor generated motions relate to advocacy requesting to meet with our Local Members of Parliament or the relevant Minister to advocate on behalf of our Community. Some of these issues include road and transport matters and cost shifting from State and Federal Governments to Local Governments. CURRENT SITUATION Since commencement of the new Council term (November 2012) to the date of the attached report (1 December 2014) there have been 161 Notices of Motion submitted. Councillors currently raise matters in the Chamber via motions or statements. There are 3 options for Councillors to raise a matter before the Council: 4. 5. 6.

Notice of Motion (Council report and forms part of the Agenda paper) General Business Urgent Business

A Council resolution is required for both Notices of Motions and Urgent Business items. Whilst General Business does not require a resolution of Council there may still be some action arising from this item and may be listed in this report. These items are generated by Councillors through the Council meeting process and often involve considerable investigation or deployment of resources the CEO will seek to prioritise the timeframe for a response to the NOM to ensure that they do not significantly impact on existing programmed workloads. CONCLUSION The latest status quarterly report is presented for noting. RECOMMENDATION That Council note the Councillor Motions Status Report.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 116

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

COUNCILLOR MOTIONS - STATUS UPDATE contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d ATTACHMENTS Title

Councillor Motions Update Report

Page 374

6.6

No.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 117

7.1

SEALING OF DOCUMENTS

Author:

Andrea Turville - Property Officer, City Development

Ward:

Olympia

File:

F2013/967 & F2013/1029

7.1

Sealing of Documents

The following documents require the affixing of the Common Seal of Council: 1

PARTY\PARTIES: .OFFICER: FILE NUMBER: DOCUMENT: ADDRESS: WARD: BRIEF EXPLANATION:

Banyule City Council and Oriel Services Limited Andrea Turville F2013/967 x F2013/1029 Lease 3 Wimpole Crescent, Bellfield Olympia Council is the owner of land located at 3 Wimpole Crescent, Bellfield and known as Cyril Cummins Reserve. Part of that land has been leased to Oriel Services Limited since 2003 for use as a wholesale plant nursery and to provide employment, employment training and support to persons with a disability. Oriel Services have exercised their option to renew the lease for a further term of five (5) years commencing on 1 November, 2013 and expiring 31 October, 2018. The lease provides for no further option. The rental is $1.00 per annum payable on demand. Council should formally ratify the lease by resolving to affix its Common Seal.

RECOMMENDATION That the Common Seal of the Banyule City Council be affixed to the lease between Banyule City Council and Oriel Services Limited for the lease of part of the land at 3 Wimpole Crescent, Bellfield, for a five (5) year term commencing 1 November, 2013 and expiring 31 October, 2018. 1.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 119

8.1

GRIMSHAW STREET / FLINTOFF STREET GREENSBOROUGH - PEDESTRIAN SAFETY

Author:

Cr Mark Di Pasquale

Ward:

Bakewell

File:

F2014/141

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move: â&#x20AC;&#x153;That interested Councillors and appropriate officers meet with the State Member for Bundoora to discuss road safety concerns at the intersection of Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough.â&#x20AC;? Explanation A number of residents in recent times have raised concerns about the safety of this intersection, particularly for pedestrians. Travelling east the intersection sweeps from Grimshaw Street into Flintoff Street and motorists tend to travel at higher speeds than the reduced speed limit of 40km/hr. This is dangerous as there are reduced sight lines and many pedestrians are crossing both Flintoff Street and Grimshaw Street at this location. There appear to be more and more pedestrians crossing these streets due to the CentreLink offices and other activity in the area, so something needs to be done to improve the safety of the intersection.

CR MARK DI PASQUALE BakewellWard ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 121

8.1

Notice of Motion

PUBLIC TRANSPORT VICTORIA BUS REVIEW

Author:

Cr Tom Melican

Ward:

Ibbott

File:

F2014/492

8.2

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move: â&#x20AC;&#x153;That Council organise a meeting with Public Transport Victoria to discuss the current bus routes and timetables, to ensure any review is beneficial to Banyule residentsâ&#x20AC;?. Explanation There is currently a bus review being undertaken by Public Transport Victoria and it is important that Council provides input into that review. Previous reviews have been undertaken without Councils input or knowledge and this has resulted in poor outcomes for the community.

CR TOM MELICAN IbbottWard

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 122

8.3

ENCOURAGING PARTICIPATION OF WOMEN IN BUSINESS AND GOVERNMENT

Author:

Cr Jenny Mulholland

Ward:

Griffin

File:

F2014/492

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move: “That Council investigate supporting frameworks that can be implemented within Banyule to encourage and support participation of Women in Business and Government and a report be presented to Council on possible actions/outcomes. Explanation Local government is in a unique position to encourage and foster women’s leadership and decision-making, and ensure that women have equal representation. Local government has a responsibility to work towards enabling the full participation of all women within their municipality in all aspects of community and public life and to assist women in Business. Local government can strengthen women’s leadership both within their organisation and through their work with the community. There are many supporting frameworks that local government can implement including:  Designate a council committee with responsibility for increasing women’s participation or create a women’s portfolio to be led by a councillor supported by council officers  Strategies for workforce participation, Women in Management and Government, and access to training & development  Networking opportunities

CR JENNY MULHOLLAND GriffinWard ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 123

8.3

Notice of Motion

8.4

EDUCATION FACILITIES IN THE OLYMPIA WARD

Author:

Cr Craig Langdon

Ward:

Olympia

File:

F2014/492

8.4

Notice of Motion

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move: â&#x20AC;&#x153;That Council advise the public that in relation to concerns regarding the lack of schools and education facilities in the Olympia Ward, contact be made with the State Government and in particular the State Government Representative.â&#x20AC;? Explanation Council has received a number of queries over the past few years and in particular recent months about the lack of schools in the area and relating to the three former school sites. The purpose of this Notice of Motion is to clarify that Council is not responsible for education; it is under the jurisdiction of State Government. Council will continue to advocate the wishes of the local community, however the State must take responsibility and provide the appropriate feedback to address these concerns.

CR CRAIG LANGDON OlympiaWard ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 15 December 2014

Page 124

ATTACHMENTS

2.2

Disability and Inclusion Advisory Group Members Attachment 1

4.2

Proposed Multi Dwelling Development at 9 Alandale Road, Eaglemont Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 4

4.3

Naming options for small park located at 1-3 McKenzie Court, Greensborough ................................................................... 303

Inclusion Access and Equity Framework Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 4

6.6

Advertised Plans ........................................................................... 261 Background information ................................................................. 275 Clause 55 Assessment .................................................................. 288 Clause 56 Assessment .................................................................. 298

Formal Naming of Small Park Located at Corner of McKenzie Court and Plenty Lane Greensborough Attachment 1

5.2

Final 'Picture Watsonia: A Vision for Watsonia Village' .................. 164 Appendices: Summary & Analysis of the Watsonia 2050 Engagement Process .................................................................... 234

Proposed Multi Dwelling Development and Subdivision at 52 Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights (former Haig Street Primary School) Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 4

4.6

Plans ............................................................................................. 131 Planning policy & Referrals............................................................ 153 Clause 55 assessment .................................................................. 155 Neighbourhood Character Assessment ......................................... 159

A Final Vision for Watsonia Village Attachment 1 Attachment 2

4.5

Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Terms of Reference...................................................................................... 126

Inclusion Access and Equity Framework ....................................... 304 Mutlicultural Plan 2014-17 ............................................................. 315 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Plan 2014-17........................ 335 Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (LGBTI) Plan 2014-17 ................................................................................. 355

Councillor Motions - Status Update Attachment 1

Councillor Motions Update Report ................................................. 374

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 125

Attachment 1: Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Terms of Reference

2.2

Item: 2.2

BANYULE CITY COUNCIL – DISABILITY AND INCLUSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Attachment 1

TERMS OF REFERENCE Name:

Aim:

Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee (BDIAC)

The aim of BDIAC is to provide Council with advice on disability and inclusion issues and on the implementation of Council’s Inclusion, Access and Equity Framework (IAEF) and Council Disability Action Plan.

Key Objective: The priority of the committee is to assist with the development of the 3 year Disability Action Plan 2015-2017.

Additional objectives  Implement the 12 month Disability Action Plan  Provide feedback and advice to Council on its policies, plans and services that impact disability communities  Consider and provide advice on key Government initiatives, programs and reviews- in particular the NDIS.  Advocate on behalf of disability communities  Consider funding and other opportunities as they may arise  Assist Council to promote the benefits of diversity within the Banyule municipality and beyond  Provide advice to Council with its communication, engagement and consultation with disability communities Assembly of Councillors and Conflicts of Interest The BDIAC is considered an Assembly of Councillors as defined under section S80A Local Government Act 1989.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 126

Item: 2.2

Attachment 1: Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Terms of Reference

   

the names of all Councillors and members of Council staff attending; the matters considered; any conflict of interest disclosures made by a Councillor whether a Councillor who has disclosed a conflict of interest leaves the assembly as required by the Local Government Act .

2.2

An Assembly of Councillor form must be completed and sent Council’s Governance unit as soon as possible at the completion of the meeting for inclusion in the next Council Meeting Agenda. The Assembly of Councillor form records:

Conflicts of Interest as defined by the Local Government Act S80A (3) Councillors: Councillors must leave the meeting if the matter under consideration could be considered a conflict of interest. The Councillor must disclose they have a conflict of interest regarding any item being considered. The same criteria for conflict of interest for an Assembly of Councillors, applies to this Advisory Committee. Staff: A staff member should declare a conflict of interest if providing advice on the matter to Council.

Membership: The BDIAC membership will consist of up to 15 community members and will include representation from:  Council (additional to the 15 community members)  Residents  Community Groups All BDIAC positions are voluntary positions.

Selection process: The selection committee will include the Manager Health, Ageing and Community Planning, and the Community and Social Planning Team. The committee will assess the nominations against the selection criteria and recommend appointments to Council.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 127

Attachment 1

The written record of an Assembly of Councillors as soon as practicable must be: (a) reported at an ordinary meeting of the Council; and (b) incorporated in the minutes of that Council meeting

Item: 2.2

Attachment 1: Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Terms of Reference

Role of members (criteria):

Attachment 1

2.2

Advisory Committee members will be able to demonstrate:  Knowledge and understanding of the needs and issues affecting disability communities.  An interest and involvement in local and/or broader disability community affairs, advocacy and networks.  An interest and understanding of Local Government services and programs from a disability/inclusion community perspective.  The ability to contribute to the strategic development of disability policy at local government level.  Direct links to local disability community populations and/or organisations.  Experience and/or understanding of the role of an advisory committee.  A commitment to working collaboratively with Council and in line with Council values. Council will aim to ensure that members of the Committee reflect the diversity of the Banyule community including ethnicity, age, gender, a range of disability experiences and disability types, younger and older carers, and different geographical areas across Banyule. Terms of Appointment:  Appointments will be for a one year term  Expressions of Interest for membership will be advertised for a minimum of 14 days  Council will appoint a Councillor to Chair the meetings  Members completing a one year term may re-apply for a further two year term  The membership of the Committee will be reviewed as part of the on-going review and implementation of the IAEF and associated plans.  The operations of the Committee will be evaluated annually to ensure it continues to be effective and relevant.  Members are free to resign from BDIAC at any time. Previous nominations may be considered to fill the vacancy. An Expression of Interest (EOI) process will be undertaken if there are no previous nominations that meet the criteria. Meeting Frequency and Duration:  The BDIAC will generally meet bi-monthly for a duration of 1.5 hours, however, there may be more frequent meetings in the first half of 2015.  It is expected that each member attend a minimum of 60% of all meetings Role of Councillor:    

To act as Chairperson of the BDIAC To be the link between Council and the BDIAC To be the spokesperson to Council on behalf of the BDIAC To nominate another Councillor to attend meetings in his/her absence

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 128

Item: 2.2

Attachment 1: Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Terms of Reference

 The Community and Social Planning Unit of Council will provide Executive support to BDIAC.

2.2

Executive Support:

Accountability and Extent of Authority:

Monitoring and reporting:  The minutes of BMAC meetings will be circulated to members via email for confirmation, and then placed on Council’s website for viewing.  All Committee minutes will be presented to Council for noting.  Recommendations and requests arising from BDIAC meetings will be presented to Council for consideration. Where this occurs, the request will require the majority support of the committee members present. Responses to recommendations will be determined based on Council’s legislative role, stated commitments in Council’s Policies and Plans and budgetary processes. Evaluation and Review: An annual evaluation of BDIAC will be carried out to identify successes, challenges and areas for improvement for the committee. The BDIAC Terms of Reference and membership will be reviewed and evaluated on a bi - annual basis or as required for any significant changes. Reimbursement of expenses: Individual members of the Committee will be reimbursed for transport related costs they have incurred in participating in meetings and related activities. Supports to participate in the meetings Council will provide reasonable supports to participate in the meetings, such as note taker and equipment, which will be negotiated with the members as needed.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 129

Attachment 1

 BDIAC members have an active role to provide feedback and advice to Council on issues relating to disability/inclusion within the municipality.  BDIAC members participate in discussions at bi-monthly meetings.  BDIAC members have an advisory role and do not hold any authority to make decisions or commitments on behalf on Council.

4.2

Attachment 1: Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 131

Attachment 1

4.2

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 132

Attachment 1: Plans

4.2

Attachment 1: Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 133

Attachment 1

4.2

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 134

Attachment 1: Plans

4.2

Attachment 1: Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 135

Attachment 1

4.2

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 136

Attachment 1: Plans

4.2

Attachment 1: Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 137

Attachment 1

4.2

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 138

Attachment 1: Plans

4.2

Attachment 1: Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 139

Attachment 1

4.2

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 140

Attachment 1: Plans

4.2

Attachment 1: Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 141

Attachment 1

4.2

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 142

Attachment 1: Plans

4.2

Attachment 1: Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 143

Attachment 1

4.2

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 144

Attachment 1: Plans

4.2

Attachment 1: Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 145

4.2

Attachment 1: Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 147

Attachment 1

4.2

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 148

Attachment 1: Plans

4.2

Attachment 1: Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 149

Attachment 1

4.2

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 150

Attachment 1: Plans

4.2

Attachment 1: Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 151

Item: 4.2

Attachment 2: Planning policy & Referrals

REFERRAL COMMENTS No external referrals were required for this proposal under Section 55 of the Act. ENGINEERING SERVICES

4.2

EXTERNAL REFERRALS

Flooding  Flooding Possible- Flood depth of up to 200mm is expected along the right of way on the northern boundary of the site and a 300mm flood depth is expected in the right of way along the western boundary. Finished floor levels of habitable areas should be placed above these levels (FFL of 47.2 will be required for Dwelling 5 and carport of Dwelling 4).  No alteration to existing topography within the existing stormwater drainage easement or stormwater overland flow path is permitted.  All boundary and internal fencing must be permeable to overland stormwater flows. Extent of permeable fence sections are to be determined by Flood Level. Application to Council is required.  Proposed structure and laneway works must allow for and not restrict or impede the free passage of overland stormwater flows, so that it does not cause higher flood levels or faster flows. Point of Discharge 

Discharge to Council drain within north easement of 53 Silverdale Road. Approximately 25m outfall drainage is required (min 225m diameter). Onsite detention is required. CEXIST = 0.35. See Council requirements.

Car Parking Council data and empirical evidence would suggest some availability of short term parking in the area, and reasonable access to public transport facilities. As such, a reduction in one (1) visitor parking space can be accepted for this development. Please note that residents in new developments with a Certificate of Occupancy permit issued after 8 November 2010 are not eligible to apply for residential or visitor parking permits.  In accordance with Banyule Planning Scheme Clause 52.06-8, accessways are to be a minimum of 3m wide. The proposed access to Dwelling 1 is not considered to meet this requirement.  The parking spaces are generally in accordance with the requirements of Design Standard 2 and will enable vehicles to enter and exit the parking spaces in an appropriate manner.  The accessway gradients are generally in accordance with the requirements of Design Standard 3. Right of Way

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 153

Attachment 2

Council’s Engineering Services Section have reviewed the proposal and raised no major concerns. Formal comments are available on file. Standard conditions relating to access, parking areas and drainage, and the following are requested should be included on any approval issued.

4.2

Item: 4.2

Attachment 2: Planning policy & Referrals

The existing right of way must be resurfaced in order for it to be used as access to Dwellings 2, 3, 4 and 5. The road construction proposed should consider the heritage status of adjacent buildings and Council's right of way guidelines. Any blue-stone pitchers that are removed from the site during the road construction process will remain the property of Council and must be returned to Council's Depot for recycling. Reconstructed/surfaced laneway should take into account potential flood impacts. Standard drainage, car parking and vehicle crossing conditions are required as well as conditions to address the driveway width to Dwelling 1 and provide for flood mitigation measures. DEVELOPMENT PLANNING ARBORIST Council’s Development Planning Arborist has advised that:

Attachment 2

 

Trees 1, 2, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13 are all weed species not protected by the VP03. Tree 1, 2 and 3 have been removed as part of a previous permit (P1173/13) and contained the following condition: Within 3 months of the removal of the tree(s) allowed by this permit replacement planting of 2 evergreen or deciduous medium-sized canopy trees (with a future height of at least 8 metres) must be provided to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and thereafter maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. At least one of the replacement trees must be established within the front setback.

  

Tree 11 has been damaged and will not survive. Tree 5 is prominent within the landscape and is nearing the end of its useful life expectancy. No trees on site are suitable for retention.

HERITAGE ADVISER    

The proposed development sits within a street that is predominantly residential in character. The appearance of the proposed development is clearly in keeping with this character. The scale of buildings within the nearby heritage precincts is predominantly a mix of single and double-storey. The scale of the proposed development is in keeping with this character. Roof forms of the buildings within the nearby heritage precincts are predominantly a mix of hips and gables. The series of staggered gabled roof forms will be in keeping with this character. It is also noted that given the two-storey scale of the development that any existing significant views within either of the adjacent heritage precincts will not be affected.

Recommendations: On heritage grounds the works proposed in this application may be supported without the need for any specific heritage conditions. It is also noted that the trees on site did not hold any heritage value.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 154

Item: 4.2

Attachment 3: Clause 55 assessment

Clause 55.02 (Neighbourhood Character and Infrastructure) Neighbourhood Character objectives Complies.  To ensure that the design respects the existing It is considered that the proposal is an appropriate neighbourhood character or contributes to a preferred response to the character of the area. See discussion on Neighbourhood Character report. neighbourhood character.  To ensure that development responds to the features of the site and the surrounding area Standard B1 Residential policy objectives Complies  To ensure that residential development is provided in accordance with any policy for housing in the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.  To support medium densities in areas where development can take advantage of public transport and community infrastructure and services. Standard B2 Dwelling diversity objective N/A  To encourage a range of dwelling sizes and types in Only five dwellings are proposed developments of ten or more dwellings. Standard B3 Infrastructure objectives Complies  To ensure development is provided with appropriate utility services and infrastructure.  To ensure development does not unreasonably overload the capacity of utility services and infrastructure. Standard B4 Integration with the street objective Conditions Required  To integrate the layout of development with the street. Standard B5 Dwelling 1 will have a frontage to and direct interface with Alandale Road. Dwellings 2-5 will have an interface with the R.O.W. However, the front door of Dwelling 1 should be relocated to face Alandale Road as a condition of permit. The proposal will activate both street frontages and enable the built form of the development to be visible to the street and make a valuable contribution to the streetscape. Clause 55.03 (Site Layout and Building Massing) Street setback objective  To ensure that the setbacks of buildings from a street respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and make efficient use of the site. Standard B6

Variation Required This site is located at the corner of Alandale Road and a laneway (which is designated as a Road on the title). To the north of the site is a supermarket and residential building with a zero setback to Alandale Road. To the south is a dwelling with a setback to Alandale Road of 15 metres. The Standard requires a setback of 9 metres. A graduated setback of 5.9 and 8.1 metres is proposed. This is considered to make a suitable transition between the frontage setbacks of the buildings either side of the site and provide an appropriate front garden setting for tree and landscape planting. Ground level side setback of Dwellings 1 and 5 are required to be 2 metres to the laneway with Dwelling 1 providing 3.4 metres and Dwelling 5, 1.9 metres. The front setback of Dwellings 2,3 and 4 are required to be 3 metres and setbacks of between 1 and 1.1 metres are provided.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 155

Attachment 3

APPLICATION NO.: P1242/2013 DEVELOPMENT ADDRESS.: 9 Alandale Road EAGLEMONT PROPOSAL: Two storey town house development, associated vegetation removal and waiver of one on site visitor car parking space

4.2

ASSESSMENT AGAINST CLAUSE 55

Item: 4.2

Attachment 3: Clause 55 assessment

4.2

The upper levels of all of the dwellings project into these laneway setbacks between 400 and 800mm.

Attachment 3

Building height objective  To ensure that the height of buildings respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character. Standard B7 Site coverage objective  To ensure that the site coverage respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and responds to the features of the site. Standard B8

Permeability objectives  To reduce the impact of increased stormwater run-off on the drainage system.  To facilitate on-site stormwater infiltration. Standard B9 Energy efficiency objectives  To achieve and protect energy efficient dwellings and residential buildings.  To ensure the orientation and layout of development reduce fossil fuel energy use and make appropriate use of daylight and solar energy. Standard B10 Open space objective  To integrate the layout of development with any public and communal open space provided in or adjacent to the development. Standard B11 Safety objective  To ensure the layout of development provides for the safety and security of residents and property. Standard B12 Landscaping objectives  To encourage development that respects the landscape character of the neighbourhood.  To encourage development that maintains and enhances habitat for plants and animals in locations of habitat importance.  To provide appropriate landscaping.  To encourage the retention of mature vegetation on the site. Standard B13

Due to the existing varied built form and presentation of of the rear of the Eaglemont village shops to the laneway, this reduced setback is not considered to be detrimental to the character of the road. The proposal will in fact significantly improve the presentation of this site to the laneway as well as enable a more efficient use of the site. Complies 8.0 metres Variation Required Site coverage is 62%. Given the location of the site immediately adjacent to the laneway and the neighbourhood activity centre, the site provides a transition between the built form of the two areas. A marginal increase in site coverage is therefore considered reasonable in this instance, particularly where a suitable landscape outcome for the site can be achieved. Complies Permeable area 26%

Complies

N/A

Complies The proposal will significantly improve surveillance of the laneway and the rear of the shops Conditions Required A concept landscape plan has been submitted and proposes the planting of one mature tree within the front setback and provision of a number of smaller trees in the rear yards of the dwellings. It will be required as a condition on any permit that may issue that a revised landscape plan be submitted using Council’s Tree planting Guidelines. There is scope to provide at least one large tree within the front setback of Dwelling 1 and one medium tree each within the rear yards of Dwellings 2,3 and 4 and two small trees within the front setback of Dwelling 5. Council’s Aborist has confirmed that no trees on site are suitable for retention.

Access objectives  To ensure vehicle access to and from a development is safe, manageable and convenient.  To ensure the number and design of vehicle crossovers respects the neighbourhood character. Standard B14 Parking location objectives  To provide convenient parking for resident and visitor vehicles.

Conditions Required The accessway of Dwelling 5 will be required to have a minimum width of 3 metres as a condition on any permit that may issue. Complies

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 156

Item: 4.2

Attachment 3: Clause 55 assessment



Complies Max wall height: 7.6 metres Minimum setback required: 2.2 metres Minimum setback provided along the southern elevation: 3.81 metres Complies No walls are proposed to be constructed on the boundary.

Complies

Complies Most affected dwelling will be the dwelling to the south. However, this will be marginally greater than the shadows cast by the current boundary fences and within limits. Conditions Required The south-western upper floor habitable room windows of D4 has potential of overlooking. This will be required to be addressed on any permit that may issue. The details of the southern boundary fences have not been submitted.

Internal views objective  To limit views into the secluded private open space and habitable room windows of dwellings and residential buildings within a development. Standard B23 Noise impacts objectives  To contain noise sources in developments that may affect existing dwellings.  To protect residents from external noise. Standard B24 Clause 55.05 (On-site Amenity and Facilities) Accessibility objective  To encourage the consideration of the needs of people with limited mobility in the design of developments. Standard B25 Dwelling entry objective  To provide each dwelling or residential building with its own sense of identity. Standard B26 Daylight to new windows objective  To allow adequate daylight into new habitable room windows. Standard B27 Private open space objective  To provide adequate private open space for the reasonable recreation and service needs of residents.

Complies

Complies People with limited mobility will be able to access the front door and living areas (including amenities) of Dwelling 1 and bedrooms of Dwellings 2-5. Conditions Required This is somewhat obscured for Dwelling 1. It will be required as a condition on any permit that may issue that the front door of this dwelling should be relocated to face Alandale Road. Complies

Conditions Required Although Dwellings 2-5 will be provided with a balcony each of 8 square metres with convenient access from a

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 157

Attachment 3

Clause 55.04 (Amenity Impacts) Side and rear setbacks objective  To ensure that the height and setback of a building from a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the impact on the amenity of existing dwellings. Standard B17 Walls on boundaries objective  To ensure that the location, length and height of a wall on a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the impact on the amenity of existing dwellings. Standard B18 Daylight to existing windows objective  To allow adequate daylight into existing habitable room windows. Standard B19 North-facing windows objective  To allow adequate solar access to existing northfacing habitable room windows. Standard B20 Overshadowing open space objective  To ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow existing secluded private open space. Standard B21 Overlooking objective  To limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows. Standard B22

4.2

To avoid parking and traffic difficulties in the development and the neighbourhood.  To protect residents from vehicular noise within developments. Standard B15

Item: 4.2

4.2

Standard B28

Attachment 3

Solar access to open space objective  To allow solar access into the secluded private open space of new dwellings and residential buildings. Standard B29 Storage objective  To provide adequate storage facilities for each dwelling. Standard B30 Clause 55.06 (Detailed Design) Design detail objective  To encourage design detail that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character. Standard B31 Front fences objective  To encourage front fence design that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character. Standard B32 Common property objectives  To ensure that communal open space, car parking, access areas and site facilities are practical, attractive and easily maintained.  To avoid future management difficulties in areas of common ownership. Standard B33 Site services objectives  To ensure that site services can be installed and easily maintained.  To ensure that site facilities are accessible, adequate and attractive. Standard B34

Attachment 3: Clause 55 assessment living room, these will not have a minimum width of 1.6 living room, the balcony to Dwellings 5 does not have all the area with a minimum dimension of 1.6 metres as required by this clause. Due to the orientation of the balcony, the layout and integration with the living space of the dwelling, the area provided is considered effective in this instance. Whist the balcony of dwelling 1 is less than 8 sqm in area, this dwelling is provided with north facing ground level secluded private open space so this is considered acceptable for a secondary open space area. Complies Dwellings 2-4 will be provided with upper level northern oriented open space areas with secondary south facing open space at ground level. Complies Storage areas of each dwelling will be located in the carport..

Complies It is considered that the proposal is an appropriate response to the character of the area. See discussion on Neighbourhood Character and main report. Complies None proposed Complies There will be no common property

Conditions Required Bin areas must be screened from view. The location of the clothesline for each dwelling will be required to be shown on any permit that will issue.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 158

Attachment 4: Neighbourhood Character Assessment

CLAUSE 22.02: RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBOURHOOD CHARACTER POLICY ASSESSMENT – Garden Suburban 3 APPLICATION NO: P1242/2013 DEVELOPMENT ADDRESS: 9 Alandale Road EAGLEMONT PROPOSAL: Two storey town house development, associated vegetation removal and waiver of one on site visitor car parking space

4.2

Item: 4.2

The Ivanhoe Major Activity Centre is in this precinct. The preferred future character of this Activity Centre will be guided by the outcomes of a structure plan. Parts of the Heidelberg Specialised and Major Activity Centres are in this precinct. The detailed landscaping and vegetation outcomes for residential sites in these Activity Centres are guided by this policy. The preferred future built form character of residential sites in these Activity Centres is guided by the Design and Development Overlay Schedule 5. These areas will protect and enhance the garden suburban character of the precinct with an emphasis on protecting trees and creating new opportunities for vegetation throughout sites. They will provide for a mix of well-designed single dwellings, medium density dwellings in garden settings, with space around and between dwellings to create an attractive, treed landscape setting. Objective To encourage the retention of buildings that contribute to the character of the precinct. Design Response 1. Retain intact and good condition Victorian, Edwardian and Interwar dwellings that contribute to the valued character of the Precinct, as part of new developments.

Complies? Yes

Alterations and extensions should retain the front façade of dwellings and be respectful to the building Discussion

N/A

The dwelling on the subject site is not considered to be significant given its exemption from being included within either the Ivanhoe Views Estate or Eaglemont Village heritage overlays. Objective To ensure new buildings and extensions are sympathetic to the current building form and architectural style Design Response 3. Materials should match the predominant wall and roof materials in the street. In predominantly weatherboard areas south of Banksia Street, buildings should be weatherboard or rendered brick.

Complies? Yes

Yes

Match wall and roof materials in extensions.

N/A

Second storey additions should reflect the architectural style and form of the existing building.

N/A

Incorporate the main themes, in correct proportions and scale, from the Edwardian, Interwar or Post war or 1960s era as appropriate to the street.

Yes

Variation should be provided between each dwelling of a development that faces the street. This can be achieved through varied roof pitches, window and door placement, materials, façade articulation and other design detailing.

Yes

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 159

Attachment 4

Outside Accessible Areas

Item: 4.2

Attachment 4: Neighbourhood Character Assessment

Attachment 4

4.2

Discussion The site is encompassed but outside two heritage overlays and located adjacent to the rear service lane of a number of commercial premises within the Neighbourhood Activity Centre. The built form and amenity on the subject site makes a transition between the activity centre and the adjoining residential area. The terraced nature of the design, presentation of the rear dwellings to the laneway, two storey scale, stepped building form that follows the slope of the land, use of a combination of traditional and contemporary facing materials and pitched roof form is considered to appropriately respond to this context.

Objective To maintain consistency of current front setbacks whilst enable tree planting in front gardens Design Response 8. Dwellings should be setback in line with the predominant front setback of dwellings along the street. 9. In accessible areas only, a reduced front setback for new buildings (including basements) may be acceptable, if this respects the predominant front setback of nearby dwellings and supports the planting and future growth of a large tree to maturity. 10.

For corner sites, the front setback of a dwelling facing the side street should be at a transition between the predominant setback along the side street, and the side setback of the dwelling facing the front street.

Complies? Variation

Variation N/A

Variation

Discussion At between 5.9 and 8.1 metres front setback to Alandale Road, the proposal is considered to make an appropriate transition between the zero setback of the supermarket within the activity centre and the 15 metre setback of 7 Alandale Road in the residential area. Sufficient space is provided within the front setback to accommodate a large canopy tree. A 1 to 3.5 metre setback of the development to the lane is proposed. A number of commercial properties that face Silverdale Road back onto the laneway with it not being immediately evident if any other dwellings front directly onto the laneway. The rear setback of the commercial premises to the laneway abutting the site varies from zero to as much as 25 metres. The proposed setbacks will activate the lane, increase surveillance and safety and provide for landscaping and three medium sized canopy trees to be provided along the southern residential interface of the development and two within the front setback to the laneway of Dwelling 5. Objective To ensure buildings and extensions do not dominate the streetscape or the building, and do not adversely affect the outlook and amenity of neighbouring dwellings Design Response 11. Second storey portions of buildings should be recessed from ground level wall surfaces, (including the front faรงade) incorporated within roof spaces where possible and minimised in height.

Complies? Variation

Variation

12.

In accessible areas, upper levels should be positioned towards the street frontage and recessed from the lower level wall surfaces.

N/A

13.

Buildings at the rear of a site should be designed to follow the topography of the land and respond sensitively to each interface. Second storeys (where appropriate) should be modest in size, have generous side and rear setbacks

Yes

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 160

Item: 4.2

Attachment 4: Neighbourhood Character Assessment

and be screened with vegetation. 14.

Developments should minimise the need for cut and fill throughout the site.

Yes

The transitional location of the site enables it to accommodate a built form that bridges the gap between the activity centre and the residential area to the south. The development appropriately responds to the slope on the land and graduates the building to reflect the fall of the site from west to east. Cut and fill is minimised as a result. Appropriate setbacks are provided along the southern interface to minimise visual bulk impact and provide for tree planting to soften this elevation of the development.

Design Response 15. Solar panels should be located to minimise their visual impact. Air conditioning, rainwater tanks, bins and storage should be located and/or screened so they are not visually obtrusive in the streetscape. In accessible areas, rooftop plant equipment should be screened and/or located to minimise their visual impact and integrate with the roof form. Discussion 16.

Complies? Yes Yes

N/A

The orientation of the site is such that any solar panels would be located on the side (facing north) and will not be directly visible from the street. Any permit issued should contain a requirement for the location of these facilities to be shown. Objective To minimise loss of front garden space, and the dominance of vehicle access, storage facilities and built form as viewed from the street Design Response 17. Locate carports and garages behind the line of the dwelling.

Complies? Variation

Yes

18.

Dedicated car parking spaces should not be provided between the front wall of a dwelling that faces the street, and the front property boundary. Landscaping such as large shrubs and trees in the front setback and garden beds along driveway edges should be provided to discourage car parking in this location

19.

Encourage outcomes that consider the Banyule City Council Residential Vehicle Crossing Policy 2012.

20.

Driveways should include curves and bends that provide sufficient room for landscaping at varying heights.

N/A

Driveways should be finished in muted tones that soften their appearance and blend with vegetation. Discussion

Yes

21.

Yes

Variation

Whilst a second crossing is permissible to the lane, a total of four crossings are proposed to the laneway with a fifth to Alandale Road. The proposed access arrangement will still provide for two of the dwellings to have 1 metre deep front gardens facing the laneway. A third can be required for Dwelling 2 as a condition of permit. This will also assist in providing a security/privacy buffer between the laneway and ground floor bedroom windows. This is considered an acceptable design response due to the existing built form character of the laneway. The four laneway crossings allow for the best use of the existing laneway as a means of access to service the development and provide a landscape buffer and appropriate built from setback to the adjoining dwelling to the south at 7 Alandale Road. The proposed design response is considered to be in keeping with the context of this site. The driveways will be finished with an exposed aggregate and provide a detailed finish to this paving.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 161

Attachment 4

Objective To ensure that household services are not a visually prominent feature.

4.2

Discussion

4.2

Item: 4.2

Attachment 4: Neighbourhood Character Assessment

Objective To maintain and strengthen the view of established front gardens, and tree lined streets and to reflect the predominant era of the dwellings. Design Response 22. Front gardens should contain at least one (1) large tree and understorey landscaping that includes large shrubs Front fences should be permeable. 24. Secluded private open space should be located behind the line of a dwelling that faces the street. Discussion

Attachment 4

23.

Complies? Yes

Yes N/A Yes

At least one large tree will be located within the front setback of the site. It will be required as a condition on any permit that may issue that a revised landscape plan be submitted using Councilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Tree Planting Guidelines. There is scope to provide at least one large tree within the front setback of Dwelling 1 and one medium tree each within the rear yards of Dwellings 2,3 and 4 (or up to three small trees each) and two small trees within the front setback of Dwelling 5. Planting will be provided within the minimal front and side setbacks to the laneway with additional planting to be provided as a condition of permit within the front setback of Dwelling 2. Objective To maintain and strengthen the garden dominated streetscape character and landscaped setting of the precinct Design Response 25. Retain existing trees wherever possible. If this cannot be achieved, or a tree is considered appropriate for removal, the site should provide adequate space for offset planting of exotic or native trees as appropriate that will grow to a mature height similar to the mature height of the tree to be removed

Complies? Yes

Yes

One (1) medium to large tree should be provided for every 400 sq.m of site area, with a preference for large trees. This may include existing trees that are worthy of retention. At least one of the large trees should be provided in the front setback.

Yes

Buildings (including basements) should be a sufficient distance from at least one side or rear property boundary to enable the planting and growth of medium to large trees. These setbacks should provide sufficient area for future growth of the mature canopy of trees, and understorey planting. 28. If more than one dwelling is proposed on a site outside an accessible area, sufficient separation should be provided between each dwelling to allow for the planting and future growth of small to medium trees and understorey vegetation. 29. Tree species and planting locations should be carefully selected to avoid canopy or root conflicts with overhead wires, easements and existing trees.

Yes

26.

27.

30.

Other than for the core of the Ivanhoe Major Activity Centre, building site coverage should not exceed 40% in order to provide sufficient site area for planting, growth and retention of vegetation. This may be varied if the proposal is in an accessible area and demonstrates that the vegetated character of the site and precinct is protected and enhanced by retaining existing vegetation and providing sufficient area for the planting of additional trees and other vegetation.

31.

If there is no street tree within the frontage of a dwelling, a new street tree should be proposed.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 162

Variation

Yes Variation

N/A

Item: 4.2

Attachment 4: Neighbourhood Character Assessment

The development will be provided with adequate setback from property boundaries to the north, south and west to provide meaningful landscaping. The site contains a street tree and as such, a street tree is not required to be planted. The terraced built form of the development reflects the built form of the commercial premises to the north. Whilst site coverage will exceed 40%, this is considered to be acceptable in this instance given the unique location of the site between the commercial area and the dwelling to the south, as discussed earlier.

Design Response 32. New buildings at or near ridgelines should designed and sited so that cut and fill is minimised and the building sits below the height of trees along the ridgeline.

Complies? N/A

N/A

New buildings at or near ridgelines should have muted colours and tones, and non-reflective materials.

N/A

Trees and vegetation that contribute to the landscape should be retained. New native or indigenous trees should be planted on or near the ridgeline to form a continuous canopy. Discussion

N/A

33. 34.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 15 DECEMBER 2014 Page 163

Attachment 4

Objective To ensure that developments on or near ridgelines retain existing trees, sit below the tree canopies, minimise excavation, and enable further tree planting to form a continuous canopy, so that the scenic quality is maintained and enhanced

4.2

Discussion