Banyule City Council 23 March 2015 Agenda Part 1 by Banyule City Council

Ordinary Meeting of Council Council Chambers, Service Centre 275 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe 23 March 2015 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 2 March 2015 Disclosure of Interests Nil 1. Petitions Nil REPORTS: 2. People – Community Strengthening and Support 2.1 Rosanna Road and Darebin Street - Proposed School Crossing Supervisor .............................................................................................................. 3 2.2 "Victoria Cross" Estate, Macleod - Improving Recognition of the Victoria Cross Recipients Street Names ................................................................. 6 3. Planet – Environmental Sustainability 3.1 Urban Forest Plan ................................................................................................. 13 4. Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

AGENDA (Contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d) 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6

North East Link - Quarterly Report ........................................................................ 19 Review of Traffic around Loyola College, Watsonia ..................................................................................... 23 Alphington Paper Mills Proposal ........................................................................... 28 Bell Street Mall - A Safer Mall .............................................................................. 34 Proposed Changes to the Planning and Environment Regulations ....................... 39 Conversion of an existing dwelling into two attached dwellings at 16 Odenwald Road, Eaglemont ............................................................................ 44

5. Participation â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Community Involvement in Community Life 5.1 Multicultural Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes - 5/2/2015 .............................. 59 5.2 LGBTI Advisory Committee Meeting - Minutes - 10/2/2015 ................................... 61 5.3 Minutes - Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Meeting 28/1/15 & 18/2/2015 ............................................................................................. 64 5.4 Appointment of Councillor to the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) Committee ................................................................................................. 67 6. Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely 6.1 VAGO Report - Effectiveness of Support for Local Government Report ................................................................................................................... 69 6.2 VAGO Report - Local Government Results of the 2013-14 Audits ........................ 77 6.3 Protected Disclosures - Banyule awarded Gold Star by Independant Broad Based Anti Corruption Commission (IBAC) ............................ 83 6.4 Councillor Strategic Planning Session .................................................................. 87 6.5 Tenancy 1 and Tenancy 2 460 Lower Heidelberg Road Heidelberg - Proposed Change of Use ................................................................................... 91 6.6 22 and 24 Peters Street Watsonia - Notice of Intention to Sell .............................. 96 6.7 Adoption of Proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015) ...................................... 102 6.8 Reallocation of 2014/2015 Local Roads Resheeting Program Funding............................................................................................................... 111 6.9 Councillor Motions - Status Update ..................................................................... 114 6.10 Assembly of Councillors ...................................................................................... 117 7. Sealing of Documents Nil 8. Notices of Motion 8.1 Divestments ........................................................................................................ 121 8.2 Auditor General's Review into the Effectiveness of Support for Local Government .............................................................................................. 123 8.3 Mayoral Duties and Attendances ........................................................................ 125 8.4 Survey on Council Performance ......................................................................... 130 8.5 Opposition to Legalisation of Mixed Martial Arts.................................................. 131 9. General Business 10. Urgent Business Closure of Meeting

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 2

2.1

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

2.1

ROSANNA ROAD AND DAREBIN STREET PROPOSED SCHOOL CROSSING SUPERVISOR

Author:

Daniel Kollmorgen - Manager Transport, Sustainability and Municipal Laws, City Development

Ward:

Griffin

File:

F2015/57

Previous Items Council on 17 November 2014 (Item 4.2 - School Crossing Superviser Program Update) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council provides supervisors at school crossings throughout the municipality to improve the safety of children walking to and from schools. Requests for new crossings and supervisors are considered against VicRoadsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; warrants. Concerns were received in relation to pedestrian safety at the signalised intersection of Rosanna Road and Darebin Street, Heidelberg, at school pick-up and drop-off times. The number of children and vehicles at the intersection show that it meets the appropriate warrants for a State Government crossing supervisor subsidy. The site has been included in the 2015/16 application to VicRoads. Due to the volume and nature of the traffic on Rosanna Road, it is proposed that the site be supervised as soon as a crossing supervisor is available, given the safety concerns at this location. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Fund a school crossing supervisor at the signalised intersection of Rosanna Road and Darebin Street, Heidelberg, as soon as a crossing supervisor is available, given the safety concerns at the location.

Work with Heidelberg Primary School and Good Start Early Childcare Centre to encourage walking/cycling as a means of accessing the school.

Notify Heidelberg Primary School and Good Start Early Childcare Centre of this resolution.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 3

2.1

People – Community Strengthening and Support

ROSANNA ROAD AND DAREBIN STREET - PROPOSED SCHOOL CROSSING SUPERVISOR cont’d CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “provide services for people at important life stages”. BACKGROUND Council is responsible for the ongoing review of the school crossing program including the operation of supervised school crossings throughout the municipality. Each year the State Government provides a subsidy to Council to offset 26.7% of the costs of the supervision at sites that meet specific warrants. Council must submit an application for this subsidy to VicRoads. The 2015/16 school crossing supervisor subsidy application has been submitted to VicRoads and it did not include this site in the original application. The request for amendment of the annual subsidy application was granted by VicRoads to allow this site to be included. Concerns have been received relating to pedestrian safety at the signalised intersection of Rosanna Road and Darebin Street, Heidelberg. The concerns noted that motorists frequently failed to stop at the red light and speed through the intersection when the pedestrian green lights are displayed. Further, when traffic is at a gridlock, the concerns indicate that vehicles regularly block the crossing and pedestrians are required to navigate between vehicles. These issues are worse during school drop off (8:30am-9:30am) and pick up (3:00pm-4:00pm) times when children are using the crossing. A locality plan showing the subject location in relation to Heidelberg Primary School and the Early Learning Heidelberg Childcare Centre is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 – Locality Map, intersection of Rosanna Road and Darebin Street, Heidelberg

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 4

ROSANNA ROAD AND DAREBIN STREET - PROPOSED SCHOOL CROSSING SUPERVISOR cont’d An assessment of the warrants for a school crossing supervisor at the intersection of Rosanna Road and Darebin Street, Heidelberg has been undertaken in relation to VicRoads guidelines. The guidelines indicate that an unsupervised crossing is warranted where 20 or more students cross the road and the traffic volume exceeds 50 vehicles during any hour on a normal school day. For a supervised children’s crossing to be warranted for a primary school, the number of children crossing at the crossing (minimum 20) multiplied by the number of vehicles (minimum 100) must exceed 5,000. Pedestrian and vehicle counts were undertaken at this intersection in February 2015. The results of these counts are provided in Table 1. Table 1 – Pedestrian and Vehicle Data – Rosanna Road and Darebin Street, Heidelberg Date Thursday, 12 Feb 2015 Warrants Unsupervised School Crossing Supervised School Crossing (Primary School)

Pedestrians 27

Vehicles 3255

Multiple 87,885

20 20

50 100

1,000 5,000

In accordance with VicRoads’ guidelines, this site is eligible for VicRoads subsidy funding for a supervised children’s crossing. The 2015/16 funding application has been forwarded to VicRoads, however VicRoads has indicated that it would consider this location as an additional site. FUNDING IMPLICATIONS The provision of a permanent school crossing supervisor is estimated to cost approximately $10,000 per year. Recently, VicRoads subsidy has covered around 27% of the costs and the remaining 73% has been borne by Council. The costs include staffing, training and equipment costs. Consideration could be given to the installation of a school crossing supervisor at the intersection of Rosanna Road and Darebin Street, Heidelberg prior to the receipt of the subsidy funding. However, this is likely to incur a cost overrun of the current school crossing budget for the 2015/16 financial year of approximately $4,000. CONCLUSION Following requests from the community, a survey for pedestrian and traffic volumes was undertaken at the intersection of Rosanna Road and Darebin Street, Heidelberg. The results of the survey indicate that the site meets the warrants for a school crossing supervisor under VicRoads’ guidelines. Due to the volume and nature of traffic on Rosanna Road, it is proposed that a school crossing supervisor be provided at the intersection of Rosanna Road and Darebin Street, Heidelberg as soon as a school crossing supervisor is available, given the safety concerns at this location.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 5

2.1

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2.2

"VICTORIA CROSS" ESTATE, MACLEOD IMPROVING RECOGNITION OF THE VICTORIA CROSS RECIPIENTS STREET NAMES

Author:

Michael Hutchison - Projects Coordinator, City Development

Ward:

Ibbott

File:

F2013/923

Previous Items Council on 15 September 2014 (Item 8.4 - Victoria Cross Estate) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At its meeting on 15 September 2014, Council resolved through a Notice of Motion that officers investigate, with appropriate authorities, how to better honour and recognise the Victoria Cross recipients that are currently acknowledged through their names on street signs in Macleod’s Victoria Cross Estate. In response to the Notice of Motion and in consultation with the Victorian Government, a series of interpretive signs featuring Victoria Cross recipients name; battalion; the date; location and battle in which their bravery was recognised, is proposed. This is further complemented by the proposed replacement of existing standard street signage with new blades that feature the official Anzac Centenary logo for improved visual prominence. Supported through a $3,600 grant from the Victorian Government’s ‘Centenary of Anzac’ program coupled with a further $1,000 in grant funds from the Office of Geographic Names along with Council’s own financial contribution, the fabrication and installation of the new signage can now be facilitated in the lead up to the Centenary of Anzac celebrations pending Council’s authorisation and endorsement. RECOMMENDATION That Council 1.

Progress the installation of street blade signage honouring VC recipients;

Approve the design and installation of three commemorative display signs from the available 2014/15 Budget;

Notify local residents of the project via a letter from the Mayor and Ibbott Ward Councillor;

Further develop and refine designs and installation locations of signage in consultation with Councillors;

Investigate the costs of installing a gateway treatment within the Victoria Cross Estate and consider funding in a future capital works budget.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 6

2.2

People – Community Strengthening and Support

"VICTORIA CROSS" ESTATE, MACLEOD - IMPROVING RECOGNITION OF THE VICTORIA CROSS RECIPIENTS STREET NAMES cont’d 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. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “celebrate and promote Banyule’s diversity and heritage”. BACKGROUND Acknowledging that 25 April 2015, ANZAC Day, marks 100 years since the Gallipoli landings and is our nation’s annual commemorative day for acknowledging and remembering those who served not only in WWI, but in conflicts and operations throughout the last century - at its Ordinary Meeting of 15 September 2014, Council resolved that: 1.

Council investigate and work with the appropriate authorities regarding how to better honour an recognise the recipients (being Jacka, Cherry, Dunstan, McNamara, Joynt, Grieve, Ruthven, Dwyer and Kenna) of the Victoria Cross (VC) in World War 1 (known then as The Great War) in the area locally known as the Victoria Cross Estate.

A report be presented back to Council and include: a. b.

d. e.

Using the Victoria Cross symbol and the expression “Victoria Cross Estate” on all street signs within the estate. Approval may be required. Creating billboards to be located in the various public places within the Victoria Cross Estate with pictures of all those honoured and the details of actions and life stories. The possible locations being the large roundabout outside the Railway Station, Cherry Street Avenue of Honour (approval from the City of Darebin will be required), the parks/playgrounds, shopping centre, the YMCA etc. Constructing a pathway along the Darebin Council side of the Cherry Street. There is currently a “goat track” and seating along the roadway. This is within the City of Darebin and funding should be sought from them. Banyule may contribute like it did along Kingsbury Drive. Whether the VC Estate was designed by Walter Burley Griffin and whether we should honour him at the same time. The ability for some proposed works to be completed by ANZAC next year and the remainder in the future budgets.

CURRENT SITUATION Following a thorough investigation researching the history of the Victoria Cross Estate and the award recipients in which streets within the estate are named, officers successfully prepared an application for funding through the Victorian Government’s Victorian Anzac Centenary Fund via the Department of Premier and Cabinet. This

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 7

2.2

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2.2

People – Community Strengthening and Support

"VICTORIA CROSS" ESTATE, MACLEOD - IMPROVING RECOGNITION OF THE VICTORIA CROSS RECIPIENTS STREET NAMES cont’d was further supplemented by a separate application to the Victorian Government’s Office of Geographic Names. Noting that both grant applications were not fully funded, Council is now required to consider and confirm the current project scope by way of contributing its own funding to bring the project to fruition. The current project scope seeks to: 1. Installation of Street Blade Signage Council has secured $3,600 in grant funds from the Victorian Government to celebrate the Centenary of ANZAC. These funds, together with $1,000 from the Office of Geographic Names (OGN) will enable the installation of new street blade signs honouring the nine Victoria Cross recipients. For completeness, it is also suggested that the recognition of Private Bruce Kingsbury, who was awarded a posthumous VC in World War 2 be acknowledged as well. Kingsbury Drive heads west from the intersection of Waiora Road and Ruthven Street, the western boundary of the Victoria Cross Estate. Attachment 1 to this report lists the details of each VC recipient who will be acknowledged through this grant funded initiative. The commemorative street sign is proposed to include the:  VC recipient’s name,  battalion,  the date,  location; and battle in which their bravery was recognised. The left hand side of the sign will include Council’s logo and the Centenary of Anzac logo. Attachment 2 to this report shows a draft layout of the street blade sign. The inclusion of the Victoria Cross emblem (which requires approval from the Commonwealth Government) is not proposed for this signage. This will decrease the amount of information on the limited space available on a street sign.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 8

"VICTORIA CROSS" ESTATE, MACLEOD - IMPROVING RECOGNITION OF THE VICTORIA CROSS RECIPIENTS STREET NAMES cont’d Locality Plan The area discussed in the report is shown below:

Figure 1: “Victoria Cross” estate, Macleod

2. Commemorative Display Signs Three interpretive signs are proposed for installation in the Council owned and managed semicircular grassed area on McNamara Street opposite the heavily pedestrianised Macleod Railway Station (shown in figure 1). Funded by Council, the signs will honour the bravery of the nine VC recipients who have streets named after them in the VC Estate. The signs will be constructed of graffiti resistant baked enamel to ensure maximum longevity. Text and images will be printed on both sides of the three signs, and it is envisaged that the signs will be installed in a semi-circle, enabling passers-by to view each sign with ease. Officers are currently seeking permission from the Commonwealth Government for use of the official Victoria Cross emblem within the design of the proposed signage. Comprising display panels 2m wide x 1m high mounted in a powder coated 1.8m high frame, the three signs will contain:   

Information on the establishment of the estate, which was marketed for sale from early 1919 as the Macleod Estate and designed by town planner and surveyor Saxil Tuxen. Pictures and history of the Avenue of Honour (on Cherry Street) which is located adjacent to the VC estate in the City of Darebin. Text and images honouring each of the nine Victoria Cross recipients.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 9

2.2

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2.2

People – Community Strengthening and Support

"VICTORIA CROSS" ESTATE, MACLEOD - IMPROVING RECOGNITION OF THE VICTORIA CROSS RECIPIENTS STREET NAMES cont’d  

A timeline which is to run along the bottom of each sign, placing in context the date and location of the battle in which the bravery of the VC recipient was recognised and to be supported by maps showing the location of these battles. Council’s logo.

The design of these signs will be modelled on the commemorative sign that is to be installed in Mount Street Heidelberg, honouring the memory of Fred Lasslett, World War 2 Prisoner of War. See below for an indication of the size, but not content, of the proposed commemorative sign.

Figure 2 – Indicative Display Signs (styles)

The budget for these signs is intended to come from Council’s available Corporate Signage Budget. Quotes received for design, fabrication and installation of the three signs, including securing permissions and reproductions of historic photographs of each VC recipient from the Australian War Museum will cost a total of $25,200. 3. Companion Works The location of the proposed commemorative sign is the semicircular grassed area opposite Macleod Station on the west side of McNamara Street. This land is road reserve, not public open space. Its only improvement is the shared path installed in partnership with the City of Darebin with the support of the Victorian Government a number of years ago. In anticipation of the installation of commemorative signage, Council’s Assets, Parks and Gardens departments have jointly funded the installation of an additional concrete footpath which has replaced the worn dirt path heading west from the pedestrian crossing to the bus stop at the intersection of Macleod Street. These works have been funded through existing maintenance budgets and has been delivered. 4. Letter to Darebin Council – Avenue of Honour A letter was recently sent from the Mayor, Cr. Craig Langdon on behalf of Banyule Council to the Mayor of Darebin Council, Cr. Steven Tsitas requesting the consideration of investments that might improve the appearance and public recognition of the Avenue of Honour, and complement Banyule City Council’s investment in celebrating this important centenary.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 10

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2.2

"VICTORIA CROSS" ESTATE, MACLEOD - IMPROVING RECOGNITION OF THE VICTORIA CROSS RECIPIENTS STREET NAMES cont’d CONCLUSION Completion of the proposed works will be a significant step towards improving the recognition of the Australian Victoria Cross recipients honoured in street names at the Macleod Estate (locally known as the “Victoria Cross” estate) in the current centenary period of the First World War (1914-1918). ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Attachment 1 - list of street names

135

Attachment 2 - street sign blade draft example

137

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page

Page 11

3.1

URBAN FOREST PLAN

Author:

Peter Benazic - Manager Parks & Gardens, Assets & City Services

File:

F2014/6062

3.1

Planet – Environmental Sustainability

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of the Urban Forest Plan is to provide a clear strategic direction that underpins the sustainable management of Banyule street trees and park trees. The City Plan identifies the development of this plan as a priority objective which is consistent with the views expressed by our community. The Urban Forest Plan responds to the community desire for ongoing stewardship of trees. The plan articulates the multitude of benefits that trees provide for our community. It also identifies a number of challenges and provides clear and ambitious objectives to sustain Banyule’s tree population through targeted actions. Trees evoke a range of divergent views from our community and as a result this plan has endeavoured to capture the sentiment or residents and stakeholders groups. The feedback collected from the community through a thorough and extensive consultation process has been generally positive. Council has been complimented on the development of the strategic approach to this important asset class. The feedback also identified some areas of improvement. The Urban Forest Plan identifies 11 goals that will support implementation of the Plan to ensure that Banyule’s Urban Forest continues to thrive, provide the ongoing environmental benefits and meet the expectation of our community. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Adopt the Urban Forest Plan

Make the plan available to the public on the Council web site

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. 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.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 13

3.1

Planet – Environmental Sustainability

URBAN FOREST PLAN cont’d CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “protect and enhance our natural environment”. The plan aims to meet the key initiatives which are; o

Raise community awareness of Banyule’s Urban Forest.

Finalise and implement an Urban Forestry Policy and Strategic Plan to improve the quality and quantity of the city’s urban forest.

Work towards further establishing and building the profile of urban forestry in Banyule and supporting action on canopy enhancement in the public and private realm.

Inspect and protect our treed environment in public places through Council’s Parks and Gardens service area, including collection of scientific data on the City’s public realm trees to assist the maintenance and protection of our urban forest.

Work with the Banyule community to broaden our understanding of the benefits and importance of our urban forest, and increase our connection to them.

BACKGROUND The vision for the Urban Forest is to “enhance our dynamic urban forest so that it continues to provide community health benefits and contributes towards neighbourhood character for current and future generations” this is consistent with Councils City Plan Vision. The City of Banyule’s Urban Forest is currently a thriving diverse mix of exotics, natives and indigenous remnant vegetation. There is an estimated 65,000 street trees in Banyule. There are also over 50,000 park trees in maintained open space areas and over 110,000 reserve trees in remnant vegetation stands and native areas of significance that Council manages. The Urban Forest Plan identifies that there are increasing complexities in an ever changing urban environment. Issues such as increasing urban density, rising levels of customer service expectation, aging infrastructure, increasing litigious activity, extreme climate events, cultural diversity, threats to biodiversity, rising costs of resources are considered in this plan. Council and the community acknowledge the positive impact that our urban trees, parks and bushland reserve have on Banyule’s unique character. The Plan aims to strengthen environmental stewardship which is consistent with Councils Planet Policy Frameworks. Specifically the importance of our living landscapes in providing basic ecosystem amenities such as clean air, clean water, shelter and habitat. To ensure that Plan had the appropriate rigour and factual content a stratified sample inspection of Banyule’s street tree population was undertaken using an internationally recognised software tool. 11,604 trees were examined, noting their size, health and maturity. The analysis of the data determined that the tree population was in a

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 14

URBAN FOREST PLAN cont’d generally good state of health, trees were generally structurally sound and there was a diverse spread of tree life expectancies. The results of the detailed inspection indicated that Eucalyptus species and other natives specie are dominant in the city landscape. The information also provides a basis for calculations for economic values trees provide across a number attributes such as carbon storage, energy offsets etc. Through an understanding of the state of the existing urban forest, a series of goals have been developed to meet proposed vision for Banyule’s Urban Forest. The proposed goals are ambitious, yet achievable and through complementary programs of tree planting, routine maintenance and community engagement. The implementation of these goals will lead to the sustainable management of one of Banyule City Council’s most valuable assets. The goals are as follows:           

Increase canopy cover in public land Encourage an increase in canopy cover on private land Increase environmental benefits of urban forest Improve health of urban forest Improve biodiversity Maintain and improve urban character Raise the profile of the urban forest within Council Improve community engagement with the urban forest Improve establishment rate of new tree plantings Improve species selection Apply world best practice

These goals will be successful though a series of actions working towards definable measures and achieved within the current budget parameters. In conjunction with the development of the Plan a number supporting operational procedures were also reviewed. Council is cognisant of the need to ensure that public safety considerations are met and supported through the appropriate operational procedures. This occurs in conjunction with 2 year routine safety and maintenance inspections of all street trees. CONSULTATION There was extensive consultation undertaken for the Plan including:  Presentation to the Banyule Environment Advisory Committee (BEAC) in late 2014 and in March 2015.  Feedback from relevant Council departments to ensure it was congruent with organisational policies.  Two public forums.  Council’s social media platform was also used to encourage feedback.  Published on Council’s web page with a facility for community feedback.  The Parks staff also undertook an infield information collection process in which two hundred surveys were conducted during Council events. A common feedback point is reflected in the following comment “I commend the concept of an Urban Forest Strategy and agree with the range of community benefits specified in the draft document. The idea of managing all the trees within the municipality in one integrated strategy is sound and will enhance the amenity of

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 15

3.1

Planet – Environmental Sustainability

3.1

Planet – Environmental Sustainability

URBAN FOREST PLAN cont’d Banyule” This comment was consistently echoed throughout the consultation process. The consultation process also revealed that the community understood the concept of habitat creation and encouraged the use of dead trees for this purpose in appropriate locations. There was comment regarding identifying greater engagement and promotion with volunteers for greening activities. Whilst the feedback regarding benefits of trees was generally positive there was also comment provided regarding the issues that trees create. One comment requested additional consideration to “help residents when they are impacted by injury and damage caused by trees”. Issues such as leaf, bark and branch drop created significant concern for some members of the community. Distortion to street infrastructure was also highlighted as a concern by some people and has been the subject of petition to Council in recent times. Comment regarding excessive tree size and the potential for damage was also raised. The infield survey data found that 99% people considered it was important that Banyule maintained trees in parks and streets and there was strong support for continued tree planting in both parks and streets. In relation to tree size 69% of those surveyed had a preference for medium to large trees. There was mixed response to species selection with 44% of respondent’s preferring native tree to exotic trees and 47% preferring that Council use both native and exotic. In relation to tree nuisance issues 19% of the respondents identified leaf drop as an issue, 29% damage to footpaths was a concern and 43% indicated that there we no issues of concern. Feedback was also received regarding strengthening community participation in tree planting activities to create greater community ownership. The importance of local providence species was mooted to ensure that local fauna establishment opportunities were optimised. FUNDING IMPLICATIONS The budget for tree maintenance activities which support the Urban Forest Plan is funded through the existing operating budget. A graduated capital works funding program will be submitted for consideration in the Council Budget for increased tree planting and establishment. Relevant grants pertaining to greening projects will also be sought from Federal and State Government agencies as they become available. CONCLUSION The Urban Forest Plan clearly demonstrates Council’s ongoing commitment to our natural environment. The Plan has incorporated in-depth analysis and contemporary thinking to demonstrate the broad values that trees provide for the liveability of the City for its citizens and wildlife. Whilst trees have traditionally be valued for their amenity and environmental attributes the Plan clearly demonstrates the broader value and benefits of trees.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Banyule Urban Forest Plan

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 138

Page 16

Planet – Environmental Sustainability

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

3.1

URBAN FOREST PLAN cont’d

Page 17

4.1

NORTH EAST LINK - QUARTERLY REPORT

Author:

Daniel Kollmorgen - Manager Transport, Sustainability and Municipal Laws, City Development

File:

F2013/333

Previous Items Council on 10 November 2014 (Item 4.4 - North East Link - Quarterly Report) Council on 7 July 2014 (Item 4.4 - North East Link - Quarterly Report) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY To provide Council with a status update on planning for the proposed North East Link, which in summary is that:   

The State Election was held on Saturday 29 November and resulted in a change of Government, from Liberal to Labor. The Hon Luke Donnellan MP is the new Minister for Roads and Road Safety. The Labor Party’s transport document “Project 10,000” released in 2013, makes no reference to the North East Link. VicRoads have met with Council recently on a number of occasions and are beginning to establish a renewed working relationship. At the most recent meeting, VicRoads indicated that they are waiting to hear from the new Government on its transport plans and priorities.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Write to the Hon Luke Donnellan MP, Minister for Roads and Road Safety, seeking advice on the Government’s plans for the North East Link and the truck curfew trial proposed for some declared Main Roads in Banyule;

Follow up with VicRoads on the status of the Rosanna Road working group.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 19

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

NORTH EAST LINK - QUARTERLY REPORT cont’d 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. BACKGROUND Council considered an initial report on the status of the proposed North East Link and an overview of relevant Council resolutions and positions on the link, regional transport, and associated heritage and environmental issues at its meeting on 14 December 2009. Council resolved in part as follows: “That Council officers report to the Council every three months on the response from the Minister, VicRoads or other Government departments or agencies on progress in the planning of the North-East link.” In line with this resolution Council considered the most recent report on this matter on 10 November 2014, and resolved that Council: “1.

Make a submission to VicRoads on the proposed Principal Traffic Flow Network (PTFN) within Banyule including: a.

Concern that all Yarra River crossing around Banyule are proposed to be on the PTFN. It is considered appropriate that public transport and bicycles should have some priority at scare river crossings, Feedback that Rosanna Road/Greensborough Highway should not be on the Principal Traffic Flow Network, consistent with Council’s position on the precedent road user hierarchy and preferred traffic route.

Take up VicRoads suggestion to form a working group to investigate solutions for the safety and amenity impacts of traffic on Rosanna Road”

In accordance with item 1 of this resolution, on 16 January, Council made a submission on the draft Principal Traffic Flow Network (PTFN) to VicRoads. The draft PTFN is defined by VicRoads as the preferred route for business and freight traffic. The submission supported the seven key principles of the PTFN, however the implementation of the principles identifies some issues for the road network across Banyule, including Rosanna Road/Greensborough Highway. Principle 1 states that the draft PTFN supports economic growth by identifying strategic routes for regional movement of people and freight. Council submited that Rosanna Road/Greensborough Highway has significant safety and amenity issues with current traffic volumes and the road appears to have no capacity to support further economic growth. It is considered that Rosanna Road/Greensborough Highway should therefore not be included in the PTFN, consistent with Council’s position on the precedent road user hierarchy and preferred traffic route. Furthermore, the North East Link has not been included in the PTFN as a ‘Future Link’ even though several long term road proposals around Melbourne have been included. Council’s submission sought further clarification of this issue.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 20

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.1

NORTH EAST LINK - QUARTERLY REPORT cont’d Banyule supported the following roads not being part of the PTFN:       

Grimshaw Street, The Circuit and Para Road – Greensborough Activity Centre. Heidelberg Road (Chandler Highway to Lower Heidelberg Road). Lower Heidelberg Road (Heidelberg Road to Upper Heidelberg Road – Ivanhoe East shopping centre). Upper Heidelberg Road (Heidelberg Road to Bell-Banksia Link – Ivanhoe shopping centre). Burgundy Street – Heidelberg shopping centre. Lower Heidelberg Road (Bell-Banksia Link to Lower Plenty Road) Lower Plenty Road (Lower Heidelberg Road to Rosanna Road – Rosanna shopping Centre.

No response has yet been received from VicRoads. In accordance with item 2 of this resolution, VicRoads is currently working through the arrangements for the Rosanna Road Working Group. CURRENT SITUATION The State Election was held on Saturday 29 November and resulted in a change of Government, from Liberal to Labor. The Hon Luke Donnellan MP is the new Minister for Roads and Road Safety. In July 2014, Council wrote to the State Government and Opposition requesting an assessment and solution to the ever increasing traffic volumes and conditions on Rosanna Road. A response was received from Luke Donnellan MP, the then Shadow Minister for Roads, Road Safety and TAC. Mr Donnellan’s response indicated that he “agrees that Rosanna Road requires a number of measures to lessen congestion and address truck measures for local residents. Victorian Labor is considering your requests”. Mr Donnellan has not indicated his position on the North East Link. In 2013, Victorian Labor released its alternative vision for transport in Victoria, entitled Project 10,000. As part of Project 10,000, Victorian Labor promised:     

Removal of 50 worst level crossings on the metropolitan rail network (including Lower Plenty Road, Rosanna crossing) Build Melbourne Metro Rail Get 5,000 trucks a day off the West Gate Bridge Guarantee $2 billion for country and suburban roads, and Create 10,000 construction jobs

Project 10,000 made no reference to the North East Link. In November 2014 prior to the State Election, the Labor Party announced a trial truck curfew on a number of arterial roads throughout Banyule. The curfew will run between 10pm and 6am, seven days a week. The truck curfew will be implemented on:   

Greensborough Highway, between Grimshaw Street and Banksia Street, Rosanna Road, between Lower Plenty Road and Banksia Street, Lower Plenty Rd/Main Rd, between Greensborough Road and Fitzsimons Lane,

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 21

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

NORTH EAST LINK - QUARTERLY REPORT cont’d     

Para Road, between Grimshaw Street and Lower Plenty Road, St Helena Road/Karingal Dr, between Grimshaw St and Bolton Street, Bolton Street, between Karingal Drive and Main Road, Waiora Road, between Kingsbury Drive and Banksia Street, and Waterdale Road between Kingsbury Drive and Bell Street

The curfew will be a twelve month trial, assessed by VicRoads in consultation with the community. VicRoads will work with local councils to ensure the curfew doesn’t affect local streets. No indication has yet been provided on the timing of the trial period from the State Government. CONCLUSION At the 29 November 2014 State Election, the Australian Labor Party was successful and has formed a new Labor Government. At this stage, the Andrews Government’s position on the North East Link is unknown. Council officers and VicRoads officers have met twice since the previous North East Link report was tabled to Council and are beginning to establish a renewed working relationship. At the most recent meeting in January 2015, VicRoads indicated that they were waiting to hear from the new Government on its transport plans. The Labor Government propose to introduce a trial truck ban on arterial roads across Banyule, including Rosanna Road and Greensborough Highway. The curfew will run between 10pm and 6am, seven days a week, and be in place for a 12 month period. Further information should be sought from the State Government on the timing of the truck ban trial. ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 22

4.2

REVIEW OF TRAFFIC AROUND LOYOLA COLLEGE, WATSONIA

Author:

Ana Caicedo - Project Engineer, City Development

Ward:

Grimshaw

File:

F2014/704

4.2

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

Previous Items Council on 21 July 2014 (Item 4.1 - Bungay Street, Watsonia - Traffic Investigation) Council on 17 March 2014 (Item 8.4 - Investigation - Traffic Challenges Bungay Street, Watsonia) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Following the Council Resolution of 21 July 2014, additional parking restrictions were introduced in Bungay Street and Kenmare Street near Loyola College, Watsonia, on 22 September 2014. Traffic operations in the area have now been reviewed and it is proposed to introduce additional measures to minimise ongoing traffic conflicts and encourage a one-way traffic operation in the area around Loyola College. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Notes that the trial of the following parking restrictions has been completed and that they will remain in place: a.

No Stopping restrictions (8.00 – 9.00am and 2.30 – 4.00pm School Days) on the south side of Bungay Street and the east side of Kenmare Street (between Bungay Street and Princes Street); Two minute parking (8.00 – 9.00am and 2.30 – 4.00pm School Days) on the north side of Bungay Street along the Loyola College frontage;

Notify residents and install No Stopping restrictions (8.00 – 9.00am and 2.30 – 4.00pm School Days) on the west side of High Street, between Bungay Street and Princess Street;

Investigate parking occupancy levels and consult with residents in Loyola Court and Regis Court Watsonia on the possible installation of time parking restrictions;

Consult with Loyola College, local residents, and the Victoria Police about a proposed trial to: a. b.

Restrict traffic access from Watsonia Road into Bungay Street (8.00 – 9.00am and 2.30 – 4.00pm School Days). Prohibit access from Princes Street into High Street.

Notes that Municipal Laws Officers regularly enforce the road rules around Loyola College.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 23

4.2

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

REVIEW OF TRAFFIC AROUND LOYOLA COLLEGE, WATSONIA cont’d

Receive a further report on the traffic operations of streets surrounding Loyola College six months after the installation of any access restrictions resulting from the consultation in resolution 4. 7.

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. 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 its meeting on 21 July 2014, Council considered a report of the results of an investigation into the traffic challenges in Bungay Street, Watsonia, and connected streets as a consequence of pick-ups and drop-offs at Loyola College, and resolved: “That Council: 1. Implement the proposed 3 month trial of No Stopping restrictions (8.00 – 9.00am and 2.30 – 4.00pm School Days) on the southern side of Bungay Street and the Eastern side of Kenmare Street (between Bungay Street and Princes Street) and 2 minute parking (8.00 – 9.00am and 2.30 – 4.00pm School Days) on the northern side of Bungay Street along the Loyola College frontage. 2. Formalise the arrangements after a 3 month trial provided there are no further concerns regarding traffic congestion. If there are ongoing congestion issues, residents and Loyola College be consulted with regard to the implementation of turn bans at selected locations during school drop off / pick up times. 3. Advises residents and Loyola College of this resolution.” Following three months of regular school traffic and the operation of the parking restrictions in accordance to the above Council resolution, this report considers options to further reduce the traffic conflicts in the area. Figure 1 shows the area around the Loyola College and the existing school day parking restrictions.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 24

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

4.2

REVIEW OF TRAFFIC AROUND LOYOLA COLLEGE, WATSONIA contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d

Figure 1: Existing Parking Restrictions for School Days around Loyola College, Watsonia DISCUSSION Observations of the morning and afternoon peak traffic around the Loyola College show a reduction of traffic conflicts around the school following the installation of parking restrictions on the south side of Bungay Street, and on the east side of Kenmare Street Figure 2 highlights the main points for traffic conflicts that are of concern: 1.

Vehicles parked within 10m of the intersections, obstructing access to connecting roads. Mainly at the intersections of Bungay Street with Castlereagh Place, Loyola Court, and Regis Court. Vehicles parked on High Street, on both sides of the road, between Bungay Street and Princes Street, reducing the trafficable road space to less than 4m with conflicts between north and south bound traffic. High number of turning movements at the intersection of High Street and Bungay Street.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 25

4.2

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

REVIEW OF TRAFFIC AROUND LOYOLA COLLEGE, WATSONIA cont’d

Figure 2: Traffic Conflict Locations during School Pick-up and Drop-off Times around Loyola College, Watsonia. Feedback received from residents of the area and parents of the school is consistent with these observations. Concerns have also been raised in regard to the level of allday parking in Loyola Court and Regis Court. To date, no comments have been received from the Loyola College. In order to improve the identified traffic conflicts in the area, it is proposed that: 1. 2.

Council’s Municipal Laws Officers increase the patrolling activity in the area to improve access to connecting streets. No Stopping restrictions are installed to operate between 8am and 9am, and 2:30pm and 4pm, on school days, on the west side of High Street, between Bungay Street and Princes Street to improve traffic flow. Loyola College, local residents and the Victoria Police be consulted on a proposal to prohibit the access from Watsonia Road into Bungay Street between 8am and 9am, and 2:30pm and 4pm, on school days. Residents of High Street between Princes Street and Bungay Street are consulted on a proposal to prohibit access into High Street (north of Princes Street) from Princes Street.

It is important that the Victoria Police is included in the consultation process given that they are responsible for the enforcement of the turn bans and access restrictions.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 26

REVIEW OF TRAFFIC AROUND LOYOLA COLLEGE, WATSONIA contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d This proposal promotes better traffic circulation through the local road network by encouraging one-way traffic operation. Figure 3 shows the proposed parking arrangements, turn bans and traffic direction.

Figure 3: Proposed Parking Restrictions and Possible Turn Bans for School Days around Loyola College, Watsonia A further review of how the proposed changes effects the traffic operations surrounding the school would be necessary at a six month period should any changes to access arrangements at Watsonia Road and Bungay Street or Princes Street and High Street occur following consultation. CONCLUSION The traffic operation around the Loyola College, Watsonia, has been reviewed and options to further improve the flow of traffic and road safety have been analysed. It is recommended that following notification and consultation with residents and Loyola College, the proposed changes as shown in Figure 3 are implemented. ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 27

4.2

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

4.3

ALPHINGTON PAPER MILLS PROPOSAL

Author:

Anne North - Senior Strategic Planner, City Development

File:

F2015/794

4.3

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Amcor site in Alphington (within the City of Yarra) is a 16.5 hectare parcel of land located on the corner of Heidelberg Road and the Chandler Highway and extending down to the Yarra River. Amcor ceased its paper recycling operations at the site in late 2012, and in June 2013, arranged for the land to be sold. A development plan has been produced that outlines the future use and development of the site. The development plan provides for an anticipated 4,800 residents as well as non-residential land uses including commercial, community, hospitality and retail. Although this site is located in the City of Yarra it is anticipated that the proposed development of the site may have an impact on the performance of the nearby Ivanhoe Activity Centre. Traffic congestion and capacity on the Hurstbridge railway line are also key issues. This report summarises what is proposed through the development plan and recommends that Council consider lodging a submission to the City of Yarra expressing issues in relation to off-site impacts. RECOMMENDATION That Council make a submission to Yarra City Council outlining issues in relation to the Alphington Paper Mills Development Plan, including the size of the retail component and its impact on the Ivanhoe Major Activity Centre as well as traffic and transport issues. 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. 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 The Amcor site in Alphington is a 16.5 hectare parcel of land bounded by Heidelberg Road, Parkview Road, Chandler Highway and the Yarra River. Amcor ceased its paper recycling operations at the site in late 2012, and in June 2013, arranged for the land to be sold.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 28

ALPHINGTON PAPER MILLS PROPOSAL cont’d

The site is zoned Mixed Use and is affected by various planning overlays including a Development Plan Overlay (DPO). The purpose of the DPO is:  

To identify areas which require the form and conditions of future use and development to be shown on a development plan before a permit can be granted to use or develop the land. To exempt an application from notice and review if it is generally in accordance with a development plan.

In late 2014 Yarra Council received a development plan from joint property developers Alpha Partners and Glenvill Group. The development plan seeks to convert the site into a major residential and commercial precinct, housing up to 4800 residents. The development plan will generally guide all future development applications for the site. Yarra City Council is the authority responsible for assessing and approving the development plan. Locality Plan

Map 1: Location of Alphington Paper Mill – Regional Context

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 29

4.3

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.3

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

ALPHINGTON PAPER MILLS PROPOSAL cont’d

Map 2: Location of Amcor site

PROPOSAL The majority of the site will accommodate residential development comprising a mix of apartments and houses ranging from 1 bedroom to 4 bedrooms. The development plan proposes 2,500 dwellings that will house up to 4,800 residents. The breakdown of residential accommodation is as follows: Dwelling Size 1 Bed 2 Bed 3 Bed 4 Bed

Number

Total %

948 1224 251 77

39% 49% 9% 3%

A total of 125 dwellings have been identified in the development plan for affordable housing. This represents 5% of total housing, which is a requirement of the DPO. There is no government funding currently available for this aspect of the development plan. However the developers and Yarra City Council are seeking partnerships with accredited housing associations to see whether a viable scheme can be delivered without government funding. The Amcor site is considered to be a suitable site for residential infill development however it is anticipated that there will be an off-site traffic impact in the area that will need to be addressed. These impacts are discussed in the ‘Issues’ section of this report. The development plan also proposes a ‘neighbourhood activity centre’ including 19,300sqm of retail floor space (incorporating supermarkets, speciality retail, restaurants and cafes) and a further 11,500sqm of office floor space. A total of 2,300 jobs are anticipated to be created, as well as 6,600 construction jobs.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 30

ALPHINGTON PAPER MILLS PROPOSAL cont’d The retailing activity within the site will be provided over a number of different precincts. The Village Centre precinct (Precinct 2) will contain the more conventional retailing offering of supermarket and specialty retailing, while Precinct 3, the Artisan Precinct will contain restaurants and cafes. The development plan promotes the commercial development on the site as a ‘neighbourhood activity centre’ however it is important to consider the competitive environment within which it will operate and the likely impacts. These impacts are discussed in the ‘Issues’ section of this report.

Map 3: Precinct Plan

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 31

4.3

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.3

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

ALPHINGTON PAPER MILLS PROPOSAL cont’d ISSUES In preparing a submission in response to the proposed Development Plan the following issues should be considered and addressed: Economic Impacts The Development Plan proposes more than 19,000sqm of retail floor area and is referred to as a ‘neighbourhood activity centre.’ This retail space will provide for one full line supermarket and one discount supermarket. It could be argued that this amount of floor space is beyond what would constitute a ‘neighbourhood centre’ in the hierarchy of activity centres. There are various competitive centres close to the subject site, most notably the Ivanhoe Major Activity Centre which is located 2.2km to the north east and has a retail floor area of 15,000sqm. There are currently no major supermarket traders within the Alphington trade area with shoppers travelling either to Northcote Plaza or Ivanhoe, or Kew for a full line supermarket. It is anticipated that the retail floor space proposed at this out of centre development may have a negative economic impact on the Ivanhoe Major Activity Centre. Traffic and Transport With up to 4,800 residents anticipated to be living at the Paper Mill site there will be a significant increase in traffic movements around the intersection of Heidelberg Road and Chandler Highway. This constrained intersection will impact significantly on Banyule residents heading south. There are two important transport capacity generating projects planned for the area that are yet to be realised:  

The Chandler Highway bridge duplication, and The grade separation of the Grange Road railway crossing

These planned projects highlight the existing transport constraints which limit the extent of traffic and transportation movement in and around the site during busier network operating periods. Various enhancements are also needed to support sustainable transport practises including the development of, and upgrade to, safe bicycle and pedestrian access routes in and around the subject site. The documentation supporting the development plan does little to address how the redevelopment will impact on train services on the Hurstbridge rail line. It is unclear whether the developers have consulted with Public Transport Victoria (PTV) and whether future upgrades to the Hurstbridge line will be considered. 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.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 32

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

4.3

ALPHINGTON PAPER MILLS PROPOSAL contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d CONSIDERATION OF FEEDBACK Yarra City Council is seeking feedback on the development plan for the former Amcor paper mill in Alphington. The period for community feedback will start on Monday, 2 March and end on Monday, 30 March 2015. Council has been advised that they have until 22 April 2015 to lodge a submission to allow for Council meeting scheduling. Yarra Council will consider all feedback when assessing the development plan. It will also seek feedback and approvals from relevant external authorities such as VicRoads. Yarra Council is expected to decide whether to approve the development plan in mid2015. If Council approves the development plan, the developers would have permission to progress the project. The developers would be required to submit planning applications to Council for separate stages of the development. The applications must be generally in accordance with the approved development plan and would not need to be publicly advertised. CONCLUSION Council has the opportunity to lodge a submission in relation to the Development Plan for the Alphington Paper Mills site outlining issues about the off-site impacts of the proposal. Submissions from Council are due by the 22 April 2015. A submission on behalf of Banyule Council will be prepared and submitted by this date in line with issues raised in this report. ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 33

4.4

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.4

BELL STREET MALL - A SAFER MALL

Author:

Ben Smith - Economic Development CoOrdinator, City Development

Ward:

Olympia

File:

F2015/167

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The ‘A Safer Mall’ project will implement a range of streetscape improvements designed to activate the Bell Street Mall (the Mall) and contribute to community safety and crime prevention objectives. The project is funded by the Department of Justice with a contribution from Council’s capital works program. Works are anticipated to be completed in June 2015 and will include:      

Diverse range of seating options catering for different user groups at the Mall. Improved lighting. Softer landscaping. Community artwork and photo-media lightboxes. Enhanced events facilities, including a stage. Introduction of more colour and visual interest.

This report seeks Council’s endorsement of the project. RECOMMENDATION That Council endorses the ‘A Safer Mall’ project for the Bell Street Mall and the implementation of the final designs. 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. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction 3.4 to “enhance Banyule’s public and open spaces”. BACKGROUND In April 2014 Council was successful in securing funds from the Department of Justice (DOJ) to contribute to crime prevention initiatives through the development and improvement of public safety and security infrastructure. The successful project application – ‘A Safer Mall’ – proposed a range of improvements to target public spaces in the Mall.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 34

BELL STREET MALL - A SAFER MALL cont’d Infrastructure grants of up to $250,000 could be applied for, in a competitive process, to support the development of new infrastructure, or the redevelopment of existing infrastructure to help improve community safety, security and confidence in public places. Council’s application for the funds referred to previous work that had been done at the Mall in recent years including extensive consultation and engagement in plans for wholescale redevelopment of the entire Mall site. The Bell Street Mall Master Plan and Urban Design Framework set high level goals and principles for achieving longer term objectives for the site, and these were used to underpin the objectives of the ‘A Safer Mall’ project. The objectives of the project are to: 1.

Enhance perceptions of safety through visual enhancements, lighting unsafe areas and space activation (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design principles (CPTED)) at the Mall. Seek to reduce crime and anti-social behaviour.

The project is focused on activation of the public spaces deemed to be most at risk from a crime prevention perspective. These areas were highlighted by a CPTED report that was completed by the Victoria Police to inform the funding application and project development. The final budget for the project, shown below, leveraged 76% of the total project cost (excluding in-kind support) from the State Government, with Banyule Council contributing the remaining 24%. Note that this excludes a further proposed Council allocation of $50,000 in Council’s draft 2015/16 capital works budget for replacement of the PVC canopy roof over the central event space at the Mall. Source Public Safety Infrastructure Fund – Department of Justice Banyule City Council (cash) Banyule City Council (in-kind) Total

Amount $229,227.27 $72,500.00 $12,060.00 $313,787.27

Once a funding agreement was in place between Council and the DOJ, and some initial project scoping work was completed, implementation of the consultation phase began. While some detail was provided to the DOJ about the works, they were proposed on the condition that further refinements would be made after the community and other stakeholders were given the opportunity to provide feedback. Project management structures were established, including an Officers Working Group, and an External Reference Group. The external reference group’s role is to provide feedback at key stages of the project, and is comprised of Council, Bell Street Mall Traders Association, individual traders, NMIT, 3081 Connect, Our Hub, efocus, Victoria Police, and the Heidelberg West Community Safety Group. Extensive project-specific consultation was carried out in August 2014, with three main conclusions. First, people wanted the project to have a bigger impact by being concentrated in one area, rather than dissipated over a wider area, with key features that demonstrated ‘something had been done’. Second, people wanted to see more colour, contributing to the sense of a strong visual impact. Third, people wanted to see more greenery in the Mall.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 35

4.4

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.4

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

BELL STREET MALL - A SAFER MALL cont’d The project was modified to accommodate the strong preferences from community consultation, and refined with consultation from the External Reference Group. The final designs comprise of:        

Rebuilt planters around the trees providing more comfortable seating and removal of much of the existing metal seating. Installation of new plants and greenery. Colourful new surfacing at the central space outside the post office to replace the current cracked paving. Softer landscaping with artificial turf outside Shop 48. Installation of feature concrete seating, with designs developed in collaboration with the local community. Improved lighting underneath shop canopies. A new decked ‘stage’ facing the central space for use at events. New community artwork and lightboxes along Oxford Arcade as well as upgraded lighting.

All of the proposed works respond to the key areas highlighted in the Mall CPTED report, and will contribute to the underlying community safety and crime prevention objectives of the ‘A Safer Mall’ project. CURRENT SITUATION The ‘A Safer Mall’ project is currently progressing through the procurement stage, and a tender process is underway. An advert was placed in The Age on 21 February, with a closing date for tender responses of 17 March. It is anticipated that a contractor will be selected by April, with works commencing in May and completed in June. While the works specified in the detailed designs are anticipated to use all allocated funds, a small contingency has been allowed for in the budget. In the event that these contingency funds are not fully used, further works will be carried out to additional spaces in the Mall, including the section close to Tobruk Avenue. Such works are likely to include replacement of street furniture including seats and tables to a design and finish in keeping with the main works. FUNDING IMPLICATIONS A funding agreement between Council and the Department of Justice defines the scope and parameters of the DOJ funds. Council has agreed to spend the funds in line with the details provided in the original funding application unless a variation request is made and approved by the DOJ. One such variation has been made to change the construction start date of the project and provide further detail about the project deliverables. This variation was made to allow for various design changes that were made to accommodate the outcomes of community consultation. Any further substantial changes at this stage of the project would be very likely to push the construction dates into the 2015/16 financial year which would jeopardise the availability of Council and DOJ funds. CONSULTATION The table below provides a summary of the consultation activity carried out and the impact of each event or process on the project.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 36

BELL STREET MALL - A SAFER MALL cont’d Date

Event / process and consultation

Impact of consultation

2009

Initial application – Shaped around objectives and principles of Mall Master Plan and UDF, which had extensive community consultation in 2009.

Strongly influenced proposals, with a focus on activation of the space

13 Aug 2014

External Reference Group – Meeting with representation from Cr Langdon, BSMTA, individual traders, NMIT, 3081 Connect, Our Hub, e-focus, Victoria Police, and the Heidelberg West Community Safety Group.

Emphasised need to engage with community, but be realistic about what could be achieved, and manage expectations.

21, 22 and 23 Aug 2014

Walk-by consultation sessions at the Mall for three days, with opportunity given to provide open comment, as well as complete a survey (over 140 surveys completed by residents, shoppers and traders).

Strong preference from the community for more focused improvements that introduced more colour and more greenery to the space, and had a bigger visual impact

19 Nov 2014

Bell Street Mall Traders Association AGM – Presentation and discussion about proposals, including main focus of improvements and refinements being made to plans to accommodate views from consultation.

Broad approval of proposals with no further comments or concerns raised, other than being kept informed.

2 Dec 2014

External Reference Group – Group was presented with latest plans from landscape architect. Community Walk at Dusk – The main purpose of this exercise was to inform the evaluation of PSIF (a similar walk will be completed after the improvements, and the results of the two compared), however the comments were also relayed to the landscape architect.

Various small refinements.

2 Dec 2014

Small changes made to plans. For instance, concern was raised about sight lines in Oxford Arcade. Consequently proposed planter boxes were replaced with proposed tree surround treatments.

TIMELINES Date Apr 2014 Aug 2014 Oct to Dec 2014 Dec 2014 Feb 2015 Apr 2015 May to Jun 2015

Milestone Confirmation of successful funding application to DOJ Extensive community consultation Refinement of designs Display of final designs and visualisations at Shop 48 in the Mall Commencement of procurement process Confirm contractors Implement construction

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 37

4.4

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.4

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

BELL STREET MALL - A SAFER MALL cont’d CONCLUSION The ‘A Safer Mall’ project presents an exciting opportunity to improve public spaces that currently contribute to people’s perceptions of safety in the Mall. The final designs strike a balance between contributing to community safety outcomes, activating underutilised public areas and making an impact on the space that the community expressed a strong desire for. While the funds available and the community safety focus of the project mean that a comprehensive beautification of the Mall cannot be achieved with this project, the improvements take a significant step in the right direction at the Mall after many years of perceived underinvestment. Further investment, such as the refurbishment of Shop 48 and Council’s allocation of $50,000 for replacement of the PVC canopy roof in the draft 2015/16 capital works budget, will continue to have a positive impact on activation of the Mall. It must also be noted that Council’s remit within these improvements can only extend to the public spaces. During consultation it was reinforced that people’s perceptions of the Mall are also driven by the condition and appearance of private property within the space. Council continues to encourage traders and property owners at the Mall to invest and improve the spaces they are responsible for to complement Council and State Government investment.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

A Safer Mall - Final detailed design plans

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 175

Page 38

4.5

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.5

PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT REGULATIONS

Author:

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

File:

F2015/78

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Planning and Environment Regulations 2005 are required to be reviewed every 10 years. The Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) are seeking comment in relation to changes proposed to the Regulations. While very few changes are proposed to the Regulations, having regard to Council’s previous submission to the review of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, it is considered that the proposed changes fail to address the absence of a ‘complex’ planning application stream and the need for a prescribed timeframe which is greater than the current 60 days and appreciates the complexity of many larger applications. The DELWP argues that these matters are beyond the scope of this review and has invited that Council’s provide further information and evidence to support further investigation of changes. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Make a submission to the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning in relation to the proposed Planning and Environment Regulations 2015 which outlines that: a)

The Department’s further investigation of the mandatory provision of a current copy of title with planning applications is supported and that Council provide additional information to assist with this investigation.

The Department’s further investigation of a ‘complex’ application stream and commensurate prescribed timeframe is supported particularly having regard to the implications of VicSmart applications on Planning Permit Activity Reporting and the percentage of all other applications decided within 60 statutory days and no consideration of weekends and public holidays.

Prepare a Motion for MAV State Council which outlines the need to increase fees relating to permit applications under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and relevant Fees Regulations.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 39

4.5

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT REGULATIONS cont’d 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 The Planning and Environment Regulations 2005 are currently being reviewed by the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP). The new Regulations will be in place by the end of May 2015. The Department is seeking feedback on the proposed Planning and Environment Regulations 2015 by 27 March 2015. The Planning and Environment Regulations 2005 prescribe the requirements for the operation of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (the Act). This includes requirements in relation to public notice, times frames for Council’s processing of an application, time frames for appeals to the Tribunal, the prescription of forms (i.e. planning permit), information to be included with applications and information to be made available to the public. The Regulations are required to be renewed every 10 years to:  Determine whether matters covered by the existing regulations still need to be regulated.  Determine whether other matters need to be regulated.  Improve the operation of the regulations, where required. 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. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION The DELWP has prepared both a discussion paper and the proposed Planning and Environment Regulations 2015 for comment. The key inclusions and changes in the proposed Regulations are detailed in table 1 below and in summary include: 

A further information request time for VicSmart applications of 5 business days and a 10 business day timeframe for failure to determine applications for review. This is in line with what was promised during the rollout of VicSmart



A reduced timeframe for further information requests from 28 days to 21 days where no referral is required. If referral is required the 28 days period is retained.



Two new classes of amendment are prescribed for section 20A. These are an amendment to the Victoria Planning Provisions or a planning scheme to insert or update a heading and updating a reference to a clause

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 40

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment



4.5

PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT REGULATIONS cont’d Three additional forms for:   

Giving notice of a proposal to amend or end a section 173 agreement Giving notice of a decision to amend or end a section 173 agreement Giving notice of a decision to refuse to amend or end a section 173 agreement

Table 1: Key issues raised in consultation and changes proposed. Theme Key issues raised Changes proposed Making a permit • The relationship between No changes are proposed to the application section 47 and regulation 15. prescribed information requirements • What constitutes a complete for an application for a permit or an permit application. application to amend a permit. The • The process for dealing with existing information requirements in ‘incomplete’ applications. the existing regulations will continue to apply. Requiring the applicant to provide more information

• Times for requiring more information. • The process for coordinating information requirements from referral authorities.

Referral process

• The time for a referral authority to request more information. • The time for a referral authority to comment on a referred application.

Applications for review

• The time for a ‘failure to decide’ application for review. • The different times for an objector to apply for a review of a decision and for the permit applicant to apply for a review of a permit condition • The classes of section 20A amendments. • Documents required to be submitted to the Minister with an adopted amendment. • Handling of personal information in planning documents. • Electronic transmission and receipt of planning documents. • The need for additional prescribed forms.

Planning scheme amendments

Planning documentation

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

To encourage more timely decision making under section 54, three prescribed times are proposed: • 5 business days for VicSmart permit applications • 28 days for applications that require referral under section 55 • 21 days for all other applications. No changes are proposed to the time given to a referral authority to provide its advice before the responsible authority can make a decision. However, the department invites more feedback on ways in which the referral process could be improved. No changes are proposed for the times for making applications for review. However, the department invites more feedback on ways in which the process could be improved. Proposed regulation 8(1)(e) and (f) include the two new classes of amendment prescribed for section 20A. The Electronic Transactions (Victoria) Act 2000 is sufficient to allow for the electronic submission and transmission of planning documents. No additional provisions in the Act or the Planning Regulations are required.

Page 41

4.5

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT REGULATIONS cont’d The following discussion considers the more significant aspects of the DELWP’s proposed changes. Making a permit application In Banyule’s submission to the Planning and Environment Act Review (1 May 2009) it was put forward that provision of a current copy of title (i.e. no more than 3 months old) should be a mandatory requirement. The department is not proposing to mandate this requirement and considers that more work is needed to understand the nature and extent of the issue and that strengthening an approach to incomplete applications must be through changes to the Act rather than the Regulations. It is considered that the DELWP’s further investigation of the mandatory provision of a current copy of title with planning applications be supported and that Council provide additional information to assist with this investigation. Requiring the applicant to provide more information It is proposed to reduce the time prescribed for Council to request further information and ‘stop the statutory clock’. The reduction will be from 28 days to 21 days for all applications unless they are a VicSmart (minor) application or an application which requires a Section 55 referral (mandatory referral i.e. VicRoads). It is considered that the reduced timeframes will place greater demand on the Planning Department but will also provide for improvements to processing timeframes from the applicant’s perspective. Applications for review The introduction of VicSmart applications has identified ‘straightforward’ application types and the Regulations prescribe a timeframe of 10 business days for Council to make a decision. If a decision is note made within this timeframe, an applicant can lodge a ‘failure to decide application’ where the decision making is taken from Council and given to the Tribunal. For any other planning application, the Regulations prescribe a timeframe of 60 statutory days. In Banyule’s previous submission to the review of the Act, it was argued that there is a need to identify a third application type for ‘complex’ applications where a prescribed timeframe of 90 statutory days would apply. In electing to make no changes in this regard, the Department has stated that there is insufficient justification to increase the prescribed timeframe for ‘complex’ applications. Concerns around defining a complex application and the need for significant consultation similar to that carried out prior to the introduction of VicSmart are also stated by the Department. While the Department has quoted PPARS data suggesting that a reasonable number of applications were decided within the prescribed timeframe, there is concern that this will change once PPARS reporting has regard to VicSmart timeframes. It is suggested that Council flag this concern and encourage the DELWP’s further consideration of a ‘complex’ application stream.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 42

PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT REGULATIONS cont’d It is noted that there is no consideration of public holidays or weekends in relation to statutory days in the DELWP’s proposed changes. Matters outside of scope of review The DELWP has suggested that it is not possible to consider a number of important changes within the scope of review of the Regulations and there are other planning matters which fall into this category. In particular, it is noted that the planning application fees have not been reviewed in several years. The impact of this on the Planning Department’s service delivery is exacerbated by an increase in planning applications. CONCLUSION While the number of significant changes proposed to the Planning and Environment Regulations 2005 is limited, it is considered that the DELWP should continue to investigate the matters deemed beyond the scope of the review including:  The benefit of a ‘complex’ application stream and a prescribed timeframe for such applications that appreciates the complexity.  The ability for a current certificate of title to be a mandatory application requirement. A submission outlining these considerations including further information in support further changes to the planning process will be provided by 27 March 2015. ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 43

4.5

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.6

CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING DWELLING INTO TWO ATTACHED DWELLINGS AT 16 ODENWALD ROAD, EAGLEMONT

Author:

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

Ward:

Griffin

File:

P534/2014

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposal seeks to undertake internal and external buildings and works to an existing single dwelling to convert it for use as two dwellings. The proposal incorporates measures to seek compliance with State and Local Planning Policy (including Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy) and with ResCode although many aspects of the existing dwelling compromise the level of compliance that can be achieved. The report outlines an improved outcome that could be achieved compared to the existing situation and refers to an attached set of conditions should Council take the view that the application should be supported. The report also outlines that Council could maintain a view that the many aspects of the existing dwelling compromise the level of compliance that can be achieved with the relevant Planning considerations. If Council believes that this combined with new issues resulting from the revised approach to vehicle storage outweigh the potential improvements, then it should not support the proposal subject to the reasons outlined below. RECOMMENDATION That Council having complied with Section 52, 58, 60, 61 and 62 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, resolves that a Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit be issued in respect of Application No. P534/2014 for conversion of an existing two storey dwelling into two attached dwellings at 16 Odenwald Road EAGLEMONT on the following grounds: 1.

The proposal does not comply with Clause 21.04-1 Housing of the Banyule Planning Scheme as it does not achieve a balance between the objectives of protecting residential amenity and providing for desired future neighbourhood character outcomes, on the one hand, and providing for urban consolidation and satisfying housing demand, on the other.

The proposal does not comply with Clause 21.05 Natural Environment of the Banyule Planning Scheme as it only allows minimal vegetation to be established for biodiversity, habitat and contribution to the neighbourhood character through landscaping measures.

The limited ability to landscape the site frontage due to the restricted front setback and the rear garden due to the vehicle access and car parking facilities is contrary to the ‘Position on the site’ and Vegetation cover’ Objectives of Clause 22.02 Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy and Standards B1 Neighbourhood Character and B13 Landscaping Objectives of Clause 55

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 44

4.6

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.6

CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING DWELLING INTO TWO ATTACHED DWELLINGS AT 16 ODENWALD ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d (ResCode) of the Banyule Planning Scheme. 4.

The inability to provide large shrubs or trees with acceptable planting areas across the site is contrary to the ‘Front boundary treatment and fencing’ and ‘Vegetation cover’ Objectives of Clause 22.02 Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy and Standards B1 Neighbourhood Character and B13 Landscaping Objectives of Clause 55 (ResCode) of the Banyule Planning Scheme.

Planning Permit Application:

P534/2014

Address:

16 Odenwald Road EAGLEMONT

Proposal:

Conversion of an existing two storey dwelling into two attached dwellings

Existing Use/Development:

A single two storey dwelling with basement level

Applicant:

Mrs Rosemary Zumpano

Zoning:

General Residential – Schedule 2

Overlays:

Vegetation Protection – Schedule 3

Notification (Advertising):

Two signs on site and notices to abutting and opposite owner/occupiers

Objections Received:

Five

Ward:

Griffin

The site is occupied by a single detached dwelling. The proposal involves buildings and works to convert the existing single dwelling into two dwellings. The application seeks to address the previous VCAT decision which upheld Council’s refusal to grant a permit for a similar proposal, based on a lack of landscaping within the front setback of the development and subsequent adverse impact on neighbourhood and streetscape character. The proposed buildings and works include the following: Basement/Ground Floor     

Removal of driveway within front garden of Dwelling 2 and replacement with landscaping; Removal of double garage door from front elevation of Dwelling 2 and infilling of opening with a solid plinth with casement windows above Closure of external door between the storage room and alfresco area located to the rear of the dwelling; Closure of wall opening to separate two rear terrace/alfresco areas; Closure of internal doorways between the: o Lounge rooms located near the front of the dwelling; o Meals and family rooms located to the rear of the dwelling.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 45

4.6

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING DWELLING INTO TWO ATTACHED DWELLINGS AT 16 ODENWALD ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d First Floor  Constructing a 1.7m high glazed screen wall along the northern side of the first floor rear terrace of Dwelling 2 Details of the proposed dwellings are as follows: Table 1: Summary of the proposal Secluded Car private open parking space provision Dwelling 1 40 sqm 2 Dwelling 2

49 sqm

Dwelling Density Site Coverage Impervious Site Coverage

Bedrooms

Height

4 (including the study) 5 (including the study)

Double storey Two storey plus basement level

1:390 sqm 59% 78%

A copy of the proposed plans form 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 This property has been subject to a number of planning, building and local law applications and investigations over the past seventeen years. These relate to the unauthorised use of the land for two dwellings and the unlawful construction of a vehicle crossover, its removal and continued unauthorised use of a nature strip for vehicle access. Following is a summary of the key development history relating to the site. Table 2: Chronology of Planning, Building and Local Law site history. Date Action 28 May 1997 Planning Application P264/97 – Two Dwellings Applicant on behalf of owner lodged a planning permit application for two dwellings. 24 March 1999

P264/97 Refused Planning permit application No. P264/97 for dual occupancy development was refused on the basis that the applicant had failed to provide sufficient information.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 46

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

15 April 1999

23 February 2000

19 October 2000

4.6

CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING DWELLING INTO TWO ATTACHED DWELLINGS AT 16 ODENWALD ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d Planning Application P208/99 – Two Dwellings The architect lodged a planning application on behalf of the owner for two dwellings. P208/99 Refused by Council Planning application P208/99 for dual occupancy development refused by Council under delegation. The grounds of refusal were as follows: 1.

The mass, scale and setbacks of the proposed development does not respect the neighbourhood character.

The proposed development will result in a loss of amenity to surrounding properties due to visual bulk.

The proposed development does not sufficiently comply with the Good Design Guide for Medium Density Housing.

The proposed development is contrary to the Banyule Neighbourhood Character Strategy.

P208/99 Refusal upheld by VCAT (First Appeal) The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) upheld the Council refusal. In its concluding comments VCAT stated that they …agree with the Responsible Authority’s submission that having regard to the established character of this area, a more responsive design would be smaller in scale, relocate the dwellings back in line with dwellings on adjacent properties and reduce the visibility of the garages at the front, as well as the first storey levels. This is clearly a difficult site to develop having regard to the topography and the nature of surrounding development, and the permit applicant has chosen to attempt to develop two substantial three bedroom dwellings with double carports. Not only does this fail to introduce the required diversity of housing type into the locality, as was submitted by the Responsible Authority, but it results in a form of development which is excessive for this site and unsympathetic or responsive to the land form or the arrangement of buildings and outdoor areas on neighbouring properties.

4 October 2001

Building Permit for Dwelling Building permit issued by City of Whittlesea acting as the

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 47

4.6

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING DWELLING INTO TWO ATTACHED DWELLINGS AT 16 ODENWALD ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d Relevant Building Surveyor for the owner to allow the construction of a single dwelling. Although the approval allowed for one dwelling the scale of development shown on the plans was similar to the two dwelling development shown in application P208/99 refused by both Council and VCAT. December 2002 – January 2005

Dwelling Construction

4 October 2004

Crossover Constructed

Site works and a majority of the dwelling was constructed over a two year period with the final inspection undertaken by the Relevant Building Surveyor on 28 January 2005.

An additional crossover was constructed without the necessary Council approval to provide access to a second garage on the site. A street tree was damaged during the construction and a Planning Infringement Notice was issued as well as an infringement notice for the unlawful construction of the crossover. Concerns about the installation of multiple services and the potential for the building to be used as a dual occupancy were also raised with the land owner’s solicitor. November 2004

Crossover Reinstated The crossover was reinstated in November 2004 and the relevant infringement notices paid on 23 February 2005. The nature strip was subsequently reinstated.

29 November 2004

Dwelling at ‘lock-up stage’ Development was completed to ‘lock-up’ stage and an inspection carried out by Council’s Planning Department to determine whether the development was in accordance with the approved plans and formed one or two dwellings. The owner was advised of Council concerns in relation to characteristics of the development which indicated that it was constructed as more than one dwelling.

4 February 2005

Amended Building Approval An amended building approval was issued and a Certificate of Occupancy granted by the City of Whittlesea in its role as the Relevant Building Surveyor. (Note: The amended plans were not supplied to Council until 23 March 2005).

9 March 2005

Inspection indicates more than one dwelling A further inspection was undertaken and the owner advised of inconsistencies with the building plans on Council’s file and observations that the development appeared to be two dwellings.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 48

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

11 April 2005

4.6

CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING DWELLING INTO TWO ATTACHED DWELLINGS AT 16 ODENWALD ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d Council Resolution A report was considered by Council in relation to matters arising from the existence of the dwellings and potential use of the building as two dwellings. The following resolution was made in relation to that meeting: 1. That the owner is advised that based on the inspections and current development of the site, it is considered that the building has been established as two dwellings and as such a planning permit is required. 2. Council write to the owner requesting an application for planning permit for the two dwellings within 21 days (3 weeks). 3. If an application for planning permit is not lodged within 21 days then further enforcement proceedings be initiated based on the advice of Council’s legal advisors. 4. A decision in relation to the application for a second crossover on the site is deferred pending the outcome of the planning issues associated with the site. 1 July 2005 – 1 December 2009

Site Inspections Further inspections were undertaken on site to determine whether or not works had been undertaken since the time of the Council resolution. Initial inspections revealed that not all works had been completed, however following correspondence from Council these works were undertaken. There were ongoing inspections and observations of the building over the time with respect to the use of the building as two dwellings and the use of a second garage with unauthorised access over a nature strip. Based on the fact that there was no evidence that the building was being utilised as two dwellings no enforcement took place as there was no breach of use. However, the owners were reminded on a number of occasions that the building must continue to be used as a single dwelling. An inspection was also undertaken by Council officers during the open to view for the sale of the property in December 2009. Again there was no evidence that there was any breach of use at that time.

14 December 2010

Planning Permit application P948/10 – Conversion to two dwellings Ratio Consultants lodged a planning application on behalf of the owner for the conversion of an existing dwelling into two dwellings and minor buildings and works.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 49

4.6

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING DWELLING INTO TWO ATTACHED DWELLINGS AT 16 ODENWALD ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d

26 September 2011

P948/10 Refused by Council Planning application P948/10 to convert existing dwelling into two dwellings (including buildings and works and use) was refused by Council at the Council Meeting on 26 September 2011 principally on neighbourhood character, landscaping, car parking, overlooking and private open space grounds

26 October 2012

P948/10 Refusal upheld by VCAT (Second Appeal) VCAT upheld Council’s refusal to grant a permit.

25 January 2013

Planning Permit application P87/13 Following the refusal of planning application P948/10 by both Council and VCAT, Melbourne Planning lodged a planning application on behalf of the owner for buildings and works and the use of the land for two dwellings.

7 June 2013

P87/13 Refused by Council

16 December 2013

The application was refused by Council on neighbourhood character, landscaping, car parking and overlooking grounds. P87/13 Refusal upheld by VCAT (Third Appeal) VCAT upheld Council’s refusal to grant a permit on lack of landscaping within the front setback of the development and subsequent adverse impact on neighbourhood character.

Aside from the change to the residential zoning of the land from Residential 1 to General Residential – Schedule 2, there have been no significant material changes to the relevant planning scheme provisions since the previous application was refused by Council and the Tribunal.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 50

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.6

CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING DWELLING INTO TWO ATTACHED DWELLINGS AT 16 ODENWALD ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA The subject site is located on the northern side of Odenwald Road. The site is irregular in shape, and has a total area of approximately 781 square metres. The subject site currently contains an existing single dwelling that is proposed to be converted into two dwellings.

Subject site

Figure 1 – Aerial photograph The existing dwelling has a floor plan that is mirrored across a party wall that extends north to south through the building. The building contains two kitchens, two main living areas, two laundries, a total of ten bedrooms, six bathrooms, two entrances and two sets of metre readers. The main living areas either side of the party wall are connected by two internal doorways. The surrounding area is characterised by a mix of dwelling types, styles and layout. There are a number of Californian Bungalows and Edwardian houses that form a strong character for the area. Materials include weatherboard and brick and roofing tends to typically be tiled. Established gardens including native and exotic species are a key characteristic of the area. The Eaglemont shops and train station are approximately 600 metres to the southwest of the site. The Heidelberg major activity centre, services and train station are approximately 600 metres to the north of the site. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION The application was notified in accordance with section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 because it was deemed that the application could cause material detriment. Two site notices were erected; one on the Oldenwald Road frontage of the site and one on the rear laneway boundary. Letters were sent to abutting and opposite owner/occupiers. Five objections were received on the following grounds:

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 51

4.6

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING DWELLING INTO TWO ATTACHED DWELLINGS AT 16 ODENWALD ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d  The built form and scale is detrimental to neighbourhood character and unchanged from previous proposals rejected by Council and VCAT  Excessive site coverage  Sets a poor precedent for future unauthorised development  Lack of building setbacks and space for landscaping  Future reinstatement of second driveway and garage access to Odenwald Road.  Retention of barrier in front of property required to prevent a second driveway access to Odenwald Road. A public consultation meeting was held to discuss the proposal in February 2015. The applicant, Mayor, Ward Councillor and a number of objectors attended the meeting. REFERRAL COMMENTS Engineering Council’s Engineering Department raise no objection, noting that the vehicle car parking dimensions and driveway gradients are satisfactory. A condition is required to ensure that the plans show that an all-weather sealed driveway is to be provided to serve the rear car parking facilities for proposed Dwelling 2. A summary of the referral response is provided in Attachment 2 to this report. PLANNING CONTROLS The planning controls applicable to the site are outlined in Table 3 below: Table 3: Applicable Planning Controls Control Neighbourhood Residential Zone Vegetation Protection Overlay – Schedule 3 (VPO3)

Clause 32.09 42.02

Permit Triggered Yes No

POLICIES CONSIDERED Relevant policies considered in the assessment of this proposal are outlined in table 4 below: Table 4: Relevant Planning Scheme Policy Policy SPPF Settlement Built Environment and Heritage (including sub clauses) Housing (including sub clauses) LPPF Land Use Natural Environment Built Environment (Accessible area) Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy – Garden Suburban Precinct 3. Safer Design Policy

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Clause 11 15 16 21.04 21.05 21.06 22.02 22.03

Page 52

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.6

CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING DWELLING INTO TWO ATTACHED DWELLINGS AT 16 ODENWALD ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d Planning controls are identified in Attachment 3 to this report. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION As outlined in this report, this property has a lengthy history of breaches of the Banyule Planning Scheme, consideration of a number of more recent planning applications to convert the premises into two dwellings and determinations by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. The current owner of the site has been involved in various proceedings in relation to this site for nearly 20 years. In 1997 a dual occupancy (two dwelling) proposal for the site was refused by Council with a subsequent two dwelling proposal in 1999 also being refused primarily on neighbourhood character grounds with the decision being upheld by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. The land owner subsequently built a ‘single dwelling’ without the need for planning approval but effectively constructed a building which resembled the refused dual occupancy proposal. Further applications over the years to convert the building into two dwellings have been refused by both Council and VCAT. Little has changed over the years with the substantive building constructed largely representing the same built form that was refused in the late 1990’s. On this basis, a continued stance against the proposal on the basis that it is inconsistent with neighbourhood character is not unreasonable. Notwithstanding this, in assessing the current proposal Council should also consider the basis of the Tribunal’s guiding decisions in the two most recent determinations on the proposed conversion of the premises into two dwellings. Council should also consider the overall outcome now sought to be achieved by the proposal and whether this would be a better outcome than the site remaining as is. Planning by stealth and previous planning history In the Second Tribunal decision in relation to this site, the Tribunal specifically commented that: I cannot refuse this application because of the Council and objector concern about ‘planning by stealth’. What this means is that the Council must consider the current proposal on its town planning merits. However, Council is also not bound to accept an outcome that is substandard and would not normally be accepted simply because the building exists. Key concerns previously raised by Council and accepted by the Tribunal The focus of the assessment by Council and the Tribunal has been upon the streetscape impact of a second garage and driveway fronting onto Odenwald Road, the extent of paving within the front setback and the subsequent impact upon the streetscape. In the Second Tribunal decision in relation to the site the Tribunal commented that: The development has a stark appearance in the street, quite out of character with what exists in this neighbourhood. I agree with the submissions of the Council and the residents that the streetscape

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 53

4.6

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING DWELLING INTO TWO ATTACHED DWELLINGS AT 16 ODENWALD ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d presentation is dominated by driveways and garages. What planting does exist within the remaining areas of the front setback is entirely ineffective in providing a garden setting reflective of that which characterises this neighbourhood. The issue then becomes whether the Applicant’s proposed changes as shown on the Application plans, will increase planting to the extent that an acceptable neighbourhood character outcome will be achieved. My conclusion is that they would not. The Council demonstrated that in an overall sense, there will be little (if any) meaningful change to the landscaping in the front setback, as compared to the scheme considered by the Tribunal in the earlier case. It does not, in my view, represent a significant change in the application such that I should depart from Member Naylor’s decision to refuse a permit. The three intertwined key considerations in the assessment of this proposal can therefore be distilled to landscaping, streetscape and neighbourhood character. What has changed in this latest application The applicant has now sought to amend the proposal to respond to the concerns raised in the previous VCAT decisions. The maximum width of the existing driveway serving proposed Dwelling 1 is proposed to be reduced in width from 8.2 metres to 5 metres. It is also proposed to convert the double garage to proposed Dwelling 2 to a rumpus room. The garage door is to be removed and replaced with casement windows. The hard surface of the driveway is to be removed and replaced with garden. The driveway access gate in the front fence is to be removed and replaced with a single pedestrian access gate and fencing to match the remainder of the existing front fence. The architectural plans show that sufficient space is available for one new 8 to 10 metre high medium sized canopy tree to be planted within the front garden of proposed Dwelling 1 with two medium sized trees in the proposed front garden of Dwelling 2. The rumpus room that was located at the rear of proposed Dwelling 2 has already been converted to a single garage. A new access and garage door has been inserted into the northern elevation of this part of the structure to provide access to the garage. A second uncovered car parking space has been created adjacent to the southern wall of this garage. A new access has been created from the rear laneway to provide vehicle access to the garage and car parking space. An area large enough for the planting of a medium height canopy tree has been retained within the rear garden of Dwelling 2 with the architectural plans showing a tree to be planted in this area. It is noted that no Planning Permit was or is required for any of the works associated with the creation of the new access and on site car parking facilities to service the existing dwelling. Council’s Building and Local Laws Departments have also both confirmed that no Building or Local Laws Permits were required for these works in this instance.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 54

CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING DWELLING INTO TWO ATTACHED DWELLINGS AT 16 ODENWALD ROAD, EAGLEMONT contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d How does the proposal respond to established landscape, streetscape and neighbourhood character concerns Whilst a landscape plan has been submitted with the application, this plan does not integrate with the submitted architectural plan. It is considered that the architectural plan is more effective in demonstrating the future pattern of landscaping that can be achieved for the proposal. There is an opportunity for increased landscaping in the front setback. The area available for landscaping and ability to reduce the impact of the stark building is not sufficient to lead to an outcome that would be accepted if this was a new building being proposed. On this basis alone refusal of the proposal could once again be argued. Nonetheless, subject to a detailed landscape plan corresponding with the architectural site plan, it is considered that there is now sufficient opportunity for a modified landscaping plan to achieve a reasonable softening of the frontage setback of the development through the provision of additional space for lower, middle and upper storey planting within the front garden. This can be required as a condition of any permit that may issue. Compliance with planning policy 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 which is discussed within the Clause 55 assessment and Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy assessment annexed as Attachments 3 and 4 to this report. A brief summary of the findings of these assessments are provided below. Clause 55 The Clause 55 assessment indicates that the proposal does not comply with many clauses although there can be modifications to improve the level of compliance with some of the objectives of the Clause that can reasonably be applied to the conversion of the existing single dwelling into two dwellings. Further opportunities to improve considerations such as site permeability, front fencing and internal views within the development are available and these could be addressed through permit conditions if the proposal is approved. Variations are sought to Standards with respect to street setback and north facing windows as detailed below. Street setback The dwellings on either side of the subject site are setback some 9.5 to 10 metres from the street alignment. The existing building is setback 6 to 6.5 metres from the street alignment and therefore does not comply with the standards in ResCode. The street setback was considered by the Registered Private Building Surveyor when the building was constructed as a single dwelling with a Building Permit. The construction of a single dwelling on the land did not require planning permission. Any increase in building setback would require demolition of the front section of the building. To minimise the visual impact of the reduced setback, the width of the driveway to Dwelling 1 could be reduced and the front driveway to Dwelling 2 removed. These

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 55

4.6

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

4.6

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING DWELLING INTO TWO ATTACHED DWELLINGS AT 16 ODENWALD ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d modifications significantly increase the opportunity for tree planting and landscaping to now occur within the front setback. The removal of the double garage door to Dwelling 2 and its replacement with casement windows and the provision of front fencing to integrate with the design and appearance of the existing front fence will also facilitate the improved visual presentation of the development to the street. There are concerns about the reduced front setback and bulk of the upper levels of the building. If the proposal is refused, the building will remain and nothing may change. Alternatively, this application provides an opportunity for the appearance and setting of the existing building to be improved. Whilst the building may not be designed to the standard that Council may have required if a planning application had initially been lodged and determined for two dwellings on the site (eg. greater frontage setback and reduced upper level built form), the proposal now presents an opportunity to improve the landscape character criticisms of the development. Open space provision The conversion of the rear rumpus room to a single garage and the provision of a second car parking space with access from the rear laneway did not require planning permission. This results in much of the ground level rear secluded private open space being allocated for car parking and vehicle access. This space will therefore no longer be available for use as recreational open space or landscaping which is a poor outcome. Additional recreational open space areas are provided within upper levels of Dwelling 2, including a 40 m2 terrace and these are designed to cater for the recreational needs of future residents. This is not an ideal outcome as ground level landscaped open space would normally be expected for a dwelling of this size and commonly occupied by larger and family type households in this area. Extensive rear landscaping would also normally be expected which is not able to be provided. Neighbour and resident amenity The internal amenity and potential external amenity impact of the proposal are largely addressed in the proposal or can be reasonably addressed through permit conditions. The exception to this is Standard B20 which requires adequate solar access to be provided to existing north facing habitable room windows of north facing windows of adjoining residences. In this instance there is one north facing habitable room window located at 14 Odenwald Road which abuts the eastern site boundary. This window is located within 3 metres of the site boundary. As a result, the southern elevation of proposed Dwelling 1 is required to be located 2.9 metres in from the application site boundary for a distance of 3 metres either side of this window. A minor encroachment into this area of up to approximately 1 metre exists. As the building has already been erected under a Building Permit, the proposal does not actually alter anything in respect to this aspect of the building or its future use. It is also worth noting that this neighbour has been notified of the application and not raised any objection. The proposed variation is therefore considered acceptable in this instance. Neighbourhood Character Policy The proposal does not meet the objectives of Council’s Neighbourhood Character Policy. The existing site coverage exceeds 40% of the site area at 58%. In this instance, the proposal seeks to improve the neighbourhood character outcome by

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 56

CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING DWELLING INTO TWO ATTACHED DWELLINGS AT 16 ODENWALD ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d increasing the extent of landscaping within the front garden of the development and improving the presentation of the façade of the building to the street by replacing a double garage door with casement windows. In addition, the upper levels of the building are not recessed from the lower levels on the two side elevations of the building but this cannot be modified and the proposed use has no impact upon this aspect of the existing building. A variation is sought to the landscaping objective as insufficient space is provided within the front garden of each dwelling to facilitate the planting of one large tree within the front garden of each dwelling. A large Dutch Elm street tree is located within the nature strip in front of the site and therefore it may not be appropriate for the front garden area adjacent to this street tree to accommodate a large tree due to the presence of the Elm, even though it would have been possible if the dwellings were adequately set back. A medium sized tree of 10 to 12 metres in height is more appropriate. Sufficient space is available for the planting of two further medium sized canopy trees within the front setback along with further lower and middle storey planting. A variation is also sought to the requirement for separation between the two dwellings for the provision of further landscape planting. The planting of three medium sized trees within the front setback and one at the rear in addition to further lower and middle storey planting within the front garden is proposed to respond to the front garden character objective sought under the policy and improve the existing streetscape presentation of the building. The removal of the existing driveway to Dwelling 2 and its replacement with landscaping will also improve the environment for the Dutch Elm street tree located in front of the site. The approval of the proposal would, in time, also provide the opportunity to remove the temporary barrier from the nature strip which is currently in place to prevent unauthorised vehicle access to the property over the Odenwald Road nature strip. This would also result in improvement to the streetscape of this part of the Oldenwald Road. CONCLUSION The current proposal provides an opportunity to improve the existing streetscape presentation of the building to Odenwald Road through conditions of a planning permit. If the property were to remain as a single dwelling, Council would have no authority to require the design modifications and streetscape presentation improvements now proposed. The modifications now proposed address some of the key shortcomings of previous proposals identified by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. Should Council seek to support the application for the reasons outlined above subject to conditions, appropriate conditions are outlined in Attachment 5. If Council maintains a view that the many aspects of the existing dwelling compromise the level of compliance that can be achieved with the relevant Planning considerations and that this combined with new issues resulting from the revised

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 57

4.6

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.6

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING DWELLING INTO TWO ATTACHED DWELLINGS AT 16 ODENWALD ROAD, EAGLEMONT cont’d approach to vehicle storage outweigh the improvements outlined, then it should not support the proposal subject to the reasons outlined in the recommendation at the beginning of this report. ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Plans

183

Additional Background

187

Clause 55 Assessment

191

Neighbourhood Character Assessment

196

Recommendation to support

201

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page

Page 58

5.1

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.1

MULTICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES - 5/2/2015

Author:

India Mortlock - Community & Social Planner, Community Programs

File:

F2015/167

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to provide Council with the minutes for noting from the Multicultural Advisory Committee Meeting held on 5 February 2015 and to present any matters for consideration arising from the minutes. As per the Multicultural Advisory Committee Terms of Reference, these minutes were emailed on 12 February 2015, adopted on 23 February 2015 and posted on the website. There were no recommendations for Council’s consideration from this meeting. RECOMMENDATION That Council notes the 5 February 2015 Minutes of the 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 “encourage diverse and inclusive community participation”. BACKGROUND In 2013 Council resolved to establish the Multicultural Advisory Committee. The Committee has full membership of fifteen people, comprising residents and representatives of community organisations, agencies and service providers who have a focus on provision of services to multicultural communities in Banyule. The role of the Multicultural Advisory Committee is to provide Council with advice on multicultural issues and on the development and implementation of Council’s Inclusion, Access and Equity Framework (IAEF) and Multicultural Plan. The minutes of the Banyule Multicultural Advisory Committee are circulated to members via email for confirmation, and then placed on Council’s website for viewing.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 59

5.1

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

MULTICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES - 5/2/2015 cont’d The minutes of the Multicultural Advisory Committee meetings are also presented to Council for noting 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, it is 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 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 Multicultural Advisory Committee held its sixth meeting on 5 February 2015 at the Council Chambers. The minutes from the meeting are in Attachment 1. Councillor Di Pasquale chaired the meeting and Councillor Garotti also attended the meeting. Twelve committee members attended the meeting. As per the Multicultural Advisory Committee Terms of Reference, these minutes were emailed on 12 February 2015, adopted on 23 February 2015 and posted on the website. There were no recommendations for Council’s consideration from this meeting. CONCLUSION The Multicultural Advisory Committee met on Thursday 5 February 2015. This report includes the minutes of that meeting for noting.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Multicultural Advisory Committee Meeting - Minutes - 5/2/2015

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 207

Page 60

5.2

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.2

LGBTI ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES - 10/2/2015

Author:

India Mortlock - Community & Social Planner, Community Programs

File:

F2015/167

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to provide Council with the minutes for noting from the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender and Intersex (LGBTI) Advisory Committee Meeting on 10 February 2015 and to present any matters for consideration arising from the minutes. As per the LGBTI Advisory Committee Terms of Reference, the minutes were sent to Committee members on 18 February and adopted on 23 February 2015 and posted on Council’s website. The Committee made a recommendation for Council’s consideration, relating to the International Day Against Homophobia (IDAHO): That the rainbow flag be raised on Friday 15 May and remain flying for one week until Thursday 21 May One committee member, Philip Orth, advised that he was resigning from the Committee. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Note the 10 February 2015 minutes of the LGBTI Advisory Committee

Agree to the rainbow flag being raised in front of the Ivanhoe Civic Centre on Friday 15 May and remain flying for one week until Thursday 21 May 2015.

Note that Mr. Philip Orth has resigned from the Committee.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 61

5.2

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

LGBTI ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING - MINUTES - 10/2/2015 cont’d BACKGROUND In 2013, Council resolved to establish the LGBTI Advisory Committee. The Committee has twelve members, comprising residents and representatives of community organisations, agencies and service providers who have a focus on provision of services to LGBTI communities in Banyule. The role of the LGBTI Advisory Committee is to provide Council with advice on LGBTI issues and on the development and implementation of Council’s Inclusion, Access and Equity Framework (IAEF) and LGBTI Plan. As per the LGBTI Advisory Committee Terms of Reference, the minutes of the LGBTI Advisory Committee are circulated to members via email for confirmation, and then placed on Council’s website for viewing. The minutes of LGBTI Advisory Committee are presented to Council for noting after each meeting. Recommendations and requests arising from LGBTI Advisory 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 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 LGBTI Advisory Committee held its sixth meeting on 10 February 2015 in the Tom Roberts Room of the Ivanhoe Service Centre. The minutes from the meeting are attached. The minutes were sent to Committee members on 18 February and adopted on 23 February 2015 and posted on Council’s website. Councillor Mulholland chaired the meeting and Councillor Melican and Councillor Langdon also attended the meeting. Seven committee members attended.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 62

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.2

LGBTI ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING - MINUTES - 10/2/2015 cont’d

Councillor Mulholland noted that Philip Orth had resigned from the Committee due to moving overseas. The Committee discussed Council’s plans to mark IDAHO Day (International Day Against Homophobia). On 2 February, Council resolved to host a morning tea and flag raising ceremony and a cocktail event (resolution CO2015/5). Note: IDAHO Day is on Sunday 17 May but the Council will hold the flag raising ceremony on Friday 15 May. The Committee discussed actions to raise awareness of IDAHO Day and recommended that the rainbow flag should remain flying for one week (from Friday 15 May until Thursday 21 May) in order for more people to see it. CONCLUSION The LGBTI Advisory Committee met on Tuesday 10 February 2015. This report includes the minutes of that meeting for noting and a recommendation to fly the LGBTI flag for one week to raise awareness of IDAHO Day. ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Minutes - LGBTI Advisory Committee Meeting - 10/2/15

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 211

Page 63

5.3

MINUTES - DISABILITY AND INCLUSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING - 28/1/15 & 18/2/2015

Author:

Helen Parker - Community and Social Planner, Community Programs

File:

F2015/167

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to provide Council with the minutes for noting from the first two Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Meetings held on 28 January 2015, and on 18 February 2015, and to present any matters for consideration arising from the minutes. As per the Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Terms of Reference, these minutes were emailed to members of the Advisory Committee, adopted and posted on the website. There were no recommendations for Council’s consideration from these meetings. RECOMMENDATION That Council notes the 28 January 2015 and 18 February 2015 Minutes of the Disability and Inclusion 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 “encourage diverse and inclusive community participation”. BACKGROUND In 2014 Council resolved to establish a Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee with membership consisting of Councillors, residents and community groups. The role of the Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee is to provide Council with advice on Disability and Inclusion issues and on the development and implementation of Council’s Inclusion, Access and Equity Framework (IAEF) and Disability Action Plan.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 64

5.3

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

MINUTES - DISABILITY AND INCLUSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING 28/1/15 & 18/2/2015 cont’d The minutes of the Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee are circulated to members via email for confirmation, and then placed on Council’s website for viewing. The minutes of the Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee meetings are also presented to Council for noting 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 and Inclusion communities, it is not the only avenue for consultation and engagement. Other networks, groups and individuals who are not formal Advisory Committee members, are also 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 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. CURRENT SITUATION The Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee held its first meeting on 28 January 2015, and its second meeting on 18 February 2015. Both meetings were held at the Rosanna Offices. The minutes from the 28 January 2015 meeting are in Attachment 1. The minutes from the 18 February 2015 meeting are in Attachment 2. Councillor Jenny Mulholland chaired the 28 January 2015 meeting and Councillor Craig Langdon also attended. Thirteen committee members attended the meeting. As per the Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Terms of Reference, these minutes were emailed were emailed on 4th February 2015, adopted on 9th February 2015, and posted on the website. Councillor Craig Langdon chaired the 18 February 2015 meeting and Councillor Jenny Mulholland also attended. Eleven committee members attended the meeting. As per the Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee Terms of Reference, these minutes were emailed on 27 February 2015, adopted on 4 March 2015 and posted on the website. There were no recommendations for Council’s consideration from these meetings, as these were the initial meetings still scoping issues and needs of the community.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 65

5.3

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.3

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

MINUTES - DISABILITY AND INCLUSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING 28/1/15 & 18/2/2015 cont’d CONCLUSION The Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee met on Wednesday 28 January and Wednesday 18 February 2015. This report includes the minutes of these meetings for noting. ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee (BDIAC) minutes 28 01 2015

215

Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee (BDIAC) minutes 18 02 2015

220

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page

Page 66

5.4

Participation – Community Involvement/Comm Life

5.4

APPOINTMENT OF COUNCILLOR TO THE MUNICIPAL ASSOCIATION OF VICTORIA (MAV) COMMITTEE

Author:

Emily Outlaw - Council Governance Liaison Officer, Corporate Services

File:

F2014/4054

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Annually Council appoints Councillor delegates and substitutes to the Council Advisory Committees and external Committees at its Mayoral Election meeting. At the meeting on 28 October 2014, one (1) delegate and three (3) substitutes were appointed for Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) Committee. It has since been established a limit of one (1) substitute can be appointed for this Committee. This report is to appoint the substitute for the 2014/15 period until the next appointments to be held on 16 November 2015. RECOMMENDATION That Council appoint Councillor Steven Briffa as substitute for the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) Committee and advise the MAV of the appointment. 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 “advocate on behalf of our community”. BACKGROUND The following appointments were determined on 28 October 2014: EXTERNAL COMMITTEES Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) Provides leadership by supporting local governments to achieve high levels of respect and recognition through improved performance.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

EXISTING DELEGATE Cr Tom Melican

EXISTING SUBSTITUTE Cr Jenny Mulholland Cr Craig Langdon Cr Mark Di Pasquale

Page 67

5.4

Participation – Community Involvement/Comm Life

APPOINTMENT OF COUNCILLOR TO THE MUNICIPAL ASSOCIATION OF VICTORIA (MAV) COMMITTEE cont’d CLARIFICATION Upon providing the above information to the Municipal Association of Victoria it was clarified that due to voting rights of delegates and substitutes, the MAV only allow one (1) delegate and one (1) substitute to be appointed. ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 68

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.1

VAGO REPORT - EFFECTIVENESS OF SUPPORT FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT REPORT

Author:

Emily Outlaw - Council Governance Liaison Officer, Corporate Services

File:

F2014/1162

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On 26 February 2015 the Victorian Auditor General’s Office (VAGO) tabled a report on the Effectiveness of Support for Local Government in Victorian Parliament. This audit assessed the effectiveness, efficiency and economy of support activities undertaken to assist councils to carry out their duties and obligations to the community. The report focused on the activities of Local Government Victoria (LGV) and the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) as key bodies that provide support to councils. Contained in the VAGO 110 page report, are the findings of the audit as well as recommendations leading forward as a result of those findings. After distribution of the VAGO report on Effectiveness of Support for Local Government, the MAV issued a response on the findings and recommendations of the Auditor General’s Office which it released to all Councils. Details of both the findings from the VAGO report and the MAV’s reply are included in the contents of this report to be noted by Council. RECOMMENDATION That the Victorian Auditor General’s Office’s (VAGO) report on Effectiveness of Support for Local Government and the comments by the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) be noted. 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. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “maintain and strengthen corporate information and innovation”. BACKGROUND In Victoria, 79 councils are responsible for providing a wide range of services to their communities. Local Government Victoria (LGV) supports local councils to ensure they are responsive, accountable and efficient, and that they comply with the Local

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 69

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

VAGO REPORT - EFFECTIVENESS OF SUPPORT FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT REPORT cont’d Government Act 1989 (LG Act). The Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) advocates for local government interests, builds the capacity of Councils, facilitates effective networks, initiates policy development and advice, supports Councillors and promotes the role of local government. The Auditor General is an independent officer of the Victorian Parliament, appointed to examine the management of resources within the public sector on behalf of Parliament and Victorians. An audit of Effectiveness of Support for Local Government was conducted and tabled in Victorian Parliament on 26 February 2015. This audit focused on the assessment of the effectiveness, efficiency and economy of the support provided to councils by Local Government Victoria and Municipal Association of Victoria. A link to the document can be found at http://www.audit.vic.gov.au/publications/20150226Support-for-Local-Gov/20150226-Support-for-Local-Gov.pdf As stated in the Auditor General’s Audit Summary, ‘support’ was defined as any activity undertaken to assist councils to carry out their duties and obligations to the community, and to facilitate more efficient and effective Council operations. The VAGO audit report essentially found that the support provided by LGV was effective however it was quite critical of the many aspects of the service and operation of the MAV. The MAV has since responded to the findings of the VAGO report and forwarded the response to Councils. 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.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 70

VAGO REPORT - EFFECTIVENESS OF SUPPORT FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT REPORT cont’d REPORT After the findings were tabled by VAGO, the MAV responded and forwarded the response to Councils with their address to VAGO’s recommendations. That response is included below to demonstrate and contains both a summarised version of the recommendations of VAGO and the response from the MAV. Issue

VAGO Audit

MAV response

MAV functions and oversight Role of MAV and role of LGV

Different roles and responsibilities not well defined in Audit

Local Government Victoria (LGV) and the MAV have distinct roles. LGV, as the regulator of local government, provides an oversight role on behalf of the Minister to ensure that councils comply with the Local Government Act 1989. The principal driver of LGV support services is regulation of local government. The MAV provides services and advocacy on behalf of local government and is accountable to its constituent members through an elected Board. MAV members determine MAV priorities including advocacy, training, events, procurement, insurance, grants and policy support activities. Membership of the MAV is discretionary (all 79 Victorian councils are current financial members), and participation in our insurance schemes, financial and procurement, events and other activities are voluntary.

Government oversight

Although it was not intended under the MA Act that the Minister would have the power to direct MAV, the Minister is nevertheless still responsible for the Act’s administration. LGV does not actively oversee MAV’s performance or compliance with the MA Act, nor proactively provide advice to the Minister. MAV currently performs a broad

While the Minister has responsibility for the Municipal Association Act 1907, the Minister does not direct the MAV nor does the MAV Act provide for this role. It is not LGV’s role, implied or otherwise, nor does the MAV Act empower LGV to oversight the Association. The MAV, in accordance with the legislation and its Rules, has an elected Board, and a State Council representing all member councils. This governance structure reflects the legislation that MAV is a membership association controlled by its constituent members.

MAV functions and relationship

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

The MAV Act, empowers the MAV, through its Rules, to exercise all functions and powers

Page 71

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

VAGO REPORT - EFFECTIVENESS OF SUPPORT FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT REPORT cont’d Issue

VAGO Audit

MAV response

to MAV Act

range of support functions and it is not clear if all of these functions are within its remit or align with its intended purpose.

Statutory body

MAV is a public statutory authority and in a 2004 case the Supreme Court of Victoria determined that it was a body established for public purposes. There is an absence of statutory oversight of the MAV, including several Acts that would ordinarily apply to public bodies.

necessary or convenient for it to carry out its objectives, including to promote, advocate and represent the interests of local government. The broad range of support services undertaken by the MAV are formally endorsed by constituent members who govern the Association, and the implementation of activities is oversighted by the MAV Board. The MAV’s support services fit within the defined objectives of the MAV. The MAV is a statutory corporation, however it is one that is concurrently and primarily a membership association governed by its constituent members as empowered under the MAV Act and Rules. The governing legislation provides MAV with the authority to offer insurance services in a competitive market. As a body corporate, the MAV is not identified as a public entity under the Public Administration Act; no direction has been issued by the Minister requiring MAV compliance with the Finance Management Act; and the Keeper of Public Records has formally confirmed that the MAV is not subject to the Public Records Act. In accordance with the governing Act, MAV is accountable to its constituent members, not the Minister or LGV. However, MAV insurance activities and financial accounts are reported annually to the Victorian Parliament.

MAV Governance Board oversight and governance

There is no process in place for assessing the MAV Board’s performance. It is the responsibility of the MAV Board to ensure there are appropriate alternative governance arrangements in place (…in the absence of the MAV being required to comply with administrative and records management legislation applying to many other

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

The MAV Board is elected by members every two years. The MAV is audited annually by global accounting firm EY (external auditor), while an MAV Internal Audit Committee delivers an audit program on areas of major risk, and its meeting minutes are reviewed quarterly by the MAV Board.

Page 72

VAGO REPORT - EFFECTIVENESS OF SUPPORT FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT REPORT cont’d Issue

VAGO Audit

Performance management system for staff

public bodies/entities) There is no formal performance management system in place for any MAV staff other than the CEO, so it is not clear how staff or managers are held to account for their performance

Project management framework

The MAV does not have an overarching project management framework.

Corruption and fraud policies

MAV provided fraud awareness training for all staff for the first time in October 2014, and drafted a fraud and corruption policy at the same time. The absence of any training or guidance previously is concerning given MAV manages large procurement and contracts both for itself and on behalf of councils. The MAV’s Gifts, Benefits and Hospitality Policy is marked as having been established in June 2014. It is unclear how the MAV managed gifts, benefits and

Gifts, benefits and hospitality

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

MAV response

There is a performance management regime in place for the CEO, with the Board assessing the CEO’s performance. The performance management model adopted by MAV for all other staff is based on an Enterprise Management Model, incorporating regular performance assessment and feedback, plus an annual performance review. All staff are held accountable for their performance at an individual and team level, and their work performance is also reported back to members through the annual report documenting how the MAV delivered on its approved strategic work plan. For the projects examined by the Audit, financial reporting and acquittals were completed to funding bodies, and reporting on project activities was greater than was formally required by the funding organisation. The MAV will improve its project management framework to reflect better practice, including documentation of the process. The Audit did not identify any instance of fraud or corruption in the course of the Audit, and no internal or external MAV audit has ever identified any such instances either. The MAV staff Code of Conduct, including corruption and fraud, predates the Audit and was previously reviewed in 2011, and more recently in 2014. A new Fraud and Corruption policy was approved by the MAV Board in February 2015, together with a Fraud and Corruption Control Framework based on Australian standards and approved by the MAV’s Audit Committee in December 2014.

The MAV policy pre-dates the Audit and was reviewed in 2011, as noted in an MAV Internal Audit report, and reviewed again more recently in 2014. The Gifts, Benefits and Hospitality Policy was listed as relevant policy together with the Records Management Policy, Equal Opportunity Policy, Travel and Allowances Policy and OH&S Policy at the end of the 2011 version of the Staff Code of Conduct. The Gifts, Benefits

Page 73

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

VAGO REPORT - EFFECTIVENESS OF SUPPORT FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT REPORT contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d Issue

VAGO Audit

MAV response

hospitality prior to the introduction of this policy

and Hospitality Policy applies to any instance where items are offered to or received by the MAV Board or employees, and immediate family where applicable, if a conflict of interest is raised. A lack of entries in the MAV records by staff reporting a potential, perceived or actual conflict of interest does not offer evidence that the Staff Code of Conduct is not working. The more valid conclusion is that the Code and its processes for declaration are working and that this has minimised the need for declarations. Monitoring, With the exceptions Funding for procurement, events and training; Evaluation and of MAV insurance; and project grants are directly linked Reporting: Procurement, MAV with project activities. The allocation of core sources of MAV Insurance, grants funds derived from other sources (including funding and events, MAV membership fees) are applied by MAV in cannot link sources accordance with priorities determined and of funding with its agreed by members and the MAV Board through work activities. adoption of an annual Budget which enables implementation of the Strategic Work Plan, State Council resolutions and emerging issues. The capacity to direct resources as new priorities arise is a key requirement of a member association, and robust monthly financial reporting ensures strict oversight of MAV financials by the MAV Board. MAV Support Services Procurement standards

Procurement probity

MAV is not subject to legislation or other whole of government requirements related to procurement. MAV is not undertaking procurements consistent with the standards required of councils under the LG Act, despite acting on their behalf MAV does not have a formal procurement policy in place to guide its procurement activities. Consequently there is limited formal

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

While MAV is not bound by the LGV Best Practice Procurement Guidelines, its procurement procedures are, for the most part, consistent with the guidelines. Existing MAV procurement controls have not been adequately acknowledged in the Audit report., An Internal MAV Audit Report concluded in 2013 that current controls in place over MAV Procurement are generally adequate. The internal audit report also identified no high risks, nine medium risks and one low risk; and all but one recommendation (relating to data collection) has been acted upon. MAV has comprehensive processes to ensure probity and good practice in its procurement practices. MAVâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Procurement Process Overview provides detailed guidance to staff from business case to tender evaluation, appointment of suppliers and contract management. The overview also requires the development of a Tender Evaluation Plan, which

Page 74

VAGO REPORT - EFFECTIVENESS OF SUPPORT FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT REPORT cont’d Issue

Procurement conflicts of Interest

Procurement competitiveness

VAGO Audit

MAV response

guidance for staff in applying probity standards consistent with better practice.

includes considerable detail on the requirements for probity and ethics in conducting a procurement tender, the requirements for declaration of conflict of interest, confidentiality and the appointment of a probity adviser.

Until recently, MAV had insufficient policies, internal mechanisms or processes for assisting staff to manage conflicts of interest.

MAV’s Procurement Tender Evaluation Plan required all members of the evaluation panel to sign conflict and confidentiality declarations. MAV staff, not being members of the evaluation panel, did not make declarations. The MAV has recently amended the requirement to provide that staff who provide any support to an evaluation panel must also complete conflict and confidentiality declarations.

This audit also found insufficient assurance over probity and potential conflicts of interest, which were neither declared nor managed by MAV. Audit found issues with the competitiveness of MAV procurement processes, which led it to question whether these support activities provide councils with value for money.

The MAV does not accept it has not managed actual, perceived or potential conflicts of interest by the successful self insurance workcover tenderer. This view is supported by legal advice.

In the case of internal MAV tenders conducted to appoint insurance service providers, the Audit findings lack consideration of all relevant issues, context and history. For Liability Mutual Insurance, Audit relied on the support of a single recommendation in the review of risk management services to inform its findings. More detailed and considered reports commissioned and implemented by MAV to ensure member value were provided to Audit. The tender for a proposed self-insurance workers’ compensation scheme occurred in a competitive environment, with an independent Tender Evaluation Panel appointed to choose the preferred supplier. All tenderers were current service providers to local government – the entire basis for their selection for tender. MAV does not believe a perceived or actual conflict of interest existed and has received legal advice that supports this view. All MAV tenders conducted on behalf of councils under the Ministerial exemption have been open tenders. Councils are not obliged to participate,

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 75

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

VAGO REPORT - EFFECTIVENESS OF SUPPORT FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT REPORT contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d Issue

VAGO Audit

MAV response and must individually assess the value of any contract, not rely on the work of an agent. This is a required obligation in accordance with the 2013 Local Government Best Practice Procurement Guidelines developed by LGV to ensure each council complies with legislation. Assessments undertaken by each council will vary according to whether alternative sources of local supply offer a better value contract option. MAV would support a review of the section 186 Ministerial exemption by LGV. This was only provided to the MAV in July 2014, while similar exemptions have been available to other procurement service providers for the past five years.

The full VAGO report and MAV response are attached to this report. CONCLUSION The purpose of VAGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s audit was to measure and evaluate the support provided to Local Governments. The MAV replied to the conclusions of the VAGO report and both reports are brought before Council for information to provide an insight of the advocacy on behalf of Local Government performed by both VAGO, LGV and MAV. Whilst LGV have not formally responded, it is mentioned numerous times through the table included in this report.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Municipal Association of Victoria's reply to VAGO Report

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 227

Page 76

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.2

VAGO REPORT - LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESULTS OF THE 2013-14 AUDITS

Author:

Tania O'Reilly - Manager Finance & Procurement, Corporate Services

File:

D15/37377

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Victorian Auditor-General’s Office is responsible for conducting the financial audits of all Victorian local government councils. The audits are done annually. VAGO presented the yearly report to the Victorian State Parliament on 26 February 2015 titled Local Government: Results of the 2013-14 Audits. The report from the Auditor General presents the outcomes and observations from the 2013–14 financial audits of the 79 local councils, 11 regional library corporations and 13 associated entities. The full report can be obtained from the VAGO website with the key outcomes relevant to Banyule City Council noted in this summary report: 

Banyule Council was issued a clear audit opinion by the Victorian AuditorGeneral’s Office (VAGO) on the Financial Statements for year ended 30 June 2014.



Included in the report is a section on Financial Sustainability Risks Banyule Council has maintained its financial sustainability year on year. Overall, Banyule Council had a low financial sustainability risk assessment.



The Office of the Auditor General conducted minor audits on internal controls over creditors and grants (received). The report issued seven recommendations. Banyule Council will review all the recommendations within this report to determine where current policies and processes can be improved.



The Local Government Investigations and Compliance Inspectorate published a review on councillor discretionary funds (Ward Funds) recommending that they be abolished. Banyule Council abolished ward funds in 2013.



The Auditor General noted that the Local Government Performance Reporting Framework (LGPRF) commences on 1 July 2014. Banyule Council has set procedures in place to ensure the Performance Statements are prepared in accordance with the LGPRF for year ending 30 June 2015.



The Auditor General also made note that local councils continue to face the challenges of delivering quality services to their community, maintaining their existing assets and funding future capital works. To do this effectively, local councils will need to effectively prioritise spending and determine sustainable rates for services provided within the government's proposed rate capping policy, effective from 2016/2017.

Banyule Council is currently developing its City Plan and Strategic Resource Plan in light of these challenges.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 77

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

VAGO REPORT - LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESULTS OF THE 2013-14 AUDITS cont’d RECOMMENDATION That Council: 

Receive the report from the Victorian Auditor-General’s Office: Local Government Results of the 2013-14 Audits



Note the outcomes and observations from the 2013–14 financial audits of the 79 local councils, 11 regional library corporations and 13 associated entities.

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. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “provide responsible financial management and business planning processes”. BACKGROUND The Victorian local government sector comprises 79 local councils, 11 regional library corporations (RLC) and 13 associated entities. Local government is recognised in Victoria’s constitution as the third tier of government. Local councils are governed by democratically elected councillors and their operations are administered by the council-appointed chief executive officer. While administered under the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act), each council operates autonomously and is directly accountable to its constituents. The report from the Victorian Auditor General’s Office (VAGO), informs Parliament about significant issues identified during their audit and complements the assurance provided through individual audit opinions included in the annual reports of each entity. The report can be found at http://www.audit.vic.gov.au/reports_and_publications/latest_reports/201415/20150226-local-government.aspx Included in VAGO’s report is a section on Financial Sustainability Risks. VAGO uses a series of six ratios/indicators to arrive at their conclusions. They compare all councils within five categories based on geographical location and partly on council size. Banyule is one of 17 councils in the Inner Metropolitan category. The VAGO report includes details of the six Financial Sustainability Indicators and the Risk Assessment criteria for the financial sustainability indicators. The risk assessment is the value given to each indicator and is used to compare Banyule Council to the other councils in the Inner Metropolitan category and to the category average. The risk assessment falls into one of three risk zones – low (green), medium (orange) and high (red).

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 78

VAGO REPORT - LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESULTS OF THE 2013-14 AUDITS cont’d The risk assessment is calculated on the mean average of the results for the past five years – 2010 to 2014 (inclusive) for three of the indicators and on the 2014 financial results for the other three. The assessments for three of the six indicators are based on the mean average for the past five financial years (2010-2014 inclusive), shown as (mean) for:  average underlying result  capital replacement and  renewal gap. The other three indicators are as at 30 June 2014, shown as (2014 only), for:  Liquidity  indebtedness and  self-financing. Five of the six assessment areas also have forecast figures for the next three years based on the budgets for 2015-2017. VAGO use these figures to give an assessment on the future trend of the indicator. The renewal gap indicator does not use future budgets. 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. DISCUSSION Audit Opinion Banyule City Council received a clear audit opinion on the Financial Statements for year ended 30 June 2014. The Statements included the Standard Statements and the Performance Statement. This confirms that the statements have been prepared according to applicable accounting standards and the financial reporting requirements of the Local Government Act 1989, where appropriate. Council completed the Financial Report prior to the statutory due date of 30 September 2014. Council was not named in the Victorian Auditor-General’s Office report apart from the tables showing the list of Victorian councils and the Financial Sustainability Risk assessments.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 79

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

VAGO REPORT - LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESULTS OF THE 2013-14 AUDITS cont’d Local Government Performance Reporting Framework VAGO reminded all councils that “from 1 July 2014, local councils must prepare Performance Statements in accordance with the Local Government Performance Reporting Framework”, (LGPRF). The new regime requires extensive financial and non-financial information to be disclosed. This framework is designed to ensure that all councils are measuring and reporting on their performance in a consistent and meaningful way. Banyule Council has participated in the trial runs for LGPRF reports for year ended 30 June 2014 and the quarter ended 30 September 2014. Banyule officers also produced LGPRF reporting for internal assessment for the quarter 31 December 2014 of the current financial year. Banyule Council: Financial Sustainability Risk Assessment results for 2013-14 For the summary of the “Financial Sustainability Risk Assessment results for 201314”, Banyule Council was given an overall Sustainability Assessment of low risk (green). The overall Inner Metropolitan category also had a low risk assessment, with 2 of the 17 councils having a medium or high risk assessment. Banyule Council had four indicators in the low risk (green) zone and two indicators in the medium risk (orange) zone. The four low risk (green) indicators are: 1. 2. 3. 4.

average underlying result liquidity capital replacement and renewal gap.

The two medium risk (orange) indicators are: 1. 2.

indebtedness and self-financing.

1) The underlying result indicator was comfortably in the low risk zone with 3.6% (mean), and was slightly below the category average of 4.9%, (mean). Banyule’s future trend was improving. 2) The liquidity indicator ratio of 4.1, (2014 only), was the best in the Inner Metropolitan council area and was well above the category average of 1.8, (2014 only). Banyule’s future trend was stable. 3) The capital replacement indicator was comfortably in the low risk zone with a ratio of 2.1, (mean), which was the second best in the Inner Metropolitan category. The category average was 1.6, (mean). Banyule’s future trend was stable. The indicator compares spending on capital works to depreciation and amortization.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 80

VAGO REPORT - LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESULTS OF THE 2013-14 AUDITS contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d 4) The renewal gap indicator was comfortably in the low risk zone with a ratio of 1.5, (mean), compared to the category average of 1.2, (mean). Banyule Council had the third best ratio in the Inner Metropolitan category. Councilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ratio was boosted by significant capital works program in the 2012 and 2011 years. These two years were in the low risk zone. The other three years were in the medium risk zone. Overall the five year mean average was low risk. The challenge for Council is to maintain the good indicator result during future years of rate capping and by conducting a higher level of renewal capital works. The renewal gap compares the rate of spending through renewing, restoring and replacing existing assets with the rate that they depreciate. Spending more than the rate an asset is used indicates that a council is sufficiently renewing its assets. 5) The indebtedness indicator was in the upper end of the medium risk zone with a mean average of 56.7%, (2014 only). The low risk range is 40% or less and the medium risk range is 40 to 60% indebtedness. For the five years Council had two years in the low risk zone and two years in the lower end of the medium risk zone. The fifth year, 2014, is where the indebtedness percentage was the highest of all the five years. This was a reflection of the loans taken out to purchase the former school sites. The sale of the school sites will generate significant income to fund future capital works. Council has made a conscious effort in the draft budget covering the next four years to reduce the amount of the loans outstanding. The VAGO indebtedness indicator shows an improving trend and the indicator returns to the low risk zone in 2017, with 38.2%. This indicator and the self-financing indicator seem to go hand in hand as they impact on each other. 6) The self-financing indicator was in the middle of the medium risk zone (10 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 20%) with 16.6%, (2014 only) with the category average of 20.5% just marginally in the low risk zone (20% or more). For Banyule, three of the past five years, including the past two, have been in the medium risk zone. The other two years were only marginally in the low risk zone. The draft budget for 2016-2019 shows that the self-financing indicator is steadily improving with the percentage of 19.4%, almost in the low risk zone in 2017. For all councils, in 2014, 42% were rated as high or medium self-financing risk compared to 34% in 2012-13. To improve this indicator Banyule Council would need to increase operating income or reduce operating expenses or a combination of both. The challenge for Banyule Council, in the near future, is to improve this indicator in an era of the Victorian Government set to introduce a rate capping policy for the 2016-17 financial year. Also, for 2017 - 2019, the pausing of financial assistance grants over the next three years adds to the challenge.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 81

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

VAGO REPORT - LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESULTS OF THE 2013-14 AUDITS cont’d Minor Audits and Reviews VAGO conducted a minor audit, outside the scope of the normal financial audit, on creditors and grants received and issued seven recommendations in the report. The recommendations revolved around grants and the need for comprehensive policies, effective management practices and enhancing policy compliance monitoring. These were not directed to any specific council. The VAGO report included, as part of their normal audit, four other recommendations throughout the report covering financial reporting and performance reporting. These were not directed to any specific council. For Banyule, the conduct of audits by Council’s internal auditors on processing and procedures will assist to keep a check Council’s policies, management and monitoring of those policies and maintenance of Banyule’s creditor data Masterfile. In October 2013, the Local Government Investigations and Compliance Inspectorate published a review of councillor discretionary funds (Ward Funds). The review identified issues regarding accountability of discretionary funds and recommended that they be abolished. Banyule Council abolished the use of Ward Funds in April 2014. Rates and government grants continue to be the primary sources of revenue for all councils – accounting for 72 percent of total revenue, (Banyule 76.4% for year ended 30 June 2014). CONCLUSION Banyule City Council received a clear audit opinion on the Financial Statements for year ended 30 June 2014 and is in a sound financial position based upon its financial sustainability indicator results.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 82

6.3

PROTECTED DISCLOSURES - BANYULE AWARDED GOLD STAR BY INDEPENDANT BROAD BASED ANTI CORRUPTION COMMISSION (IBAC)

Author:

Vivien Ferlaino - Governance Co-ordinator, Corporate Services

File:

F2014/4228

Previous Items Council on 29 July 2013 (Item 6.1 - Protected Disclosures (Replacement of the Whistleblowers Act)) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Banyule City Council is a public body subject to the Protected Disclosures Act 2012 (PD Act). The purpose of the Act is to encourage and facilitate the making of disclosures of improper conduct by public officers and public bodies, including the Council as a public body, its staff, employees and Councillors. Banyule is committed to the aims and objectives of the PD Act. It recognises the value of transparency and accountability in its administrative and management practices, and supports the making of disclosures that reveal improper conduct. It does not tolerate improper conduct by the organisation, its employees, officers, or Councillors, nor the taking of reprisals against those who come forward to disclose such conduct. In the second half of 2014, the Independent Broad-Based Anti-Corruption Commission (IBAC) undertook a review of procedures established by public bodies as required under the Protected Disclosure Act 2012 In December 2014, IBAC released its report on the findings of the review, titled “Review of Protected Disclosure Procedures – Section 60 of the Protected Disclosure Act 2012”. It is very pleasing to note that Banyule Council has been identified in IBAC’s report as a best practice Council and given a ‘gold star’ rating for its procedures, and therefore compliance with the PD Act. Only 15 of the 114 public bodies reviewed, which included all Victorian Councils and Government Departments, achieved this rating. Further clarification with IBAC identified that the assessment of procedures looked at both the required content and accuracy of the content. Banyule had all the required content (exceptional compared to others) and the content was correct both legally and according to IBAC’s guidelines. The rating for usability of Banyule’s procedures was very high, the only accessed organisation to achieve such a rating. While there are still areas for improvement by all public bodies as an outcome of the review, this recognition by IBAC contributes significantly to Banyule’s image and reputation as a leader and champion of good governance. As a result of the feedback from IBAC, a minor update to the Guideline’s previously adopted by Council is required.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 83

6.3

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.3

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

PROTECTED DISCLOSURES - BANYULE AWARDED GOLD STAR BY INDEPENDANT BROAD BASED ANTI CORRUPTION COMMISSION (IBAC) cont’d RECOMMENDATION That Council adopt the reviewed Protected Disclosure Procedures for Banyule City Council. (attached) 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”. 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. It is considered that the Protected Disclosure Procedures are consistent with, and advances rights outlined in the Charter. The human rights most relevant to these procedures are the rights to:  recognition and equality before the law (section 8)  freedom of expression (section 15)  take part in Public Life (section 18) BACKGROUND The Protected Disclosure Act 2012 replaced the Whistleblowers Act 2001. Council must establish and put in place written procedures to facilitate the making, handling and notification of protected disclosures. Council adopted procedures in July 2013. There are three main purposes of the PD Act: 1. To encourage and assist people to make a disclosure of improper conduct and detrimental action by public officers and public bodies 2. To provide certain protections for people who make a disclosure, or those who may suffer detrimental action in reprisal for a disclosure 3. To ensure that certain information about a disclosure is kept confidential – the identity of the person making the disclosure, and the content of that disclosure. In July 2014, IBAC wrote to Council advising that it would be undertaking a review of procedures established by public bodies. The procedures being reviewed related specifically to the procedures required under S58 of the PD Act, in relation to:

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 84

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.3

PROTECTED DISCLOSURES - BANYULE AWARDED GOLD STAR BY INDEPENDANT BROAD BASED ANTI CORRUPTION COMMISSION (IBAC) cont’d  

The making, handling of and notification to IBAC of disclosures; and The protection of persons from detrimental action in relation to the making of disclosures. All public bodies including local governments were required to establish and implement procedures in accordance with the requirements of the PD Act by 10 August 2013. Banyule’s procedures, prepared by the Governance team, were endorsed and approved by Council on 29 July 2013. Following advice of the review by IBAC, Council was then forwarded a detailed survey to complete and was required to provide all information and evidence of Council’s procedures, which was subsequently completed and submitted by the due date. DISCUSSION IBAC’s Review Report On 15 December 2014, IBAC released its report on the review of Protected Disclosure Procedures. A copy of the full report can be found at the following link http://www.ibac.vic.gov.au/docs/default-source/reports/review-of-protecteddisclosure-procedures---january-2015.pdf?sfvrsn=2 In summary, the review found that of the 114 bodies reviewed, the majority (88) met the requirements of the IBAC Guidelines and the PD Act, however most had procedures which were deficient in some respect, and areas for improvement have been identified. 26 of the 114 bodies reviewed had not met the requirements of the PD Act. IBAC has requested all bodies review their procedures in light of the issues identified in the report and all organisations should consider whether or not their procedures can be simplified or made more user friendly, and should ensure that their procedures are made readily available, particularly to members of the public Banyule’s Procedures awarded Gold Star Of the 114 public bodies reviewed, which included all councils, fifteen (15) were singled out by IBAC and given a ‘gold star’ rating for their procedures, on the basis that each of these procedures demonstrated some aspect of best practice. Pleasingly, Banyule has been nominated as one of these best practice councils. The full list of gold star organisations as appears on page 27 of the report. Banyule has received this recognition because it went beyond merely complying with the minimum requirements expected and has been innovative in the way it has developed and promoted the procedures and messages in relation to protected disclosure. Further clarification with IBAC about what is was that made Banyule receive a gold star included: 

The assessment of procedures looked at both required content and then whether existing content was accurate. Banyule had all the required content (exceptional compared to others) and the content was correct both legally and according to IBAC’s guidelines.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 85

6.3

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

PROTECTED DISCLOSURES - BANYULE AWARDED GOLD STAR BY INDEPENDANT BROAD BASED ANTI CORRUPTION COMMISSION (IBAC) cont’d    

Banyule’s information was publically available, was logically placed for searching, understandable and in plain language. It was well sign posted, with extra links to resources The rating for usability was very high, Banyule was the only accessed organisation to achieve such a rating Information was clear and comprehensive The summary sheet was very useful and clear

IBAC held a Protected Disclosure Coordinator Annual Forum 2015 on Friday 6 March 2015 at which the Manager Governance and Communication, Gina Burden, and Governance Co-ordinator, Vivien Ferlaino, were invited to present about Banyule’s implementation of the PD Act and the establishment of our procedures. Banyule Protected Disclosure Procedures Review As part of the feedback received from IBAC as a result of their Review, one small amendment was required to Banyule’s adopted Procedures. This involves removal of the reference to the Victorian Inspectorate as a reporting body for Local Government in relation to protected disclosures. The only reporting bodies are the IBAC and the Ombudsman. CONCLUSION The purpose of the PD Act is to encourage and facilitate the making of improper conduct by public officers and public bodies, including the Council as a public body, its staff, employees and Councillors. The Protected Disclosure Procedures supports the making of disclosures to reveal improper conduct. Receiving recognition and being identified as a best practice public body by an authority such as IBAC enhances Banyule’s reputation as a leader in good governance, particularly in relation to transparency and accountability. A review of Council’s procedures has occurred and a minor amendment made as a result of IBAC’s audit.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Banyule Protected Disclosure Procedures

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 237

Page 86

6.4

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.4

COUNCILLOR STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSION

Author:

Gina Burden - Manager Governance and Communication, Corporate Services

File:

F2015/167

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY It is important for Councillors to have access to conferences, forums and other training opportunities to develop their skills and ability to represent and engage with their constituents. There is also an expectation that Councillors, as part of their strategic role, make time to plan for the ongoing viability and long term direction of the municipality. This year as part of the training and development program for Councillors at Banyule, a facilitated weekend workshop was held offsite between 6 – 8 February 2015, involving the Councillors and key Senior Officers. The focus of the Strategic Planning Session was to review Council’s vision, prioritise deliverables for the community, and discuss opportunities for improvement. In the spirit of good governance, through being accountable and transparent, this report has been prepared to provide an overview of the Strategic Planning Session and to endorse those matters where there was general consensus that further action is required. RECOMMENDATION That: 1.

Council note the report on the Councillor Strategic Planning session held 6 – 8 February 2015; and

Officers report back to Council on the development and implementation of any strategies or initiatives, resulting from the Strategic Planning Session, which will either require Council endorsement or a budget allocation.

Council notes that this report was prepared at the specific request of the Councillors who attended the Strategic Planning Session to provide transparency to the community on the nature of the session and the outcomes achieved.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 87

6.4

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

COUNCILLOR STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSION cont’d CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “provide responsible financial management and business planning processes”. BACKGROUND The Councillor Strategic Planning Session held on the weekend of 6 - 8 February 2015, was the first offsite development/planning workshop of its type to be held by the incumbent Banyule Council and was attended by: Councillors: Craig Langdon (Mayor); Jenny Mulholland (Deputy Mayor); Steven Briffa; Mark Di Pasquale; Rick Garotti; Wayne Phillips Apology – Tom Melican (Interstate due to family commitments) Officers: Simon McMillan (CEO); Allison Beckwith (Director Community Programs); Geoff Glynn (Director Assets and City Services); Scott Walker (Director City Development); Gina Burden (then Acting Director Corporate Services); Peter Utri (Manager Organisational Systems); Tania O’Reilly ( Finance and Procurement) Facilitator: Lydia Wilson (Consultant) 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. DISCUSSION A number of key themes and issues were discussed and workshopped over the course of the two day Strategic Planning Session to which each Councillor present contributed robustly. Prior to the workshop, the facilitator undertook preparation by consulting with each Councillor to ensure the issues of importance to each of them would be covered in the workshop. During the workshop, the role of the facilitator was to assist with setting the scene, to keep things moving, and to focus discussions and synthesise feedback and input. Staff present contributed to the workshop by preparing the relevant background information and data for the Councillors to work through, and to provide clarification, information, and support as required. The themes and issues explored during the course of the weekend, included: Council Vision and City Plan Priorities: Detailed discussion and review was held on whether the City Plan continues to reflect Council’s Vision. There was general consensus that: •

The strategic framework of the City Plan should, for the remainder of Council’s term, remain constant with the 5P structure of: People, Planet, Place, Participation and Performance.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 88

COUNCILLOR STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSION cont’d • • • • •

The Key Directions of the City Plan still accurately describes Council’s intent for its community. The 7 themes developed last year threading through this framework remains constant, though the emphasis of these has altered. A major review of the City Plan is needed in year two of a Council’s term. Advocacy is required to the State Government on changing the timing of adopting the City Plan to allow a new Council time to settle and understand community priorities. A simple two page summary document of the City Plan should be developed and sent to all residents.

Key Councillor Priorities and Associated Timelines: During this session Councillors focused discussion on: • • • •

Summary of achievements over the current term Key capital expenditure commitments and updates Major Project updates and timelines for completion Improved promotional/communication plan relating to key Council projects

Financial Overview: Information and presentations related to: • Long term financial strategy • Rating Strategy • Debt strategy • Capital Expenditure Program • Implications of Rate Capping Opportunities for Improvement: This included detailed discussion and ideas sharing related to ways in which Council can continue to improve its operational efficiency, possibilities for cost savings, sharing of resources, potential revenue generation, and capacity building. Deliverables and future actions: A summary of the suggestions and actions which resulted from the two day planning session is listed below. A number of these will require further development and reporting back to Council. Improved Communication and Marketing, including: • Stronger communication and promotional plan regarding what we are achieving in all areas, and to explain what it is Council does and the key cost factors for Council, eg streetlights, asphalt. • Simple message to community of City Plan intent, including need for a two page document explaining the City Plan to be sent to all residents. • Improved Communication plan for capital projects as part of project funding. • Investigate an “App” (application for smart devices) for customer enquiries. • Ward News and Banner on line. • Establishing Communication Protocols. • Provide Social Media and IT training as part of the Councillor Training program, to assist Councillors to better utilise and communicate using the new technology.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 89

6.4

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.4

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

COUNCILLOR STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSION cont’d Corporate/Financial • Refresh of City Plan needs to occur one year after election of new Council. • Advocate, through MAV, for timing of adoption of City Plan immediately after elections to be reviewed. • Critical review of what and how we do our work for our community to gain the best outcomes. • Need to measure our success and communicate outcomes. • Pursue effective and efficient opportunities both on an income and expenditure base. • Key financial principles to be reinforced for strategic budgets over next 4 years. • Councillors to be briefed on the service review program – timelines and process. • Rating Strategy to be confirmed and adopted. • Undertake and complete review of Councillors Resources and Expense Policy. Service and Infrastructure Planning • Continue to be strong in our strategic planning in all areas. • Make sure our resources match our planning. • Council to review its Master Plans listing. • Continued focus on asset renewal as a priority. • Need for improved asset information for decision making. • Agree on city-wide approach for capital works program delivery, for both small and large projects. Relationship Building • Continue to work together as a cohesive Council. • Continue working on developing strong professional relationship with the Executive. • Build on partnerships within the community and effectively use Council’s partners to advocate for us, as well as us advocating for them (affected community groups, associations, stakeholder groups). • Examine who is best placed to deliver services in the community. CONCLUSION The recent two day Councillor Strategic Planning Session was considered a successful and productive event by both the Councillors and Officers present as it allowed an opportunity for these two groups to step away from the everyday and reflect upon the important strategic issues that will face this Council over its remaining term and into the future. A number of actions and strategies were discussed and formulated as part of the workshop, many of which will now require further development and reporting back to Council. ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 90

6.5

TENANCY 1 AND TENANCY 2 460 LOWER HEIDELBERG ROAD HEIDELBERG PROPOSED CHANGE OF USE

Author:

Jeanette Kringle - Property Co-ordinator, City Development

Ward:

Griffin

File:

F2013/1036 F2013/1037

6.5

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

Previous Items Council on 2 February 2015 (Item 6.4 - Tenancy 1 and Tenancy 2 460 Lower Heidelberg Road Heidelberg - Proposed change of use) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council currently leases the ground floor of the Council-owned commercial building known as 460 Lower Heidelberg Road Heidelberg to Specialist Diagnostic Services Pty Ltd (Specialist Diagnostic) under a five year lease, which is due to expire on 23 March 2015. Specialist Diagnostic has exercised its option for the final further term of five years. At the same time Specialist Diagnostic have requested to amend the permitted use under the lease from office administration to a Genetics/Molecular Pathology Laboratory (dry laboratory - not a chemistry laboratory). Molecular testing analyses Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) – an individual’s genetic code. The proposal to amend the permitted use triggered the need to give public notice under sections 190 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act). The proposal to amend the permitted use will also trigger the need for a planning permit, which will include an assessment of the car parking requirements. At its ordinary meeting on 2 February 2015 (CO2015/13) Council considered a report on the proposed change of use and authorised the giving of public notice. Public notice was given in the ‘Heidelberg Leader’ on 10 February 2015, with submissions on the proposal invited in accordance with section 223 of the Act. The submission period closed at 5:00 pm on 11 February 2015 with no submissions being received. The purpose of this report is for Council to decide whether or not to approve the proposal to amend the permitted use under the lease from office administration to a dry laboratory. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Acknowledges that Specialist Diagnostic Services Pty Ltd has exercised its option for a five (5) year lease of the Council-owned land and buildings known as Tenancy 1 and Tenancy 2, 460 Lower Heidelberg Road Heidelberg.

Having complied with sections 190 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989: a. by giving public notice in the Heidelberg Leader on 10 February 2015; b. by providing an opportunity to those who have requested to be heard at Council’s Ordinary Meeting of 23 March 2015 to be heard at that meeting; and

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 91

6.5

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

TENANCY 1 AND TENANCY 2 460 LOWER HEIDELBERG ROAD HEIDELBERG PROPOSED CHANGE OF USE cont’d c. by recording that no submissions have been received; approves the proposal to amend the permitted use under the lease from Office Administration to a Genetics/Molecular Pathology Laboratory (dry laboratory). 3.

Authorises the affixing of the common seal of Council to a lease with Specialist Diagnostic Services Pty Ltd for the purposes of a Genetics/Molecular Pathology Laboratory (dry Laboratory) for the term of five (5) years commencing on 24 March 2015 and ending on 23 March 2020.

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. 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 provides that “A person must not be deprived of his or her property other than in accordance with the law.” It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. Council has the legislative power to lease land owned or vested in Council’s name. Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) provides that a person may make a submission in respect of a proposal by Council to lease land or to make a substantial amendment to the existing lease. BACKGROUND Council is the owner of the two storey commercial building constructed on the Council-owned land known as 460 Lower Heidelberg Road Heidelberg (shown in the location plan in Figure 1). The building was constructed by the former Heidelberg Council in 1994 with pre-committal leases to the Commonwealth of Australia.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 92

TENANCY 1 AND TENANCY 2 460 LOWER HEIDELBERG ROAD HEIDELBERG PROPOSED CHANGE OF USE cont’d

Figure 1: Location Plan The current tenants in the building include Specialist Diagnostic Services Pty Ltd (Specialist Diagnostic), which leases Tenancy 1 and 2 (707m2 on the ground floor) for office administration and HWZ Services Pty Ltd and Banksia Partners Pty Ltd, which leases Tenancy 3 (440m2 on the first floor) also for office administration (financial services). The current five year lease to Specialist Diagnostic is due to expire on 23 March 2015. The current lease provides for a further term of five years and Specialist Diagnostic has exercised the option for the final further term. In addition to exercising its option, Specialist Diagnostic has requested Council to consider amending the permitted use from office administration to laboratory for Genetics/Molecular Pathology (not a chemistry laboratory). Molecular testing analyses Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) – an individual’s genetic code. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION The building has a total net lettable area of 1,147 m2 and is currently fully occupied. Tenancy 1 and Tenancy 2, 460 Lower Heidelberg Road Heidelberg, covers the whole of the ground floor of the building (the subject land), and comprises part of the land in Certificate of Title Volume 8958 Folio 910. There are 28 undercover car parking spaces in the basement of the building. The lease for Tenancy 1 and Tenancy 2 allocates 23 car parking spaces for the exclusive use of Specialist Diagnostic.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 93

6.5

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.5

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

TENANCY 1 AND TENANCY 2 460 LOWER HEIDELBERG ROAD HEIDELBERG PROPOSED CHANGE OF USE cont’d PLANNING CONTROLS The subject land is included in a Commercial 1 Zone (C1Z) under the Banyule Planning Scheme (BPS) and is affected by the Design and Development (DDO1) overlay control. The purpose of C1Z is to create vibrant mixed use commercial centres for retail, office, business, entertainment and community uses. The DDO1 controls the design and built form of new developments. The proposed use of the subject land as a laboratory is not specifically defined in the BPS but under the nesting diagrams the use would be classified as industry. The nature of the use will be assessed as part of planning and building permit applications. CURRENT SITUATION This report does not consider the appropriateness or otherwise of the proposal to amend the permitted use from a building or planning perspective. Those permit applications will be dealt with under separate processes. The purpose of this report is for Council to hear and consider any submissions received and decide whether or not to approve the proposal to amend the permitted use under the lease. LEGAL CONSIDERATION Public notice of the proposal was given in the ‘Heidelberg Leader’ on 10 February 2015, with submissions on the proposal invited in accordance with section 223 of the Act. The submission period closed at 5:00 pm on 11 February 2015, with no submissions being received. DISCUSSION The giving of public notice does not obligate Council to approve the proposal to amend the permitted use. It is merely an invitation to the public to make a submission in respect to the proposal. Having exercised its option for a further term under the existing lease, Specialist Diagnostic is entitled to a new five year lease. Specialist Diagnostic has advised that the exercise of the option is not interdependent on the success of its proposal to amend the permitted use. However it is eager for the proposal to proceed to facilitate the relocation of the laboratory service which currently operates in Gippsland. CONCLUSION The exercise of the option by Specialist Diagnostic for a further term of five years is an entitlement under the terms and conditions of the existing lease. The exercise of the option and proposal to amend the permitted use are not interdependent. Building and planning permits will be required to amend the land use. Those permit applications will be dealt with under separate processes. Council has satisfied the requirements under the Act by giving public notice of the proposal and inviting and affording the opportunity to hear submissions (if any). No submissions were received.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 94

TENANCY 1 AND TENANCY 2 460 LOWER HEIDELBERG ROAD HEIDELBERG PROPOSED CHANGE OF USE contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d

In light of the above, the proposal to amend the permitted use under the lease from office administration to a Genetics/Molecular Pathology Laboratory (dry laboratory) should be supported. ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 95

6.5

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.6

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.6

22 AND 24 PETERS STREET WATSONIA NOTICE OF INTENTION TO SELL

Author:

Joseph Tabacco - Manager Property & Economic Development, City Development

Ward:

Grimshaw

File:

2013/1090

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Consistent with the former Diamond Valley Shire Council’s vision to expand A K Lines Reserve in Watsonia, the former Council acquired 22 and 24 Peters Street Watsonia in 1974. Based on the other municipal priorities, the former Council’s vision was never realised with 22 and 24 Peters Street being the only properties acquired at the time. An assessment of the current usefulness, purpose, key issues and saleability of Council owned land at 22 and 24 Peters Street Watsonia has been conducted revealing that the land is surplus to Council’s requirements. This report seeks Council’s authorisation to commence statutory procedures associated with a notice of intention to sell the land. The giving of public notice of Council’s intention to sell does not compel Council to sell the 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 land. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

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 22 and 24 Peters Street Watsonia (land) by giving public notice and inviting written submissions on the proposal in the “Diamond Valley Leader” on 14 April 2015.

Receive written submissions and hear submissions on the proposal to sell the 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 6 July 2015 beginning at 7.45pm to be held in the Council Chambers, 275 Upper Heidelberg Road Ivanhoe.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 96

22 AND 24 PETERS STREET WATSONIA - NOTICE OF INTENTION TO SELL cont’d 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. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “develop and deliver best value services and facilities”. BACKGROUND Compulsorily acquired in 1974 by the former Diamond Valley Shire, the land known as 22 and 24 Peters Street Watsonia was purchased with the intention of extending the adjacent A K Lines Reserve – assuming that all properties abutting the reserve would also be acquired to facilitate this vision. Owing to a range of other municipal priorities, the former Diamond Valley Shire’s project never fully transpired with 22 and 24 Peters Street being the only properties acquired at that time. Following a recent investigation assessing the usefulness, purpose, key issues and saleability, the land has been identified as surplus to Council’s requirements. Consistent with the surrounding residential land, a planning scheme amendment process was initiated by Council in 2014 which proposed to rezone the land from Public Park and Recreation Zone (PPRZ) to General Residential Schedule 1 (GRZ1). The outcome of the rezoning exercise resulted in Council determining at its meeting held 10 November 2014 to: 1.

Adopt Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C103 to rezone 22 and 24 Peters Street, Watsonia from Public Park and Recreation Zone to General Residential Zone Schedule 1.

Request the Minister for Planning to approve Amendment C103 into the Banyule Planning Scheme.

Whilst formal amendment approval is yet to be received it is now appropriate for Council to initiate statutory procedures associated with a notice of intention to sell the land in preparation for the pending approval of the rezoning by the Minister for Planning.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 97

6.6

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.6

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

22 AND 24 PETERS STREET WATSONIA - NOTICE OF INTENTION TO SELL cont’d Locality Plan

The land comprises two parcels on separate titles. The combined property area of which is 1150m2. Each parcel measures an equal 575m2 which could be sold individually or collectively as a development site. The land is bounded by residential properties to the north-east and south-west. The land is further bound by A K Lines Reserve to the south-east as illustrated in the locality plan above. 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.” 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). CURRENT SITUATION The land is serviced by gas, sewerage and water supply. Suitable overhead electricity supply is not readily available therefore an underground connection will be required. The lawful point of stormwater discharge is located approximately 40 metres northeast of the boundary within A K Lines reserve. Drainage construction is necessary and requires further detailed design. Following the completion of the statutory process articulated in this report and the consideration of submissions, if Council determines to proceed with selling the land,

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 98

22 AND 24 PETERS STREET WATSONIA - NOTICE OF INTENTION TO SELL contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d arrangements will be made to ensure that the installation and connection of the balance of services outlined above are activated. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION It is noted that the water supply and tapping for the club rooms and oval at A K Lines Reserve is currently sourced from within the south side of 22 Peters Street Watsonia. Assuming that Council proceeds to sell the land, the tapping and water supply facilitated through 22 Peters Street Watsonia would need to be cut. An alternative supply source would need to be identified and connected to facilitate continued water supply to A K Lines Reserve. LEGAL CONSIDERATION 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. 2. 3. 4.

Sale by public auction. Sale by private treaty. Expression of Interest (EOI). Request for Quotations (RFQ) and Request for Proposals (RFP).

In this instance the sale of 22 and 24 Peters Street Watsonia individually or collectively via public auction is likely to achieve the best overall outcome. SUBDIVISION ACT 1988 If Council sells land deemed as public open space, to which section 20 of the Subdivision Act 1988 applies, the proceeds from any sale must be used to: a. b.

buy land for use for public recreation or public resort, as parklands or for similar purposes; or improve land already set aside, zoned or reserved (by the Council, the Crown, a planning scheme or otherwise) for use for public recreation or public resort, as parklands or for similar purposes; or improve land (whether set aside on a plan or not) used for public recreation and public resort, a parklands or for similar purposes, with the approval of the Minister administering the Local Government Act 1989.

Given that the land is currently public open space, any proceeds from the sale of the land will be redirected back into open space projects. 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.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 99

6.6

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.6

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

22 AND 24 PETERS STREET WATSONIA - NOTICE OF INTENTION TO SELL cont’d 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. POLICY IMPLICATIONS GUIDELINES FOR THE SALE AND EXCHANGE OF COUNCIL LAND 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. PUBLIC NOTICE

Consistent with Council’s Official Newspaper Policy, the giving of public notice for this proposal will be through the “Diamond Valley Leader” which is generally circulated within the Watsonia and surrounding area. The giving of public notice of Council’s intention to sell does not compel Council to sell the 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 land. CONCLUSION Based on the land being surplus to Council’s requirements, it is now appropriate for Council to give consideration to the sale of the land. Accordingly, authorisation to commence the statutory procedures to give public notice of Council’s intention to sell the land should be supported with any

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 100

22 AND 24 PETERS STREET WATSONIA - NOTICE OF INTENTION TO SELL contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d submissions being received in respect of the proposal to be considered by Council at a future meeting, before deciding whether or not to sell the land. ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 101

6.6

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.7

ADOPTION OF PROPOSED GENERAL LOCAL LAW NO. 1 (2015)

Author:

Janice Richardson - Governance Officer, Corporate Services

File:

F2014/1342

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Banyule City Council’s existing General Local Law No. 1 (2005) ceases to operate on the 27 April 2015. As a result, this Local Law has undergone an extensive review and a new proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015) has been developed. It is proposed that the new General Local Law No. 1 (2015) will commence operation when the existing General Local Law No. 1 (2005) is revoked. Council resolved at its meeting on the 17 November 2014 to commence the prescribed statutory process outlined under section 119 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989, and gave Notice of Intention to Make a Local Law. The giving of public notice provides the opportunity for members of the public affected by the proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015) to make a written submission in relation to the proposed Local Law. Council is obliged, under section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 to hear and give consideration to any submissions received in relation to the proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015). The public were able to view the proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015) on Council’s website and at Council’s Customer Service Centres. The submission period was from the 27 November 2014 and closed at 5.00pm on 30 January 2015. Council received two written submissions. One person requested to speak on their submission at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on Monday 16 February 2015. As a result of the hearing of submissions, one minor change has been made to the definition of “building works” in the proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015). This change will address the concern raised by the person who spoke on their submission at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on Monday 16 February 2015. Further, Council conducted two Public Meetings, wrote to Victoria Police, Traders’ Association representatives and dog clubs, received press and television coverage relating to one of the proposed Local Laws clauses and held a specific meeting with representatives of some of the Traders Associations during the consultation period. Following the commencement of the statutory process, all documents were forwarded to Council’s legal advisor for advice. As a result of the legal advice, some modifications were made to the proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015), Local Law Community Impact Statement, Template Assessment: New Local Laws Clauses and the Human Rights Charter – Assessment of Compatibility. All the changes have been documented in more detail within the body of this report and the Local Law Community Impact Statement.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 102

6.7

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.7

ADOPTION OF PROPOSED GENERAL LOCAL LAW NO. 1 (2015) cont’d RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

adopts the proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015) (Attachment 1) and the Footpath Trading Policy (Attachment 2) (incorporated document), with the commencement date of 15 April 2015.

revokes the existing General Local Law No. 1 (2005) at the commencement of General Local Law No. 1 (2015), on the 15 April 2015.

adopts the proposed Local Law Community Impact Statement (Attachment 3) on the 15 April 2015, which includes:  Template Assessment: New Local Laws Clauses (Appendix 1)  Template Assessment: Existing Local Law (Appendix 2)  Human Rights Charger – Assessment of Compatibility (Appendix 3)  Summary Document: Submissions, Communications and Other Consultation (Appendix 4).

gives notice of the adoption of the General Local Law No. 1 (2015) via the Government Gazette and public advertisement in accordance with section 119(3) of the Local Government Act 1989.

sends a copy of the adopted General Local Law No. 1 (2015) to the Minister for Local Government in accordance with section 119(4) of the Local Government Act 1989

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 103

6.7

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ADOPTION OF PROPOSED GENERAL LOCAL LAW NO. 1 (2015) cont’d What are Local Laws? Local Laws:       

are adopted to protect public health, safety, or amenity in a municipality. They are designed to ensure that the actions of an individual or group do not have a negative or undesirable impact on the rest of the community. are a form of regulatory instrument. cannot duplicate, overlap, conflict with or be inconsistent with existing Federal or State legislation. cannot duplicate or be inconsistent with any planning scheme. should not be created unnecessarily. Council needs to consider whether there are alternatives to a Local Law that might better suit the needs of the community. only apply within a particular municipality. have a 10 year life and must be renewed after that time to remain valid. This ensures that Local Laws remain current and suitable to the purpose for which they were originally made.

Council is obliged to ensure that the regulatory approach adopted involves the least burden or the greatest advantage to its community. CURRENT SITUATION Banyule City Council’s existing General Local Law No. 1 (2005) ceases to operate on the 27 April 2015. An extensive review has been undertaken and a proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015) (Attachment 1) has been developed, which will commence operation when the existing General Local Law No. 1 (2005) is revoked. A steering committee comprising relevant officers from across the organisation was established in late 2013 to develop a process for reviewing the Local Law. The lead project officers also participated in the LGPro Better Local Laws Program between October 2013 and August 2014. Community consultation was conducted in February-March 2014 where Council asked for comment on the perceived effectiveness of the existing Local Law. Extensive consultation was undertaken across the organisation and with the Victoria Police. Benchmarking with other Councils has also been undertaken continually between February-August 2014. At the Ordinary Meeting of Council on the 17 November 2014, it was resolved: “That: 1.

Council endorses, in principle, proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015), proposed Local Law Community Impact Statement, Schedule 1 – Notice to Comply, Schedule 2 – Penalties, Appendix 1 – Template Assessments: New Local Laws Clauses, Appendix 2 – Template Assessments: Existing Local Law No. 1 (2005) – General Local Law and Appendix 3 – Human Rights Charter – Assessment of Compatibility;

Council commences the statutory process for the making of the proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015) and its associated documents;

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 104

ADOPTION OF PROPOSED GENERAL LOCAL LAW NO. 1 (2015) cont’d 3.

In accordance with sections 119 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989, Council gives notice in the Government Gazette, the Heidelberg and Diamond Valley Leader and on Council’s website stating: 3.1

the purpose and the general purport of the proposed Local Law;

3.2

that a copy of the proposed Local Law, proposed Local Law Community Impact Statement and associated documents can be obtained from Council offices, Council’s Libraries and from Council’s website;

3.3

that any person affected by the Local Law may make a submission relating to the proposed Local Law under section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989, and submissions will be received from 27 November 2014 until 30 January 2015;

3.4

that copies of submissions (including submitters’ names and addresses) will be made available at the Council meeting at which the above proposal will be considered. Council is also required to make submissions available for public inspection for a period of twelve months.

In accordance with section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989, submissions will be heard at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on Monday 16 February 2015.”

Following this meeting Council gave Notice of its Intention to Make a Local Law in the Government Gazette (published on 27 November 2014), the Heidelberg and Diamond Valley Leader (published on 25 and 26 November 2014) and on Council’s website (with all relevant documents downloadable). All documents were available at Council’s three Customer Service Centres either for viewing or for collection by the public. Following the commencement of the statutory process, all documents were forwarded to Council’s legal advisor for advice on the following: 

Is the Local Law consistent with all applicable legislation?



Assessment of the “Delegations and Authorisations” clause



Assessment of the “Asset Protection Permit” clause



Are there any omissions or flaws in the Local Law?



Are any provisions unworkable?



Assessment of the Local Law Community Impact Statement and Human Rights Assessment



Assessment of new provisions



Assessment of “Unsightly Land” clause

The Local Law Review Steering Committee met and agreed with all of the advice received from the legal advisor. The changes recommended have been incorporated into the proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015) and the Human Rights

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 105

6.7

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.7

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ADOPTION OF PROPOSED GENERAL LOCAL LAW NO. 1 (2015) cont’d Assessment. The legal advice did not recommend any changes to the Community Impact Statement. The major changes were the inclusion of revised clauses for:  Delegations and Authorisations 

Asset Protection Permit



Parking Permit

Based upon the legal advice, modifications have been agreed by the Steering Committee and made to the proposed new clauses:  Vacant Land and Buildings on Land 

Maintenance of Private Drains and Stormwater Retention Systems

The “Vacant Land and Buildings on Land” clause has been split into two parts and “abandoned” has been added before “buildings”. This change provides greater clarity to the clause. Part (b) has been deleted from Maintenance of Private Drains and Stormwater Retention Systems due to the overlap with the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008. Further legal advice was sought on Schedule 2 – Penalties where there is provision of a penalty of 5 penalty units for the failure to comply with a condition of a permit. Legal advice recommended an additional penalty (of a higher amount) in Schedule 2 for the failure to comply with a condition of a permit in relation to certain clauses of the Local Law. This would apply to permits issued for certain activities (usually around council assets and building works) where conditions are not complied with because the consequences of not complying with a condition of a permit are not high enough. As a result of the legal advice, Schedule 2 – Penalties has been modified to have penalties of 5 penalty units and 10 penalty units for the offence of “failure to comply with a condition of a permit” for specific clauses. These have been detailed in Schedule 2. Modifications have been made to the templates and assessment for the new clauses and the General Local Law No. 1 (2015) document. Most other changes were minor, such as changing the word “issue” to “serve” or the inclusion of “section 42 of the Domestic Animals Act 1994” in the Authorising Provisions. Officers, using best practice principles, have prepared the following documents:  Proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015) (Attachment 1)  Proposed Footpath Trading Policy (Attachment 2)  Local Law Community Impact Statement (Attachment 3, including appendices 1-4): 

Template Assessment: New Local Laws Clauses (Appendix 1)



Template Assessment: Existing Local Law (Appendix 2)

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 106

ADOPTION OF PROPOSED GENERAL LOCAL LAW NO. 1 (2015) cont’d  

Human Rights Charter – Assessment of Compatibility (Appendix 3) Summary Document – Submissions, Communications & Other Consultation (Appendix 4)

HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER The proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015) was assessed as a whole against the Human Rights Charter. The assessment indicated that seven rights were impacted:       

Freedom of movement (section 12) Protection of privacy and reputation (section 13) Freedom of expression (section 15) Peaceful assembly and freedom of association (section 16) Property rights (section 20) Right to liberty and security (section 21) A fair hearing (section 24)

In all instances, it was considered that the limitation was reasonable because the interests or impact to the majority of the community was greater than the interest or impact on an individual. Further reduction of the limitation was available to an individual through the ability to appeal permit conditions and Notices to Comply. An individual also has a further ability to reduce the limitation by taking any matter to the Magistrates Court for a decision. LEGAL CONSIDERATION Section 119 of the Local Government Act 1989 provides that Council must give notice of its intention to make a Local Law in the Government Gazette and a public notice stating –  the purpose and general purport of the proposed Local Law  that a copy of the proposed Local Law and any explanatory document can be obtained from the Council office  that any person affected by the proposed Local Law may make a submission relating to the proposed Local Law under section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989  that a copy of the proposed Local Law  any explanatory document setting out prescribed details in relation to the Local Law is available for inspection at, and obtainable from the Council office during ordinary business hours. Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 provides that Council must publish notice –  specifying the matter in respect of which the right to make a submission applies  containing the prescribed details in respect of that matter  specifying the date by which submissions are to be submitted, being a date which is not less than 28 days after the date on which the public notice is published  stating that a person making a submission is entitled to request in the submission that the person wishes to appear in person, or to be represented by a person specified in the submission, at a meeting to be heard in support of the submission  if a request for a submission has been made, the Council must—

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 107

6.7

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.7

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ADOPTION OF PROPOSED GENERAL LOCAL LAW NO. 1 (2015) cont’d -

provide the person with the opportunity to be heard in support of the submission in accordance with the request at a meeting of the Council or of a committee determined by the Council fix the day, time and place of the meeting give reasonable notice of the day, time and place of the meeting to each person who made a request.

Upon adoption of a Local Law by Council, the Local Law must be gazetted, public advertisement taken out and a copy forwarded to the Minister for Local Government in accordance with sections 119(3) and 119(4) of the Local Government Act 1989. CONSULTATION Public Meetings Council advertised and conducted two Public Meetings in the Council Chambers, 275 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe, on:  

Wednesday 17 December 2014 at 7.00-8.00pm Wednesday 21 January 2015 at 7.00-8.00pm

No members of the public attended the meeting on the 17 December 2014 and 5 members of the public attended the meeting on the 21 January 2015. Written Consultation Council wrote specifically to the following organisations where it was considered they may be affected by the proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015):   

Victoria Police Banyule City Council Traders’ Associations Banyule City Council Dog Clubs

As a result of this correspondence, a meeting was held with the representatives of the various Traders’ Associations within Banyule City Council on Tuesday 20 January 2015. No correspondence or feedback has been received from the Victoria Police or the dog clubs. Media Coverage In December 2014, Council received considerable press and television coverage over the proposed Local Law clause “Removal of Waste, Organic and Recycling Bins”. The general consensus from the talkback was that most people supported this clause. Feedback to lawreview@banyule.vic.gov.au email address: 1.

As a result of the media coverage over the placement of bins, one person emailed in support of the local law clause requiring removal of the bins within 24 hours of collection.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 108

ADOPTION OF PROPOSED GENERAL LOCAL LAW NO. 1 (2015) cont’d 2.

As a result of the media coverage over the placement of bins, one person emailed objection to the local law clause requiring placement of the bins for collection no earlier than 3.00pm on the day prior to the day of collection.

One person emailed an objection to the General Local Law No. 1 (2015) on the grounds that consultation over the Christmas/New Year period is an abuse of power.

Written Feedback: One letter has been received on behalf of traders based at the Bell Street Mall and the Olympic Village. The letter voiced concern about the greater challenges they faced in their businesses and would like the Footpath Trading Policy to reflect their particular economic conditions and the physical layout of their shopping precincts. The traders expressed concern about the Permit Fee structure and would like consideration for discounted permit fees. Officers will be consulting with these traders when a full review of the Footpath Trading Policy is conducted later this year. SUBMISSIONS Council received two written submissions in accordance with section 119 and section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 at the closing of submissions on the 30 January 2015. No submission objected to the General Local Law No. 1 (2015) as a whole document. One submission writer requested to be heard at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on Monday 16 February 2015. As a result of the hearing of submissions and the concern expressed by the submitter to the clause “building works hours”, the Local Law Review Steering Committee met to consider the concerns raised. The Steering Committee agreed to make changes to the definition of “building work” to include section 5 (1) (e) of the Domestic Building Contracts Act 1995 in the proposed General Local Law No 1 (2015), to read as follows: “has the same meaning as: (a) in the Building Act 1993; and (b) domestic building work in section 5 (1) (e) of the Domestic Building Contracts Act 1995.” The other written submission raised specific concerns on some of the proposed Local Law clauses, the penalties applied and the Local Law Community Impact Statement. This submitter specifically queried discrepancies in the penalties referred to in the proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015) and the assessment templates for the New Local Laws Clauses:    

Maintenance of Waste, Organic and Recycling Bins Removal of Waste, Organic and Recycling Bins Hard Waste Collection Street Bins and Park Bins

The proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015) had the infringement penalty of 2 penalty units for each clause and the assessment template showed the

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 109

6.7

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.7

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ADOPTION OF PROPOSED GENERAL LOCAL LAW NO. 1 (2015) contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d infringement penalty of 3 penalty units for all clauses except Street Bins and Park Bins which had 5 penalty units. The proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015) showed the correct figure and the assessment templates have been modified accordingly. All concerns raised by this submitter have been addressed in a written response. TIMELINES The current timelines are as follows: 23 March 2015

Council adopts proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015) and the proposed Footpath Trading Policy (incorporated document). Council revokes General Local Law No. 1 (2005). Council adopts the proposed Local Law Community Impact Statement and its incorporated documents, Appendices 1-4.

15 April 2015

General Local Law No. 1 (2015) comes into effect.

26 March 2015 onwards

Council gives notice of the adoption of the General Local Law No. 1 (2015) via the Government Gazette and public advertisement in accordance with section 119(3) of the Local Government Act 1989.

As soon as practicable

Send a copy of the adopted Banyule City Council General Local Law No. 1 (2015) to the Minister for Local Government in accordance with section 119(4) of the Local Government Act 1989.

CONCLUSION The section 119 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 process has provided an opportunity for the community to provide submissions in relation to the proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015). The Ordinary Meeting of Council on Monday 16 February 2015 has provided affected persons an opportunity to be heard in relation to their submission. One person spoke on the proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015) under section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989. Council has considered all submissions and the legal advice and made minor changes to the proposed General Local Law No. 1 (2015). ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Proposed Local Law No. 1 (2015)

281

Proposed Footpath Trading Policy

326

Proposed Local Law Community Impact Statement, including Appendices 14

348

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page

Page 110

6.8

REALLOCATION OF 2014/2015 LOCAL ROADS RESHEETING PROGRAM FUNDING

Author:

James Kelly - Manager Assets & Infrastructure, Assets & City Services

File:

F2014/655

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2014/2015 Council, through the Capital Works Budget process allocated a total of $1,490,428 for the resheeting of local roads. To date $1,290,128 has been spent and $200,300 is available. The reason for the available funds is due to the transfer of two roads (Wallowa Road and Looker Road) from the 2014/2015 Roads to Recovery program to the 2015/2016 Roads to Recovery Program due to unforseen weather. As Roads to Recovery funds were paid to Council by the Department of Infrastructure and Transport, two roads from the Local Roads resurfacing program needed to be transferred in order to spend the allocated funds. This transfer produced funds which can be used to resurface other local roads listed in future years under the Capital Works Program. The purpose of this report is to seek Council approval for the reallocation of $200,300 of Local Roads resurfacing funding within 2014/15 Capital Works Budget to several roads identified in this report. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Acknowledges the transfers of the two Local Roads (Wallowa Road and Looker Road) to the Roads to Recovery Program, and

Reallocate the available funds from the 2014/2015 Local Roads Resheeting Program to the following resurfacing projects: a. Service road at Rosanna Shopping Centre, b. Leon Avenue, Rosanna c. DelPura Glen, Greensborough d. Golf Avenue Rosanna

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 111

6.8

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.8

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

REALLOCATION OF 2014/2015 LOCAL ROADS RESHEETING PROGRAM FUNDING cont’d BACKGROUND Within the 2014/15 Roads to Recovery funding allocation it was identified that resurfacing works were required at both The Concord and Mira Court Bundoora. These works, due to location and impact on local businesses, could only be completed during drier months and at times of least impact on residents and local businesses. The works were planned to commence on a weekend over the Christmas period, unfortunately the works were required to be cancelled due to heavy rainfall occurring at the time scheduled for these works. Attempts were made to reschedule the proposed resurfacing works by seeking quotations including potential staging of the works. It was quickly identified that the only effective time would be to program the works for the following Christmas period. Two roads from the Local Roads Resurfacing Program – Wallowa Road and Looker Road were moved to the Roads to Recovery Program to utilise the allocated funds. This outcome has created $200,300 of Local Roads Resheeting funding underspend for this financial year. Council officers have undertaken a review of the upcoming resheeting program in the coming two years and have identified the following projects as being recommended to be completed with the funding now available. 

  

Rosanna Road Service Road at the Rosanna shops $55,000. (It is programed to resheet Beetham Parade, Rosanna, shortly as part of the 2014/15 program so there are opportunities to undertake this service road resheet at the same time to provide potential savings to Council and less disruption to the local businesses and residents.) Leon Avenue, Rosanna from Greenhilda Rd to Grove Rd $40,300 Delpura Glen, Greensborough from Avandina Cr to Cul-De-Sac (E) $40,000 Golf Av, Rosanna, from Lower Plenty Rd to Finlayson Rd $64,000

Part of the decision process for the reallocation of these Roads to Recovery funds was to ensure the funding allocation is spent in this financial year and that Councils assets renewal target is achieved. 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. CONCLUSION In light of the above the reallocation of 2014/2015 Local Resheeting Program funding for the resurfacing of Service road at Rosanna Shops, Leon Avenue, DelPura Glen and Golf Avenue should be supported.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 112

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.8

REALLOCATION OF 2014/2015 LOCAL ROADS RESHEETING PROGRAM FUNDING cont’d ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 113

6.9

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. RECOMMENDATION “That Council note the Councillor Motions Status 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. 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;

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 114

6.9

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

  

6.9

COUNCILLOR MOTIONS - STATUS UPDATE cont’d a summary of the motion; action taken by officers regarding the motion and date of action taken. (this includes letters sent); 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 3 February 2015. 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 (3 February 2015) there have been 167 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. ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Councillor Motions - Update Report

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 439

Page 115

6.9

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

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

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 116

6.10

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS

Author:

Cindy Ho - Governance Officer, Corporate Services

File:

F2014/337

6.10

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:

9 February 2015

Type of Meeting:

Site Visit

Matters Considered:

Ivanhoe Aquatic Centre Redevelopment -site visit of the progress achieved to date. Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Wayne Philips

Councillors Present:

Staff Present:

Darren Bennet – Manager Leisure, Recreation & Cultural Services Arun Chopra – Manager Capital Projects Albert Aboud – Construction Engineer Nic Hall – Manager Banyule Leisure Facility Management

Others Present:

ADCO Constructions Site Managers

Conflict of Interest:

Nil

Date of Assembly:

2 March 2015

Type of Meeting:

Councillor Briefing

Matters Considered:

Items on the Council Agenda for the Ordinary Meeting of 2 March 2015 (excluding confidential

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 117

6.10

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d items) as listed below: 1.1 4.1 5.1 6.1 6.2

6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6

8.1 8.2 8.3

Car Parking in the Ivanhoe Shopping Area Consent to remove vegetation from 5 Whitelaw Court, Eaglemont Diamond Valley Relay For Life 2015 Notice of Intention to Cause a General Valuation 219 Southern Road, Heidelberg West Proposed Sale of Land - Commence Statutory Procedures 1 Stradbroke Avenue Heidelberg Proposed Exchange of Land. Assembly of Councillors 29 Alamein Road Heidelberg West Proposed Sale of Land Proposed Governance Local Law No.2 (2015) - Incorporating Meeting Procedures Code Shared Services in Local Government Council Committees Capacity of the Hurstbridge Rail Line

9. General Business 

Baptcare 70th Anniversary



Passing of Michael Leighton last year - Former Heidelberg City Councillor



Chinese New Year at The Mall

Councillors Present:

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

Staff Present:

Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Allison Beckwith – Director Community Programs Scott Walker – Director City Development Peter Utri – Acting Director Corporate Services Geoff Glynn – Director Assets & City Services Gina Burden – Manager Governance and Communication Vivien Ferlaino – Governance Co-ordinator Daniel Kollmorgen – Manager Transport, Sustainability and Laws Joseph Tabacco – Manager Property & Economic

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 118

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.10

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d Development Joel Elbourne – Manager Urban Planning and Building Others Present:

Nil

Conflict of Interest:

Nil

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

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 119

8.1

DIVESTMENTS

Author:

Cr Craig Langdon

Ward:

Olympia

File:

F2014/492

8.1

Notice of Motion

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move:

That a report be prepared and presented to a future meeting of Council on Council’s financial investments that provides: 1)

a greater understanding of Council’s current financial investments

an assessment of those financial investments against: a. b. c.

the Charter of Human rights and Responsibilities (e.g. any unethical investing exposure to fossil fuel or carbon intensive industries Council’s Investment Policy

any recommended amendments to Council’s Financial Investment Policy

Explanation Council’s investment activities are legally bound by Section 143 of the Local Government Act 1989 which states: A Council may invest any money –      

In Government securities of the Commonwealth In securities guaranteed by the Government of Victoria With an authorized deposit-taking institution With any financial institution guaranteed by the Government of Victoria On deposit with an eligible money market dealer within the meaning of the Corporations Act In any other manner approved by the Minister after consultation with the Treasurer either generally or specifically, to be an authorised manner of investment for the purposes of this section

When selecting banking partnerships Banyule City Council has a responsibility to ensure that its investment process incorporates sustainable investment and socially responsible investment, in addition to the objective of achieving a competitive financial return. When determining ethical investment practices, the below should be considered: 

Negative screening - Avoiding investment in industries which have a negative impact on society and the environment

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 121

8.1

Notice of Motion

DIVESTMENTS cont’d 

Positive screening - Proactive search for investments that contribute positively to society and the environment



Corporate engagement - Dialogue with companies invested in for the purpose of raising issues of concern and advocating positive change to company practices

A review of Council’s current investment policy against potential unethical investment practices, will inform Council of whether any amendments should be made to improve Council’s ethical investment commitments

CR CRAIG LANGDON Olympia Ward

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 122

8.2

AUDITOR GENERAL'S REVIEW INTO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SUPPORT FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Author:

Cr Rick Garotti

Ward:

Grimshaw

File:

F2014/492

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move:

â&#x20AC;&#x153;That Council: 1.

Endorses the findings and recommendations from the Victorian Auditor General's review into the Effectiveness of Support for Local Government, noting the concerns that have been raised by the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) regarding the first recommendation.

Writes to the Minister for Local Government to express our endorsement for the review, noting the concerns that have been raised by the MAV regarding the first recommendation.

Writes to the MAV President and each member of the newly elected Board to express our endorsement of the Auditor General's report, noting the concerns that have been raised regarding the first recommendation, and to call on the MAV to work proactively to implement the recommendations that apply directly to them.

Tables this item for consideration at the next MAV State Council meeting.â&#x20AC;?

Explanation The Victorian Auditor General tabled its report on the Effectiveness of Support for Local Government in the Victorian Parliament on the 26 February 2015. The audit assessed the effectiveness, efficiency and economy of the support provided to councils by Local Government Victoria (LGV) and the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV). The Auditor General found that neither LGV or MAV are able to "clearly demonstrate how their support activities contribute to the effective and efficient operation of Councils. Both LGV and MAV need to strengthen their focus and outcome reporting and evaluation." Banyule City Council contributes over $60k per annum of rate payer funds to the MAV in membership fees. Accordingly, Council has a very strong interest in ensuring that the MAV delivers value-for-money support and advocacy service to Victorian Councils. The MAV is encouraged to look at the Auditor General's review as an opportunity to proactively examine its governance, functions and processes to ensure it can

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 123

8.2

Notice of Motion

8.2

Notice of Motion

AUDITOR GENERAL'S REVIEW INTO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SUPPORT FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT cont’d continue to deliver the high-quality advocacy and support service that Victorian Councils require.

CR RICK GAROTTI Grimshaw Ward ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 124

8.3

MAYORAL DUTIES AND ATTENDANCES

Author:

Cr Craig Langdon

Ward:

Olympia

File:

F2014/492

8.3

Notice of Motion

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move:

“That Council notes the report from the Mayor on the meetings he has attended.” Explanation Below is a summary of the various meetings I have attended, including Council Meetings, Council Briefings, Advisory Committee meetings, Community meetings and events. Council Meetings 6 October 2014 20 October 2014 28 October 2014* *Special Meeting for Mayoral

Council Briefings 13 October 2014 27 October 2014 8 December 2014

Cemetery Trust 1 December 2014

Election

10 November 2014 1 December 2014 15 December 2014 + Note: Leave of Absence was taken during the period of 14 November to 30 November 2014 (inclusive). Other Council Related Meetings: 30 September 2014

Planning Consultation Meeting

1 October 2014

Event Planning Meeting Youth Summit Briefing Multicultural Advisory Committee Gaming Machine Meeting Planning Consultation Meeting Malahang Advisory Committee LGBTI Advisory Committee Public Consultation Meeting Development Services Meeting Planning Consultation Meeting Youth Summit Governance Discussion Community Development Meeting Planning Meeting Local Law Special Councillor Briefing Planning meeting Development Services Meeting Malahang Advisory Committee Community Development Meeting Public Consultation Meeting

2 October 2014 3 October 2014 6 October 2014 7 October 2014 8 October 2014 9 October 2014 10 October 2014 14 October 2014 20 October 2014

21 October 2014

22 October 2014

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 125

8.3

Notice of Motion

MAYORAL DUTIES AND ATTENDANCES contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d 23 October 2014 28 October 2014 29 October 2014 30 October 2014 5 November 2014 6 November 2014 11 November 2014

12 November 2014 13 November 2014 2 December 2014 3 December 2014 4 December 2014

5 December 2014 8 December 2014 10 December 2014 11 December 2014

15 December 2014 16 December 2014 19 December 2014 30 December 2014 6 January 2015 15-17 January 2015 19 January 2015 20 January 2015 23 January 2015 26 January 2015 28 January 2015 29 January 2015 2 February 2015 3 February 2015 4 February 2015 5 February 2015 6 February 2015 6-8 February 2015 9 February 2015 10 February 2015

Community Development Meeting MAV Annual Conference Community Development Meeting Darebin Creek Management Committee Development Services Meeting 3081 Connect Meeting Malahang Advisory Committee Meeting Community Development Meeting Community Development Meeting Malahang Advisory Committee Meeting Planning Meeting Community Development Meeting Community Development Meeting Sporting Facility Meeting BANSIC Annual General Meeting Planning Meeting Greensborough Office Project Advisory Committee Development Services Meeting Public Consultation Meeting Warringal Conservation Meeting MAV Mayoral Program Metropolitan Waste Management Group Banyule Community Health Meeting Planning Meeting Volunteers Event Meeting Community Development Meeting Banyule Environment Advisory Committee Community Development Meeting Citizenship Ceremony meeting Planning Meeting Public Consultation Meeting Planning Meeting Community Development Meeting Strategic Planning Group Meeting Planning Meeting Planning Meeting Councillor Development Meeting Councillor Development Meeting Mayoral Leadership Conference Mayoral Ball Meeting Community Development Meeting Planning Meeting Advisory Committee Information Meeting Australia Day Citizenship Ceremony Disability & Inclusion Advisory Committee Community Development Meeting Planning Meeting Community Development Meeting Sporting Club Meeting Public Consultation Meeting Multicultural Advisory Committee Age Friendly Advisory Committee Constituent Meeting Councillor Strategic Planning Session One Flintoff Project Advisory Committee Ivanhoe Aquatic & Fitness Centre Development Update Sporting group Meeting LGBTI Advisory Committee

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 126

Notice of Motion

11 February 2015 12 February 2015 13 February 2015 16 February 2015

17 February 2015

18 February 2015 19 February 2015 20 February 2015 23 February 2015

24 February 2015

25 February 2015 26 February 2015

27 February 2015 2 March 2015 3 March 2015 4 March 2015

5 March 2015 10 March 2015 11 March 2015

12 March 2015 13 March 2015

8.3

MAYORAL DUTIES AND ATTENDANCES contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d Banyule Age Friendly City Training Banyule Environment Advisory Committee Sporting Facility Meeting Planning Meeting Community Development Meeting Sporting Group Meeting Community Development Meeting Development Services Meeting Development Services Meeting Community Development Meeting Strategic Planning Meeting Disability Inclusion Advisory Committee Strategic Planning Meeting Budget Meeting ANZAC Centenary Meeting Planning Meeting Constituent Meeting Local Police Meeting Community Development Meeting SES Meeting Strategic Property Group Meeting NOM Status Update Mayors Meeting Development Services Meeting World Health Organisation Age Friendliness Workshop Public Consultation Meeting Sporting Club Meeting 3081 Connect Meeting Public Consultation Meeting Sporting Club Meeting Community Safety Working Group Community Development Meeting Resident Interest Group 3081 Connect Meeting Community Development Meeting Public Consultation Meeting Anzac Day Meeting Planning Meeting Development Services Meeting Planning Meeting Banyule Environment Advisory Committee Public Consultation Meeting Development Services Meeting Banyule Audit Committee

Community Meetings/Events 1 October 2014 2 October 2014 5 October 2014 7 October 2014 9 October 2014 11 October 2014

15 October 2014

Seniors Morning tea Bundoora Italian Senior Citizens Anniversary Celebration St George Anglican Church Lunch Clyde James Smith Memorial Police Leadership Award Northern Indoor Bowls Tournament Neighbourhood Watch Zone Volunteers West Ivanhoe Football Club Presentation Ivanhoe Harriers Athletic Club Centenary Make Bullying Disappear Charity Function Malahang Bicycle Breakfast North East Region Volunteer Resource Centre AGM

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 127

8.3

Notice of Motion

MAYORAL DUTIES AND ATTENDANCES cont’d 16 October 2014

17 October 2014 18 October 2014 19 October 2014 22 October 2014

24 October 2014 25 October 2014 26 October 2014

28 October 2014 29 October 2014

2 November 2014 4 November 2014 5 November 2014 8 November 2014 9 November 2014 10 November 2014 11 November 2014

13 November 2014

2 December 2014 3 December 2014 4 December 2014 5 December 2014 6 December 2014

7 December 2014 9 December 2014 10 December 2014 12 December 2014

13 December 2014 14 December 2014 16 December 2014

18 December 2014

Legal Matters for Older Fellas – Seniors Event Women in Business Brunch IDV Sensory Garden Official Opening Yarra Plenty Regional Library Meeting Alice House Gathering Place Livingstone Street Community Centre City of Whittlesea Mayoral Community Thank You Dinner Dance North Heidelberg Football Club AGM Prime Ministers inaugural NAIDOC Medal Presentation Children’s Week/Community Safety Month Event Rotary Club of Rosanna Dinner Ministers Visit – Briar Hill Preschool One Hundred Faces Project Launch – Children’s Week Rosanna Library Story time & craft activities Heidelberg Stars Soccer Presentation Night Playground Launch/Picnic in the Park Ivanhoe Garden Club Caring for Carers Graffiti Prevention & Removal Grants Announcement Minister Visit – Sherbourne Primary School Darebin Creek Environment Centre AGM Simms Road Pavilion Opening Stage 1 St George Anglican Church Lunch West Ivanhoe Roosters Melbourne Cup Day Grand Opening of UPPS Watsonia Motor Show Cherry Street Remembrance Day Service National Recycling Week Event – Rethink Centre Banyule Community Health AGM Banyule Residents National Recycling Week Experience Austin Health Remembrance Day Observation Service Malahang Flag Project Launch Refugee Welcome Zone Launch Banksia Palliative Care AGM & 25 Year Anniversary Macleod College Jubilee Dinner Community Walk at Dusk Napier Waller Committee of Management NBAA Grand Finale Breakfast Boots for All Volunteer Recognition and Open Day Uniting Church Drop in session Community Open Day at Heidelberg Mosque 3081 Christmas Concert Movies on the Move – Griffin ward St George Anglican Church lunch Time Out resource Launch & Project celebration Jets 2014 end of year Celebration All Saints Anglican Church Community Lunch Olympic Adult Education Annual Certificate Ceremony Warringal Private Hospital Development Opening Bellfield Community Garden Celebration Bell Street Matt Christmas Carnival Carols by Candlelight 2014 Greensborough Christmas Market Italian Pensioners Christmas Event Operations Christmas BBQ HACC Christmas Event Metropolitan Planning Authority Evening House Christmas Event

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 128

Notice of Motion

19 December 2014 22 January 2015 24 January 2015 26 January 2015 1 February 2015 5 February 2015 9 February 2015 10 February 2015 14 February 2015 18 February 2015 19 February 2015 21 February 2015 24 February 2015 26 February 2015 27 February 2015 28 February 2015 2 March 2015 3 March 2015 4 March 2015 5 March 2015

6 March 2015 14 March 2015 15 March 2015

8.3

MAYORAL DUTIES AND ATTENDANCES cont’d Montmorency Secondary College Awards Evening Christmas in the Village Age Friendly Advisory Committee Lunch Addressing Graffiti in Diamond Valley Steering group Meeting Greenwood Drive Reserve Sausage Sizzle Movies on the Move – Beale Ward Jaga Jaga Australia Day Community Awards The Pride March Heidelberg Stars Soccer Club Open Day Ivanhoe Girls Cooerwull Awards Ivanhoe Grammar Centenary Exhibition 100 Years of Ivanhoe Grammar Book Launch Community Leaders in Sustainability Program Water Wise Gardens Movies on the Move – Grimshaw Ward Volunteers Thank You Lunch Opening of Redevelopment Macleod Tennis Club Courts Below the Belt, Prostate Cancer Awareness Launch th Baptcare 70 Anniversary Commemorative Afternoon tea Australian Made Campaign Supporters Forum Ford Park Tour Bell Street Mall Lunar New Year Twilight Market Co-Housing & Sustainability Community Safety Working Group Ivanhoe Traders Association AGM Dada Lives Exhibition Opening NBAA Business Network & Awards International Women’s Day Brunch Up, Up & Away Exhibition Opening World Day of Prayer Service Movies on the Move – Bakewell Ward Home Harvest Feast Indian Cultural Festival Chelsworth Park Water harvesting Project Launch

The listing of these events does not cover the numerous meetings I have with the CEO and other staff, nor does it include meetings with individual constituents. The meetings listed usually includes various staff and/or a number of community / residents. Council-related meetings and community meetings have been separated. I have endeavoured to attend all meetings for the entire time they were conducted but it was not always possible.

CR CRAIG LANGDON OlympiaWard

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 129

8.4

SURVEY ON COUNCIL PERFORMANCE

Author:

Cr Rick Garotti

File:

F2015/

8.4

Notice of Motion

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move: “That Council supports the printing and preparation of a survey from Councillor Rick Garotti to the residents of Grimshaw Ward on the performance of Council.” Explanation It has been a privilege to serve as the Grimshaw Ward Councillor on Council for the last two years. Given it is over the half-way mark in my four year term on Council I am seeking to survey local residents on how Council is delivering for them. In the lead-up to the October 2012 election I committed to the following policies:     

Be an open and responsive Councillor. Minimise rate increases through sound financial management. Strike the right balance between development and neighbourhood character. Tackle growing traffic congestion on our local roads. Upgrade our local community assets and amenities.

While I believe Council is delivering well in most policy areas, with opportunities for improvement, I am interested in receiving honest resident feedback on Council's performance. I have prepared a survey which I will personally distribute (letter box) to residents. I seek endorsement from Council to have this survey printed on my Council letter head and folded for easy distribution.

CR RICK GAROTTI Grimshaw Ward ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 130

8.5

OPPOSITION TO LEGALISATION OF MIXED MARTIAL ARTS

Author:

Cr Craig Langdon

Ward:

Olympia

File:

F2014/492

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move:

“That Council: 1.

Write to the Premier and Minister for Sport opposing to the legalising of Mixed Martial Arts or “cage” fighting as it’s more commonly known.

Call on the State Government to re-instate the 2007 ban introduced by the then State Minister for Sport and Recreation and now Deputy Premier, James Merlino.

Supports the calls of Victoria Police and the Melbourne Lord Mayor Robert Doyle to ban this sport.”

Explanation Mixed Martial Arts is a dangerous sport. To quote the rules a “technical submission: The referee stops the match when a fighter is caught in a submission hold and is in danger of being injured. Often it is when a fighter gets choked unconscious, other times it is when a bone is broken in a submission hold.” Due to its nature Mixed Martial Arts can and does cause cuts. The rules also quote “large cuts” and a doctors’ intervention. Unfortunately Melbourne has experienced a number of incidents and deaths caused by “one punch cowards” and such events as “cage” fighting promotes such activities.

CR CRAIG LANGDON Olympia Ward ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 23 March 2015

Page 131

8.5

Notice of Motion