Banyule City Council Ordinary Meeting Agenda 5 October 2015

Ordinary Meeting of Council Council Chambers, Service Centre 275 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe 5 October 2015 commencing at 7.45pm Following the public forum commencing at approximately 7.30pm and may be extended to 8pm if necessary.

AGENDA

Acknowledgement of the Traditional Owner, the Wurundjeri willam people "Our meeting is being held on the Traditional Land of the Wurundjeri willam people and, on behalf of Banyule City Council, I wish to acknowledge them as the Traditional Owners. I would also like to pay my respects to the Wurundjeri Elders, past and present, and to the Elders of other Aboriginal peoples who may be here today” Apologies and Leave of Absence

Confirmation of Minutes Ordinary Meeting of Council held 21 September 2015 Disclosure of Interests 1. Petitions Nil REPORTS: 2. People – Community Strengthening and Support 2.1 World Health Organisation - Age friendly Cities Indicators Meeting......................... 3 2.2 Alliance for Gambling Reform ................................................................................. 8 3. Planet – Environmental Sustainability 3.1 Proposed multistorey mixed use development at 443 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe (P1453/2014) - VCAT Consent Order ......................... 11 4. Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment 4.1 Ivanhoe Grammar School Development Plan - Transition to Compliance ........................................................................................................... 17

AGENDA (Cont’d) 4.2 4.3

Modified outcome for multi-storey mixed use development at 4-6 Flintoff Street, Greensborough (P563/2014) ......................................................... 24 Review of Opportunities for Advertising Signs on Council Land ............................ 30

5. Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life 5.1 Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre Draft Master Plan ................................... 35 6. Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely 6.1 Air Rights Over Forge Lane Between 37 Burgundy & 4 Villa Streets Heidelberg ................................................................................................ 43 6.2 292 Lower Heidelberg Road Ivanhoe East - Encroachment on splay corner .......................................................................................................... 50 6.3 Assembly of Councillors........................................................................................ 54 7. Sealing of Documents Nil 8. Notices of Motion 8.1 Illegal Mini (Monkey) Bikes ................................................................................... 59 9. General Business 10. Urgent Business Closure of Meeting

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 2

2.1

2.1

People – Community Strengthening and Support

WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION - AGE FRIENDLY CITIES INDICATORS MEETING

Author: Leanne Horvath - Coordinator, Assessment, Social Support and Service Planning, Community Programs File:

F2014/6042

Previous Items Council on 25 May 2015 (Item 2.1 - World Health Organisation Developing Indicators for Age-Friendly Cities - Pilot Project Meeting) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Since 2012, the World Health Organisation has been leading a project to develop a tool for selecting and measuring indicators to assess a community’s age-friendliness.

In 2014-2015, a global pilot study was conducted with fifteen (15) communities selected from around the world to use a draft version of the tool – “Measuring the Age-friendliness of Cities: A Guide to Using Core Indicators”.

Banyule was the only Australian pilot site selected to participate in the study.

After completing this exercise, the pilot sites met in Geneva, Switzerland, on 10-11 June 2015 at the World Health Organisation headquarters to discuss their experiences and perspectives as a group. This allowed each site to validate the information they provided in their written reports and clarify issues that should be addressed before the World Health Organisation indicator tool is finalized.

The meeting was attended by a total of twenty-five (25) participants, including representatives of the pilot sites, international experts, and World Health Organisation staff members.

Specific recommendations for revising the tool were also discussed.

Banyule’s participation in the global pilot project has sparked interest from a range of local, State and Federal government and non-government organisations wanting to learn from our experience and wanting to work with Banyule. The indicator data collected as part of the project will form a baseline measure for Banyule to see progress as it continues to work towards enhancing the age-friendliness of the Banyule community.

RECOMMENDATION That Council 1. Note the World Health Organisation – Age friendly Cities Meeting Report 2014.

2. Continue implementing the actions and initiatives that support making Banyule an Age friendly City.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 3

2.1

People – Community Strengthening and Support

WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION - AGE FRIENDLY CITIES INDICATORS MEETING 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 “promote and support health and wellbeing”.

BACKGROUND Last year Banyule City Council was accepted as a member of the World Health Organisation (WHO) Global Network of Age-friendly Cities. Membership to this network supports Councils work in enhancing the lives of older people in Banyule.

During 2014-2015, the WHO conducted a global pilot study with (fifteen) 15 communities from around the world. The pilot sites used a draft version of the tool – “Measuring the Age-friendliness of Cities: A Guide to Using Core Indicators” – to measure the core indicators described in the tool in the context of their own community. Banyule was the only Australian pilot site selected to participate in the study.

Over a four month period, Banyule undertook a data collection project to populate the draft WHO indicators of age-friendliness. Through a world café workshop conducted in March 2015, older residents were invited to comment on the results and provide feedback on the draft indicators. This information was presented in a report and submitted to the WHO. Each pilot site was then invited to have representation at a two day meeting held the 10 – 11 June 2015 in Geneva, Switzerland at the WHO headquarters.

At its meeting of 25 May 2015 Council resolved to support officer attendance at the WHO Developing Indicators for Age-friendly Cites - Pilot Project Meeting in Geneva, Switzerland, noting that attendance was being funded by the World Health Organisation. It also resolved that staff make a presentation at a future Council meeting on the outcomes and learning from the project.

HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions.

In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 4

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2.1

WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION - AGE FRIENDLY CITIES INDICATORS MEETING cont’d It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.

DISCUSSION The Developing Indicators for Age-friendly Cites - Pilot Project meeting was attended by a total of twenty-five (25) participants, including representatives of the pilot sites, international experts, and WHO staff members.

Each pilot site was given the opportunity to present their work, focusing on a specific topic, and to offer insights that are relevant to the broader group. Several key issues emerged during the discussions, including the importance of champions, shared ownership, use of rigorous methods, local adaptation of the indicators, equity, and sustainability.

Specific recommendations for revising the tool were also discussed. Several key learnings emerged during the discussions which will be used by the World Health Organisation to revise the tool and to enhance other aspects of the Age-friendly Cities initiative.

1. The importance of Champions: Many of the pilot sites pointed to the importance of having champions as a key success factor for the pilot project and for the age-friendly initiative more broadly.

2. The importance of ownership: The pilot sites had consensus on the importance of broadly secured ‘ownership’ of the age-friendly initiative and the indicators, within the older adult community, across different political ranks, sectors and partners.

3. Maintaining rigour: The pilot sites all agreed that it is important to maintain rigour when gathering data for the indicators.

4. Standardisation vs adaptability: Nearly all pilot sites stressed that the adaptability of the indicators was a greater priority for them and a necessary quality in order to ensure that the measurement is meaningful in their local context, and that currently available data can be utilized.

Placing this into a local context, it is more important for Banyule to compare across neighbourhoods or age groups than to compare Banyule’s indicator results with other countries. Therefore it is important to consider the World Health Organisation indicator definitions, but adapt them where necessary to our local context.

5. Equity analysis: Equity analysis means comparing data for different population groups and geographic areas within a community to identify disparities. Identifying the most vulnerable or least advantaged population or area within a community was a

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 5

2.1

People – Community Strengthening and Support

WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION - AGE FRIENDLY CITIES INDICATORS MEETING cont’d commonly used approach for assessing equity. An equity analysis that takes into account both place-based and person-based features were also considered to be important, especially in terms of their implications for the intervention strategy.

The age-friendliness of a particular area may vary according to the characteristics of the people who live there (e.g. age, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status) as well as the spatial aspects of the area (e.g. geographical features, built environment). Thus, both dimensions should be considered in analysing equity.

6. Sustainability: Tying the indicator collection into existing workflows, rather than setting it up as an independent project, was seen as a way to reduce burden and enhance sustainability. Identifying champions and developing broad community ownership, as mentioned earlier, were also seen as important factors for sustainability especially in a changing political environment.

Banyule staff will be incorporating these learnings into Banyule’s Age-friendly City strategic planning. Further work will be undertaken on understanding the Banyule age-friendly indicator results, in particular looking at an equity analysis of some place-based and person-based features.

A copy of the WHO report is attached. (Attachment One) Banyule’s participation in the pilot project has created a high level of interest from other local, State and Federal government and non-government organisations wanting to learn from our experience and wanting to work with Banyule.

The opportunity to be involved in the pilot project and participate in the global meeting held in Geneva has created a worldwide network and staff have identified a variety of opportunities for Banyule’s senior groups to collaborate with like-minded community members from other Age-friendly City locations.

FUNDING IMPLICATIONS The WHO funded Council with a one-off grant to undertake the pilot project.

Banyule’s participation in the pilot project meeting was a requirement of the project and the WHO providing additional funding for one Banyule officer to attend.

CONCLUSION The WHO will revise the tool “Measuring the Age-friendliness of Cities: A Guide to Using Core Indicators” taking into account the results of the pilot study, including the Geneva, Switzerland meeting. It is anticipated that the tool will be officially launched by the World Health Organisation in late 2015.

Banyule City Council will continue to work towards the development of an Agefriendly City Strategy which will build upon this indicator work and incorporate the learnings from the Geneva, Switzerland meeting.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 6

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2.1

WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION - AGE FRIENDLY CITIES INDICATORS MEETING cont’d ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1

World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 62

Page 7

2.2

2.2

People – Community Strengthening and Support

ALLIANCE FOR GAMBLING REFORM

Author: Shawn Neilsen - Inclusion Access & Equity Social Planner, Community Programs File:

F2015/167

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Alliance for Gambling Reform (Alliance) is a newly-formed national collaboration of organisations with a shared concern about the harmful impacts of gambling in Australia. The Alliance seeks to campaign for reforms to the gambling industry to reduce harm from poker machines and to protect disadvantaged communities from the infiltration of increasing numbers of poker machines.

This report seeks Council’s endorsement to support the Alliance and its campaign plan. An introductory flyer about the Alliance is attached to this report.

RECOMMENDATION That Council become an “Alliance Supporter” to the Alliance for Gambling Reform.

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 “promote and support health and wellbeing”.

BACKGROUND At its ordinary meeting of 7 September Council resolved to “consider becoming an ‘Alliance Supporter’ of the Alliance for Gambling Reform and a report be presented back to Council on the details of the Alliance program and the campaign plan.”

The new National Alliance for Gambling Reform (Alliance) was established with the aim of ‘making pokies safer’. The Alliance, involves church, welfare and community organisations and local government peak bodies, including the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) and the Victorian Local Governance Association (VLGA). All Victorian local governments have been invited to join as members.

The Alliance seeks to campaign for reforms to the gambling industry to reduce harm from gambling. Initially, the Alliance will focus on poker machine related harm through supporting a $1.00 per spin bet limit in Victoria and seeking licensing changes to address the increasing practice of gaming operators shifting existing machines into more vulnerable communities.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 8

ALLIANCE FOR GAMBLING REFORM cont’d The mission of the Alliance aligns closely with, and builds upon, the local government led Enough Pokies campaign which Council was participated in last year.

HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions.

In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities.

It is considered that the subject matter of this report positively seeks to support and protect human rights through pursing change to ensure safer gaming practices.

CURRENT SITUATION In 2014 Council participated in the state-wide local government campaign, Enough Pokies, which successfully mobilised over 70 councils and other supporters including the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV), The Victorian Local Governance Association (VLGA), and The Salvation Army.

The campaign was timed to coincide with the November 2014 state election and aimed to raise awareness of the predatory conduct of the major gaming operators which are increasingly targeting and exploiting some of Victoria’s most disadvantaged communities with the placement of their poker machines.

Enough Pokies was successful in bringing together an unprecedented coalition of councils advocating for reform on pokies licensing systems.

Building on the work of Enough Pokies is a key part of the mission of the Alliance.

Victorian local government is a key driving force behind the Alliance with the MAV and VLGA involved in supporting and assisting it. Organisations supporting the Alliance are: • • • • • • • • •

The VLGA; The MAV; The Salvation Army; The Uniting Church in Australia; The Reichstein Foundation; Victorian Inter-Church Gambling Taskforce; Australian Churches Gambling Taskforce; Whittlesea Inter-agency Taskforce on Gambling (WITOG); and Gambling Impact Society (NSW).

DISCUSSION The Alliance is a national collaboration of organisations with a shared concern about the harmful and unjust impacts of gambling in Australia. It represents the first time that key organisations have attempted to collaborate and pool their respective efforts, resources and talents to seek important reform in this area. Alliance board membership is comprised of leading experts and public spokespeople in gambling prevention, representing agencies across Victoria and Australia.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 9

2.2

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2.2

People – Community Strengthening and Support

ALLIANCE FOR GAMBLING REFORM cont’d The Alliance also seeks to partner with councils to press for regulatory changes to the licensing system for the location and placement of poker machines, as sought through the Enough Pokies campaign.

Alliance campaign activity is due to launch later in 2015 and support will be sought from councils to assist with coordinating localised community campaigns and events aligning with the national campaign.

The Alliance board will oversee the implementation of the Alliance campaign plan and a National Campaign Manager has been engaged to implement and execute the campaign.

As an ‘Alliance Supporter’ it is envisaged that Council’s logo may be displayed along with the logos of other Alliance Supporters on the Alliance website when it is established. Council will also be able to use the Alliance’s logo to promote the Alliance as appropriate, and may consider coordinating some local events to coincide with the launch of the Alliance’s campaign later in the year. As an ‘Alliance Supporter’ Council is not responsible for the activities of the Alliance and, although it is not likely, if there were any concern about any action or position taken by the Alliance in the future, it would be entirely open to Council to resolve to cease to be an Alliance Supporter at any time.

FUNDING IMPLICATIONS There are no direct financial implications associated with Council becoming an Alliance Supporter. It is envisaged that there will be some staff in-kind support from time to time associated with supporting the activity of the Alliance however, this support is not mandatory and any requests for assistance will be determined on a case by case at the time by appropriate staff.

CONCLUSION The Alliance seeks to campaign for reforms to the gambling industry to reduce harm from poker machines and to protect disadvantaged communities from the infiltration of increasing numbers of poker machines.

The mission of the Alliance builds on the Enough Pokies campaign and it is recommended that Council endorse involvement in supporting the Alliance.

This report seeks Council’s endorsement for involvement in supporting the Alliance and its campaign plan. An introductory flyer about the Alliance is attached to this report.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1

Alliance for Gambling Reform Flyer

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 77

Page 10

3.1

PROPOSED MULTISTOREY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT 443 UPPER HEIDELBERG ROAD, IVANHOE (P1453/2014) - VCAT CONSENT ORDER

Author:

Nick Helliwell - Major Developments Planner, City Development

Ward:

Olympia

File:

P1453/2014

Previous Items Council on 13 April 2015 (Item 4.1 - Proposed 26 Storey Mixed Use Development at 443 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe (P1453/14)) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Planning permit application P1453/2014 for a 26 storey mixed use tower block at 443 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe was refused by Council at its meeting of 13 April 2015. The applicant lodged an appeal with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) against Council’s decision. As part of the appeal process, a Compulsory Conference was held at VCAT on Friday 28 August 2015.

The conference was chaired by the Tribunal with the permit applicant, objector parties to the review, VicRoads and Council representatives in attendance.

As a result of the proceeding, ‘Without Prejudice’ amended plans and permit conditions were agreed to by Consent Order by the permit applicant, VicRoads and the objector parties to the review incorporating a number of key changes, including but not limited to: • • •

A redesign of the architectural aesthetic of the proposal by a different architectural practice Reducing the building height from 26 storeys to 14 storeys Reduced office space with a subsequent reduced shortfall in statutory car parking by 46 spaces

The Consent Order, incorporating amended plans and permit conditions, provides Council with the opportunity to decide whether to agree to the Consent Order. Based on a review of the proposal and feedback received following further notification to objectors to the original proposal, it is considered that Council should agree to the Consent Order and VicRoads conditions.

RECOMMENDATION That Council agree to the Consent Order and VicRoads conditions and advise the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal and all parties to the Tribunal proceeding, as well as all original objectors to the proposal.

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.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 11

3.1

Planet – Environmental Sustainability

3.1

Planet – Environmental Sustainability

PROPOSED MULTISTOREY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT 443 UPPER HEIDELBERG ROAD, IVANHOE (P1453/2014) - VCAT CONSENT ORDER 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 “maintain and improve Banyule as a great place to live”.

BACKGROUND Council determined to refuse planning permission for a 26 storey mixed use tower block on land at 443 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe at its meeting of 13 April 2015.

Following this decision, an appeal was lodged with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT). As part of the appeal process, a Compulsory Conference was held at VCAT on Friday 28 August 2015. The conference was chaired by the Tribunal with the permit applicant, objector parties to the review, VicRoads and Council representatives in attendance. The purpose of the conference included identifying and clarifying the nature of the issues in dispute in the proceeding and to promote a settlement of the proceeding.

As a result of the proceeding, amended plans labelled “VCAT Changes 28.8.15 Revision C” and permit conditions were agreed to by Consent Order by the permit applicant, VicRoads and the objector parties to the review. A copy of these plans is annexed to this report at Attachment 1. A copy of the Consent Order is annexed at Attachment 2 and additional VicRoads conditions at Attachment 3. The Revision C plans incorporate a number of key changes, including but not limited to: • • •

A redesign of the architectural aesthetic of proposal by a different architectural practice; Reducing the building height from 26 storeys to 14 storeys; Reduced office space with a subsequent reduced shortfall in statutory car parking by 46 spaces.

The resident objector parties to the review accepted at the Compulsory Conference that whilst the revised design did not achieve everything that they were seeking, it nevertheless provided a major and significant improvement over the original 26 storey proposal considered by Council and the community.

The Consent Order, incorporating amended plans and permit conditions, needs to be considered by Council. If Council accepts the VCAT Order and VicRoads conditions in full, the Tribunal will direct a permit to issue on the terms of the Order and the VicRoads conditions and the seven day VCAT hearing scheduled to commence on 19 October 2015 will not proceed. If Council does not accept the resolution in full, the terms of the Consent Order become void and the matter will proceed to a full hearing on the basis of further Substitute Plans for a 16 storey building with no reduction in office space. These substitute plans have been submitted by the applicant as a ‘precaution’ that Council does not accept the VCAT Consent Order. A copy of these plans is annexed at Attachment 4.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 12

PROPOSED MULTISTOREY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT 443 UPPER HEIDELBERG ROAD, IVANHOE (P1453/2014) - VCAT CONSENT ORDER cont’d HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.

CONSULTATION Following the outcome of the Compulsory Conference, all parties to the VCAT hearing and all objectors to the initial planning application were notified in writing by Council of the outcome of the conference and advised that Council would consider the proposed changes to the Revision C ‘without prejudice’ plans at a Council meeting on 5 October 2015. Objectors were informed that the Revision C plans and the Tribunal’s Consent Order are located on Council’s website and that should they wish to provide any further comments to Council on these latest plans, a written submission should be lodged with Council by 21 September 2015.

As a result, at the time of writing, five further submissions have been received, all from parties to the review who agreed to the Consent Order.

It should be noted that parties who were present or were represented at the Compulsory Conference have agreed to the terms of the Consent Order and are bound by the Order. A representative's signature on the consent agreement is effectively a party’s signature.

Council should also note that should any further comments be received from objectors to the original planning application who were not a party to the Compulsory Conference, these objectors have no legal standing in relation to the outcome reached at the Compulsory Conference between the parties. These objectors are not a party to any future VCAT proceedings (if the matter progresses to this) as they had either not filed Statement of Grounds or who had indicated that they did not wish to be heard.

TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION In considering the consent reached between the permit applicant, objector parties to the review and VicRoads, the following comments are provided in relation to how the Revision C ‘without prejudice’ plans have addressed Council’s Grounds of Refusal for the initial proposal.

Building design and scale A new design aesthetic has been brought to the building with the ‘Without Prejudice’ plans which is quite different to that originally considered. The building’s tower has been reduced in height from 26 storeys (79.75 metres) to 14 storeys (56.8 metres) including roof top plant and equipment. The new proposed elliptical form of the tower and the oval shaped angled roof form, combined with the exposed external superstructure and hanging gardens to the podium, give the building a much stronger and well considered architectural form. The provision of additional retail frontage at street level will also increase pedestrian interaction at street level. The design is considered to be a significant improvement upon the original plans considered by Council.

The building will be 28.8 metres above the preferred 28 metre building height identified in the Design and Development Overlay and the Heidelberg Structure Plan.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 13

3.1

Planet – Environmental Sustainability

3.1

Planet – Environmental Sustainability

PROPOSED MULTISTOREY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT 443 UPPER HEIDELBERG ROAD, IVANHOE (P1453/2014) - VCAT CONSENT ORDER cont’d However, due to the strategic significance of the site and the revised design meeting the objectives of the overlay, including to promote new development that provides a positive contribution to the built form of the area, the revised proposal is considered acceptable.

Landscaping Whilst a substantial Spotted Gum will be lost from the site, the higher quality of architectural design reflected in the ‘Without Prejudice’ version C plans, including the reduced height of the tower, reduces the need for the retention of this tree to soften the appearance and setting of the building. The hanging gardens to the podium level of the building also serve to soften the appearance and setting of the building. In conjunction with the landscape works proposed within the two road reserves, the proposal is considered to provide a suitable landscape design response to its setting.

VicRoads raised no concerns in relation to the potential impact of the works on VicRoads land to the south of the site Car and bicycle parking/access The shortfall in the statutory car parking rate for the proposal initially considered by Council was 149 spaces. The office floor area has been reduced by 1,316 square metres in the Version C plans. As a result, the shortfall in the statutory car parking rate generated by the proposal has been reduced to 46 spaces. Applying empirical parking rates, the revised proposal generates an on-site car parking rate of 270 spaces. A total of 296 spaces are provided and as this is greater than the empirical demand, the statutory shortfall is considered to be acceptable. The statutory bicycle parking rate is also reduced from 94 spaces to 87 spaces with 89 spaces being provided. On this basis, Council’s Engineering Department are supportive of the revised proposal and the agreed permit conditions.

Future resident amenity The south-west facing apartments on the Level 3 podium have now been provided with larger balconies and/or improved orientation for access to natural light. This is also an improvement upon the original design.

VicRoads VicRoads concerns have been addressed in the Version C plans and they have agreed to the Consent Order with conditions that reflect what is shown in the Version C plans.

CONCLUSION As a result of the amended plans labelled VCAT Changes 28.8.15 Revision C ‘Without Prejudice’ plans and permit conditions being agreed to by Consent Order by the permit applicant, VicRoads and the objector parties to the review and based on an assessment of the revised proposal, it is considered that Council should agree to the Consent Order and VicRoads conditions.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 14

Planet – Environmental Sustainability

3.1

PROPOSED MULTISTOREY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT 443 UPPER HEIDELBERG ROAD, IVANHOE (P1453/2014) - VCAT CONSENT ORDER cont’d ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1

Version C Consent Order Plans

2

VCAT Consent Order

109

3

VicRoads permit conditions

123

4

VCAT Substitute Plans

125

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 79

Page 15

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.1

IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN - TRANSITION TO COMPLIANCE

Author:

Andy Wilson - Team Leader - Development Planning, City Development

Ward:

Griffin

File:

P777/1999

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The development of Ivanhoe Grammar School (the School) is currently in a state of transitioning between the old development plan (February 2000) and the new plan approved in June 2015 but not yet endorsed. There were expectations set under the previously approved development plan, particularly as it relates to car parking, that have not been fulfilled. While these expectations will be resolved with the completion of projects scheduled under the newly approved development plan, this plan is yet to be finalised and the timing is currently at the discretion of the school.

The school has also provided census data for August 2015 confirming that its staff and student numbers are currently in excess of the maximums allowed under the February 2000 Plan.

This report raises a number of issues that need further consideration and details from the school including the appropriate level of car parking on site to meet the statutory requirement for the number of staff; submission of a plan to show how vehicles will be accommodated to enter and exit the site from Russell Street for early morning drop off; provision of a Tree Care management plan: and a plan for managing access arrangements for the various access points for the period before the new car park is constructed.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Grant an extension of time to the existing development plan for 12 months (to July 2016) or until a new development plan is endorsed (which ever is the sooner) and agree to transition arrangements which vary the plan on the condition that Ivanhoe Grammar School: a. Increase on site car parking by 47 spaces to the satisfaction of Council by the commencement of Term 1 2016 to meet the statutory demand for the number of staff that exceeds the number of staff permitted under the 2000 development plan. Alternatively, the School must ensure its staff and student numbers do not exceed that permitted under the 2000 development plan by the commencement of Term 1 2016. b. Provide a plan that demonstrates how vehicles can enter the site and exit again through Russell Street for early morning drop offs to the Council’s satisfaction by December 2015. c. Provide a Tree Care Management Plan to Council’s satisfaction by December 2015. This plan must outline the current outstanding compliance matters relating to replacement tree planting for trees removed without planning permission.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 17

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN - TRANSITION TO COMPLIANCE cont’d d. Develop a plan to Council’s satisfaction that outlines how the School will manage its access control before the approved car park is completed and include those controls as a transitioning arrangement in the final 2015 development plan.

2. Where the conditions of the transition arrangement outlined in 1 above are not met, enforce the existing Development Plan arrangement to ensure full compliance.

3. Request that the School ensure that the final development plan submitted for approval clearly shows 7 car parking spaces immediately west of Locksley house as included in the total number of car parking spaces used for the purpose of calculating the total occupancy of facilities during events.

4. Write to the School to inform them of Council’s decision.

Planning Permit Application:

P777/1999

Development Planner:

Andy Wilson

Address:

41 The Ridgeway, Ivanhoe

Proposal:

Development Plan approval

Existing Use/Development:

Ivanhoe Grammar School

Applicant:

Whiteman Property and Accounting

Zoning:

Neighbourhood Residential Zone 3, General Residential Zone 2

Overlays:

Development Plan Overlay 4, Environmental Significance Overlay 4, Vegetation Protection Overlay 3, Significant Landscape Overlay 2, Land Subject to Inundation Overlay, Heritage Overlay (HO69)

Notification (Advertising):

No

Ward:

Griffin

This report outlines the School’s plans to achieve compliance with Council’s expectations, particularly during the period of transition between the end of the existing February 2000 development plan and the commencement of the new 2015 development plan.

This transition constitutes two main phases including the period between now and the endorsement of the new 2015 development plan and secondly, the commencement of development under the new development plan and the completion of the sports centre and car park.

OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 18

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.1

IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN - TRANSITION TO COMPLIANCE cont’d BACKGROUND/HISTORY On 9 June 2015, Council resolved to approve a Development Plan for Ivanhoe Grammar School until 2021. The approval was granted subject to a number of changes including provision of additional information such as the provision of census information to confirm the current student and staff numbers. The approval was also subject to a series of recommendations around achieving compliance in the interim period between the expiry of the existing development plan and the commencement of the new.

The first Ivanhoe Grammar School Development Plan was approved on 1 February 2000 (P777/1999). This plan has been extended several times with the most recent extension through until July of this year. Without an extension to this plan and in absence of the new plan being finalised and endorsed, there is uncertainty about which development plan should be adhered to.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 19

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN - TRANSITION TO COMPLIANCE cont’d

Figure 1: Locality Plan SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA Ivanhoe Grammar School is located on the southern side of Lower Heidelberg Road, to the east of its intersection with Upper Heidelberg Road. It is bounded by The Boulevard to the south and The Ridgeway and Russell Street to the east and west respectively. The area is typically characterised by residential development set within established gardens. The site is located approximately 500m from the centre of Ivanhoe and is set between Darebin (450m) and Ivanhoe (350m) train stations.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 20

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.1

IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN - TRANSITION TO COMPLIANCE cont’d TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION The School’s ability to comply with Council’s expectations on the site can be grouped under two main phases: the period between now and the endorsement of the new development plan and the period between the endorsement of the plan and the completion of the new car park. These two phases are particularly important in considering how the school will transition to compliance with regards to staff and student numbers and the availability of car parking on site.

Transition between now and endorsement of the new plan The existing development plan approved in 2000 had a number of expectations relating to the construction of additional car parking. At the time of approval, 91 car parking spaces existed on site. The plan required an additional 68 spaces, totalling 159 spaces. When officers prepared the report to Council in June, there was a shortfall of 21 spaces on site. However, since this time, the School has made available additional spaces on site which were constructed but not available for parking. The School has advised that there is now a total of 147 spaces available on site for parking, including 2 spaces that have been constructed but not previously recorded. This results in a shortfall of 12 spaces.

In addition to making more spaces available on site, the school has identified an opportunity to construct 9 new spaces by utilising existing car parking areas more efficiently. This would include 4 to the west of Locksley House, 3 at the Benson Centre and 2 to the south of the south ground. This would result in a total of 156 on site spaces, 3 short of the required number under the original development plan. The School has also suggested further spaces could be created on site however this would necessitate the removal of vegetation which is not preferred by the School.

In addition to a shortfall of car parking spaces from the previously approved plan, the school has confirmed that its current staff and student numbers are in excess of the maximum approved under the existing development plan. Recommendation A of Council’s resolution in June requires that the school provide a census of staff and student numbers in August of 2015. This has been provided and indicates that the school is currently beyond the limit specified in the 2000 development plan for both staff numbers and student numbers.

In summary, based on the shortfall of car parking spaces on site that have not been constructed under the 2000 development plan (12) and including the demand for new car parking spaces as a result of the additional staff already working on site (44), the school has a shortfall of 56 car parking spaces. While it is noted the School has recently made some existing spaces available and found opportunity to construct 9 new spaces, this would still result in a shortfall of 47 spaces. It is considered that the school should be required to achieve compliance with regards to onsite car parking by providing these additional car parking spaces or by reducing its staff and student numbers to be consistent with the expectations of the 2000 development plan.

Early morning drop off for swim school Recommendation E of Council’s resolution in June requires the school to provide a plan to indicate how it will improve circulation of vehicles at the southern end of the school so that vehicles can enter and exit via Russell Street. Council’s traffic engineers consider this to be a viable solution to increase safety for these vehicles

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 21

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN - TRANSITION TO COMPLIANCE cont’d and students being dropped off. The School’s traffic consultant has also not raised any issues with this solution from a safety perspective, only noting that it would be more straight forward for vehicles to continue through and exit at Fairy Street.

The School has confirmed that storage areas and bins will be relocated and that concrete wheel stops can be removed in specific locations to allow for better circulation of cars and a two way movement of vehicles from Russell Street.

However, no specific plan has been submitted to clarify how this will be achieved.

The School should be reminded of the expectations of Recommendation E of Council’s resolution in June and be given a timeframe to comply with this requirement.

Commencement of new plan and completion of sports centre and car park Clarification regarding number of people on site and exact spaces that can be utilised for car park during events after hours.

Recommendation A of the resolution in June requires the total occupancy of facilities to not exceed the number of people derived from a calculation of the standard car parking ratio for ‘place of assembly’ having regard to the number of on-site car parking spaces available within the at-grade and underground sports centre car parking spaces plus the at-grade spaces to the west of Locksley House. The School understands that this calculation does not include the spaces on the residential boundary to the west of Locksley House. The School should be informed that this resolution allows for the 7 spaces immediately to the west of Locksley House but does not allow for the spaces further west (along the residential interface) or south west of Locksley House to be included in this calculation. This allows for a total of 610 people on site for events (176 spaces for the south ground underground car park including the at grade spaces to the south of the oval + 7 spaces immediately to the west of Locksley House). The School should be asked to include this detail in the final development plan submitted for approval to avoid any confusion regarding which spaces are included for the purposes of this calculation.

With regards to the access arrangements outlined in Council’s decision of 9 June, it is noted that these will apply when the new plan is endorsed. However, a period of transition is required between when the plan is endorsed and when the new car park is constructed due to the restrictions placed on the existing Russell Street/Scotts Parade entrance (which seeks to restrict access for maintenance vehicles only).

Furthermore, it is noted that the School has removed a barrier that prevented vehicles from travelling between Elphin and Fairy Streets within the site. When the new access controls are given effect, this access arrangement is not considered likely to result in any adverse amenity impacts to surrounding properties and is considered acceptable. Therefore, it is suggested the new access arrangements only apply when the construction of the new car park is completed.

Outstanding compliance issues Landscaping remediation required to offset vegetation previously removed.

Recommendation A of Council’s resolution of June 2015 requires the preparation of a Tree Care Management Plan that includes locations on site for replacement planting for trees that have previously been removed without permission. The School should

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 22

IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN - TRANSITION TO COMPLIANCE cont’d be reminded of this requirement and that a suitable timeframe be given to ensure compliance.

Extension of time to existing Development Plan It is noted that the current development plan was previously only extended through until July of this year. To ensure that the existing development plan remains ‘live’ until the new one is endorsed, it is considered reasonable that the plan be extended by a further 12 months.

CONCLUSION The School has confirmed that it is currently not in compliance with the existing development plan. The School should be required to demonstrate how it will achieve the appropriate level of car parking on site to meet the statutory requirement for the number of staff that are in excess of the existing development plan, or reduce its staff numbers to be consistent with the existing available car parking on site. In addition, the School should be required to submit a plan to show how it will accommodate vehicles entering and exiting the site from Russell Street for early morning drop off, provide a Tree Care management plan and a plan for managing access arrangements for the various access points for the period before the new car park is constructed.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 23

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.2

MODIFIED OUTCOME FOR MULTI-STOREY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH (P563/2014)

Author:

Nick Helliwell - Major Developments Planner, City Development

Ward:

Bakewell

File:

P563/2014

Previous Items Council on 9 June 2015 (Item 4.4 - Proposed nine to ten storey mixed use building at 4-6 Flintoff Street, Greensborough) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Planning permit application P563/2014 for a nine to ten storey mixed use development at 4-6 Flintoff Street was supported by Council at its meeting of 9 June 2015. A Notice of Decision was issued with a Planning Permit subsequently issued on 21 July 2015. A number of conditions were attached to the permit, which included; • • •

modifications to the built form involving the deletion of one level of the building and subsequent reduction in the building height, the podium height reduced to four storeys and a minimum upper level wall setback from the face of the podium above the podium (except for the corner tower) of 4.5 metres.

A standard time limit condition.

The applicant lodged an appeal with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) on 7 August 2015 against these conditions as well as a number of standard permit conditions. A Compulsory Conference has been scheduled for 8 October 2015 with a two day VCAT hearing scheduled to commence on 19 November 2015 should the matter not be resolved at the Compulsory Conference.

A request was received on 14 September 2015 initiating discussions about the potential for a Consent Order to vary the built form permit conditions. The modifications will result in a different built form outcome to that approved by Council and therefore requires Council consideration.

It is considered that the proposed variation to the built form permit conditions have merit and will result in an acceptable urban design outcome. As such, the proposed amendment to the built form conditions and the time limit condition sho8uld be supported.

RECOMMENDATION That: 1.

Council agree, without prejudice, to a Consent Order which provides for a modified outcome in relation to the approved Planning Permit P563/2014 for a mixed use development at 4 – 6 Flintoff Street, Greensborough including: (a)

Amendment to Condition 1(b) to allow for the height of the podium to be

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 24

4.2

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

MODIFIED OUTCOME FOR MULTI-STOREY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH (P563/2014) cont’d lowered to five storeys adjacent to the tower on the south-western part of the Grimshaw Street podium and four storeys on the most south-eastern part of the Grimshaw Street podium, measured from the ground floor level of the building.

2.

(b)

Amendment to Condition 1(c) to provide a minimum wall setback to Flintoff and Grimshaw Streets at all levels above the podium of 4.5 metres from the site boundary, except for the tower at the corner of Flintoff and Grimshaw Streets and internal reconfiguration/consolidation of apartments necessary to achieve these changes. Glazed or visually lightweight balconies may project approximately 1.5 metres into this setback area.

(c)

Amendment to the time limit in Condition 25 to enable a 4 year commencement timeframe for the development.

The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal and the applicant be advised of Council’s decision.

OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter.

CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “maintain and improve Banyule as a great place to live”.

BACKGROUND/HISTORY Council’s decision to approve the proposal included consideration of draft urban design guidelines for this section of the Greensborough Principal Activity Centre which will form the basis of a future Planning Scheme Amendment. The decision included modifications to the built form proposed by the application including the deletion of one level of the building and subsequent lowering in the building height, the podium height reduced to four storeys and a minimum upper level wall setback from the face of the podium above the podium (except for the corner tower) of 4.5 metres.

The applicant has expressed concerns in relation to the proposed built form conditions as follows: •

Condition 1(b) - The requirement to lower the podium height to four storeys upsets the vertical balance of the building as presented to Grimshaw Street.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 25

4.2

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.2

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

MODIFIED OUTCOME FOR MULTI-STOREY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH (P563/2014) cont’d The applicant proposes an alternative modification to this elevation comprising a five storey podium adjacent to the tower stepping down to a four storey podium to the south-east.

•

Condition 1(c) - The minimum 4.5 metre setback required above the podium does not take into consideration the 4.1 metre ground level setback and 2.5 metre podium setback already provided from the site boundary. The requirement to lower the podium height to four storeys upsets the vertical balance of the building as presented to Flintoff Street and the architectural aesthetic and proportions of the design.

The applicant proposes a setback of 4.5 metres above the podium measured form the site boundary.

The applicant has sought to challenge the requirements at VCAT. A meeting to discuss the built form permit conditions was held between the permit applicant and their planning consultant and Council representatives on 10 September 2015.

HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION It is not considered that the amendments sought to the built form conditions would result in any potential increased adverse impact over and above that of the plans previously considered by Council. It is also noted that whilst one objection was received in relation to the permit application, the objector has not sought to be a party to the appeal.

TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION The applicant has proposed modifications to the built form conditions seeking to achieve the following: •

The requirement to lower the podium height to four storeys on the Flintoff Street elevation deleted.

The applicant is concerned about the impact of such a change to the podium level on the architectural presentation of the building to Flintoff Street. The applicant considers that the podium height is designed to ensure that the base of the building is solid and anchors the building, and that upper levels appear recessive and as a secondary built form element in the streetscape.

The views to the upper levels of the building are tempered by their setback from the podium. The use of lighter coloured materials and design treatments in the upper levels softens the visual impact and, importantly, the form of the podium form itself serves to screen views of the upper levels. A reduction in podium height would alter the viewing angle to the upper levels and reveal more of the building.

The proportions of the podium façade treatment would also be altered, and the architectural balance of the proportion of the building base to upper levels would be detrimentally altered. It is considered that the proposed alternative changes would

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 26

MODIFIED OUTCOME FOR MULTI-STOREY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH (P563/2014) cont’d result in a well-resolved and properly proportioned building. The building will still be reduced in scale on this elevation as a result of the requirement to lower the building height through the removal of the top level. Whilst this is a key change to the building presentation it is one that can be accommodated without upsetting the balance of the building form or the architectural integrity of the building.

•

The requirement to lower the podium height to four storeys to Grimshaw Street modified to five storeys adjacent to the tower on the south-western part of the Grimshaw Street podium and four storeys on the most south-eastern part of the Grimshaw Street podium, measured from the ground floor level of the building.

This would provide for the building podium stepping down in height towards the neighbouring Centrelink building. Combined with the reduction in one level of the building, it is considered that the stepping down of the façade and roof of the building will assist the built form of the structure integrating with the scale and appearance of the neighbouring building. These changes can be accommodated with minimal disruption to the architectural form and integrity of the architecture of the building and enhance this key streetscape elevation.

•

The minimum 4.5 metre setback required above the podium measured from the site boundary instead of the face wall of the podium.

The setting back of the upper levels of the building above the podium 4.5 metres measured from the site boundary will provide sufficient setback to allow the podium to provide a solid base to the building and allow the upper level to be more recessive when viewed from street level. The use of lighter coloured materials and design treatments in the facing of the upper levels also softens the visual impact of the upper levels.

•

Time limit

The applicant has also sought to extend the commencement time limit for the development from two to four years under Condition 25 of the permit. This is considered reasonable for a large scale project of this nature and this can be supported.

APPEAL PROCESS A Compulsory Conference has been scheduled by VCAT on 8 October 2015. The purpose of the conference is: • • • •

To identify and clarify the nature of the issues in dispute in the proceeding; To promote a settlement of the proceeding; To identify the questions of fact and law to be decided by VCAT; and To allow the VCAT Member to give directions concerning the conduct of the proceeding.

The proposed modifications are considered to be consistent with the overall thrust of existing and emerging policy for the site and Greensborough Major Activity Centre. It is therefore considered that Council should agree on a without prejudice basis to a Consent Order incorporating the following variations to the planning permit conditions:

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 27

4.2

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.2

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

MODIFIED OUTCOME FOR MULTI-STOREY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH (P563/2014) cont’d 1.

Condition 1(b) amended to read: The height of the building podium lowered to five storeys adjacent to the tower on the south-western part of the Grimshaw Street podium and four storeys on the most south-eastern part of the Grimshaw Street podium, measured from the ground floor level of the building.

2.

Condition 1(c) amended to read: A minimum wall setback to Flintoff and Grimshaw Streets at all levels above the podium of 4.5 metres from the site boundary, except for the tower at the corner of Flintoff and Grimshaw Streets and internal reconfiguration/consolidation of apartments necessary to achieve these changes. Glazed or visually lightweight balconies may project approximately 1.5 metres into this setback area.

3.

Condition 25 amended to read: In accordance with section 68 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, this permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies: •

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

•

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

•

The use is not commenced within six years of the date of this permit; or

•

The use is discontinued for a period of two years.

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

Before the permit expires, or

(b)

Within six months afterwards, or

(c)

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

ADDITIONAL MATTERS The applicant has also sought a review of Condition 1(a) which seeks to reduce the height of the building by one storey, Condition 1(h) which requires the preparation of drainage engineering plans for approval with architectural plans, Condition 1(l) requiring materials to be endorsed by an Urban Designer, Condition 2(g) requiring water sensitive urban design details to be shown on the landscape plan and Condition 24 requiring the preparation of a Section 173 Agreement to advise future occupants of the building that they are not entitled to trader or resident on street car parking permits and that waste is to be collected by a private waste collection service. It is considered that the removal of these conditions should not be supported as they are standard permit conditions for this type of development. Some fine tuning of these remaining permit conditions may occur through the Compulsory Conference process where these are considered to be inconsequential in terms of the built form of the building.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 28

MODIFIED OUTCOME FOR MULTI-STOREY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH (P563/2014) cont’d CONCLUSION It is considered that Council should agree to the proposed amendment to the built form conditions in Condition 1(b) and (c) and the time limit under Condition 25 attached to Planning Permit P563/2014 and that the remaining permit conditions should prevail.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 29

4.2

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.3

REVIEW OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVERTISING SIGNS ON COUNCIL LAND

Author:

Anne North - Senior Strategic Planner, City Development

File:

F2014/676

4.3

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Investigations have been conducted as to whether there may be increased opportunity to allow commercial advertising on Council land. Commercial advertising has the potential to provide additional revenue streams and improved Council assets.

One of the types of advertising on Council land that was examined was sponsorship signs at sporting clubs. Many community based sporting clubs are under pressure to raise sponsorship to help provide the services and facilities of the highest quality for their participants.

On 9 Jun 2015 Council resolved to undertake a process to amend the Outdoor Advertising Policy to allow sponsorship advertising on sporting ground structures that face main roads. Council also resolved that further guidance be sought and requirements developed in relation to freestanding club identification and sponsorship signs adjoining the main sportsground entrances including standard Banyule logos and format.

Sporting groups have been consulted on the proposed changes and although the response was low it has been positive.

RECOMMENDATION That Council adopts the amended Outdoor Advertising Policy (October 2015) that facilitates the opportunity for Banyule Sporting Clubs to increase their revenue streams.

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 “enhance Banyule’s public and open spaces”.

BACKGROUND Outdoor Advertising is the display of signs on land or a building that identifies a business, service or product. Council has an Outdoor Advertising Policy which was prepared in 1999 and revised in February 2010. The policy provides a consistent approach to signage within the municipality and encourages signs that complement

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 30

REVIEW OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVERTISING SIGNS ON COUNCIL LAND cont’d or enhance the setting on which they appear. It sets out clear requirements and guides the decision making process.

Investigations have been undertaken as to whether there may be increased opportunity to allow commercial advertising on Council land. Commercial advertising has the potential to provide additional revenue streams and improved Council assets.

Current practices in relation to four types of advertising on Council land have been examined and the possibilities to expand the advertising potential within each type are considered. The four types are: • • • •

Council Owned Outdoor Assets – these include bus shelter, public bins, light poles, shelters and canopies Advertising on Council owned buildings and land - this includes the possibility of advertising signs within car parks and road reserves Sponsorship Signs at Sporting Clubs – advertising at the entry of reserves as well as on pavilions and coaches boxes Temporary Signs on Council Owned Land - these sites are used for noncommercial advertising and generally use by community groups.

At its meeting on 9 June 2015 Council received a report in relation to the Outdoor Advertising Policy. Many community based sporting clubs are constantly under pressure to grow sponsorship to provide services and facilities of the highest quality for their participants. One of the aspects explored in this report was Sponsorship Signs at Sporting Clubs and the opportunity to expand the advertising potential and revenue for sporting clubs. Specifically in relation to this type of advertising Council resolved to: Undertake a process to amend the Outdoor Advertising Policy to allow sponsorship advertising on sporting ground structures that face main roads. Further guidance and requirements are also to be provided in relation to freestanding club identification and sponsorship signs adjoining the main sportsground entrance including standard Banyule logos and format. The amended policy is to undergo consultation with sporting groups and is to be bought back to Council for approval.

DISCUSSION In response to the Council resolution of 9 June 2015, work has been done to amend the Outdoor Advertising Policy which is located at Attachment 1. The main changes to the policy involve ‘Signs attached to buildings’ and are as follows: •

An increase in the maximum number of signs per building or structure from four to six.

• Signs may be located on a building façade which faces a main road. Where the main road is in a Road Zone Category 1, the consent of VicRoads may be required.

• Long term advertising signs on structures such as coaches boxes and fences may be supported where the advertising has exposure to an abutting road way.

Council also identified that a consistent approach to the larger advertising signs in prominent locations near sporting ground entrances was needed. In response requirements have been developed in relation to freestanding club identification and sponsorship signs adjoining the main sportsgrounds entrance including standard

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 31

4.3

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.3

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

REVIEW OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVERTISING SIGNS ON COUNCIL LAND cont’d Banyule logos and format. This ‘best signage reserve’ template can be found at Attachment 2. This template is now also incorporated in the Outdoor Advertising Policy.

CONSULTATION On the 12 August 2015 letters were sent to 96 sporting clubs in Banyule advising that there may be opportunity to increase revenue for sporting clubs through expanded advertising potential, particularly for Clubs located in prominent locations.

The letter advised clubs that Council was considering amending the Outdoor Advertising Policy to improve the revenue stream through expanded advertising, including: •

Allowing sponsorship advertising on sporting ground structures that face main roads.

•

Providing further guidance and requirements in relation to freestanding club identification and sponsorship signs adjoining the main sportsground entrance including standard Banyule logos and format.

Three sporting clubs provided a written response to Council. These written submissions are provided in Attachment 3. All of the responses supported Council amending the Outdoor Advertising Policy. Although supportive of Council reviewing the policy to increase revenue streams, one of the sporting clubs requested that Council: 1. Consider the material that banners on perimeter fencing is made from to minimise injury to players sliding under fences.

2. Consider the need for advertising opportunities at shared clubs to be equally shared between so that one club does not have a monopoly on the advertising areas being provided.

3. Ensure the products being advertised are children/family friendly and are businesses that meet community standards.

Discussion 1. The safety of players is considered extremely important. It is considered that Council’s Outdoor Advertising should include a requirement that advertising signs on perimeter fences of an oval or pitch be suitably secured to the fence to reduce player injuries. The attached policy includes suitable amendments.

2. The Current Outdoor Advertising Policy addresses this issue and states that where there is more than one occupier of the reserve and associated buildings, the applicant must provide written proof of an amicable agreement between such occupiers in relation to the apportionment of signage rights.

Where this is not obtained, the signs will need to be removed at the end of each seasonal allocation for the group that has obtained the sign.

3. Council’s Outdoor Advertising Policy includes a requirement in relation to temporary signs that “Signs on Council owned or managed land will not be permitted to advertise alcohol, tobacco, gaming, a brothel or escort service.”

It is considered that the policy should be amended to apply this requirement to signage at sporting clubs, particularly given the volume of children and

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 32

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.3

REVIEW OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVERTISING SIGNS ON COUNCIL LAND cont’d younger adults attending sporting clubs/grounds. Such a change is included in the final draft policy attached.

HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions.

In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities.

It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.

CONCLUSION Investigations have been undertaken in relation to Sponsorship Signs at Sporting Clubs and whether there is opportunity to expand the advertising potential and revenue for Banyule sporting clubs. It is considered that sponsorship opportunities at sporting grounds can be improved and the Outdoor Advertising Policy has been amended accordingly.

A standard sign format has also been developed in for freestanding club identification and sponsorship signs at the entrance to sporting grounds. This format will provide a consistent approach to advertising signs at sports grounds across the municipality and will include the Banyule logo.

Sporting clubs have been consulted in relation to the proposed changes and the response has been supportive. Any suggestions made by clubs have been incorporated in the revised Outdoor Advertising Policy.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1 2

Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015 'Best Reserve' Signage Template

155 181

3

Submissions to the Outdoor Advertising Policy Review

182

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page

Page 33

5.1

5.1

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

MACLEOD RECREATION AND FITNESS CENTRE DRAFT MASTER PLAN

Author: Tom Zappulla - Leisure Facilities, Place & Partnership Co-Ordinator, Community Programs Ward:

Ibbott

File:

F2015/962

Previous Items Council on 1 December 2014 (Item 5.3 - Macleod Recreation and Fitness Master Plan) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre (MRFC) is located in Wungan Street Macleod. The original facility was constructed in the 1980s, is currently at programming capacity and there are a number of universal access and design issues limiting its functionality and ability to serve the community.

In November 2013, Council engaged HM Leisure Planning to complete a master plan for the Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre. In December 2014, Council released the draft master plan to the public for consultation for a seven (7) week period. At the conclusion of the consultation period Council received nineteen (19) submissions regarding the plan. The key issues which emerged through the consultation phase focused on the quality and level of consultation during the preparation of the draft plan and the proposed relocation of the indoor sports court.

Following this feedback Council requested officers conduct a second round of consultation to influence the preparation of the finalised masterplan.

The subsequent consultation process proved more effective with over 550 people actively engaged during consultation periods. The second round of consultations has given strong endorsement to the earlier consultations findings. A key change has been the recognition of the need to retain, upgrade and better service the existing indoor sports court and to ensure it can operate as an effective training, competition and home-base for the Banyule Hawks Basketball Club.

Following the second consultation process, the original concept design was reviewed and a second option has been prepared. Option 1 includes relocating the indoor sports court to another venue and Option 2 maintains the indoor sports court however one of the four multi-purpose program rooms would not be able to be delivered.

The overall size difference between both options is 130square metres and the project cost difference is $462,000.

Council may consider endorsing both options for the purpose of further consultation and consider the feedback at a future meeting prior to making a final decision in regard to which option to pursue.

This report seeks Council endorsement of the draft master plan for the purpose of community consultation and invites written submissions between the 7 October and 2 November 2015.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 35

5.1

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

MACLEOD RECREATION AND FITNESS CENTRE DRAFT MASTER PLAN cont’d A further report will then be provided following the consultation period.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Release the draft Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre Master Plan for the purpose of community consultation until the 2 November 2015.

2.

Place an advertisement in the relevant Leader Newspapers and on Council’s website inviting community members to submit written proposals in relation to the draft master plan.

3.

Distribute the one page summary to all existing members of the Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre, local traders and service providers within the Macleod area.

4.

Receive a further report following the community consultation period.

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 “promote and support health and wellbeing”.

BACKGROUND Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre (MRFC) is located in Wungan Street Macleod. The land at Wungan Street Macleod is Crown land and is leased to Banyule City Council. The buildings located on the site are owned by Banyule City Council and leased to YMCA Victoria.

The original facility was constructed in the 1980s and is generally of a “heavy” concrete construction, similar to many community infrastructure projects of the time.

The gymnastics hall was added in the south-west corner of the site in the mid-1990s.

Minor reconfiguration works have since been undertaken to improve flexibility and amenity, including removal of a spa and sauna to improve access to and the amenity of the child care facility.

The site is currently at programming capacity and has a number of universal access and design issues limiting its functionality and ability to serve its community.

In November 2013 Council engaged HM Leisure Planning to complete a master plan for the MRFC. A working group with officers, YMCA representatives and HM Leisure Planning was formed to assist with the preparation of the master plan. The working

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 36

MACLEOD RECREATION AND FITNESS CENTRE DRAFT MASTER PLAN cont’d group developed six stages of work to be undertaken in the preparation of the master plan. These were: 1.

An assessment of the current assets of the venue and the surrounding precinct to ascertain both constraints and opportunities for redevelopment.

2.

Reviewing the present operation of the MRFC in terms of what uses the assets permitted and determining whether asset shortcomings constrained the capacity of management to offer as full and as diverse a set of programs as the community expects.

3.

Reviewing and assessing the market reach and the clientele served by the Centre, including the size and characteristics of the catchment population, market penetration and competitors.

4.

Assessing the aspirations of the Banyule community and more specifically, of Centre users, the extent to which the venue is able to cater for community aspirations and what needs to be done to optimise access and use.

5.

In the light of 1 to 4 preparing a design brief to guide the scope and scale of any redevelopment together with the preparation of costed concept plans for the recommended works, and

6.

Preparation of a costed plan of action for the upgrading of the venue including concept designs.

To set the expectations and outcome of the project, the working group developed the below vision for the project: ‘A revitalised venue which focuses on becoming a health, wellbeing, fitness and community activity hub for the Macleod and surrounding communities, within a broader array of complementary facilities, programs and services offered by Council and others’ Locality Plan

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 37

5.1

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.1

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

MACLEOD RECREATION AND FITNESS CENTRE DRAFT MASTER PLAN 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.

CONSULTATION In the development of the draft master plan, initial community consultation was undertaken to ensure that the recommendations for the MRFC reflected the needs and aspirations of the community. The initial community consultation included: • • • • • •

meetings with user groups, a street stall including discussions with shoppers and visitors to the playground in central Macleod, letterboxing a resident survey, an associated community meeting and a survey of former Centre members.

In total, over 100 residents were involved. The draft master plan was advertised for community consultation from the middle of December 2014 and given the Christmas break, the consultation period remained open until the 6 February 2015. At the conclusion of the consultation period Council received 19 submissions regarding the plan. The key issues raised through the consultation process include: •

Community Consultation - the level of community consultation was viewed as inappropriate for such an important community facility. The views were that consultation efforts were not advertised effectively and key stakeholders were not appropriately involved in the process.

•

Concept plans detailing relocation of the basketball court to another site attracted strong community feedback: o retain the court at MRFC o providing more courts for the community not less o improving court usage and access

Given the feedback from the community in relation to the consultation process, officers completed a further series of focus groups and targeted consultation with key stakeholders between April and July 2015.

The subsequent consultation proved more effective with over 450 actively engaged.

In total over 550 people were engaged during both consultation periods. The second round of consultations with users and the wider community has given strong endorsement to the earlier consultation findings in that they call for the upgrading, modernisation and expansion of MRFC. CURRENT SITUATION A key change to the recommendations arising from the earlier consultation and research has been the recognition of the need to retain, upgrade and better service

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 38

MACLEOD RECREATION AND FITNESS CENTRE DRAFT MASTER PLAN cont’d the existing indoor sports court and to ensure it can operate as an effective training, competition and home-base for the Banyule Hawks Basketball Club.

The key outcomes from the consultation can be summarised as the following: • There is a need for more facilities not less, with regard to the indoor sports court and there is strong community opinion to retain the existing court.

• The community want to maintain and enhance the community hub element of the Centre. The draft plan should plan to improve/emphasise this more • There is a need to ensure that older adult programs are well represented at the Centre • Keep the Centre accessible, both financially and availability wise • Municipal highball context and strategic intent must be included in report • Retain at least two tennis courts for access to the community • Create flexible and accessible exercise and program space • Improve wayfinding and signage for the Centre and the precinct The initial draft master plan was also being prepared in parallel with the proposed Banksia Community Stadium project. Key items driving the process and future direction of the Centre were the possibilities of new courts being available at the new stadium. This context and the associated needs analysis and findings were not included in the first version of the draft master plan. The updated version of the master plan now includes a detailed summary of the context of the proposed Banksia Community Stadium and the synergies and implications on the MRFC. A detailed Research report has also been prepared which supports the Executive Summary.

Concept Plans: Following the revised consultation process, the original concept design was reviewed and a second option was completed. Option 1 is in Attachment 1 and Option 2 is included in Attachment 2.

The proposed warm water pool remains as a long term aspiration and is viewed as outside the scope of the current project. Highlights of both designs include: • New lift and stair access to all levels • Upgrade of finishes, fittings and fixtures generally • Upgrade of plant and equipment generally, and • Upgrade of external facades generally.

Option 1 Option 1 includes relocating the indoor sports court to another venue and with that area divided into two levels through the installation of a mezzanine floor and the development of both dry health and fitness program rooms with a floor space of 500 – 550 square metres.

The core ground level facilities are: • New entry statement and large, transparent internal street and social space providing clear views to services on offer and improved way-finding (i.e.

Sound universal design) • Refurbished amenities

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 39

5.1

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.1

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

MACLEOD RECREATION AND FITNESS CENTRE DRAFT MASTER PLAN cont’d • • • • • •

Refurbished gymnastics venue including expanded seating and viewing space New dedicated gymnastics change rooms Expanded crèche with upgraded amenities Expanded gymnasium and gathering space Retention of space for future specialist program pool, and Consolidated administration space and meeting room adjacent to reception.

The core first level facilities are: • • • • •

New group exercise rooms above the former sports hall, now the new gymnasium, within existing building envelope.

Refurbished / reconfigured program rooms, including viewing space to gymnastics hall below (from Program Room 4) Four professional consulting suites, waiting room, reception and refurbished toilets Social gathering/breakout space, and Reconfiguration to allow visual connection to social space / internal street below.

Option 2: Option 2 maintains the indoor sports court however one of the four multi-purpose program rooms on the upper level, included in Option 1, has been deleted due to the requirement to achieve the briefed floor areas for group exercise rooms. Other key changes include: • Extension of the building footprint to the north by 7 metres • Gymnasium in the existing crèche location • Flexible group fitness/programming rooms above the new gym area • The existing crèche and change rooms have been extended towards the north to provide increased floor area for new change rooms and a new gymnasium • The crèche has been relocated to a new purpose-built space adjacent to the new entry The size difference between both options is 130 square meters which is achieved by removal of the mezzanine and minimal expansion of the building footprint.

Description: Ground Level 1 Total:

Existing/Current: 2515 600 3115 sq.

Option 1: 2515 1300 3815 sq.

Option 2: 2870 1075 3945 sq.

A review of the quantities surveyor (QS) report has confirmed the cost difference between options at today’s building costs is approximately $462,000. Efficiencies developed in the design included the removal of the mezzanine, rationalisation of the amenities space and using the majority of the existing structure within the building footprint.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 40

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.1

MACLEOD RECREATION AND FITNESS CENTRE DRAFT MASTER PLAN cont’d DISCUSSION The draft Mater Plan currently includes two design options. Option 1 includes relocating the indoor sports court high ball uses to another venue, divide the court into two levels through installation of a mezzanine floor and develop both levels for dry health and fitness program rooms with a floor space of 500 – 550 square metres.

Option 2 maintains the indoor sports court to permit its optimal use for high ball sports and other Centre programs however one of the four multi-purpose program rooms on the upper level, is deleted due to the requirement to achieve the briefed floor areas for group exercise rooms.

The overall size difference between both options is 130square metres and the project cost difference is estimated at $462,000.

Council may seek to endorse both options for the purpose of further consultation and consider the feedback at a future Council meeting prior to making a final decision in regard to which option to pursue.

TIMELINES It is proposed that the period for seeking written submissions be between the 7 October and 2 November 2015.

A further report will be provided following the consultation period.

CONCLUSION The Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre is a key recreational facility for the residents of Macleod. Whilst it has continuously served as a community facility since the early 1980s, the facility is currently at programming capacity and there are a number of universal access and design issues limiting its functionality and ability to serve its community.

In addition there has been an identified need to revitalise the facility so that the optimum mix of programs, activities and services can be delivered to the Banyule community.

It is important the maintain the existing “flavour” and “atmosphere” of the venue by pursuing a “community hub” approach to the Centre’s redevelopment so as to bring in a range of other opportunities and through this, broaden its attractiveness to the wider community and to those suburbs and demographic groups it does not presently serve well.

The draft Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre master plan provides a way forward to position the facility to serve the local community in a sustainable cost effective way for the decades to come.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1

Option 1 Concept - MRFC Draft Master Plan

185

2

Option 2 Concept - MRFC Draft Master Plan

188

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page

Page 41

6.1

AIR RIGHTS OVER FORGE LANE BETWEEN 37 BURGUNDY & 4 VILLA STREETS HEIDELBERG

Author:

Lorraine James - Property Officer, City Development

Ward:

Griffin

File:

F2015/905

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Having been issued the necessary planning permission, the landowner of 37 Burgundy and 4 Villa Streets, Heidelberg, has requested Council grant air rights over Forge Lane, separating the two sites, to facilitate the construction of a permanent physical link-way between both development sites.

The link-way is proposed to be constructed over two (2) levels subject to appropriate design and planning approval.

This report seeks to initiate giving public notice, in the “Heidelberg Leader” on 13 October 2015, of Council’s intention to grant air rights over Forge Lane pursuant to Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act).

The giving of public notice of Council’s intention to grant air rights over Forge Lane does not compel Council to do so. Council is merely complying with its statutory obligations under the Act. These obligations include giving public notice, considering written submissions and hearing submissions from persons who have requested to be heard on such a proposal.

Council will decide at a future meeting whether or not to grant air rights over the ‘road’ and enter into a long-term licence and Section 173 Agreement with the landowner of 37 Burgundy and 4 Villa Streets, Heidelberg.

RECOMMENDATION That: (1)

Pursuant to Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989, the statutory procedures be commenced to give public notice of Council’s intention to grant air rights over Forge Lane to the landowner of 37 Burgundy and 4 Villa Streets, in the “Heidelberg Leader”.

(2)

Written submissions on the proposal be received and persons who have made a written request to be heard in person or by a party representing them as specified in their written submission and in accordance with the Act, be heard at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 30 November 2015 beginning at 7.45pm to be held in the Council Chambers, 275 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe.

(3)

Council will decide on whether or not to grant air rights over Forge Lane at a future meeting, after considering any written submissions received and hearing from those persons who have requested to be heard in support of their submission.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 43

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

AIR RIGHTS OVER FORGE LANE BETWEEN 37 BURGUNDY & 4 VILLA STREETS HEIDELBERG cont’d (4)

If no submissions are received, Council may decide, at its meeting of 30 November 2015, whether or not to grant air rights to the developer and enter into a long-term licence and Section 173 agreement.

(5)

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 Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions.

In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities, in particular, Section 20 which 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. Any person who considers they have been deprived of their rights may make a submission in accordance with Section 223 of the Act with respect to a proposal to grant rights.

BACKGROUND Council has granted a Planning Permit P1256/2013 for the development of 37 Burgundy and 4 Villa Streets, Heidelberg. The development comprises ground level retail, three levels of office and two levels of residential apartments on the Burgundy Street frontage and three levels of car parking with three levels of apartments on the Villa Street frontage.

Subject to an appropriate design of the link structure and planning approval, the landowner is now seeking to construct a physical link between the two developments.

To facilitate this link-way the granting of air rights to the landowner is required.

The sites and approximate location of the proposed link (red-hatched) are shown on the plan in Figure 1 below.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 44

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.1

AIR RIGHTS OVER FORGE LANE BETWEEN 37 BURGUNDY & 4 VILLA STREETS HEIDELBERG cont’d

Figure 1: Site Locations and Proposed link

The proposal is to construct a link-way over two (2) levels as shown in plans in Figure 2 below. The floor area of the link-way is proposed to be 1.8 metres wide, by 4.0 metres long; with a floor area of 7.2m2 per level, totalling 14.4m2 over two levels or approximately 78m3.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 45

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

AIR RIGHTS OVER FORGE LANE BETWEEN 37 BURGUNDY & 4 VILLA STREETS HEIDELBERG cont’d

Figure 2: Link-way over two levels Given the potential “value-add” the link-way could deliver for the development, in terms of providing a secure passage from car park to residence/office, an independent valuation was sought.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 46

AIR RIGHTS OVER FORGE LANE BETWEEN 37 BURGUNDY & 4 VILLA STREETS HEIDELBERG cont’d Council’s valuation and legal advice suggests that the ‘road’ status should not be removed from the air space above Forge Lane and sold to the developer. Such provision would lock in ownership of air rights in perpetuity presenting problems into the future, when and if the building was to be demolished. Consequently, air rights should be conveyed by way of long term licence. In doing so, the options would be to: • •

Calculate the present day value for conveying rights for the term of the licence and seek payment up front with an annual peppercorn fee payable on demand for a fixed term; or Strike an annual fee with annual increments of, for example, 4% with a fixed term.

CURRENT SITUATION Having considered all advice received, a proposal has been presented to Ratio, consultants acting on behalf of the landowner, pending Council’s consideration to: 1. Enter into a long-term (30 year) licence of the air rights for an upfront fee of $25,000. This fee is related to the current market value of the land and to the benefits that will be derived from the link-way.

2. The payment of a nominal annual fee thereafter.

In response, Ratio have advised that their client was accepting of the upfront fee of $25,000 but would like consideration given to: • • •

Extending the term to 50 years given the potential life of the building; The commencement date of that term e.g. completion of the building i.e.

Certificate of Occupancy; The commencement date of the nominal annual fee, the mechanism by which the annual fee will be calculated and if its duration would be the life of the building.

The purpose of granting air rights over Forge Lane is solely for the construction of a link-way with appropriate design and planning approval. This link-way will present itself as an encroachment over Council land. As such, the landowner must enter into an Agreement with Council under Section 173 of the Planning & Environment Act 1987.

The Agreement must: • Be at no cost to Council; • Be registered on the certificates of title to appropriate abutting lands and/or common property; • Indemnify Council against all possible claims; • Address maintenance and repair issues; • Refute potential adverse possession claims; and • Include public risk insurances, which will be the responsibility of an owners corporation when a building has been subdivided.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 47

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

AIR RIGHTS OVER FORGE LANE BETWEEN 37 BURGUNDY & 4 VILLA STREETS HEIDELBERG cont’d TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS Council’s engineers advise that assets are contained within the ‘road’ and will not be affected by the granting of air space over the ‘road’.

SERVICE AUTHORITY CONSIDERATIONS Consultation with the relevant service authorities reveals that assets contained within or in the vicinity of the ‘road’ are namely: •

Telstra Corporation Limited – an old aerial feed. (This service is not working and can be removed by the developer).

•

Jemena – Underground cables within Forge Lane (that the developer will need to consider during construction).

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS The Banyule Planning Scheme governs the use and development within the municipality and Banyule City Council is the responsible authority administering the scheme. Under the Planning Scheme, the ‘road’ is included in the Commercial 1 (C1Z) Zone and is affected by Design and Development Overlay – Schedule 5 (DDO5) and Special Building Overlay (SBO) controls.

Banyule’s Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy at Clause 22.02 of the Banyule Planning Scheme includes the area within its Garden Suburban (GS3) precinct.

Council’s Development Planning Coordinator further advises that a planning permit is required to use or develop the air space of the ‘road’.

The format of a permit condition should be: “A legally binding agreement under Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 shall be entered into between the landowner and Council prior to the commencement of the development concerning liability, maintenance and possession of parts of the development that extend into air space of land vested in the care and maintenance of Council;” LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS STATUTORY PROCEDURES Public notice of Council’s intention to grant rights must be given in accordance with Council’s Official Newspaper Policy and submissions on the proposal invited and considered in accordance with Section 223 of the Act. POLICY CONSIDERATIONS PUBLIC NOTICE

Council’s Official Newspaper Policy provides as follows:

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 48

AIR RIGHTS OVER FORGE LANE BETWEEN 37 BURGUNDY & 4 VILLA STREETS HEIDELBERG cont’d “The Heidelberg Leader and/or Diamond Valley Leader and/or the Heidelberg and Valley Weekly, where appropriate be appointed as Council’s official newspapers for the purpose of providing public notice except where circumstances may be deemed appropriate to use The Age and/or the Herald Sun for particular public notices.”

For the purpose of giving public notice for this proposal it is noted that the “Heidelberg Leader” is the newspaper that is generally circulated in the Heidelberg area.

DISCUSSION The giving of public notice of Council’s intention to grant air rights does not compel Council to do so. 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 grant air rights and enter into a long-term licence and Section 173 Agreement with the landowner.

CONCLUSION Council should now direct that, pursuant to Section 223 of the Act, public notice of its intention to grant air rights over Forge Lane be given in the “Heidelberg Leader” and a decision on whether or not to proceed be considered at a future meeting of Council.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 49

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.2

292 LOWER HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE EAST - ENCROACHMENT ON SPLAY CORNER

Author:

Lorraine James - Property Officer, City Development

Ward:

Griffin

File:

F2014/665

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY It is understood that, during the 1960’s, reconstruction works were undertaken by the former Heidelberg Council on Lower Heidelberg Road, resulting in part of the road surface and the footpath at the intersection of Withers Street being constructed on land contained in certificate of title belonging to 292 Lower Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe East (the splay).

The current property owner has formally requested that Council undertake to excise the road from that title and contribute toward the costs associated with the exercise.

The purchaser of a property has the responsibility to ensure that occupation accords with the title to the land being purchased. Had the appropriate checks been undertaken prior to the property having been purchased then the matter of title rectification could have been dealt with prior to settlement. Whilst legal advice on the matter suggests that the splay has become public highway by virtue of implied dedication as a public highway, it was an administrative oversight by the former Council, and should be rectified.

A plan of subdivision, pursuant to section 35 of the Subdivision Act 1988, should be lodged to rectify the matter and Council should contribute 50% of the total costs, in the interest of collaboration and resolution.

RECOMMENDATION That: (1)

Pursuant to Section 35 of the Subdivision Act 1988, an application for a permit is lodged and the plan registered at the Titles Office to rectify title to 292 Lower Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe East and to create the splay as R1 road on title to Council.

(2)

Council contributes up to 50% of the total cost of facilitating administrative and legal expenses associated with preparing the plan and lodging the application, with the balance to be paid for by the owner of 292 Lower Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe East.

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.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 50

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

292 LOWER HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE EAST - ENCROACHMENT ON SPLAY CORNER 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 “develop and deliver best value services and facilities”.

HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions.

In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities, in particular, Section 20 which 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.

BACKGROUND It is understood that, during the 1960’s, reconstruction works were undertaken by the former Heidelberg Council on Lower Heidelberg Road, resulting in part of the road surface and the footpath at the intersection of Withers Street being constructed on land contained in certificate of title belonging to 292 Lower Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe East (the splay). The splay has an approximate area of 6.5m2 as shown in Locality Plan in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Locality Plan The current property owner became aware of the encroachment through the process of making an application for a planning permit to construct a front fence.

Subsequently, a formal request was made for Council to undertake to excise the road from the title and to contribute toward the costs associated with the exercise.

Council sought legal advice on the matter which suggests that the splay has become public highway by virtue of implied dedication as a public highway.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 51

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

292 LOWER HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE EAST - ENCROACHMENT ON SPLAY CORNER cont’d

The owner of 292 Lower Heidelberg Road should have been aware of the public use of the splay when acquiring it in 2012. A due diligence exercise to ensure that occupation accorded with title to 292 Lower Heidelberg Road should have been conducted at the time of purchase.

The property owner has been advised that there is no legal obligation for Council to amend the title. Needless-to-say, it was an administrative oversight by the former Council, and should be rectified.

CURRENT SITUATION The property owner has, to date, expended funds to undertake a title survey and has obtained a quotation from Bosco Johnson Pty. Ltd. to undertake the preparation of a plan of subdivision (the Plan) and the necessary works to remedy the situation.

Additional costs payable over and above the Bosco Jonson quote have been identified by officers. These fees are: • • • •

Land Victoria Titles Registration, to have the title ‘made available’, certification of plan, and to obtain mortgagee’s consent.

As the proposal is contingent on the mortgagee giving consent, the property owner has now obtained, from the bank, “in principle” agreement in writing as to what is being proposed.

The title will be required to be ‘made available’ at Land Registry prior to registration of the Plan. There is no set fee for this. It depends on the individual bank’s fee structure. Following registration of the Plan, the splay will be known as R1 road. A separate title will then issue to Council for the R1 road and the title to 292 Lower Heidelberg Road will then issue to the bank.

TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION Any existing Council or service authority assets within the splay will not be affected by this proposal.

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS The Banyule Planning Scheme governs the use and development within the municipality and Banyule City Council is the responsible authority administering the scheme. Under the Planning Scheme, the splay is included in the General Residential Zone – Schedule 2 (GRZ2) and is affected by Vegetation Protection (VPO3) overlay controls.

Banyule’s Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy at Clause 22.02 of the Banyule Planning Scheme includes the area within its Garden Suburban (GS3) precinct.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 52

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.2

292 LOWER HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE EAST - ENCROACHMENT ON SPLAY CORNER cont’d LEGAL CONSIDERATION STATUTORY PROCEDURES A plan of subdivision, pursuant to section 35 of the Subdivision Act 1988 and based on survey, would be dealt with as a procedural plan, exempt from the provisions of clause 62.4 of the Banyule Planning Scheme.

FUNDING IMPLICATIONS No allowance has been factored into the 2015/16 budget to remedy this matter.

However, Council’s contribution toward facilitating administrative and legal expenses associated with the plan will not exceed 50% of the total cost, with the balance of costs shared with the property owner.

No land acquisition costs are anticipated.

CONCLUSION There is no legal obligation for Council to amend the title. However, it was an administrative oversight by the former Council, and should be rectified.

In the interest of collaboration and resolution it would seem appropriate that Council should now direct that, pursuant to section 35 of the Subdivision Act 1988, a Plan of Subdivision be initiated to create the splay as R1 road on title and rectify the title to 292 Lower Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe East and that costs to effect such processes be shared with the owner.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 53

6.3

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.3

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS

Author:

Emily Outlaw - Council Governance Liaison Officer, Corporate Services

File:

F2015/337

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:

14 September 2015

Type of Meeting:

Councillor Briefing

Matters Considered:

1. Disability Review 2. HACC Solar Saver Program 3. Macleod Recreation Centre & Watsonia Pool Lease 4. Public Open Space Strategy Review 5. MAV State Council Meeting 6. SRV Funding Update 7. Community Development & RSL Grants 8. Community Information Support Services Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Rick Garotti

Councillors Present:

Staff Present:

Others Present:

Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Allison Beckwith – Director Community Programs Scott Walker – Director City Development Peter Utri – Acting Director Corporate Services Russell Darling – Acting Director Assets & City Services Giovanna Savini – Manager, Youth & Family Services Daniel Kollmorgen – Manager Transport, Sustainability & Municipal Laws Leanne Horvath – Coordinator, HACC Service Delivery

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 54

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d

2

Conflict of Interest:

Clayton Simpson – Resource Conservation Officer John Milkins – Coordinator, Environmental Sustainability Peter Benazic – Manager, Parks & Gardens Jeff Parkes – Coordinator, Open Space Planning Ben McManus – Coordinator, Leisure & Cultural Services Nil

Date of Assembly:

21 September 2015

Type of Meeting:

Councillor Briefing

Matters Considered:

Items on the Council Agenda for the Ordinary Meeting of 21 September 2015 as listed below: 1.1 Petition regarding Permanent Road Closure on Leith Walk, Macleod 2.1 Road Safety programs and initiatives undertaken

by Council in 2014/15 2.2 Electronic Gaming Machines - Investigation into Local Planning Policy and Cap on Numbers 4.1 Children's Crossing at Fernside Avenue, Briar Hill 4.2 Bell Street Mall - Traders' Parking Permits 4.3 Banyule Flats and Warringal Parklands Heritage Considerations 4.4 North East Link - Quarterly Report 4.5 Greensborough Activity Centre next phase of Development 4.6 Carols by Candlelight Location Option For 2015 and 2016 5.1 Advocacy Report 1 January 2015 - 30 June 2015 5.2 Heidelberg Park Pavilion - Capital Works Project 5.3 Community Information and Support Services Service Model 6.1 Scouts Association of Australia Victorian Branch - Lease 6.2 Creation of Plantation Lane 6.3 Proposed road Discontinuance and Sale of Land - Section of Pimelea Lane at the rear of 43 Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights 6.4 Proposed Discontinuance and Sale of Section of Road (RW028) Adjacent to the Rear of 4/98 Lower Heidelberg Road Ivanhoe 6.5 157 Wungan Street Macleod - Notice of Intention to Lease 6.6 Certification of the Financial Statements and Performance Statement for the year ended 30 June 2015 6.7 Items for Noting 6.8 Assembly of Councillors 8.1 Community Consultation for a Community

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 55

6.3

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.3

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d Garden 8.2 Babarrbunin Beek - Aboriginal Commemorative walk 8.3 One Flintoff to reflect history of City of Banyule and Shire of Diamond Valley 8.4 Active Reserves Redevelopment Program 8.5 Protection for Victims of Crime 9. General Business 9.1 Youth Festival at Macleod Park 9.2 Macleod Football Club - Winning Their First 1st Division Premiership Since 1971 9.3 Bryant Reserve & Adjacent Council Car Park 9.4 Vale Luigi/Gino Villani Councillors Present:

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

Staff Present:

Conflict of Interest:

Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Allison Beckwith – Director Community Programs Scott Walker – Director City Development Peter Utri – Acting Director Corporate Services Russell Darling – Acting Director Assets & City Services Vivien Ferlaino – Governance Coordinator Gina Burden – Manager, Governance Giovanna Savini – Manager, Youth & Family Services John Minchinton – Coordinator, Aged & Disability Services David Bailey – Coordinator, Engineering Services Doug Baker – Financial Accountant Nil

Date of Assembly:

28 September 2015

Type of Meeting:

Councillor Briefing

Matters Considered:

1. Disability Review – NDIS Update 2. Macleod Recreation & Fitness Centre Masterplan Update 3. Planning & Development Opportunities 4. Budget & Capital Project Planning Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Craig Langdon Tom Melican Wayne Phillips Rick Garotti Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Allison Beckwith – Director Community Programs Scott Walker – Director City Development Peter Utri – Acting Director Corporate Services

Others Present:

3

Councillors Present:

Staff Present:

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 56

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d

Others Present:

Conflict of Interest:

Geoff Glynn – Director Assets & City Services Giovanna Savini – Manager, Youth & Family Services Shawn Neilson – Community & Social Planner Lisa Raywood – Manager, Health & Aged Services Darren Bennett – Manager, Leisure, Recreation & Cultural Services Frances Giannotti – Coordinator, Youth & Community Partnerships Joseph Tobacco – Manager, Property & Economic Development John Minchinton – Coordinator, Aged & Disability Services Nil

RECOMMENDATION That the Assembly of Councillors report be received.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 57

6.3

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

8.1

ILLEGAL MINI (MONKEY) BIKES

Author:

Cr Craig Langdon

File:

F2014/492

8.1

Notice of Motion

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move:

“That Council: 1. Write to the Minister for Roads and Road Safety and Local Members of Parliament seeking a review of existing legislation and / or the introduction of new rules that deter the use of illegal mini bike riders.

2. Council write to the Mayor of Frankston City Council confirming Banyule’s support for the initiatives by Frankston City Council to work with the Police and State Government in an effort to deter illegal mini bike riders.

3. Council submit a motion to the Municipal Association Victoria (MAV) State Council seeking a review of existing legislation and / or the introduction of new rules that deter the use of illegal mini bike riders.”

Explanation Council has raised concern about the growing instance of illegal mini bike use across the municipality and in particular in the vicinity of Darebin Creek. Over the past 3 years Banyule together with Darebin Council, representatives from Victoria Police, Neighbourhood Renewal (3081 Connect) and concerned local residents have been discussing the issue of illegal mini / motor bikes on the Darebin Creek.

Various concepts have been reviewed and considered. Council has installed signs at entrances and painted signs on trails prohibiting the use of the mini / motor bikes on public land.

It is distressing to learn that a fatality has occurred recently in Carrum Downs as a result of illegal mini bike use. This tragedy reinforces Banyule’s resolve to support Frankston City Council’s efforts in establishing ways to deter illegal mini /motor bikes.

CR CRAIG LANGDON Olympia Ward ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 5 October 2015

Page 59

ATTACHMENTS

2.1

World Health Organisation - Age friendly Cities Indicators Meeting Attachment 1

2.2

Alliance for Gambling Reform Attachment 1

3.1

Version C Consent Order Plans....................................................... 79 VCAT Consent Order .................................................................... 109 VicRoads permit conditions ........................................................... 123 VCAT Substitute Plans .................................................................. 125

Review of Opportunities for Advertising Signs on Council Land Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3

5.1

Alliance for Gambling Reform Flyer ................................................. 77

Proposed multistorey mixed use development at 443 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe (P1453/2014) - VCAT Consent Order Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 4

4.3

World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report....................... 62

Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015 ...................... 155 'Best Reserve' Signage Template .................................................. 181 Submissions to the Outdoor Advertising Policy Review ................. 182

Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre Draft Master Plan Attachment 1 Attachment 2

Option 1 Concept - MRFC Draft Master Plan ................................. 185 Option 2 Concept - MRFC Draft Master Plan ................................. 188

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 61

Attachment 1: World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report

Attachment 1

2.1

Item: 2.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 62

2.1

Attachment 1: World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report

Attachment 1

Item: 2.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 63

Attachment 1: World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report

Attachment 1

2.1

Item: 2.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 64

2.1

Attachment 1: World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report

Attachment 1

Item: 2.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 65

Attachment 1: World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report

Attachment 1

2.1

Item: 2.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 66

2.1

Attachment 1: World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report

Attachment 1

Item: 2.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 67

Attachment 1: World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report

Attachment 1

2.1

Item: 2.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 68

2.1

Attachment 1: World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report

Attachment 1

Item: 2.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 69

Attachment 1: World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report

Attachment 1

2.1

Item: 2.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 70

2.1

Attachment 1: World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report

Attachment 1

Item: 2.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 71

Attachment 1: World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report

Attachment 1

2.1

Item: 2.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 72

2.1

Attachment 1: World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report

Attachment 1

Item: 2.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 73

Attachment 1: World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report

Attachment 1

2.1

Item: 2.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 74

2.1

Attachment 1: World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report

Attachment 1

Item: 2.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 75

Attachment 1: World Health Organisation Pilot Site Meeting Report

Attachment 1

2.1

Item: 2.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 76

2.2

Attachment 1: Alliance for Gambling Reform Flyer

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 77

Attachment 1: Alliance for Gambling Reform Flyer

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 78

3.1

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 79

Attachment 1

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 80

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

3.1

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 81

Attachment 1

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 82

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

3.1

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 83

Attachment 1

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 84

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

3.1

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 85

Attachment 1

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 86

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

3.1

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 87

Attachment 1

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 88

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

3.1

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 89

Attachment 1

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 90

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

3.1

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 91

Attachment 1

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 92

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

3.1

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 93

Attachment 1

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 94

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

3.1

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 95

Attachment 1

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 96

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

3.1

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 97

Attachment 1

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 98

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

3.1

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 99

Attachment 1

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 100

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

3.1

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 101

Attachment 1

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 102

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

3.1

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 103

Attachment 1

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 104

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

3.1

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 105

Attachment 1

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 106

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

3.1

Attachment 1: Version C Consent Order Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 107

3.1

Attachment 2: VCAT Consent Order

Attachment 2

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 109

Attachment 2

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 110

Attachment 2: VCAT Consent Order

3.1

Attachment 2: VCAT Consent Order

Attachment 2

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 111

Attachment 2

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 112

Attachment 2: VCAT Consent Order

3.1

Attachment 2: VCAT Consent Order

Attachment 2

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 113

Attachment 2

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 114

Attachment 2: VCAT Consent Order

3.1

Attachment 2: VCAT Consent Order

Attachment 2

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 115

Attachment 2

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 116

Attachment 2: VCAT Consent Order

3.1

Attachment 2: VCAT Consent Order

Attachment 2

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 117

Attachment 2

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 118

Attachment 2: VCAT Consent Order

3.1

Attachment 2: VCAT Consent Order

Attachment 2

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 119

Attachment 2

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 120

Attachment 2: VCAT Consent Order

3.1

Attachment 2: VCAT Consent Order

Attachment 2

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 121

Attachment 2

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 122

Attachment 2: VCAT Consent Order

3.1

Attachment 3: VicRoads permit conditions

Attachment 3

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 123

Attachment 3: VicRoads permit conditions

Attachment 3

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 124

3.1

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

Attachment 4

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 125

Attachment 4

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 126

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

3.1

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

Attachment 4

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 127

Attachment 4

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 128

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

3.1

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

Attachment 4

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 129

Attachment 4

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 130

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

3.1

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

Attachment 4

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 131

Attachment 4

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 132

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

3.1

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

Attachment 4

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 133

Attachment 4

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 134

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

3.1

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

Attachment 4

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 135

Attachment 4

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 136

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

3.1

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

Attachment 4

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 137

Attachment 4

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 138

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

3.1

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

Attachment 4

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 139

Attachment 4

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 140

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

3.1

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

Attachment 4

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 141

Attachment 4

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 142

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

3.1

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

Attachment 4

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 143

Attachment 4

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 144

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

3.1

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

Attachment 4

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 145

Attachment 4

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 146

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

3.1

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

Attachment 4

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 147

Attachment 4

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 148

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

3.1

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

Attachment 4

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 149

Attachment 4

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 150

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

3.1

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

Attachment 4

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 151

Attachment 4

3.1

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 152

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

3.1

Attachment 4: VCAT Substitute Plans

Attachment 4

Item: 3.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 153

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

PART TWO – POLICY SHEETS SPECIFIC LOCATIONS AND TYPES OF SIGNS

Part 2 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 155

Attachment 1

4.3

Item: 4.3

4.3

Item: 4.3

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

1. Signs in the Greensborough Principal Activity Centre

Attachment 1

Context The Greensborough Principal Activity Centre is a place for retail, commercial and entertainment activities and is a place with a strong identity. A consistent landscaping theme and a high level of pedestrian activity is promoted. Main Street’s integrity is to be retained with new building’s facades being two storeys in height with greater bulk behind this facade if required. The entrances to the Centre are to be enhanced as Gateways. The views from the Centre to the open space areas and wooded hills to the north and north-east are to be protected and enhanced.

The landscaped central median strip and extensive nature strip landscaping distinguishes Main Street/Grimshaw Street from other ribbon shopping centres in the City. Reduced through traffic and limited on-street car parking reinforces the pedestrian focus of Main and Grimshaw Streets. The size and mass of the Greensborough Plaza separates this building from others in the Centre. From the entry points on the Circuit, the Greensborough Plaza can be considered a Freestanding Centre.

Eight distinct development precincts have been identified within the Greensborough Principal Activity Centre (Plan 1 within the Municipal Strategic Statement at Clause 21.08 indicates the precinct boundaries). Consideration should be given to the style and location of signage in each precinct to ensure consistency in design and siting.

Specific Objectives • To allow signs to contribute to a lively day time and night time character in the Centre.

• To ensure that signs respond to the architecture of the building and the landscaping and setting of the Centre and the individual precinct in which the site is located.

• To reduce the visual clutter of signs on Main and Grimshaw Streets to ensure the effectiveness of the message and to enhance the streetscape.

• To standardise the dimensions of under verandah signs to increase ease of comprehension unless unique design circumstances exist.

• To avoid signage structures which increase the overall height of the parapet wall or verandah fascia to an inconsistent standard with the built form in the immediate area.

Part 2 – Section 1 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

The Purpose of Signs

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 156

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

Main & Grimshaw Streets In general, signs in Main and Grimshaw Streets should aim to be attractive to pedestrians.

4.3

Item: 4.3

•

Internally illuminated under-verandah lightbox signs;

•

non-illuminated verandah fascia signs;

•

attractive window displays; and

• above verandah signs (to attract pedestrians from further away) where they are located flush to the wall to maintain the continuity of the streetscape and are designed to enhance the streetscape and respond to the character of the building.

Where the rear of buildings are visible from car parks or other public access viewpoints, such as on the east side of Main Street and the south side of Grimshaw Street, signs should consist of a simple message and notice of a walkway through to the street, if appropriate.

Greensborough Plaza Signs which identify the Greensborough Plaza and have a consistent theme are encouraged. The signs external to the building should identify the Plaza itself rather than a proliferation of individual signs identifying the various tenants. Master or directory signs are encouraged. Seasonal or festive decorations of the building’s exterior are also encouraged. Signs within the Plaza are exempt from this policy as they cannot be seen outside the building.

The Gateways Sites at the Gateways to the Centre are important entry points to the Centre. Signs at these sensitive locations should enhance the visual appearance of these entry points and should include landscaping consistent with the District Centre theme planting where possible. The existing signs at the Centre Gateways fulfil important traffic, directional and parking control functions. Pedestrian access points are also identified. It is important that any new signs, not interfere or conflict with important “information” or traffic signage.

Part 2 – Section 1 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

Major Promotion Signs

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 157

Attachment 1

Examples of such signs are:

4.3

Item: 4.3

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

Major Promotion Signs should only be supported in limited circumstances at key entry points to the centre. The amount of major promotion signs visible from any one point should be limited to ensure that the signs do not detract from the built form, surrounding landscape, or capacity of externally facing tenancies to convey appropriate business identification signage (particularly for smaller tenancies) without imposing visual clutter.

Signs which are not encouraged

Attachment 1

Sky, panel, animated, illuminated fascia, “V”- board, and bunting signs.

2. Signs in Freestanding Centre’s Context In the City of Banyule, the following places are described as Freestanding Centres: Bell Street Mall (The Mall), Diamond Village, Warringal Village, Heidelberg Safeway, Ivanhoe Plaza.

These Centres tend to attract patrons who drive directly there. All provide large areas for vehicular access and car parking. Each has a distinct and self-contained architectural style. Where a Centre contains specialty shops around the perimeter of a major tenant (such as a Supermarket) or is in a mall configuration, the specialty shops can be treated similarly to shops in the ribbon shopping centres.

Landscaping of the car parking area, site and building perimeter is encouraged. Clear trunk trees and ground level planting will retain a view of the Centre and enhance the site and surrounds. New signs should be respectful of urban improvement initiatives.

Specific Objectives •

To encourage simple, uncluttered and coordinated signs.

•

To encourage combined Master signs.

•

To discourage signs above the parapet or roof line.

•

To discourage signs which directly abut or unnecessarily face residential areas.

• To ensure illuminated signs do not cause light spill or glare into residential areas or distract road users.

Part 2 – Section 2 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 158

4.3

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

Attachment 1

Item: 4.3

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 159

4.3

Item: 4.3

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

The Purpose of Signs In general, signs should inform motorists and pedestrians of what shops, activities or services exist in the Centre and direct pedestrians to the entry.

Examples of such signs are: • single freestanding Master Sign announcing the Centre and listing its tenancies; and

Attachment 1

•

signs located at the entry to the building.

Speciality shops can be treated similarly to shops within Ribbon Shopping Centres.

Signs which are not encouraged Sky, panel, animated, bunting and promotion signs.

Part 2 – Section 2 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 160

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

3. Signs in Ribbon Activity Centres

4.3

Item: 4.3

Most of the retail areas in the City of Banyule are alongside roads which carry varying amounts of traffic. There are a large number such centres in the municipality ranging from small groups of shops in residential areas to larger centres including Watsonia, Heidelberg Central, and Rosanna. Many were developed in the 1950s and 1960s as the suburban areas of the City expanded.

In the older areas such as Heidelberg, much of the activity centre development occurred between 1915 and 1940. The Centres of Eaglemont, Ivanhoe, East Ivanhoe and Montmorency have been identified as centres of special significance, are mostly affected by Heritage controls, and are referred to separately in Section 4.

Ribbon Activity Centres generally consist of single or double storey buildings with verandahs or canopies protruding over the footpaths. Many of the smaller centres were built as one development and share a common architectural style.

Typically there is either parallel or angled on-street car parking in front of the shops. In some centres, street beautification works including improved street furniture and upgraded footpath paving has occurred.

Specific Objectives •

To encourage signs which enhance the cohesiveness of the Centre.

•

To encourage signs which respond to the architecture of the building(s).

• To reduce the visual clutter of signs to ensure the effectiveness of the message and to enhance the streetscape.

• To ensure there is equal access to advertising space and that signs do not adversely affect the advertising capability of adjoining or nearby premises.

•

To discourage signs above the parapet or roof line.

• To ensure that illuminated signs do not cause light spill or glare into residential areas nor distract road users.

The Purpose of Signs Signs in these Centres should aim to be attractive to pedestrians and to identify businesses for passing motorists. Examples of such signs are: •

non-illuminated verandah fascia signs Part 2 – Section 3 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 161

Attachment 1

Context

4.3

Item: 4.3

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

•

internally illuminated under-verandah lightbox signs

•

attractive window displays

• above verandah signs where they are located flush to the wall to maintain the continuity of the streetscape and are designed to enhance the streetscape and respond to the character of the building.

Attachment 1

In particular, verandah fascia’s contribute significantly to the character of these streets and should be carefully treated. Verandah awnings are functional for protecting premises from direct sunlight or rain however they are not appropriate for signs or to be left down at all times.

Where the rear of buildings are visible from car parks, signs should consist of a simple message and notice of a walkway through to the street, if applicable.

Signs which are not encouraged Sky, panel, animated, illuminated fascia, “V”- board, verandah awning signs, bunting and promotion signs.

Part 2 – Section 3 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 162

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

4. Signs in Activity Centres of Special Significance and Heritage Controls

4.3

Item: 4.3

Context

Eaglemont The Eaglemont Shopping Centre is the most intact commercial development within Banyule. The shopping centre is a distinctive and enclosed urban entity, defined by its relatively narrow street width, predominantly two-storey building height and repetitive shop design with continuous parapets and canopy line.

East Ivanhoe The shopping centre is part of the Beauview Estate which was developed as the fourth Jennings’ estate in Melbourne. That Estate is of local historical significance. The shopping centre is substantially intact and is an integral part of the estate.

Ivanhoe The Ivanhoe Shopping Centre is of local historical and social significance. It is a traditional strip shopping centre sited on one of the earliest thoroughfares in the area and represents a range of building forms, including some from the 19th century, but is predominantly form the period c1915-1940. The character of the Centre is dominated by austere commercial style which preceded and followed World War One. It is a dominant part of Banyule’s urban fabric and is the most homogenous of Banyule’s two largest strip shopping centres.

Montmorency Were Street is lined on both sides with shops, predominantly single storey but some two-storey. The Centre is characteristic of the post-war period and is of local interest as an intact 1950’s and 1960’s local shopping centre.

Specific Objectives • To ensure signs are designed and located to conserve and enhance these Centres.

•

To promote signs which enhance the cohesiveness of these Centres.

Part 2 – Section 4 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 163

Attachment 1

Within the City of Banyule there are numerous examples of buildings and areas of architectural and historic significance. Four commercial areas have been identified as of heritage significance, including Eaglemont, East Ivanhoe, Ivanhoe and Montmorency Shopping Centres. Careful consideration should be given to the design of any advertising in these centres.

4.3

Item: 4.3

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

The Purpose of Signs Signs in these Centres should aim to be attractive to pedestrians and to identify businesses for passing motorists.

Attachment 1

Examples of such signs are: • non-illuminated verandah fascia signs; •

under-verandah signs;

•

attractive window displays.

Applicants should consider using floodlit signs as they may be more in character than internally illuminated signs. Lettering which imitates or responds to styles used in the 1920s and 1930s is also encouraged as it is considered to be more in character with the Centre.

Due to the need to maintain the integrity of these buildings, sign opportunities will be more limited.

Signs which are not encouraged Sky, panel, animated, “V”-board, internally illuminated, bunting and promotion signs.

Part 2 – Section 4 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 164

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

5. Signs in Industrial Areas

4.3

Item: 4.3

Context Banyule’s principal area of industrial activity is located in Heidelberg West with other significant areas in Greensborough and Bundoora. Buildings in these areas range considerably in size and height but most are set back from the street to allow car parking, access to loading bays and landscaping. Multiple occupancies on the one site are common.

•

To ensure signs enhance the appearance of the building or site.

•

To minimise visual clutter and disruption.

•

To encourage a coordinated approach in multiple occupancy sites.

• To ensure signs are located so as not to adversely impact on the advertising capability of adjacent premises.

The Purpose of Signs The purpose of signs in these areas should be to direct clients to the site. Such signs need only describe the operator and business.

Examples of signs which serve this purpose are: • a sign on the face of the building in a similar location to those on adjoining buildings.

•

a freestanding Master sign (for multiple occupancy sites).

Signs which are not encouraged Sky, panel, “V”-board, animated, bunting and promotion signs.

Part 2 – Section 5 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 165

Attachment 1

Specific Objectives

4.3

Item: 4.3

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

6. Signs in Stand Alone Premises Context

Attachment 1

Stand Alone Premises are attracted to main road locations as their clients are generally motorists passing by. The buildings are often set back from the street with car parking or concrete aprons at the front. Such Premises are often located next to or near residential properties. Examples include Convenience Restaurants, Petrol Stations, and Car Wash Centres.

Signs on these developments must be able to attract the attention of passing traffic yet should not intrude into nearby residential areas.

Specific Objectives • To encourage clear coordinated signs.

• To encourage complementary landscaping using tall “clean trunk” trees and low ground cover.

• To discourage signs adjacent to residential properties or signs which cause light spill or nuisance to such properties.

The Purpose of Signs Signs for Stand Alone Centres should identify the business and direct customers to the premises. They should also enhance the building or site.

Examples of signs which serve this purpose are: • Illuminated or non-illuminated Pole sign: - one sign per premises.

• Direction sign: - one to each entry.

• Limited wall or building fascia sign.

• Illuminated or non-illuminated canopy fascia sign.

Signs which are not encouraged Sky, panel, above verandah, “V”-board, animated signs, promotion and bunting signs.

Part 2 – Section 6 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 166

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

7. Signs for Freestanding Offices

4.3

Item: 4.3

Context

As the City of Banyule is generally suburban in character, most freestanding offices are adjacent to or nearby residential areas. Signs need to respond to this setting and complement any landscaping associated with the office building to maintain and enhance this residential setting.

Specific Objectives • To provide an appropriate image for the building and its tenants.

• To locate signs on wall spaces designed for this purpose and not obscure architectural features such as windows and parapets.

• To encourage complementary landscaping.

• To locate signs on the ground floor ceiling line and in the case of single storey buildings below the top of the parapet or fascia of the building.

• To encourage limited freestanding signs in the building setback.

The Purpose of Signs Signs for Freestanding Offices should identify the street address of the building and identify the main tenant or tenants.

Examples of signs likely to serve this purpose are: • Limited non-illuminated wall, canopy, or building fascia sign.

• Limited freestanding signs within the building setback.

Signs which are not encouraged Sky, panel, animated, bunting, promotion and pole signs.

Part 2 – Section 7 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 167

Attachment 1

In general, less outdoor advertising is required for freestanding offices than for retail areas. External signs giving corporate or head tenant identification are common with other tenants being identified on internal directory boards. The purpose of such signs is to identify the street address, provide direction for visitors and to establish corporate identity.

4.3

Item: 4.3

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

8. Signs in Residential Areas Context

Attachment 1

Certain commercial and community uses such as medical centres, churches, milk bars, community halls, child care centres and nurseries can be located in residential areas if they are granted a planning permit. Occupants of any dwelling can also run a business from home if it complies with the Banyule Planning Scheme requirements with respect to a Home Occupation.

As expectations in residential areas include high levels of privacy and amenity, signs associated with non-residential uses should not dominate the residential setting. Some residential areas have been identified as of heritage significance and signs in those areas should be designed and located having regard to that heritage context. Signs associated with uses on main roads may be more prominent than those in local streets, given reduced residential amenity levels at main road locations.

Specific Objectives • To ensure signs do not impact on residential amenity.

• To ensure signs are of an appropriate design in areas of heritage significance.

• To ensure that signs provide direction and information to customers.

• To ensure that where a site is not adjacent to a road zone as specified in the Banyule Planning Scheme, signs are limited.

The Purpose of Signs A sign in a residential area should identify the business or occupation which occurs at the site. a.

Sites which are located in residential neighbourhoods where the land use is exclusively or predominantly residential and is in a local street is likely to have very high residential amenity. In these neighbourhoods advertising may be erected to identify the business which is conducted on the site.

• Business identification or home occupation sign should be limited to one square metre.

• Signs slightly larger than one square metre may be acceptable in circumstances where the design of the sign is not intrusive or allows for the retention of existing or incorporation of new landscaping.

Part 2 – Section 8 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 168

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

• Milk Bars, neighbourhood convenience stores or other small shops which are surrounded by residential uses will be restricted in the extent of signage if they are not adjacent to a road zone, so as to maintain the residential character of the area.

Sites which are located adjacent to a road zone where traffic volumes are higher and identification is more difficult, may be justified in seeking additional identification signage. Floodlit or illuminated signs may be appropriate for those locations. Illuminated signs should minimise any reflection, glare or light spillage to adjoining dwellings.

In any residential area located adjacent to a road zone signs should: • be located wholly within the boundary of the site and be in a well landscaped setting. They should face the street rather than adjoining residential properties.

• use colours and materials of construction that have regard to the amenity and character of the area.

• be sympathetic to the existing streetscape. This is particularly important for those premises affected by a Heritage Overlay where the architectural and historic significance of the building and neighbourhood should be taken into account.

NOTE:

Stand Alone Premises

Signs proposed for standa lone premises such as convenience stores and restaurants, petrol stations and car wash centres are discussed in Section 6 of this policy. Section 6 - Signs to Stand Alone Premises is available as a separate sheet.

Signs Which Are Not Encouraged Promotion, pole, floodlit and reflective signs.

Part 2 – Section 8 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 169

Attachment 1

b.

4.3

Item: 4.3

4.3

Item: 4.3

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

9. Long Term Signs on Council Land Context

Attachment 1

Long Term signs promoting local sporting teams, clubs or community services or commercial sponsorship of those teams, clubs or services may be appropriate on Council owned or managed land. Such land includes open space, sporting fields, libraries, community centres and maternal and child health centres. In these instances Council plays the dual role of land owner and planning authority.

While Council recognises the role of sponsorship advertising in the development of recreational groups and sporting clubs, at the same time it recognises the wider community’s expectation that its open spaces and other areas of the public environment have limited advertising.

Signs identifying businesses or promoting products sold may be appropriate on footpaths.

Temporary signs on Council land have different requirements. These are outlined separately in Section 10. _

Specific Objectives for Signs on Buildings and Reserves • To allow adequate identification of places and activities.

• To promote groups, activities or events without commercial sponsorship.

undue intrusion of

• To recognise the role of recreational groups and sporting clubs in the community and the role of sponsorship in their development.

• To recognise that the public has the right to expect its open spaces and other areas of the public environment to have a limited amount of advertising signs.

The Purpose of Signs on Buildings and Reserves Signs on Council buildings and reserves should: 1) identify the reserve and/or building and identify the regular occupier user group/s; 2) allow appropriate recognition of sponsorship of specific user groups; and 3) maintain high standards of design and appearance.

Part 2 – Section 9 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 170

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

Examples of signs likely to serve this purpose are: •

One freestanding sign at the frontage of the site identifying the user group/s.

•

Business identification or promotion signs attached to a building.

4.3

Item: 4.3

Number and Location of Signs Signs should be located on structures according to the following criteria: Freestanding signs: A Freestanding sign should be located at the entrance to the reserve to identify the main occupants of the facility and provide recognition of the main sponsors of the group(s).

•

The sign must be located to face a road under management of VicRoads (Road Zone Category One) where applicable.

•

The Size of lettering on any freestanding sign should be generally consistent with The VicRoads Traffic Management Note No 26 – Guidelines for Community Message Signs.

•

The sign must be appropriately sited to ensure that the sign does not directly face and impact on the amenity of an existing dwelling. Where vegetation or topographical features provide sufficient screening, signs may be permitted to a minimum of 25metres from an existing dwelling.

•

The size and layout of the sign should reflect the specifications of the ‘Best Reserve’ signage template (below) which sets out the maximum user group identification component and the maximum promotion/sponsorship component.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 171

Attachment 1

•

4.3

Item: 4.3

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

•

Where there is more than one (1) occupier of the reserve and associated buildings, the applicant must provide written proof of an amicable agreement between such occupiers in relation to the apportionment of signage rights.

Where this is not obtained, the signs will need to be removed at the end of each seasonal allocation for the group that has obtained the sign.

•

The sign should not be permitted in a historically sensitive area.

•

The sign must not be designed in an arch form to ensure that vehicular access to the reserve is not restricted by the height limitation of the sign.

Attachment 1

•

The sign must not be illuminated or floodlit.

•

A freestanding sign will not be supported on sites where there is no pavilion, scoreboard or coaches box. Such signs should only be permitted where no other signs are located intentionally to face outside of the site.

Signs attached to buildings:

• No more than six signs per building or structure are to be permitted and each sign must not exceed a maximum of 2m2 •

The sign(s) should be located so that it integrates well with architectural features of the facade and adopts proportions which are consistent with those used within the design of the facade.

•

Signs shall not be located above the roofline or extending outside the building envelope in any way, including being fixed on a supporting structure at an angle to walls or other parts of the structure.

•

Signs will only be permitted on buildings directly related to the lease, license or seasonal tenancy of the applicant for the sign including pavilions, scoreboards or coaches boxes

•

Signs may be located on a building facade which faces a main road. Where the main road is in a Road Zone Category 1 the consent of VicRoads may be required.

•

Long term advertising signs on structures such as coaches boxes and fences may be supported where the advertising has exposure to an abutting road way.

Part 2 – Section 9 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 172

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

4.3

Item: 4.3

General Requirements:

•

Signs on Council owned or managed land will not be permitted to advertise alcohol, tobacco, gaming, a brothel or escort service.

• Long term signs other than the match signs (see below), will not be approved on other structures such as fences.

Tennis clubs, bowling clubs and the like that have securely fenced facilities may erect limited signs on the inside of these fences provided they are not visible to passersby and the appearance of the back of the sign is not intrusive or unsightly.

Match Signs Council will permit sporting clubs to display temporary advertising signs on buildings, fences, coaches' boxes, goal posts and other such structures, directly relating to the activity, when teams are playing at their grounds. This does to apply to training sessions or registration days, however does include match days and match nights when competing against other clubs. These are “Match only” signs and they shall comply with the following requirements: • No more than one (1) key sign measuring no more than 12 square metres.

Council may provide written approval for a sign slightly larger than 12 square metres where the sign is not considered to be of detriment to the amenity of the nearby area.

• Additional individual signs are permitted but must not be more than 4 square metres in area and must be securely and safely affixed to a structure.

• Advertising on perimeter fences of an oval or pitch should be suitably secured to the fence to reduce player injuries.

• Match Signs may be displayed no more than three hours before the commencement of matches on a particular day and must be removed by the Club or its associates within two hours of the finish of the matches on that day.

• Where a match sign is displayed after 4pm on a match day and is intended to be displayed the following day due to additional matches, then the match sign may remain in place overnight when approved in writing by Council’s Leisure and Cultural Services Department.

• Upon application in writing, goalpost pads with advertising may be permitted on a temporary basis on training nights.

Signs which are not removed in compliance with these requirements may be impounded by an authorised officer. The organisation or individual responsible may incur a penalty and be required to pay the costs associated with impounding the sign.

Part 2 – Section 9 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 173

Attachment 1

•

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

4.3

Item: 4.3

Design Requirements

Attachment 1

All signs attached to a building or structure should be non-illuminated, screen printed or painted, flat signs, securely fixed to the building façade or structure in such a manner that, when the signs are removed, the fixing points of the building can be readily made good so that the appearance of the buildings is not degraded.

All freestanding signs must be durable, attractive and designed to ensure structural integrity. The sign must be of solid construction, preferably incorporating the use of high quality and permanent materials.

Internally illuminated, floodlit, pole, reflective and above verandah signs are not encouraged.

Ongoing Requirements Should Council grant approval for the erection and display of signage on Council land, it is likely that the following restrictions may be applied to any approval issued: •

The signage must not be floodlit or illuminated by external or internal lights.

• The signage must be maintained in good condition to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, including the removal of any graffiti as soon as possible.

• The signage must be located wholly within the boundaries of the subject land.

• The signage must not advertise tobacco, alcohol, gaming, a brothel or escort service or other advertising which may be deemed to be inappropriate or offensive by Council.

Part 2 – Section 9 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 174

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

Where Council issues planning approval for a sign specifically supported by the Outdoor Advertising Policy, it is likely that a fifteen (15) year expiry will apply, as provided for by the Banyule Planning Scheme. Where Council consents to the display of other signage, it is likely that a reduced sign expiry of five (5) or ten (10) years (depending on the nature of the sign) will be imposed.

4.3

Item: 4.3

Specific Objectives for Signs on Footpaths • To ensure pedestrian movement is not obstructed.

“A” board signs are only appropriate where they do not impede pedestrian movement on the footpath. “A” board signs will not be supported if they add to visual clutter within any shopping centre. Further information concerning signs on footpaths are detailed in Councils Local Law No. 1 - Part 2.

Permits for Signs on Footpaths An applicant seeking to place a sign on Council land will generally require a planning permit and Council’s written approval as manager/owner of the land.

Local Laws Permit Local Laws advertising sign permits expire on a common expiry date and a new permit will need to be obtained each year.

Signs Which Are Not Permitted Signs on Council owned or managed land will not be permitted to advertise tobacco, alcohol, gaming, a brothel or escort service or other advertising which may be deemed to be inappropriate or offensive by Council.

Signage painted on sporting fields and ovals will also not be permitted.

In addition, promotion signs which rename the public place based on commercial sponsorship are inappropriate and present risks to public safety due to potential confusion between registered place names and emergency services. These signs will not be permitted.

Part 2 – Section 9 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 175

Attachment 1

The Purpose of Signs on Footpaths

4.3

Item: 4.3

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

10. Temporary Signs

Attachment 1

Context Other sections deal with signs which are long term fixtures. This section relates to temporary signs, i.e. signs which are displayed for a limited period (except for match day signs on Council reserves which are considered in Section 9).

Such signs can be on private or Council owned land. Temporary signs are often used to promote local educational, political, religious, social or cultural events or the sale of goods or the sale or lease of a property. They are often displayed at schools, churches, public halls, vacant land and buildings for sale or lease.

Specific Objectives • To promote local educational, cultural, religious, social or recreational events.

• To enable the sale or lease of real estate and other goods.

• To ensure that signs respond to the building or setting and the surrounding area.

• To encourage signs of the minimum possible size which are erected for the shortest possible time necessary to reasonably perform their function.

• To ensure that signs do not affect residential amenity.

The Purpose of Signs Temporary signs should identify a particular event or activity and have a limited impact on the surrounding area.

Examples of signs likely to meet this purpose are: • only one sign on each frontage of the site; • signs for the sale or lease of a property being confined to the subject site; • community notice boards limited to one per property; • community notice boards with a maximum of 15% of the total sign area showing sponsor advertising.

Permit Requirements Temporary signs relating to community events or property sales which are displayed on private property generally do not require a planning permit.

However this should be verified in relation to any particular sign by contacting the Development Planning Section.

Part 2 – Section 10 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 176

general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

4.3

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

Attachment 1

Item: 4.3

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 177

4.3

Item: 4.3

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

However for temporary signs on Council owned land a permit will be required under Council’s Local Law (Local Law No. 1 – General Local Law, Schedule 3).

Applicants are advised to contact Council’s Administration and Laws Unit in these instances.

Requirements for Temporary Signs on Council Land

Attachment 1

Some Council owned sites may, subject to written approval, be used by a charitable organisation or local community group for the display of a temporary sign promoting a local educational, cultural, religious, social or recreational event not held for commercial purposes.

For the purposes of the policy: • a charitable organisation is one that can demonstrate to the satisfaction of Council that at least 75% of funds collected from its fundraising activities are used directly for the relief of some aspect of poverty, suffering or social distress.

• a local community group is one that can demonstrate to the satisfaction of Council that it is a non-profit group which provides a service to the community in general, or to a particular section of it and which has a principal objective the enhancement of the wellb eing of residents of Banyule.

Location details, standard permit conditions and standard dimensions for any sign are provided on the Local Law application form.

Such a sign may with a permit also be displayed on Council owned land which is the site of the event referred to on the sign.

Signs on Council owned or managed land will not be permitted to advertise alcohol, tobacco, gaming, a brothel or escort service.

Electronic or Variable Message Signs will not be permitted within the road reserve unless for traffic management purposes, community safety messages or as otherwise authorised by the relevant road authority.

Part 2 – Section 10 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 178

The following 18 sites have been nominated to allow ‘two’ community notice boards per site with approval from the Local Laws Section: No. 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

RESERVE

LOCATION OF SIGN

Sparks Reserve (Melway Ref: 31 D10) Burke Road North Reserve (Melway Ref: 31 K10) Yulong Park (Melway Ref 9 K12) Greensborough War Memorial (Melway Ref 20 H2) Road Reserve, Karingal Drive (Melway Ref: 21 D1) Malcolm Blair Reserve (Melway Ref: 21 E2) Yandell Reserve (Melway Ref: 21 B1) Bolton Street Road Reserve (Melway Ref: 21 G9) Montmorency Park (Melway Ref): 21 B6 Rosanna Parklands (Melway Ref: 20 B9) Malahang Reserve (Melway Ref: 19 F12) A K Lines Reserve (Melway Ref: 20 E2) Greensborough Park (Melway Ref: 10 J12) Ivanhoe Park (Melway Ref: 31 H8) De Winton Park (Melway Ref: 32 B1) Warringal Parklands (Melway Ref: 32 E3) Heidelberg Park (Melway Ref: 32 C3) Ford Park (Melway Ref:31 E3)

The Boulevard and Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe

4.3

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

The Boulevard near Burke Road North, Ivanhoe East. Note: Part of this site is owned by VicRoads Bent Street and Plenty Road, Bundoora Corner Esther and Henry Street, Greensborough Karingal Drive opposite intersection with St Helena Road, Greensborough Corner Weidlich Road and Karingal Drive, Greensborough St. Helena Road, Greensborough Corner of Bolton Street and Cressy Street, Eltham Para Road, near Rattray Road, Montmorency Corner of Chapman Street and Thomson Drive, Macleod Corner of Southern and Oriel Roads, Heidelberg West Grimshaw Street, Watsonia Diamond Creek Road, Greensborough Lower Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe East Grove Road, Rosanna Beverley Road, Heidelberg Beverley Road Heidelberg Banksia Street, Bellfield

Part 2 – Section 10 These documents should be read in conjunction with Part 1 which outlines general principles for Outdoor Advertising signs in the City of Banyule.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 179

Attachment 1

Item: 4.3

4.3

Item: 4.3

Attachment 1: Revised Outdoor Advertising Policy - October 2015

Contravention of the Local Law

Attachment 1

Any sign erected on Council land or on a Road Reserve in contravention of the Local Law may be impounded by an Authorised Officer. The organisation or individual responsible may incur a penalty and required to pay the costs associated in impounding the sign.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 180

4.3

Attachment 2: 'Best Reserve' Signage Template

Attachment 2

Item: 4.3

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 181

Attachment 3: Submissions to the Outdoor Advertising Policy Review

Attachment 3

4.3

Item: 4.3

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 182

4.3

Attachment 3: Submissions to the Outdoor Advertising Policy Review

Attachment 3

Item: 4.3

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 183

Attachment 3: Submissions to the Outdoor Advertising Policy Review

Attachment 3

4.3

Item: 4.3

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 184

5.1

Attachment 1: Option 1 Concept - MRFC Draft Master Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 185

Attachment 1: Option 1 Concept - MRFC Draft Master Plan

Attachment 1

5.1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 186

5.1

Attachment 1: Option 1 Concept - MRFC Draft Master Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 187

Attachment 2: Option 2 Concept - MRFC Draft Master Plan

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 188

5.1

Attachment 2: Option 2 Concept - MRFC Draft Master Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 189

Attachment 2: Option 2 Concept - MRFC Draft Master Plan

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 190

5.1

Attachment 2: Option 2 Concept - MRFC Draft Master Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 5 OCTOBER 2015 Page 191