Ordinary Meeting of Council Council Chambers, Service Centre 275 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe 9 June 2015 commencing at 7.45 pm 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 and to the Elders of other Aboriginal peoples who may be present here today” Apologies and Leave of Absence Confirmation of Minutes Ordinary Meeting of Council held 25 May 2015 Disclosure of Interests Presentations Launch of “Internet Forever” film REPORTS: 1. Petitions Nil 2. People – Community Strengthening and Support 2.1 Olympic Village Learning Hub - Olympic Neighbourhood House ............................. 3 2.2 Victorian State Disability Plan - Council Submission .............................................. 7 3. Planet – Environmental Sustainability Nil 4. Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
AGENDA (Cont’d) 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9
Draft Banyule Integrated Transport Plan ............................................................... 11 Ivanhoe Grammar School Development Plan 2015-2021 ..................................... 16 North East Link - Quarterly Report ........................................................................ 34 Proposed nine to ten storey mixed use building at 4-6 Flintoff Street, Greensborough ......................................................................................... 38 Draft Heidelberg and Bell Street Mall Parking Plan ............................................... 56 Update on the Neighbourhood Residential Zone................................................... 61 Banksia Redevelopment Site and Banksia Community Stadium Precinct Project Update (Former Banksia Secondary College) ............................. 66 Proposed apartment building at 13-17 Cartmell St Heidelberg .............................. 74 Planning Scheme Amendment C93 - Ivanhoe Activity Centre ............................... 93
5. Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life 5.1 Scheduled Special Council Meeting for 22 June 2015 - change to Ordinary Council Meeting ..................................................................................... 99 6. Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely 6.1 Review of Opportunities for Advertising Signs on Council Land .......................... 101 6.2 Carbon Tax Repeal Assessment......................................................................... 110 6.3 Additional Paid Parking Locations ....................................................................... 117 6.4 Items for Noting .................................................................................................. 130 6.5 Assembly of Councillors ...................................................................................... 131 6.6 1 Kalparrin Avenue Greensborough - New Lease - Commence statutory procedures ........................................................................................... 136 7. Sealing of Documents 7.1 Sealing of Documents ........................................................................................ 141 8. Notices of Motion 8.1 Request Meeting with the Minister for Local Government ................................... 143 9. General Business 10. Urgent Business Closure of Meeting to the Public That in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989, Council close the Meeting to members of the public and adjourn for five minutes to allow the public to leave the Chamber prior to considering the following confidential matter 11. Confidential Matters 11.1 contractual matters 11.2 contractual matters; AND legal advice 11.3 contractual matters s:
Matters Discussed in Camera That all confidential matters and reports related to the above items remain confidential unless otherwise specified. Closure of Meeting
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 2
2.1
OLYMPIC VILLAGE LEARNING HUB OLYMPIC NEIGHBOURHOOD HOUSE
Author:
Penelope Le Petit - Project Officer, Community Programs
Ward:
Olympia
File:
F2015/167
2.1
People – Community Strengthening and Support
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to update Council on progress of Stage Two of the redevelopment of the 1.68 hectare Department of Education and Training (DET) site in Olympic Village. Stage Two being a neighbourhood house to service Olympic Village and surrounds which will help to redress the current longstanding disadvantage in the area. A situational analysis and development options proposal for a new Olympic Neighbourhood House (ONH) was undertaken by consultants Lateral Projects and Development in 2014. With the proposed next steps to explore negotiations with Olympic Adult Education Inc. (OAE) as proposed future ONH lead tenant, options for a purpose built neighbourhood house to complement plans for a learning hub in Olympic Village. The project seeks Councils’ endorsement and support to advance stage 2 of the learning hub and formalise Council’s commitment to the development of a neighbourhood house for Olympic Village with OAE as the lead tenant and continue to explore external funding opportunities leveraging OAE committed funds towards the construction costs. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.
Confirm it’s in principal support to progress Stage Two Development of the Olympic Village Learning Hub – Olympic Neighbourhood House.
2.
Authorise relevant officers to discuss with State and Federal Governments and other potential project partners in an effort to leverage Olympic Adult Education’s committed capital funds to obtain further funding.
OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 3
2.1
People – Community Strengthening and Support
OLYMPIC VILLAGE LEARNING HUB - OLYMPIC NEIGHBOURHOOD HOUSE cont’d CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “provide services for people at important life stages”. BACKGROUND Plans to provide a range of purpose designed facilities to redress current longstanding disadvantage in Heidelberg West is progressing. The redevelopment of the 1.68 hectare Department of Education and Training (DET) site in Olympic Village is underway with a new Child and Family Centre. Charles La Trobe College - Olympic Village Junior School, the new child and family centre, the refurbishment of an existing building into a community gym & arts centre and a neighbourhood house complete the vision for the Olympic Village Learning Hub. In September 2014, as part of a brief prepared by Banyule City Council, consultants Lateral Projects and Development undertook a situational analysis and development options proposal for a new Olympic Neighbourhood House (ONH) to service Heidelberg West and surrounds. Council sought to explore, with Olympic Adult Education Inc. (OAE) as lead tenant, options for a purpose built neighbourhood house to complement plans for a learning hub in Olympic Village. OAE is currently the key provider of adult education and neighbourhood house services in the Heidelberg West area. Based across three geographical sites, Southern Road Council site, Charles La Trobe College Olympic Campus and Banyule Community Health Centre, OAE program planning suffers from disjointed locations with restricted afterhours access and limited tenure. In addition, community organisations run essential services from the current OAE facilities (i.e. Combined Pensioners Group.) Together these issues are the key drivers in the support for a new consolidated development with an expanded neighbourhood house component. A new neighbourhood house also supports the Learning hub’s ambition to: Create pathways for learning and education across all age groups Provide crucial intervention and support for students and families and to Improve local service integration. Joint Community Infrastructure Plan Council is currently a partner to City of Darebin’s Joint Community Infrastructure Plan (JCIP), a project under the banner of Northland Urban Renewal Precinct. Together with La Trobe University and the Victorian State Departments’ of Health and Housing, Environment, Land, Water & Planning and Metropolitan Planning Authority, a joint study is currently being undertaken by ASR Research into shared service delivery for Heidelberg West, Preston East and La Trobe University areas along Darebin Creek. A neighbourhood house to accommodate population growth in the Northland/ Heidelberg West area is on this group’s agenda. Locality Plan The boundary of Olympic Village Learning Hub is Southern Road, Alamein Road, Marobe Street and Oriel Road, Heidelberg West.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 4
OLYMPIC VILLAGE LEARNING HUB - OLYMPIC NEIGHBOURHOOD HOUSE cont’d CURRENT SITUATION In November 2014, Mr John Nota, Chairperson of Olympic Adult Education Inc. corresponded with Council outlining Olympic Adult Education’s (OAE) continued support to the Olympic Village integrated community learning hub and outlining OAE’s proposed financial commitment to progressing rapidly the construction and completion of a new Olympic neighbourhood house on the hub site. As such, in principle and in return for a long term lease of ONH at subsidised rates, OAE wrote that they were prepared to make the following offer: ‘$300,000 towards the total project cost of $1.75 million, payable in installments to Banyule City Council (BCC) upon certain milestones being achieved (the milestones to be agreed between BCC and OAE). (This amount provided by OAE will be sourced out of OAE’s cash reserves); $500,000 towards the total project cost of $1.75 million, payable in installments to BCC upon certain milestones being achieved (the milestones to be agreed between BCC and OAE). (This amount will be sought from various philanthropic bodies and passed through OAE to BCC). In summary, OAE is prepared to offer BCC 45% of the total projected project cost of $1.8 million (an asset to be owned by BCC on Department of Education and Training land) in return for becoming the manager and long term tenant of ONH, subject to the term of the lease and annual lease rental being acceptable to OAE. At its November 2014 meeting, the Committee of Management resolved to progress OAE obtaining charitable status. Based on the success of similar organisations such as OAE obtaining philanthropic donations and gifts for the construction of facilities similar to ONH, the COM is confident that OAE will be able to raise $500,000 towards the construction of ONH.’ (Information from OAE letter to Council) OAE would be pleased to discuss this concept further and work towards agreeing the concept in greater detail, including the establishment of the project milestones. CONCLUSION A neighbourhood house for Olympic Village and surrounds will help to redress the current longstanding disadvantage in the area. To further advance the neighbourhood house project, Council staff will progress negotiations with the Victorian Department of Education and Training on Council’s behalf, to seek a deed of agreement to lease with conditions of both usage and tenure, the rear of Charles Latrobe Secondary Collage Olympic Village Campus. The project will seek Councils’ endorsement and support for Stage Two development of the learning hub and formalise Council’s commitment to the development of a neighbourhood house for Olympic Village with OAE as the lead tenant. Plans can then be made for further concept discussion with Olympic Adult Education Committee of Management and a project working group formed. Pending Council’s endorsement, Council staff will continue to explore external funding opportunities leveraging OAE committed funds towards the construction of ONH.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 5
2.1
People – Community Strengthening and Support
2.1
People – Community Strengthening and Support
OLYMPIC VILLAGE LEARNING HUB - OLYMPIC NEIGHBOURHOOD HOUSE cont’d
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
OLYMPIC NEIGHBOURHOOD HOUSE - Situational Analysis & Development Options. Heidelberg West 3081
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 146
Page 6
2.2
People – Community Strengthening and Support
2.2
VICTORIAN STATE DISABILITY PLAN COUNCIL SUBMISSION
Author:
Shawn Neilsen - Inclusion Access & Equity Social Planner, Community Programs
File:
F2015/167
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Victorian Government, through the Victorian Disability Advisory Council has invited Local Government to provide submissions regarding the development of the new State Disability Plan 2017 - 2020. Officers have consulted with Council’s Disability Inclusion and Advisory Committee and other Council departments to prepare a response. The draft submission advocates for opportunities for Banyule’s local people with a disability to be reflected and addressed through the development of the next State Disability Plan. RECOMMENDATION That Council endorse the submission (attached) to the State Government regarding the development of the new State Disability Plan 2017 - 2020. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “promote and support health and wellbeing”. BACKGROUND On 17 March 2015, the Minister for Housing, Disability and Ageing announced the development of a new State Disability Plan for 2017-2020. The Victorian Disability Advisory Council’s (VDAC) is a group appointed to provide timely, well informed and strategic advice to the Minister for Housing, Disability and Ageing. VDAC are undertaking early targeted consultations on the development of the State Disability Plan for 2017-2020 and have invited Local Government to respond. The next State Disability Plan 2017-2020 will be informed by both the findings and recommendations of the Family and Community Development Committee’s Inquiry
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 7
2.2
People – Community Strengthening and Support
VICTORIAN STATE DISABILITY PLAN - COUNCIL SUBMISSION cont’d into Social Inclusion and Victorians with Disability and further submission and consultation processes. ADVOCACY This basis of this report is to advocate for improved social and economic participation of Victorians with a disability through the development of the State Governments new Disability Plan 2017 – 2020. 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. The Victorian State Disability Plan aims to support people with a disability to participate in community life and to protect people against discrimination. It is considered that Council’s submission advocates to enhance and protect the rights of people with a disability reflected within the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities. CURRENT SITUATION The Victorian State Disability Plan expires in 2016. Preliminary consultations have begun to inform the development of the new State Plan. The Victorian Disability Advisory Council (VDAC) has invited Local Government to provide early feedback as to the future directions of the next State Plan. CONSULTATION Council’s Disability Inclusion Advisory Committee and internal staff have been consulted in the development of this report. DISCUSSION The purpose of the Victorian Disability Advisory Council’s (VDAC) invitation for comment from local government is to assist with the development of the next State Disability Plan. Five broad questions were asked of Council which reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of the current State Plan, opportunities for improvement as well as identifying particular local issues. Council’s response has incorporated themes from its own Disability Action Plan, together with consultation feedback from Banyule’s Disability Inclusion Advisory Committee, and Council Officers. The five broad questions are: 1. What sort of structures do you have in place to engage with people with a disability in your local council area?
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 8
People – Community Strengthening and Support
2.2
VICTORIAN STATE DISABILITY PLAN - COUNCIL SUBMISSION cont’d 2. In submissions made to the Inquiry into Social Inclusion and Victorians with Disability (Sept 2014), Councils and communities identified a number of priorities to full social and economic participation of people living with a disability, including: I. II. III. IV. V.
Physical infrastructure and accessibility to the built environment Social inclusion through increased participation in community life Economic participation and independence Locally-focused initiatives to improve social inclusion and Reducing attitudinal barriers and discriminatory practices in the community
Do these points reflect the issues that exist in your community? What does your community see as the top three priorities for government in this area? (provide examples & attachments if desired) 3. Strengths: What features of the SDP 2013-2016 have enabled Councils and communities to influence change? How and why have these features helped? Please provide examples. 4. Improvements: How can the next State Disability Plan provide a more effective guide or tool for councils to influence change within their local communities? Please provide examples. 5. Finally, what do you think is needed to increase the economic and social participation of people with a disability in your community? Please provide your response in the box below, including any additional information we should consider in developing the next State Disability Plan The nature of the submission is high level and strategic, and relates to the Victorian Government’s State Disability Plan. Council is currently in the process of re- revising its own Disability Action Plan which will identify local opportunities and projects for Banyule. CONCLUSION Council’s submission to the Victorian State Disability Plan consultation captures a broad picture of opportunities for Local Government and local issues facing people with a disability and their families. The purpose of the submission is to advocate that the issues and opportunities for Local Government and of local people with a disability be reflected and addressed through the development of the next State Disability Plan.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
State Disability Plan - Banyule Council Submission - May 2015
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 163
Page 9
4.1
DRAFT BANYULE INTEGRATED TRANSPORT PLAN
Author:
Bailey Byrnes - Transport Planning Team Leader, City Development
File:
F2013/623
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council has worked with the local community and other key stakeholders to prepare the draft Banyule Integrated Transport Plan (BITP). This draft document has been prepared to give long-term direction in transport and land use decisions in the municipality. The draft BITP has been shaped by community input and local expertise. Information collected through consultation to date has been used to develop the plan’s vision and themes, as well as the supporting strategies. The draft is now ready for further consultation. Responses to the draft will help inform a final BITP. The final document will provide an overall framework to address transport issues, and create a more accessible, safe, liveable and sustainable community. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.
Approve the draft Banyule Integrated Transport Plan for consultation until 14 August 2015.
2.
Receive a further report in November 2015, to consider the consultation received and adopt the final Banyule Integrated Transport Plan.
OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “support sustainable transport”. 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
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 11
4.1
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.1
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
DRAFT BANYULE INTEGRATED TRANSPORT PLAN cont’d recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. It is considered that the draft BITP enhances and protects the following Human Rights: Your right to life (section 9) The accessibility of essential services is important in ensuring the community have access to medical care and associated facilities. The BITP further enhances this right by encouraging alternative transport modes to these services. Your right to take part in public life (section 18) Ensuring the community is able to attend public and council meetings contributes to well-informed decision making involving the community. This right is further enhanced by ensuring the key destinations, including Council facilities, are universally accessible. Right to protection of cultural rights (section 19) The community is becoming more culturally and linguistically diverse. These differences may restrict access to some transport modes, reducing the ability to connect to social, education and employment opportunities. The BITP ensures cultural and language differences are considered when planning and providing transport services and information. BACKGROUND Council’s Integrated Transport Strategy expired in 2013. A new Banyule Integrated Transport Plan (BITP) is being prepared. This delivers on one of Council’s Place objectives of the City Plan to: Support Sustainable Transport - Develop an integrated transport plan for Banyule. The BITP is a long-term strategic plan that will help guide transport and land use decisions in our municipality. The plan provides an overall framework to address transport issues, and create a more accessible, safe, liveable and sustainable community. It sets a long-term vision, identifies high-level policies, and outlines strategies and actions to achieve this. THE DRAFT BANYULE INTEGRATED TRANSPORT PLAN Developing the Plan The draft BITP (Attachment 1) has been shaped by public input and local expertise over the last 18 months. Key inputs include: A review of current literature and policy initiatives around the themes of landuse, transport, economic development, open spaces, employment and innovation; Community consultation conducted during the review of the Banyule City Plan, through Council’s community advisory groups, and additional consultation conducted during the BITP development process; Feedback from a Transport Workshop with Banyule councillors and staff;
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 12
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.1
DRAFT BANYULE INTEGRATED TRANSPORT PLAN cont’d State Legislation and State Government plans, policies and strategies; Council commissioned research: o
Banyule Household Survey, 2011 and 2014;
o
Statistical data published on the Banyule Community Profile, Social Atlas and Economy websites produced by id consulting;
Discussions with an external reference group, comprising stakeholders from Government departments and agencies, neighbouring councils, trader association representatives, key community, employment and education groups. The information and feedback collected helped develop the plan’s vision and themes, as well as the supporting strategies and actions. A summary of all the feedback received during Phase One and Phase Two is included at Attachment 2. Vision, Themes and Policy Statements The vision draws on community feedback on what the transport system in Banyule should be. This includes having an accessible system, being safe to use, easy to understand and negotiate, and provides a greater choice and more available transport options. The vision in the draft BITP is: Banyule is a City with accessible, liveable and sustainable communities, with good access to jobs, education, shopping and community opportunities with a safe transport network. The vision is aspirational in defining what kind of city Banyule will be in the future. It is supported by six themes each considering a different aspect of transport. Each theme is guided by a policy statement, and supported by strategies and actions that will help to achieve the vision. The relationship between the vision, themes and policies is demonstrated in Figure 1. Strategies and Actions The proposed strategies and actions are outlined in the document. Actions range from procedural changes, development of supplementary policies and advocating for change on a local and regional scale. CONSULTATION Consultation will commence in conjunction with the public release of the draft BITP. The consultation program has been developed in conjunction with Council’s Social Planning team in consideration of the consultation completed to date. Residents and community will be invited to provide feedback on the draft document over a two month period, through: The Banyule Website, including links to the draft BITP and the feedback summary paper. A consultation survey (through the Banyule Website). An article in the July/August Banyule Banner.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 13
4.1
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
DRAFT BANYULE INTEGRATED TRANSPORT PLAN cont’d Drop-in sessions at the Greensborough, Rosanna and Ivanhoe Council offices. The draft BITP will be available for consultation until Friday 14 August 2015. The feedback will assist in the preparation of a final BITP for future Council adoption. It is expected that this document will be considered by Council in November 2015.
Figure 1 – BITP Vision, Themes and Policy Statements
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 14
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.1
DRAFT BANYULE INTEGRATED TRANSPORT PLAN cont’d CONCLUSION The draft BITP has been prepared in response to a key initiative in Council’s City Plan, after an extensive consultation process. Further consultation is proposed to inform the final document. The BITP will give long-term direction in transport and land use decisions in our municipality. ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Draft Banyule Integrated Transport Plan
168
2
Feedback Summary Paper
198
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page
Page 15
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.2
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021
Author:
Andy Wilson - Team Leader - Development Planning, City Development
Ward:
Griffin
File:
P777/1999
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Ivanhoe Grammar School has submitted a Development Plan for approval that outlines the next phase of development of the school. The plan seeks to increase staff and student numbers as well as construct a number of new facilities including a sports centre and underground car park at the southern end of the school and a new senior years building in the centre of the site. The Development Plan has seen a number of revisions following extensive consultation with Council and the community. It is considered the plan, subject to further amendments, is an appropriate outcome that will facilitate an additional phase of development for the school and result in acceptable amenity impacts to surrounding properties. RECOMMENDATION A That Council having complied with the Development Plan process and Section 60 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, resolves that the Development Plan for the Ivanhoe Grammar School at 41 The Ridgeway, Ivanhoe, be approved after the following amendments to the plan have been made: Sports Centre 1. In relation to the design of the sports centre, words which indicate that: a. The overall height is kept to the minimum necessary to facilitate the activities listed in the Development Plan having regard to the relevant design standards for netball and basketball court dimensions and clearance. b. It is to incorporate a pitched roof with the pitch running east west so that the wall heights of the building are further minimised at the northern and southern elevations and that the wall heights of the eastern elevation are also minimised. This must result in the wall heights at each end being reduced by up to 2 metres from the maximum overall height. c. The sports centre finished in high quality materials, colours and architectural finishes so as to minimise the dominance of the building height and appearance, and also ensuring plant and equipment is located on the opposite side of the sports centre away from residential properties. d. The Landscaping master plan includes screening vegetation along the eastern elevation to soften views of the built form from the residential properties to the east. 2. The sports centre use limited to the following: a. School Use - 7am – 9.30pm weekdays and 7am-1pm on Saturdays without further written consent from Council. No use Sunday without further written consent from Council. b. Community Use – 7am – 9.30pm weekdays and 7am-1pm on Saturdays without further written consent from Council. No use Sunday without further written consent from Council. Community use includes use of
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 16
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d school facilities, by individuals or groups, for the purpose of education, recreation, cultural activities for students, the local community or young persons. Users do not need to have an affiliation with the school. This may include the hire of facilities by such groups. c. Uses that do not fit the above performance measures are not allowed. 3. The primary use of the sports centre during school hours for school purposes. The sports centre can be made available for community use but must not be used for commercial purposes. 4. The sports centre not to be used until all of the spaces within the underground car park are made available. 5. An acoustic report is to be provided as part of the planning permit application for the sports centre. The sports centre design is to demonstrate how the recommendations within the acoustic report are incorporated. After completion of the sports centre and prior to its use, an acoustic engineer is to provide a certification report to demonstrate compliance with the recommendations within the acoustic report. The building must be tested during use for typical activities. Intensity of use at southern end of the school 6. Activities within Locksley House limited to the hours of 7am-9.30pm weekdays and 7am-5pm Saturday. 7. A requirement that the uses across the site including the proposed sports centre, Locksley House and the swimming pool facility, are scheduled so that future events avoid a scenario whereby multiple facilities are operating at high capacity concurrently outside of school hours. The combined total occupancy of facilities must not at any time 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 for the uses within the school grounds. Should there be an instance where this is unavoidable, Ivanhoe Grammar is to obtain the prior written consent of Council in advance of the events occurring. 8. The future planning permit application for the sports centre must be submitted with details of how the facility will be managed to regulate its use for community purposes. Car Parking 9. The Development Plan staging plan amended to show the Car park constructed concurrently with the Sports Centre with the car parking component to be made available as soon as practical prior to commencement of use of the sports centre. 10. A 15 minute transition time for the arrival of vehicles in the morning and a 30 minute transition time in the evening for the departure of vehicles is allowed but the facilities must not be used during these times. 11. The car park entry to Russell Street modified to: a. Restrict traffic movements to right in and left out; b. Include methods for minimising disturbance to nearby residential properties as a result of headlights from vehicles entering and exiting the car park; c. Provide adequate site lines to the Scotts Parade intersection. This may require the removal of some vegetation within the Road Reserve. 12. The correct number of parking spaces currently on site, including accurately describing the total number of spaces lost as a result of the development plan
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 17
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d and the correct surplus calculated using the existing approved staff numbers under the 2000 Development Plan. 13. Details of how car parking spaces across the entire site will be maintained for staff parking. This must address the storage of maintenance vehicles, plant, equipment and materials in appropriate locations. 14. The staging Plan amended to require an increase in staff and students to be staged so that new on site car parking is generally made available at the rate of 1 car parking space to each 0.833 staff. 15. Preparation of a Green Travel Plan with particular focus given to the transport habits of staff. The plan should include the option of implementing a remote student drop off point near to the school from which point school staff would coordinate a ‘walking school bus’ to the Ridgeway Campus. 16. An area nominated on the plan indicating the location of bicycle parking spaces in accordance with Clause 52.34. Traffic management 17. Vehicle access to the site controlled in accordance with the following: a. Russell Street: 5.45am – 10pm weekdays and 6.45am – 5pm Saturday. b. Existing Scotts Parade: Open for maintenance vehicles only. c. Fairy and Elphin Street: 7.30am – 6pm weekdays for staff access only. No access on weekends. d. Elphin Street through to Fairy Street (through school): For staff access only. 18. The layout of the underground car park designed to provide for integration with the existing car parking spaces south of the south ground. 19. The layout of the underground car park designed to provide for a safe drop off location at the front of the sports centre with the ability to enter from Russell Street, circulate and exit back onto Russell Street. This should include low level lighting where appropriate. 20. The number of buses dropping off and picking up students be assessed and reported to Council at the same time that census of students is given in August of 2016. 21. The submitted Traffic Management Plan updated to reflect all requirements set out in the final Development Plan to ensure that there are no inconsistencies and anomalies between the plans. Staff and Student numbers 22. A census of student and staff numbers (including full time, part time and contractors) taken in August of 2015 and an annual census taken on an ongoing basis. The census data is to be provided To Banyule City Council annually. The census must include all registrations at the Ridgeway Campus excluding the ELC. The results will be made available to any interested residents. 23. The total number of children permitted in the Early Learning Centre to not exceed 66 and a total of 3 staff. 24. The Development Plan amended to provide information in relation to staff and students on sites outside the DPO boundary are included in total staff and student numbers. This should include a statement that staff on sites outside the Development plan boundaries are included in the total number of staff on site at any one time. Tree protection and landscaping
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 18
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d
25. The building envelope for the Dodemaide Hall extension amended to retain and protect tree number 19 (Olea europea) as described in the Arboricultural report prepared by Recovery Tree Services dated 25 March 2015. 26. The submitted landscape master plan amended to accurately show all trees proposed to be removed for the senior years centre and any redesign required to retain and protect all high retention value trees. 27. A Tree Care Management Plan prepared which becomes an appendix to the Development Plan and provides an inventory of all trees on site, general methods to be adopted to ensure these trees are maintained in a healthy condition and the locations nominated for replanting of trees to ensure compliance with previous planning approvals granted for tree removal. 28. A landscape plan will be required as part of all future applications for planning permits for development. All landscape works on site should reflect the existing heritage landscape themes on site by planting species that strengthen these heritage values. 29. The Landscaping master plan includes screening vegetation along the eastern elevation to soften views of the built form from the residential properties to the east. Other 30. All future planning permit applications to require a Construction Management Plan which will outline how the development will be managed to minimise off site amenity impacts and environmental impacts. Each plan must include details of how car parking will be managed on site so as to maximise the retention of spaces for staff parking and how spaces lost will be offset. RECOMMENDATION B That Council write to each member of the Resident Interest Group to thank them for their valuable input into the Development Plan process and acknowledge the contribution they have made to the outcome. RECOMMENDATION C 1. That Council undertake consultation with surrounding residents on a proposal to implement a 12 month trial of parking restrictions, which may include a resident parking permit scheme, in some locations within the surrounding street network to minimise Ivanhoe Grammar School staff parking in the street and encouraging them to park within the on-site car park; 2. That Council alter the parking restrictions for on street parking spaces on the eastern side of The Ridgeway to be short term parking only. RECOMMENDATION D That any outstanding planning compliance matters that have been raised are investigated further and where necessary ensure appropriate action is taken to address these. RECOMMENDATION E 1. That the school provide a plan to describe how it will transition to compliance
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 19
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d with respect to onsite car parking spaces. This plan must identify where existing spaces that are not currently available can be made available and where new spaces (in addition to those approved under the 2000 Development Plan) can be accommodated on site. 2. That the school provide details of alterations to the existing southern carpark to include removal of concrete wheel stops in appropriate spaces to facilitate circulation of vehicles associated with swim school drop offs to ensure vehicles can enter and exit at the Russell Street entrance.
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:
Ken Whiteman
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):
Yes
Submissions Received:
130 (+36 in support)
Ward:
Griffin
Ivanhoe Grammar School has submitted a development plan which outlines the use and development of the Ridgeway campus until 2021. It is proposed to increase approved student numbers from 1400 (approved in 2000) to 1690. It is also proposed to increase staff numbers from 149 full time and 62 part time (approved in 2000) to 175 full time and 85 part time plus 8 contract staff. With respect to development, the following Table outlines the proposal to consists of: Table 1 Facility
Location
Envelope size Sports centre South of the south 45 x 72m oval South Ground Under the southern 45 x 71m carpark oval at its southern end Senior years Central to the site 47 x 37m centre
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Height (max)
Tree removal
11.5m
7 protected trees
-
2 weeds
16.5m
4 protected trees
Page 20
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d Year 9 Centre Dodemaide Hall
Central to the site 23 x 32m North of north 35 x 20m ground
9m 7m
n/a 1 protected tree (Significant Tree rated with high retention value). n/a
Year 2 art North of north 20.5 x 8m 6.5m rooms ground Chapel South of north 3m x 6m 4.2m n/a extension ground Buckley Hall* Central to the site 10.9 x 6.1m 3.4m n/a * Separate approval was granted for this development as it is deemed to be consistent with the existing development plan.
Table 2 below outlines the buildings proposed and their uses for a variety of purposes including: Table 2 Facility Sports centre
Use Indoor courts for IGS extended sporting program including basketball, volley ball, badminton, table tennis, aerobics; ‘learn to swim’ pool; fitness centre; multi-purpose room; 2 classrooms; meeting room; change rooms; toilets; and storage South Ground 120 space car park. 2 way access via carpark Russell Street with additional access for staff only from Fairy Street.
Proposed Hours 7am-10pm weeknights and 7am-1pm Saturday
Staff use during school hours. Includes parent and visitor parking for school and sporting events. Senior years To provide a dedicated facility for the Normal school hours. No centre senior years students consolidating change proposed. core academic endeavour in the centre of the site. The building will include science labs, general purpose learning areas and breakout areas, a café, staff areas, storage, lockers and toilets. Year 9 Centre To provide a purpose built facility for Normal school hours. No year 9 students to support the year 9 change proposed. program. Dodemaide Music and dance centre and an indoor Normal school hours. No Hall play space for physical education change proposed. during poor weather. Year 2 art Upgrade of existing facilities Normal school hours. No rooms change proposed. Chapel Addition to enable small groups to Normal school hours. No extension participate in worship. change proposed.. Buckley Hall* Upgrade to entrance and foyer and No change proposed. enclose existing open area.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 21
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. BACKGROUND/HISTORY The first Ivanhoe Grammar School Development Plan was approved on 1 February 2000 (P777/1999). For a record of other recent approvals, refer to Attachment 1. 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 - 9 June 2015
Page 22
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.2
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d
Figure 1: Locality Plan CONSULTATION The proposed development plan has been subject to two extensive notification periods as described below: 10 July 2013 The proposed development plan was advertised widely by direct notice to residents in the locality surrounding Ivanhoe Grammar School. As a result, 128 objections were received. A consultation forum was held following the notification period which was facilitated by Council staff including planning officers and traffic engineers. The consultation
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 23
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d included two smaller consultation workshops and one larger open forum where residents were able to make submissions regarding the proposed plan. The forum was also attended by Councillors. 16 October 2014 A revised version (June 2014) of the development plan was advertised on 16 October 2014. The plan was modified to show: e. Access from The Boulevard and the proposed car parking under the sports centre removed f. A new underground car park provided under the South Ground with access from Russell Street proposed. g. The car park from under the Senior Years centre removed and the total number of spaces under the south ground increased to 120. The development plan was advertised to the same extent as July 2013 and as a result 15 submissions were received raising issues with the plan. Of these submissions, two were new submitters. In addition, 36 submissions in support of the proposal were received during this notice period, largely from parents of current students and members of staff, some of who also live close to the school. An additional consultation forum was conducted following the second notification period where residents were given an opportunity to make submissions regarding the revised plan. This consisted of a series of smaller workshop groups throughout an afternoon and evening and concluded with a larger open forum. These sessions were facilitated by Council officers and attended by Councillors. 4 May 2015 Following the release of a draft officer position on the proposed Development Plan, residents were invited to a meeting with Councillors to present their submissions regarding this position. A time slot was allocated to each resident to speak. Resident Interest Group Council resolved at its meeting of 26 August 2013 that a Resident Interest Group be formed, to include at least 2 persons per general geographic area to the west, south and east of the school and that this group is to meet with officers and Ivanhoe Grammar School representatives to discuss matters in more detail. Expressions of interest to join the group were sought from residents who reside within the locality surrounding the school. All submitters were informed of this process by direct correspondence and a notice was published in the Heidelberg Leader. Council resolved at its meeting of 16 December 2013 to appoint 10 residents to form the Resident Interest Group. The group has met regularly with officers and representatives of the school to discuss issues in more detail and to seek feedback on solutions to address concerns raised. These meetings have also been attended by Councillors. Minutes from these meetings have been made available on Council’s website for viewing by any interested residents.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 24
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.2
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d REFERRAL COMMENTS Engineering Council’s Transport section has been involved in the community consultation process associated with the development plan and various revisions. Council’s Transport section has no objection to the proposed Development Plan subject to various conditions. The following comments are made: The number of parking spaces proposed exceeds the statutory requirement. Alterations to parking restrictions in The Ridgeway to increase drop off capacity is supported. The access point proposed for the underground car park is acceptable subject to modifications to improve the safety of vehicles entering and exiting. The design of the south ground underground car park should be amended to provide for access to the existing car parking spaces to the south of the sports ground. Existing access to this car park should be restricted to maintenance vehicles only. Location of bicycle parking spaces should be shown and be centrally located. A Green Travel Plan must be prepared and submitted as a condition of any approval. This must focus particularly on the travelling habits of staff. The benefit of additional short term spaces in the Ridgeway outweighs the loss of long term spaces for teacher parking. It will also result in additional bus parking opportunities when the dedicated bus parking bays are being used. The introduction of parking restrictions within certain streets within the surrounding street network is likely to have a positive effect on increased staff parking on site. Additional traffic advice received The additional traffic impact assessment prepared by Ratio Consultants dated 30 April 2015 was reviewed by Council’s Transport section. This information is considered to be an acceptable representation of likely traffic impacts in the surrounding streets as a result of the proposed development. The following comments were made: Additional traffic expected to be generated in Fairy Street and Elphin Street is well within the capacity of the street network and is considered to be acceptable. Arborist The removal of tree 19 (Olea europea) is not supported. This tree is protected under ESO4 and has a high retention value. The development should be designed around this. High retention value trees near the proposed buildings and works for the senior years centre must be retained. All other trees are suitable for removal subject to appropriate replanting. PLANNING CONTROLS A Development Plan must be approved to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority under the Development Plan Overlay schedule 4 which applies to Private
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 25
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d Educational Establishments. This clause requires the preparation of a Development Plan which must be submitted to and approved by Council. The plan must relate to the use and development of the land for the next five years and include, amongst other things, the existing and proposed numbers of staff and students, staging and timing of proposed development, height of all proposed buildings, existing and proposed landscaping, existing and proposed provisions for access, car parking and traffic management and measures to address the interface of the land with adjoining land. After the Development Plan is approved, each individual development project will still require Council approval through a formal planning permit process but will be exempt from the need for public notification as long as it is generally consistent with the approved Development Plan. Attachment 1 includes a complete list of the relevant planning policies that are applicable to the land. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION The proposed development plan has been considered in great detail having regard to its potential amenity impacts and its suitability within the neighbourhood context. Through this detailed assessment, it is considered that, subject to a number of amendments to the plan, the plan will result in an acceptable outcome. Following is a discussion of the key considerations regarding the proposal with particular focus on protecting residential amenity while facilitating the schools intention to develop the land. Sports centre – Built form The largest of buildings proposed by the school is the sports centre, proposed to be constructed at the southern end of the school within proximity of the residential interface to the south east. A building envelope has been shown a minimum of 10.5 metres from the eastern boundary with a height of 11.5 metres, a length of 72 metres and depth of 45 metres. This would facilitate a building of 3240m2 in floor area for 72 metres in length close to the eastern boundary of two residential properties being 73 The Boulevard and 1 Scotts Parade. Due to the land falling away from the school towards the residential properties, the visual dominance of this structure is a key consideration. In response to this concern, the applicant has provided shadow diagrams that demonstrate the sports centre will overshadow 73 The Boulevard to the east but this will fall within the bounds of the ResCode standard found at clause 55.04-5 and submits that due to the existing mature vegetation on the eastern boundary, views to the future sports centre will be filtered. However, it is considered that the amenity impacts as a result of this building need to be minimised. To achieve this, the development plan should be amended to outline some general principles. These principles should include limiting the overall height to the minimum necessary having regard to the relevant design standards for netball and basketball court dimensions, to incorporate a pitched roof with the pitch running east west so that wall heights at each end can be reduced by up to 2 metres from the maximum overall height. The sports centre should also be finished in high quality
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 26
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d materials, colours and architectural finishes so as to minimise the dominance of the building height and appearance, and ensuring plant and equipment is located on the opposite side of the sports centre away from residential properties. In addition, the Landscaping master plan should include screening vegetation along the eastern elevation to soften views of the built form from the residential properties to the east. These principles should be included in the development plan prior to any approval being granted. Any future planning permit application received for the sports centre must address these principles. Sports centre – Use The school has sought to use the sports centre between the hours of 7am and 10pm five nights a week and 7am to 1pm on Saturdays with no use proposed on Sundays. While the school has not specified a non-school use of the proposed sports centre, it is acknowledged that the school hall is currently used for non school sporting uses from 7 – 9.30pm four nights a week. It is therefore expected that the sports centre will continue to be used for non school purposes outside of ordinary school hours which is considered to be a reasonable expectation of a building used for community purposes. Table 2 in Attachment 1 outlines how the use of the building is to be managed for school and community use. No commercial use of the sports centre is permitted. This principle is support in the State Government guidelines ‘Schools as Community Facilities’ (refer to Attachment 1 for greater discussion) as well as recent VCAT decisions. While it is recognised that the use of the sports centre for community purposes is acceptable, it is noted that the hours of use of the proposed sports centre will be greater than what currently occurs at the school hall. It is also acknowledged that the use of the sports centre outside of ordinary school hours has the potential to affect the amenity of residential properties in the locality. This would primarily be as a result of noise associated with the use of the facility and noise associated with traffic and parking impacts on the surrounding streets. However, it is considered that the potential amenity impacts can be adequately managed. One significant advantage of the proposal is the concentration of 120 car parking spaces on the site and with convenient access to the sports centre. This will avoid the noise impacts to residents associated with on street parking. Furthermore, the sports centre facility will be purpose built for sporting activities and with appropriate conditions, can be suitably designed to minimise impacts to surrounding properties. It is noted that the two entrances to the building have been located internally to the site on the east and northern elevations, well away from existing residential properties and conveniently located to access the proposed car park. Despite these features, it is recommended that the Development Plan be amended to include a requirement that an acoustic report be prepared by a suitably qualified acoustic engineer at the time the planning permit application is lodged. The plans submitted for approval of the sports centre must demonstrate how it has incorporated the recommendations of the acoustic report. When the building is completed it should be tested during ordinary uses to ensure compliance with this report and an acoustic engineer should provide a certificate to confirm that this has been achieved.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 27
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d In addition, the use of the sports centre will be limited to the hours of 7am to 9.30pm weekdays and 7am to 1pm on Saturdays with no use on Sundays in acrodance with the hours requested by the applicant but with a transitional period of 30mins provided between 9.30 and 10pm (See table 2 in Attachment 1). It is recommended that the Development plan be amended to set out a principle of monitoring and managing the use of the sports centre for community use. This can be submitted when a planning permit application is lodged for the sports centre. It is also recommended that the development plan be modified to control the access arrangements for vehicles accessing the site for activities associated with the sports centre so as to minimise adverse amenity impacts to surrounding residential uses. For greater discussion on this point, refer to the traffic management section below. As noted above, it is expected that the sport centre facilities will be available for community use including for sporting activities and training of local sporting clubs. With appropriate amendments to the development plan, the amenity impacts associated with this can be managed. In particular, the plan should be amended to require the access gates to be controlled as per Table 1 in Attachment 1. This includes ensuring the Russell Street access is the main access point for visitors to the facilities at the southern end of the school while access to the school via Fairy and Elphin Streets is restricted to staff only. This will ensure that vehicles entering and exiting the site are managed so as to minimise additional impacts to the surrounding residential properties. Intensity of use at southern end of school The sports centre envelope is located at the southern end of the school close to the existing Locksley House and swimming pool. This will result in a concentration of buildings at the southern end that have the capacity to attract a large number of people. To manage the adverse amenity impacts associated with this potential, it is considered that some principles be incorporated into the development plan to manage this impact. The sports centre is proposed to be used during the hours of 7am and 10pm weekdays and 7am-1pm Saturdays. As noted above, it is recommended that this be restricted to 9.30pm weekdays. The existing use of the Swimming pool is 6am to 9.30pm weekdays and 6-5pm on Saturdays with no use on Sundays (it is noted that this is an increase from the originally approved swimming pool hours which allowed from 6am-12pm Saturdays and 12-5pm 1 Saturday a month). Interim changes are recommended to the existing southern carpark in response to community requests to facilitate improved circulation of vehicles dropping off for the swim school. In addition to these two facilities, Locksley House (located to the west of the proposed sports centre) contains rooms suitable for providing small musical productions and performances. It is therefore recommended that the Development Plan be amended to require that the uses across the site including the proposed sports centre, Locksley House and the swimming pool facility, are scheduled so that future events avoid a scenario whereby multiple facilities are operating at full capacity concurrently outside of school hours. Furthermore, the occupancy of facilities should not at any time 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 parking spaces available for the uses within the school grounds. Should there be an instance where this is
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 28
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d unavoidable, Ivanhoe Grammar must seek the prior written consent of Council in advance of the events occurring so that officers can assess the appropriateness of such events. Traffic management The proposed development includes a number of measures to manage the existing traffic conditions which are also proposed to alleviate future traffic concerns as a result of the proposed development. With regard to drop off and pick up of students, it is proposed to provide an additional 20 short term spaces within The Ridgeway. This will result in all of the existing car parking spaces on the eastern side of the Ridgeway being short term spaces. It is expected that these additional 20 spaces will facilitate 100 parent drop off movements in the morning and 100 pick up movements in the evening, based on an average turn over of 5 cars per hour for each space (5 x 20 new spaces). The applicant submits that the proposed increase in student numbers (290 students who are to be accommodated in the Middle and Senior Years) will result in an additional 108 parent drop offs for each of the morning and evening peak periods. The additional 20 short term spaces would satisfy much of this demand. While this will not resolve the parking and traffic issues entirely, it is considered to be an improvement to the existing pick up and drop off movements in The Ridgeway. It should also be noted that the introduction of a Green Travel Plan is likely to reduce the number of parent drop off and picks ups. The applicant submits that this could be reduced to as little as 38 new drop off and pick up movements associated with the increase in student numbers if a Green Travel Plan is successfully implemented. In the preparation of any Green Travel Plan particular focus should be given to the transport habits of staff who represent the largest group seeking long term parking around the school. In addition, the possibility of exploring a remote student drop off point should be considered near to the school from which point school staff could coordinate a ‘walking school bus’ to the Ridgeway. However, it is noted that the conversion of the existing long term parking spaces within The Ridgeway will result in a decrease in the availability of on street parking for teachers who often require parking for most of the day. To ensure that demand for other long term on street spaces is managed, it is suggested that new parking restrictions be included in the surrounding street network. In combination with the construction of additional car parking spaces on site, the on street restrictions will have the effect of directing staff vehicles on site. Spaces on the street will therefore be available throughout the day for short term parking. In summary, the benefit of providing improved traffic circulation around the school during the drop off and pickup times is considered to outweigh the loss of 20 long term parking spaces in the Ridgeway. This improved circulation as a result of more short term spaces is also likely to assist in creating additional bus drop off and pick up opportunities within the Ridgeway for occasions when the dedicated bus drop off spaces in the Ridgeway are being used. This is due to the additional parking availability created by these spaces being short term parking spaces which will create opportunities for bus drop off and pick up for the times when this is required. The applicant has forecast a growth in students travelling by bus and it is therefore suggested that the number of buses dropping off
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 29
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d and picking up students be assessed and reported to Council at the same time that census of students is given in August of 2016. With regard to vehicle access points to the school, it is suggested that the new underground car park be primarily accessed from Russell Street with secondary access provided from Fairy Street. The Fairy and Elphin Street access points should be limited to staff only and be accessible only between 7.30am and 6pm weekdays (see table 2 in attachment 1). To minimise potential vehicle safety issues associated with the access point to the underground car park, it is recommended that the Russell Street entry and exit point be altered to restrict movements to be right in and left out. This will minimise vehicle conflict within Russell Street. So as to minimise disturbance to adjoining properties as a result of headlights of vehicles entering and exiting the car park it is recommended the Development Plan include a requirement that the entry/exit be designed to minimise headlight disturbance through the use of landscaping treatment and other methods of diffusing light. In addition, the underground car park should be designed to facilitate a drop off of students where parents can circulate through the car park and exit again onto Russell Street. This would accommodate the dropping of students for sporting events and for swimming in the morning prior to school. The existing Scotts Parade access point should be limited to maintenance vehicles only. Table 1 in Attachment 1 for includes more detail regarding access control. The Development Plan should be amended to include this table as an appendix. Car parking The Development Plan outlines the construction of a new 120 space car park under the south ground oval. The Banyule Planning Scheme requires a car parking rate of 1.2 car parking spaces for each employee. The previous Development Plan required a total of 159 car parking spaces on site. This included 68 new spaces in addition to the 91 existing spaces. Currently there are 21 spaces less than this constructed on site. The proposal would result in a statutory demand of 68 new spaces (1.2 spaces for each new employee: 57 employees +8 contractors). The proposal seeks to construct 120 new car parking spaces but would also result in the loss of 9 spaces (7 spaces to facilitate the senior years centre and 2 spaces for the Year 9 centre). This would result in a net increase of 90 spaces and a surplus of 22 spaces. It is noted that there are an existing 14 spaces associated with buildings outside the DPO boundaries (Rose St and Merton St) that are included within the total on site car parking spaces. At the time these spaces were approved under separate planning permit applications, they were considered as additional spaces. It is also noted that there are many spaces which are not currently useable due to the storage of plant and materials, however it is expected that these spaces will be made available by the completion of the development. The Development plan should be amended to require the planning permit application to outline how rubbish bins and maintenance equipment is to be managed and stored on the site to ensure all car parking spaces are available for parking.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 30
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d
Some concern has been raised that the location of the car park is not proximate to where the majority of staff work on the campus, citing the underutilisation of the existing car parking spaces at the southern end of the school. It is therefore suggested that a mechanism is required to change behaviour and result in staff parking on the school site. To this end it is proposed that a new regime of parking restrictions be introduced in the surrounding street network in some locations within proximity to the school to drive a change in parking behaviour. This may include introduction of a resident parking scheme. It is also noted above that the preparation of a Green Travel Plan should be required as a condition of any approval granted for this Development Plan and that this Plan should focus on the transport habits of staff to reduce single occupant car trips. Future development applications will also need to satisfy the statutory requirement for bicycle parking facilities however, the Development Plan should be amended to nominate an appropriate location for bicycle parking facilities. A rate of 1 bicycle space to each 20 employees is required (2.45 spaces) and 1 to each 5 students (58 spaces). This would require a total of 61 spaces. Increase in staff and student numbers The Development Plan will increase student numbers by 290 to a total of 1690, up from 1400 approved in the previous Development Plan. This is combined with an increase in staff numbers by 49 to 260 (175 full time and 85 part time) up from 211 (149 full time and 62 part time) approved in the previous development plan. It is also recognised that the current number of students and staff is higher than approved under the existing Development plan. To ensure the school maintains its student and staff numbers within the proposed maximums, it is recommended an annual census be taken. The applicant has advised that the school currently provides student registration figures to the State Government annually in August. It is suggested that this figure be submitted to Council annually to demonstrate compliance. The total number of staff across the whole site (including the Early Learning Centre and the Rose Street and Merton Street buildings) must also be confirmed when the student census data is provided. It is also noted that the school uses sites that are outside the Development Plan boundaries including at sites on Rose and Merton Streets. A number of staff work within these buildings which are included within the total number of staff in the Development Plan. It is suggested that these sites be included within the Development Plan boundaries to make future assessments of staff and student numbers more transparent. In addition to the total student numbers outlined in the Development plan, the Early Learning Centre (ELC) accommodates a total of 44 children with a maximum capacity of 66. These numbers have not been specified within the Development plan and it is therefore recommended that the plan be amended to include reference to a total of 66 children allowed on site. The plan should also make reference to the total number of staff associated with the ELC. Staging of development The applicant has submitted a staging plan which outlines when development is proposed to be undertaken. It has scheduled to construct the sports centre first
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 31
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d followed by the car park under the south ground. To ensure that the car parking becomes available as soon as possible, it is recommended that the staging plan be amended to ensure the car park and sports centre are constructed concurrently and that the sports centre is not used until the car park is completed. In fact, the school has indicated that it intends to make the car parking available before the sports centre is used. In addition to this, it is recommended that the increase in staff and students be staged so that new on site car parking is generally made available at the same rate that staff and students are increased. It is therefore suggested that a ratio of 1 car parking space to each 0.833 staff be adopted. Tree removal and Landscaping The proposal includes the removal of a number of trees as outlined in the proposal section. Most notably is the proposed removal of a tree that is listed on Banyule’s Significant Tree Register. Council’s arborist has reviewed the proposed removal of this tree and has noted that the tree is in good condition with a long useful life expectancy. From an arboricultural perspective, there is little justification for its removal and on this basis Council’s arborist has recommended its retention. This has implications for the proposed building envelope to allow for the Dodemaide Hall addition which would require the removal of this tree. Support of the Development Plan should be conditional upon the retention of this tree requiring a redesign of the Dodemaide Hall addition. The applicant has been made aware of this and has indicated that this can be accommodated without resulting in impacts upon other trees. With regards to other trees proposed to be removed, Council’s arborist has advised that no high retention value trees should be removed for the proposed senior years centre and that the proposed removal of trees for the sports centre is acceptable. An updated Development Plan should be submitted which clearly shows the retention of the high retention value trees as well as the tree listed on Council’s Significant Tree Register. To ensure the appropriate management of all trees on site is achieved including the required replanting of trees as a result of previous approval granted for tree removal, it is recommended that a Tree Management Plan be prepared by the applicant. This should provide an inventory of all trees on site, general methods to be adopted to ensure these trees are maintained in a healthy condition and the locations nominated for replanting of trees to ensure compliance with previous planning approvals granted. The submitted Development Plan also includes a proposed landscape concept plan. This focusses on enhancing the landscape setting through the campus and particularly around the proposed buildings. The landscape plan outlines that one of its key principles is to ‘Build on the School’s existing character’ and ‘recognising the historic nature of the aspects of the school’. It is suggested that this wording be strengthened to ensure that future landscape works on site adopt the existing heritage landscape themes by planting species that strengthen these heritage values. Transition to compliance
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 32
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.2
IVANHOE GRAMMAR SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-2021 cont’d Through the assessment of the Development Plan, it has become apparent that the school currently has a deficit of onsite car parking spaces to satisfy the existing approved Development Plan. In light of the proposed new car park, the deficit will be rectified when this car park is completed which is scheduled to be constructed in 2015. However, it is considered reasonable to require the school to provide details of how it can transition to compliance. It is acknowledged that many car parking spaces on site are currently not accessible as a result of being occupied by objects such as maintenance vehicles, trailers and materials. In addition, some spaces that were previously available have over time been excluded and are now marked with lines to prioritise pedestrian movement. Approval of the Development Plan should therefore lead to the school subsequently providing a plan of how it will transition to compliance, realising that full compliance will not be achieved until the proposed car park is completed. CONCLUSION Following a detailed assessment of the proposed Development Plan and extensive community consultation, it is considered that the Development Plan will result in an appropriate increase in staff and student numbers and scale and intensity of development. However, the plan should be modified to incorporate some principles that will guide future planning permit applications to ensure amenity impacts to surrounding residential properties are appropriately managed. ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Attachment 1
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 226
Page 33
4.3
NORTH EAST LINK - QUARTERLY REPORT
Author:
Michelle Herbert - Senior Transport Engineer, City Development
File:
F2013/333
Previous Items Council on 23 March 2015 (Item 4.1 - North East Link - Quarterly Report) Council on 10 November 2014 (Item 4.4 - North East Link - Quarterly Report) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY There has been some progress on planning for the proposed North East Link in the three months since last reported to Council. A response has been received from the Hon. Luke Donnellan, Minister for Roads and Road Safety, in relation to Council’s letter seeking advice on the Government’s plans for the North East Link and the truck curfew trial proposed for some declared Main Roads in Banyule. The response addresses a potential North East Link within the context of a broader infrastructure strategy and the establishment of Infrastructure Victoria which will advise the Government on key planning projects and infrastructure priorities. The Minister’s response also indicates that VicRoads is currently developing a communications plan for a Rosanna Road working group, and requested Council to nominate officers to be represented on the working group. VicRoads senior officers have met with Council to discuss initial staging of a Main Road truck curfew in Banyule. The RACV has released its Directions 2015 document which outlines the transport issues that are important to its members and the Victorian Community in the areas of mobility, safety and affordability. The document cites the North East Link as its number one project. The current State Government has abandoned the East West Link project. This may lead to an opportunity to promote the North East Link as an alternative project. The draft Banyule Integrated Transport Plan (BITP) outlines Council’s position on the North East Link as a direct orbital link between the Metropolitan Ring Road to Eastlink. Residential and community feedback on the BITP will be invited until August 2015.
RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1)
Continue to work with VicRoads to advance the declared Main Road truck curfews in Banyule.
2)
Participate in the VicRoads working group for issues on Rosanna Road.
3)
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 34
4.3
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.3
NORTH EAST LINK - QUARTERLY REPORT 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 “support sustainable transport”. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. BACKGROUND Council considered an initial report on the status of the proposed North East Link and an overview of relevant Council resolutions and positions on the link, regional transport, and associated heritage and environmental issues at its meeting on 14 December 2009. Council resolved in part as follows: “That Council officers report to the Council every three months on the response from the Minister, VicRoads or other Government departments or agencies on progress in the planning of the North East link.” In line with this resolution Council has received regular reports and considered the most recent report on this matter on 23 March 2015, and resolved to: “1. Write to the Hon Luke Donnellan MP, Minister for Roads and Road Safety, seeking advice on the Government’s plans for the North East Link and the truck curfew trial proposed for some declared Main Roads in Banyule; 2.
Follow up with VicRoads on the status of the Rosanna Road working group.”
In accordance with Item 1 of this resolution, on 30 March 2015, Council wrote to the Hon. Luke Donnellan MP, Minister for Roads and Road Safety. A detailed response addressing a number of issues has been received. The Minister acknowledges that significant infrastructure such as the North East Link requires much planning work and community consultation before it can be considered. The current State Government recognises that Victoria is in need of an infrastructure strategy to support the broader vision for Victoria together with a pipeline of priorities for investment. Further, the Government is establishing Infrastructure Victoria, which will advise the Government on key planning projects and infrastructure priorities. A potential North East Link will be considered in this context.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 35
4.3
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
NORTH EAST LINK - QUARTERLY REPORT cont’d
VicRoads has confirmed that it is developing a plan for Stage 1 of the truck curfew trial on some main roads in Banyule. VicRoads senior officers met with Council to discuss Stage 1 which will include Rosanna Road, Greensborough Highway, Waiora Road, Waterdale Road plus some local streets. Initial plans include conducting a before and after survey of trucks using main roads in Banyule, community consultation via letter drop, a community meeting to get feedback and key business liaison. VicRoads meet with Council officers regularly to progress work on a number of other traffic and transport related initiatives in Banyule. In relation to Item 2 of the resolution, discussions around the scope and operation of a Rosanna Road working group are underway between VicRoads and Council. The terms of reference and stakeholder membership for this group will be considered as part of the Communications Plan for this project, which VicRoads is currently preparing. Following VicRoads’ request, Council has nominated two senior officers to represent Council on the working group. Clarification is also being sought from VicRoads to ascertain whether Councillor representation on the working group is also possible. CURRENT SITUATION In April 2015, the RACV released its Directions 2015 document which outlines the transport issues of importance to its members and the Victorian community in the areas of mobility, safety and affordability. It presents the RACV policy position and the advocacy, education and information programs that it has developed to address these issues. In particular, it proposes a number of actions which are needed to improve the liveability and wellbeing of the Victorian community. RACV Directions 2015 has three main themes: An integrated transport system A safer transport system A fairer deal Of note, the document lists the North East link as the number one Melbourne Transport Priority : “Constructing the missing link between the M80 Metropolitan Ring Road (Greensborough) and the M3 Eastern Freeway/Eastlink is RACV’s highest priority project. This will complete the ring road around Melbourne and relieve congestion in the north-eastern suburbs. This link is of critical importance to the freight sector as it will complete the route from the south-east industrial sites, especially around the Dandenong area and ultimately the Port of Hastings to the M31 Hume Freeway”. The North East Link route shown in RACV Directions 2015 is a circumferential route from the Metropolitan Ring Road at Greensborough to Eastlink at Ringwood, via Warrandyte. The draft Banyule Integrated Transport Plan (BITP) considers the North East Link under The Transport Network theme. Council’s position on the North East Link is detailed as an action within the draft document: “Advocate for a North-East Link as a direct orbital link between the Metropolitan Ring Road to Eastlink.”
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 36
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.3
NORTH EAST LINK - QUARTERLY REPORT cont’d
Residents and community will be invited to provide feedback on the draft BITP, including Council’s position on the North East Link, until August 2015. CONCLUSION The Hon. Luke Donnellan, Minister for Roads and Road Safety has written to Council advising that a potential North East Link will be considered in the context of a newly established Infrastructure Victoria, which will advise the Government on key planning projects and infrastructure priorities. The RACV Directions 2015 report has named the North East Link as its number one priority for transport in metro Melbourne. VicRoads has commenced planning Stage 1 of the truck curfew on Main Roads in Banyule. A Rosanna Road working group is currently being set up by VicRoads with two Council officer nominations to the group. VicRoads also meets regularly with senior Council officers on a range of traffic and transport matters in Banyule. The draft BITP outlines Council’s position on the North East Link. Residential and community feedback on the document will be invited until August 2015.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 37
4.4
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH
Author:
Nick Helliwell - Major Developments Planner, City Development
Ward:
Bakewell
File:
P563/2014
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposal seeks to construct a 9 to 10 storey mixed use development which will have a maximum height of 29.4 metres in height on the land at 4-6 Flintoff Street, Greensborough. The development comprises 65 apartments, 4 shops and 3 office tenancies. A total of 70 car spaces are proposed which is 62 spaces less than the total required by the Planning Scheme. A key consideration for Council in determining this application is the extent to which it proposes an alternative response to the height and building form set out in Schedule 1 to the Activity Centre Zone applying to the Greensborough Principal Activity Centre. Council’s resolution to undertake a review of precinct 6 of the Activity Centre Zone in which the subject site is located is also a relevant consideration. While the proposal is in excess of the height requirements of the current controls, it is considered that a modified version of the proposal is appropriate having regard to Urban Design Guidelines currently being developed by Council’s Strategic Planning team which will form the basis of a future Planning Scheme Amendment. This would envisage an 8 storey development with a 4 storey podium including a landmark element on the Flintoff/Grimshaw Street intersection. RECOMMENDATION That Council having complied with Section 52, 58, 60, 61 and 62 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, resolves that a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit be issued in respect of Application No. P563/2014 for Buildings and works for the construction of a multi-storey building, alteration of access to a Road Zone Category 1, use of land for dwelling and reduction of on site car parking at 4 - 6 Flintoff Street GREENSBOROUGH subject to the following conditions: Plans (1)
Before the development permitted by this permit starts, amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the advertised plans submitted with the application but modified to show: (a)
Deletion of the third floor level of the building and subsequent lowering of the building height;
(b)
The height of the building podium lowered to four storeys on the Flintoff Street, Grimshaw Street and eastern site boundaries, measured from the
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 38
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d lower ground floor level of the building; (c)
A minimum wall setback to Flintoff and Grimshaw Streets at all levels above the podium of 5 metres from the face of the podium, 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;
(d)
All building elevations to correspond with the amended floorplan;
(e)
Landscaping as required by Condition 2 of this permit;
(f)
The glazing to the north-west wall of Office 3 extended the length of the office wall;
(g)
Provision of openings in the solid side walls of balconies to improve outlook and solar access to balconies and natural light to living areas of apartments while preserving the framing elements of the building design;
(h)
Engineering plans showing a properly prepared design with computations for the internal drainage and method for of disposal of stormwater from all roofed areas and sealed areas including the use of an On-site Stormwater Detention (OSD) system. Please note the Engineering plans must show all protected and/or retained trees on the development site, on adjoining properties where tree canopies encroach the development site and along proposed outfall drainage and roadway alignments (where applicable) and every effort must be made to locate services away from the canopy drip line of trees and where unavoidable, details of hand work or trenchless installation must be provided.
(i)
The Tree Preservation Fencing in accordance with Condition 16 of this permit;
(j)
Landscape and tree zones to be clearly marked with hatching, colour coding or similar and distinguished from useable open space areas;
(k)
A plan notation indicating that no building works or facilities are to be provided within the dedicated landscape areas;
(l)
A schedule and sample board of external building materials and colours, including details of cladding and roofing materials and detailed design and finish to the roof top feature on the tower at the corner of Flintoff and Grimshaw Streets; the schedule must be accompanied by a statement from a qualified urban designer confirming that the proposed design and finish is appropriate, or amended as required; All sustainable design features indicated in the submitted Sustainable Management Plan (SMP) prepared by Sustainable Development Consultants dated 31 October 2014. Where sustainable design features outlined in the SMP cannot be visually shown, include a notes table providing details of the requirements (i.e. energy and water efficiency ratings for heating/cooling systems and plumbing fittings and fixtures etc.); Details of the design, appearance and materials of minimum 1.7 metre high privacy screening to be provided between immediately adjacent balcony areas;
(m)
(n)
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 39
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d (o) (p) (q) (2)
(3)
All waste management features indicated in the Waste Management Plan required under Condition 18 of this permit; Car park allocation plan in accordance with Condition 23; Visitor and shopper bicycle parking for eight bicycles.
The development permitted by this permit must not be commenced until a satisfactory detailed landscaping plan is submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. Such plan must be prepared by a person suitably qualified or experienced in landscape design and shall include: (a)
Details of planting within the building setbacks and terrace area;
(b)
The identification of existing vegetation (which is not intended to be removed), and nomination of vegetation for removal throughout the site;
(c)
Provision of formed garden beds with edging around the landscape zone within the front setback to prevent vehicles parking within those areas;
(d)
Planting to consist of varying heights and species;
(e)
A schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground cover, which includes the location and size at maturity of all plants, the botanical names of such plants and the location of all areas to be covered by grass, lawn or other surface material as specified;
(f)
Location and details of paving, steps, retaining walls, fence design details and other landscape works including cut and fill.
(g)
Location, details and cross section drawings of all Water Sensitive Urban Design features in accordance with the endorsed Sustainable Management Plan and STORM report) prepared by Sustainable Development Consultants dated 31 October 2014, with reference to connection details on the engineering plans.
The use and development as shown on the endorsed plans or described in the endorsed documents must not be altered or modified except with the written consent of the Responsible Authority.
Public Transport Victoria (4)
The permit holder must take all reasonable steps to ensure that disruption to bus operation along Flintoff Street is kept to a minimum during the construction of the development. Foreseen disruption to bus operations and mitigation measures must be communicated to Public Transport Victoria fourteen days (14) prior.
VicRoads (5)
All disused or redundant vehicle crossings must be removed and the area reinstated to kerb and channel to the satisfaction of and at no cost to the Roads Corporation prior to the occupation of the buildings or works hereby approved.
(6)
The crossover and driveway are to be constructed to the satisfaction of the Roads Corporation and/or the Responsible Authority and at no cost to the Roads Corporation prior to the occupation of the works hereby approved.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 40
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d
(7)
Prior to the occupation of the building hereby approved, the access lanes, driveways, crossovers, and associated works must be provided and available for use and be: (i) (ii)
Formed to such levels and drained so that they can be used in accordance with the plan. Treated with an all-weather seal or some other durable surface.
Amenity (8)
Noise emissions from any equipment required for refrigeration, airconditioning, heating, ventilation and the like must comply with State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Noise from Commerce, Industry and Trade) No N-1 and/or Environment Protection (Residential Noise) Regulations 1997 and/or Environmental Protection Authority Noise Control Guidelines TG 302/92, as relevant.
Urban Design / External Appearance (9)
All external materials, finishes and paint colours are to be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
(10) The walls of the development on the boundary of adjoining properties must be cleaned and finished in a manner to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Car Parking / Access (11)
Areas set aside for the parking of vehicles together with the aisles and access lanes must be properly formed to such levels that they can be utilised in accordance with the endorsed plans and must be drained and provided with an all weather seal coat. The areas must be constructed, drained and maintained in a continuously useable condition to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
(12)
Areas set aside for the parking and movement of vehicles as shown on the endorsed plan(s) must be made available for such use and must not be used for any other purpose.
(13)
Vehicular access or egress to the subject land from any roadway or service lane must be by way of a vehicle crossing constructed in accordance with Council’s Vehicle Crossing Specifications to suit the proposed driveway(s) and the vehicles that will use the crossing(s). The location, design and construction of the vehicle crossing(s) must be approved by the Responsible Authority. Any existing unused crossing(s) must be removed and replaced with concrete kerb, channel and naturestrip to the satisfaction of the Council prior to occupation of the building. All vehicle crossing works are to be carried out with Council Supervision under a Memorandum of Consent for Works which must be obtained prior to commencement of works.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 41
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d (14)
The boundaries of all car spaces, access and egress lanes and the direction in which vehicles should proceed along the access lanes must at all times be clearly indicated on the ground to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Tree Protection / Landscaping (15)
Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, the landscaping areas shown on the endorsed plans must be used for landscaping and no other purpose and any landscaping must be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.
(16)
Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, prior to the commencement of works (including demolition) on the site, Tree Preservation Zones must be established around the Yellow Box (retained site tree no. 5) located in the south-western corner of the site and all street trees with the road frontages of the site. You must contact Council’s Development Planning Arborist on 9457 9878 once the Tree Preservation Fencing is erected so that an inspection of the fencing can be carried out. Once installed and inspected the Tree Preservation Zones must be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, and meet the following requirements: (a) Extent Tree Preservation Zones are to be provided to the extent of the canopy of the trees indicated as being retained on the endorsed plan, including Council’s street trees. Weed control Any weeds located within the Tree Preservation Zone are to be removed and the area mulched with 100mm of composted coarse grade woodchips (b) Fencing (i)
Vegetation Preservation fences with a minimum height of 1.2 to 1.5 metres and of chain mesh or like fence with 1.8 metre posts (e.g. treated pine) or like support every 3-4 metres and a top line of high visibility plastic hazard tape must be erected around the perimeter of the zone.
(ii)
The posts must be strong enough to sustain knocks from on site excavation equipment.
(iii)
The fences must not be removed or relocated without the prior consent of the Responsible Authority.
(c) Signage Fixed signs are to be provided on all visible sides of the Tree Preservation Fencing, stating “Tree Preservation Zone – No entry without permission from the City of Banyule”. (d) Irrigation The area must be irrigated during the summer months with 1 litre of
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 42
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d clean water for every 1 cm of trunk girth measured at the soil / trunk interface on a weekly basis. (e) Access to Tree Preservation Zone (i)
No persons, vehicles or machinery are to enter the Vegetation Protection Zone except with the consent of the Responsible Authority;
(ii)
No fuel, oil dumps or chemicals are allowed to be used or stored within the Vegetation Preservation Zone and the servicing and refuelling of equipment and vehicles must be carried out away from the root zones;
(iii)
No storage of material, equipment or temporary building is to take place within the Vegetation Preservation Zone;
(iv)
Nothing whatsoever, including temporary services wires, nails, screws or any other fixing device, is to be attached to any tree.
NOTE: Requests for consent of the Responsible Authority (City of Banyule) pursuant to this Condition should be directed to Council’s Arborist – Development Planning on 9457 9878. Consent for the conduct of works within the Tree Protection Zone, where granted, may be subject to conditions. Such conditions may include a requirement that:
Any underground service installations within the Tree Protection Zone be bored to a depth of 1.5 metres;
All root excavation be carried out by hand digging or with the use of ‘AirExcavation’ techniques;
Roots required to be cut are to be severed by saw cutting and undertaken by a qualified arborist. Or other conditions, as relevant, to ensure the ongoing health and stability of the subject tree/s.
(17)
To accommodate the development proposal the canopy of the Yellow Box (retained site tree no. 5) is likely to require pruning. All pruning is to conform to AS4373-2007 Pruning of Amenity Trees and is to be performed only by a trained and competent arborist who has a thorough knowledge of tree physiology and pruning methods to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Drainage (18)
The whole of the subject land, including landscaped and paved areas, must be graded and drained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority so as to prevent the discharge of stormwater from the subject land across any road or footpath or onto adjoining land.
Rubbish Collection (19)
Before the development commences, a Waste Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The Waste
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 43
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d Management Plan must include: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j)
Dimensions of waste areas. The number of bins to be provided and capacity. Details on method and frequency of cleaning and maintenance of waste areas. Details of ventilation. Details of unwanted goods storage. Method of waste and recyclables collection including the need to provide for private services. Hours of waste and recyclables collection. Measures to minimise impact upon local amenity. Method of presentation of bins for waste collection. Strategies for how the generation of waste and recyclables from the development will be minimised.
When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit and must be complied with at all times. Waste collection from the development must be in accordance with the plan, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. (20)
No receptacles for any form of rubbish or refuse (other than public waste bins) may be placed or allowed to remain in view from a public road or thoroughfare and odour must not be emitted from any such receptacle(s) so as to cause offence to any person(s) outside the subject land.
(21)
Unless otherwise agreed in writing, prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby approved, details as to how the following will be brought to the attention of prospective purchasers must be submitted to and approved to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority: (a)
Acknowledgement that all refuse and recycling collection for the property shall be provided internally by a private contractor at the expense of the owner of the land.
Construction Management Plan (22)
Before the development starts, a construction management plan must be prepared and submitted to the Responsible Authority for approval. The plan must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Once approved, the plan must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The plan must address the following issues: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f)
measures to control noise, dust and water runoff; prevention of silt or other pollutants from entering into the Council’s underground drainage system or road network; the location of where building materials are to be kept during construction; site security; maintenance of safe movement of vehicles to and from the site during the construction phase; on-site parking of vehicles associated with construction of the development;
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 44
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d (g)
wash down areas for trucks and vehicles associated with construction activities; cleaning and maintaining surrounding road surfaces; measures to maintain access for pedestrians and road users along Flintoff and Grimshaw Streets during construction; and compliance with Banyule City Council General Local Law No. 1 (2015).
(h) (i) (j)
Car Parking Allocation Plan (23) Prior to the occupation of the permitted development, a separate car parking allocation plan is to be prepared showing the car parking space allocation within the development for all retail, office and residential uses. The plan must include allocation of 20 on site car spaces to 20 of the proposed one bedroom apartments and one space to each of the four proposed retail spaces. Section 173 Legal Agreement (24) Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, before the use and/or development permitted by this permit starts, the owner of the land at (Insert land) must enter into an agreement with the Responsible Authority pursuant to Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and such agreement shall require that: (a)
occupants of the dwellings or commercial premises on the land have no entitlement to on-street or off-street parking by way of a resident or trader vehicle parking permit.
(b)
a private waste and recyclable collection be provided to service the building.
A memorandum of the Agreement is to be entered on title and the cost of the preparation and execution of the Agreement and entry of the memorandum on title is to be paid by the owner. Time Limits (25)
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 two years of the date of this permit;
The development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit;
The use is not commenced within four 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
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 45
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d (c)
Within 12 months afterwards if the development started lawfully before the permit expired.
Permit Notes (1)
Expiry of Permit In the event that this permit expires or the subject land is proposed to be used or developed for purposes different from those for which this permit is granted, there is no guarantee that a new permit will be granted. If a permit is granted then the permit conditions may vary from those included on this permit having regard to changes that might occur to circumstances, planning scheme provisions or policy.
(2)
Building Permit Required Building Permit must be obtained prior to the commencement of any works associated with the proposed development.
(3)
Completion of Development Immediately upon completion of the development permitted by this permit, the owner or developer of the subject land must notify Council’s Development Planning Section that the development is complete and complies with all requirements of the permit. The development will then be inspected to ensure compliance. An early inspection process will ensure that the subdivision approvals including the Statement of Compliance can be issued without delay.
(4)
Street Numbering Please note that property addresses are allocated by Council. This is usually formalised at the time of the issue of a certified plan, however it is Council’s intention to number the proposed allotments as follows: Shop 1, Lower Ground Floor, 4-6 Flintoff Street, Greensborough Office 1, Lower Ground Floor, 4-6 Flintoff Street, Greensborough Office 2, Lower Ground Floor, 4-6 Flintoff Street, Greensborough Office 3, Lower Ground Floor, 4-6 Flintoff Street, Greensborough Shop 2, Ground Floor, 4-6 Flintoff Street, Greensborough Shop 3, Ground Floor, 4-6 Flintoff Street, Greensborough Dwelling 1, Ground Floor, 4-6 Flintoff Street, Greensborough Dwelling 2, Ground Floor, 4-6 Flintoff Street, Greensborough Dwelling 3, Ground Floor, 4-6 Flintoff Street, Greensborough Dwelling 4, Ground Floor, 4-6 Flintoff Street, Greensborough etc.
(5)
Memorandum of Consent for Works
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 46
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d Council’s Construction Department must supervise all works undertaken on Council assets within private property, Council Reserves, easements, drainage reserves and/or road reserves, including connection of the internal drainage system to the existing Council assets. Prior to the commencement of any works, an application must be made and a permit received for:
(6)
A “Memorandum of Consent for Works” for any works within the road reserve; and/or
A “Drainage Connection Permit” for any works other than within a road reserve.
Residential Noise (spa pump/pool pumps/air-conditioning unit/vacuum unit etc) The operation of the (spa pump/pool pumps/air-conditioning unit/vacuum unit etc) shall comply with the Environment Protection (Residential Noise) Regulations 1997. Prohibited times of use as specified by the Regulations are Monday to Friday before 7am and after 10pm & Weekends and public holidays before 9am and after 10pm (if audible from a habitable room of a neighbouring property). The operation of the (spa pump/pool pumps/air-conditioning unit/ vacuum unit etc) must not cause a Nuisance (as defined under the Health Act 1958). A Nuisance may include issues such as noise, odour or any other thing deemed to be a Nuisance under the Act. It is recommended that the (spa pump/pool pumps/air-conditioning unit/ vacuum unit etc) is not located within close proximity to neighbouring properties and where practicable, enclosed.
(7)
VicRoads The proposed development requires reinstatement of disused crossovers to kerb and channel. Separate approval under the Road Management Act for this activity may be required from VicRoads (the Roads Corporation). Please contact VicRoads prior to commencing any works.
(8)
Waste Management Requirements Recent research indicates that weekly rubbish and recycling generation rates for apartments are in the order of: Waste source
Garbage
Apartments (1 Bedroom) Apartments (2-3 Bedroom)
80 litre 100 or 120 litre
Comingled recycling 80 litre 120 litre
Any waste management plan should have regard to these generation rates in making recommendations with respect to bin volumes and collection frequency.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 47
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d Planning Permit Application:
P563/2014
Development Planner:
Nick Helliwell
Address:
4-6 Flintoff Street, Greensborough
Proposal:
Buildings and works for the construction of a nine to ten storey building, alteration of access to a Road Zone Category 1, use of land for dwellings (65 apartments) and reduction of on-site car parking,
Existing Use/Development:
Single storey weatherboard building used as an office at 4 Flintoff Street and two storey brick office building at 6 Flintoff Street
Applicant:
Advanced Drafting Services
Zoning:
Activity Centre – Schedule 1
Overlays:
Parking – Schedule 1
Notification (Advertising):
Letters to abutting and opposite owner/occupiers and notice on both road frontages
Objections Received:
One
Ward:
Bakewell
The proposal is for a nine to ten storey mixed-use development comprising apartments, office and retail space. The building comprises the following: Two basement levels of car parking accommodating sixty three cars and six bicycle spaces, accessed from Flintoff Street A lower ground floor containing three office areas with a combined floor area of 403.6 sqm and a single retail tenancy with a floor area of 464.9 sqm, all facing Flintoff Street A ground floor containing three retail tenancies of 64, 58.2 and 164.2 sqm facing Grimshaw Street, 2 one bedroom and 2 two bedroom apartments, seven car parking spaces and sixteen bicycle spaces accessed from Grimshaw Street Seven levels of residential apartments above comprising 29 one bedroom, 27 two bed, 4 three bed and 1 three bedroom plus study apartments. A communal roof top deck. The architecture of the building is contemporary and comprises a five storey podium to Flintoff Street and a five to six storey podium to Grimshaw Street. Upper walls of the building are set between 2.5 and 8.5 metres behind the podium with some balconies projecting into these setback areas. The building elevations are articulated with the podium framing, fenestration and balcony detailing. A nine storey curved tower is proposed on the corner of Flintoff and Grimshaw Streets to define the street corner and create a landmark feature. A variety of materials including alucabond cladding, rendering and perforated aluminium are proposed which add further visual interest and detail to the design. Landscaping beds are proposed within the Flintoff and Grimshaw Street building setbacks of between 3 and 4 metres in depth. A mature Yellow Box tree located in
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 48
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d the western corner of the site at the junction of Flintoff and Grimshaw Streets is to be retained as part of the landscaping scheme for the proposal. A copy of the plans form Attachment 1 to this report. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. BACKGROUND/HISTORY A Notice of Decision was issued at P302/2012 for a seven storey mixed use building. This decision was subsequently overturned at VCAT. The basis for this decision is discussed in the technical assessment section of this report. Subsequently, Council resolved in February 2014 to undertake a review of a number of precincts within the Greensborough Principal Activity Centre, including Precinct 6 – Flintoff Street within the Activity Centre Zone. The purpose of the review is to consider the existing Schedule of controls to the Zone and consider whether these provide the conditions and framework for the development and future growth in Greensborough. This includes a review of building heights, setbacks and landscaping with the intent of preparing a Planning Scheme Amendment before the end of 2015. A background report on the review was prepared in January 2015. Community consultation on the review has commenced with a consultation meeting for landowners in Precinct 6 held on 18 February, Precinct 5 on 24 March 2015 and Precinct 2 on 31 March 2015. Council’s consultants have also now commenced work preparing Urban Design Guidelines for the precincts as part of the proposed amendment to the Planning Scheme. Whilst these guidelines have yet to be finalised and presented to Council for consideration, the preliminary draft guidelines indicate that an eight storey building with a four storey podium is appropriate with a landmark opportunity identified for the Flintoff/Grimshaw Street corner. It is proposed that a copy of the draft guidelines for Precinct 6 be circulated at the Council meeting as part of the background information on the proposal. SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA The site is located on the eastern side of the junction of Flintoff Street with Grimshaw Street opposite the WaterMarc complex, and is shown in Figure 1 below.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 49
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d
Figure 1: Subject site and surrounding area The site is triangular in shape with a boundary width to Flintoff Street of 41.2 metres and a boundary width to Grimshaw Street of 49.2 metres with a total site area of approximately 1,560 square metres. The land slopes down from south to north with a fall of approximately 6.1 metres. The site is presently occupied by a single storey weatherboard building at 4 Flintoff Street and a two storey brick building at 6 Flintoff Street. Both of these buildings are used as offices and face Flintoff Street. Vehicle access to 4 Flintoff Street is provided from Flintoff Street whilst 6 Flintoff Street has vehicle access to both Flintoff Street and Grimshaw Street, which provides access to a car park at the rear of the building. The site accommodates 9 trees with another two trees located within each of the road reserves abutting the site and a row of 14 James Stirling Pittosporum located at 8 Flintoff Street along south-western boundary of the property, immediately adjacent to the application site. The site is fenced along Grimshaw Street by a 1 to 1.6 metre high close boarded timber fence with a 1.2 metre high rock retaining wall and landscape bed extending along the 4 Flintoff Street boundary of the site and a 1.2 metre high brick retaining wall and landscape bed extending along the 6 Flintoff Street boundary. The land to the north at 8 Flintoff Street accommodates a two storey office building with the land to the east at 16-22 Grimshaw Street accommodating the four storey Centrelink/Medicare building. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION A public notice was displayed in two editions of the Diamond Valley leader newspaper, on each of the road frontages of the site and letters were sent to adjoining and opposite property owner/occupiers. A total of one objection has been received on the grounds of: Lack of car parking for a development of this scale Impact on car parking availability within the surrounding area
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 50
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d REFERRAL COMMENTS Advice has been sought from VicRoads and Public Transport Victoria as well as Urban and Landscape Design consultants, Council’s Developments Engineering Section and Development Planning Arborist. Additional details on external and internal referrals are contained in Attachment 2, however key advice is summarised as follows. VICROADS VicRoads raise no objection subject to conditions relating to closure of redundant vehicle crossings and construction of vehicle access. PUBLIC TRANSPORT VICTORIA Public Transport Victoria raise no objection subject to a condition requiring minimisation of disruption to bus services during construction. ENGINEERING SERVICES Council’s Transport Section raises no objection to the proposed reduction in on-site car parking provision. The vehicle access and car parking design is considered acceptable subject to standard drainage, vehicle crossing, car parking sealing and line marking conditions. DEVELOPMENT PLANNING ARBORIST Arboricultural advice has raised no concerns in relation to the proposed removal of eight trees from the site. The mature Yellow Box tree located in the south-western corner of the site is worthy of retention and is appropriately retained and protected as part of the development. The row of Pittosporums adjacent to the northern site boundary on neighbouring land are already stressed due to their location and site constraints. It is considered that the proposed development will have little or no impact on these trees and that they will remain viable. Tree protection conditions have been recommended as permit conditions. LANDSCAPE CONSULTANT Landscape architectural advice has identified benefit in reviewing species selection in the Flintoff Street setback and below the Yellow Box tree to be retained in the western corner of the site. PLANNING CONTROLS The planning controls applicable to the site are outlined in Table 1 below: Table 1: Applicable Planning Controls Control Activity Centre Zone – Schedule 1 Parking Overlay – Schedule 1 Car Parking
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Clause 37.08 45.09 52.06
Permit Triggered Yes Yes Yes
Page 51
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d Access to a Road Zone Category 1
52.29
Yes
POLICIES CONSIDERED Relevant policies considered in the assessment of this proposal are outlined in Table 2 below: Table 2: Relevant Planning Scheme Policy Policy SPPF Settlement Built Environment and Heritage (including sub clauses) Housing (including sub clauses) LPPF Land Use Built Environment (Diversity area) Local Places Safer Design Policy
Clause 11 15 16 21.04 21.06 21.08 22.03
Planning controls are detailed in Attachment 2 to this report. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION SUITABILITY OF THE LAND USE FOR THE SITE The use and development of the site for a mixed use building incorporating office, retail and residential components is consistent with State and Local policy, and is therefore considered to be appropriate. The proposal represents an important development of an underutilised site within an existing Principal Activity Centre. The proposed range of uses respond to a number of key elements of the Municipal Strategic Statement including objectives relating to commercial and residential development. The site provides an opportunity for a development which makes a significant contribution to the preferred and emerging character of the Centre. The design and scale of the building is an important consideration to ensure that the ultimate development is appropriate in its context. Further, the impact of the proposal on car parking provision and traffic flows are also important considerations in the area. Accordingly, the following assessment examines these issues in detail to determine the suitability of the proposal for the site. HEIGHT, FORM AND SETBACK OF THE BUILDING The preferred site specific building height under the schedule to the zone is 15 metres with a preferred building setback to Grimshaw and Flintoff Streets of 4.5 metres. In considering the current proposal, it is relevant to have regard to the Tribunal’s previous decision to withhold planning permission for a seven storey 23.2 metre high mixed use building at 4 Flintoff Street. In that case, the Tribunal was critical of the urban design response of the building; specifically the proposed 2 metre setback of the building to Grimshaw Street and the hard edge that the building presented to the
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 52
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d street. The proposed building setbacks to Flintoff Street of between 300mm and 4.5 metres were considered more acceptable but the presentation of the basement level car park structure to the street was considered visually obtrusive. The proposed building height of between two and three levels above the preferred building height was not in itself a concern to the Tribunal although further contextualisation of the built form was considered appropriate. The current proposal includes an additional parcel of land at 6 Flintoff Street which effectively doubles the size of the site previously considered. The proposed building now has a maximum height of 29.4 metres. Due to the slope of the site, the proposed building would be 3 to 5 five storeys higher than the preferred building height identified in the schedule to the zone. In addition, the building setbacks to Grimshaw and Flintoff Streets specified in the Scheme are 4.5 metres. The proposed ground level building setback to Grimshaw Street is between 900mm (at the tower) and 3 metres incorporating a 3 metre wide landscape strip. From Flintoff Street the setback ranges from zero (at the tower) to 6 metres, incorporating a 4 metre wide landscape strip. The upper levels of the building project up to 1.5 metres into these street setbacks. Whilst the provisions of the Scheme in relation to height and building setbacks are not mandatory, the objectives and intent of the schedule must be satisfied. The applicant’s urban designer has commented that given the site’s strategic corner location and size, there is merit for the site being recognised as a key development site and accommodate a robust form to complement the Water Marc complex opposite and establish a more legible urban form for the Centre. Key elements of the design response described by the urban designer include: Building height and façade has been modulated to avoid a squat looking horizontal building Demarcating the corner with a notable vertical element, a robust base presentation and recessive upper levels The verticality of the building articulated through variations in building setbacks Glazed ground level façade to Flintoff and Grimshaw Streets to increase interaction with the street Design detail focuses on the composition of the building and arrangement of materials The applicant’s urban designer has guided the form, massing and architectural detailing of the building. In terms of determining an appropriate building height or setbacks, a variation in the preferred height or setbacks can be considered by Council provided this meets the physical and strategic context of the particular site concerned. As referred to earlier in this report, Council’s consultants have also now commenced work preparing Urban Design Guidelines for Precinct 6 as part of the proposed review of the Schedule to the Activity Centre Zone. Whilst these guidelines have yet to be finalised and presented to Council for consideration, the preliminary draft guidelines indicate that an eight storey building with a podium is appropriate for this site with a landmark feature on the Grimshaw/Flintoff Street corner. A contextual analysis of the proposed building in relation to land to the east at 16-22 Grimshaw Street (accommodating the four storey Centrelink/Medicare building) and
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 53
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d land to the west accommodating Council’s WaterMark building (as proposed to be extended) demonstrates that the proposal, whilst stepping up some 8.3 metres from the height of the Centrelink building to approximately 3 metres above the highest part of the proposed WaterMarc extension, will sit comfortably in the Grimshaw Street streetscape and at the corner of Flintoff Street. In the Flintoff Street streetscape, the building will be substantially higher than the adjoining two storey office building at 8 Flintoff Street but it is anticipated that the review of the height controls will promote redevelopment of this site in due course. In this instance it is considered that an increase in the preferred building height by up to four stories can be achieved whilst being respectful of the scale of surrounding development and the existing and emerging strategic and physical site context. This is subject to the podium height of the building being reduced to four storeys, deletion of the third floor level of the building and a minimum wall setback to Flintoff and Grimshaw Streets at all levels above the podium of 5 metres from the face of the podium, except for the tower at the corner of Flintoff and Grimshaw Streets. Glazed or visually lightweight balconies may project up to 1.5 metres into this setback area. Whilst the building setbacks to Grimshaw and Flintoff Streets are less than the current preferred setbacks in the Scheme, the setbacks have incorporated planting areas of between 3 and 4 metres in depth to soften the street façade to all but the corner tower element. Furthermore, due to the modulation, configuration and elevational detailing of the proposed building and the key design response considerations outlined above, the proposed setbacks are considered to be reasonable. These modifications will bring the proposal in alignment with the emerging height and setback guidelines and will not adversely affect the architectural quality and integrity of the building. The removal of this level will result in a reduction of 6 one bedroom apartments and 5 two bedroom apartments. It is considered that the design, with the building height and setbacks modified as indicated, would be consistent with the current objectives for this precinct of the activity centre and the emerging built form guidelines discussed above. GUIDELINES FOR HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT In assessing the acceptability of the more detailed design elements of the proposal, Council is required to consider the Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Development. The proposal is considered to achieve a high level of compliance with the Guidelines and is supported. A detailed assessment against the Guidelines is included as Attachment 3. TRAFFIC AND PARKING The proposal generates a statutory on-site car parking requirement under Clause 52.06 of the Banyule Planning Scheme of 132 spaces. This comprises 70 parking spaces for apartment residents, 13 spaces for visitors, 14 spaces for the office use and 35 spaces for the retail use. The proposal is seeking to provide 70 on site car parking spaces. A reduction of 62 on site car parking spaces is therefore proposed.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 54
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.4
PROPOSED NINE TO TEN STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING AT 4-6 FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d Council’s engineers have undertaken an assessment of the proposed car parking provision. Based on the expected parking requirements for the commercial/office use and Australian Bureau of Statistics data and empirical observation for residential car ownership, Council’s engineers consider that sufficient on site car parking is provided to service the development. With the removal of Level 3, there will also be a reduction of 6 one bedroom apartments and 5 two bedroom apartments. This will reduce the overall parking shortfall of the proposal to 49 spaces. This will enable additional on site car parking to be provided to service the development. It is however considered that a Car Parking Allocation Plan should be prepared showing the car parking space allocation within the development for all retail, office and residential uses. The plan will include allocation of 20 on site car spaces to 20 of the 25 proposed one bedroom apartments (reduced from 31 one bedroom apartments as a result of the recommended deletion of the third floor level of the building) and one space to each of the four proposed retail spaces. The remaining 5 one bedroom apartments will not be provided with on-site car parking and will not eligible for parking permits. This will be required as a condition of permit through a Section 173 Legal Agreement. A total of 22 on site bicycle spaces are provided within the secure car parking areas within the development, eight publicly accessible spaces are also required. These comprise seven spaces for residential visitors and one shopper space for the proposed retail café area. Whilst these have not been provided, they are capable of being provided and this will be required as a condition of permit. Details of comments from Council’s Developments Engineers and VicRoads advice is annexed at Attachment 2 to this report. CONCLUSION It is considered that the site provides a good opportunity for a large scale mixed use development incorporating commercial and residential land uses. Subject to a reduction in the height of the building by deleting one level, establishing a podium height of four storeys and setting back the façade and balconies of the levels of the building above and behind the face wall of the podium, the proposal can be considered to adequately address the characteristics of the site, the existing Planning Scheme requirements and the emerging urban design guidelines in relation to height and built form. For these reasons the proposal is recommended for approval.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Plans
242
2
Background information
285
3
Guidelines For Higher Density Residential Develoopment
294
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page
Page 55
4.5
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.5
DRAFT HEIDELBERG AND BELL STREET MALL PARKING PLAN
Author:
Bailey Byrnes - Transport Planning Team Leader, City Development
Ward:
Griffin & Olympia
File:
F2013/611
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Heidelberg and Bell Street Mall Parking Plan (HBSMPP) considers parking trends and strategies to manage parking in the Heidelberg Activity Centre, the Bell Street Mall area, and their immediate surrounds. The draft HBSMPP is now proposed for public consultation. Responses to the draft will help inform a final HBSMPP. A final document is planned to be presented to Council for adoption later in the year. In terms of future planning, the Ivanhoe Parking Plan is proposed to be the next parking plan prepared, in the 2015/16 financial year. This replaces the Greensborough Parking Plan which was initially proposed to be prepared in the 2016/17 financial year. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.
Approve the draft Heidelberg and Bell Street Mall Parking Plan and associated parking overlays for public consultation with community feedback invited on the draft documents.
2.
Prepare the Ivanhoe Parking Plan in the 2015/16 financial year with the Greensborough Parking Plan scheduled for 2016/17 subject to an allocation in respective budgets.
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 “support sustainable transport”. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 56
DRAFT HEIDELBERG AND BELL STREET MALL PARKING PLAN cont’d Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. It is considered that the draft HBSMPP enhances and protects the following Human Rights: Your right to life (section 9) The accessibility of essential services is important in ensuring the community have access to medical care and associated facilities. This plan further enhances this right by improving accessibility to parking and increasing opportunity for parking through increased turnover. BACKGROUND The Banyule Activity Centre Car Parking Policy and Strategy (ACCPPS) was adopted by Council in November 2010 to guide the management of car parking within Banyule’s Activity Centres. One of the key initiatives of the ACCPPS is the development of a Parking Plan for each of Council’s Activity Centres, including Heidelberg, Ivanhoe and Greensborough. The development of parking plans for these centres also delivers on one of Council’s Place objectives of the City Plan to: Improve parking management in activity areas: Develop parking plans for key activity areas including Heidelberg, Greensborough and Ivanhoe. THE DRAFT HEIDELBERG AND BELL STREET MALL PARKING PLAN The aim of the HBSMPP is to provide an insight into car parking trends and issues within the Heidelberg Activity Centre, the Bell Street Mall area, and their immediate surrounds and to support a future car parking overlay in the Banyule Planning Scheme. The draft document is available in attachment 1 and considers parking in the areas shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1 – Heidelberg and Bell Street Mall Parking Plan Areas
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 57
4.5
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.5
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
DRAFT HEIDELBERG AND BELL STREET MALL PARKING PLAN cont’d The HBSMPP is structured into four sections. Part One reviews relevant Council policies and strategies to understand how the HBSMPP fits into the broader planning context, and considers current parking practices and policies around Victoria. Part Two provides an assessment of the current conditions within the Heidelberg Activity Centre, Bell Street Mall and surrounding areas, and the current parking trends within the precincts. A snapshot is provided of the current parking supply, utilisation and underlying issues, with consideration to the needs of all users of car parking in the area. Part Three outlines a range of management strategies that are proposed to be used to manage parking and travel demand within the study area. This includes management of on-street and off-street parking demand, use of parking technology and managing future parking demand. The final part examines the future parking needs in the area area, and provides an assessment of the impact of future developments, car parking rates within the area and the development of a financial contribution scheme to contribute to additional parking facilities. This information has been used to prepare draft Parking Overlays for both the Heidelberg and Bell Street Mall Activity Centres, which are appendices to the HBSMPP, and are included as Attachments 2, 3, 4 and 5. Understanding parking behaviour is critical to identifying problems and improving access to parking within the Activity Centre. The HBSMPP contains extensive analysis of parking data upon which Council can make evidence based decisions. Key inputs include:
A review of current parking practices in Victoria, including consideration of financial contribution schemes, bicycle and motorcycle parking, residential parking permits, paid parking and car parking rates. A review of current Council Plans, Policies and Strategies including the City Plan, Heidelberg Structure Plan, Banyule Activity Centre Car Parking Policy and Strategy 2010-2015. Parking surveys conducted on Friday 28 and Saturday 29 November 2014, and Friday 6 and Saturday 7 February 2015.
Key Findings High demand was identified for parking within Zone A of the Heidelberg Activity Centre (denoted orange in Figure 1), with very high occupancy levels in the on-street parking along Yarra Street, Burgundy Street, Darebin Street, Cape Street, Hawdon Street and Martin Street. Analysis of the duration of stay data indicates overstaying of time limits is highest onstreet, especially in areas with a one hour time limit. In Zone B surrounding the Heidelberg Area, demand for on-street parking is highest in areas with unrestricted time limits and around non-residential land uses such as the cemetery, schools, shops and medical centres. However, overall there is a low demand of on-street parking, with peak demand using 27% of the available supply. Within the core Zone A of the Bell Street Mall area (denoted green in Figure 1), the survey of parking supply and demand indicated a low level of utilisation, indicating adequate supply. The duration of stay in Zone A varies depending on the purpose of
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 58
DRAFT HEIDELBERG AND BELL STREET MALL PARKING PLAN cont’d the trip, with a shorter duration of stay observed at the ALDI and the Bell Street Mall car parks compared to the Melbourne Polytechnic car parks. In Zone B surrounding the Bell Street Mall area, there is a high demand for parking on Waterdale Road and sections of O’Keefe Street. This demand is most likely from drivers destined for the Heidelberg Repatriation Hospital. Overall there was a low level of utilisation of the on-street parking within this area, with demand for parking during the survey period similar to the peak hour recorded (13% of the available supply). This suggests that on-street parking is predominantly being used for residential purposes. Parking Management Strategies The HBSMPP identifies a number of strategies to better manage parking within the Heidelberg Activity Centre, the Bell Street Mall area, and their immediate surrounds. These include:
Managing the on-street parking restrictions in accordance with the existing Banyule ACCPPS; Providing greater transport mode choice – requiring the provision of Green Travel Plans for new developments, and a higher bicycle parking rate for particular land uses; Parking Technology – identification of technologies to enable higher turnover and better access to parking within the activity centres; Future multi-deck car park locations – Identification of areas within Zone A of the Heidelberg Activity Centre where future multi-level car parking could be provided; and New schedules to the Parking Overlay (PO) in the Banyule Planning Scheme – it is proposed to introduce two separate schedules to the PO for the Heidelberg Precinct Core Area and the Bell Street Mall and Heidelberg West Core Area to amend the parking rates for particular land uses, and provide a mechanism for a collection of a financial contribution in lieu of parking for developments. This contribution would go towards construction of a multi-deck car park and other parking and transport initiatives within these areas.
CONSULTATION Upon release of the draft HBSMPP, traders, businesses, residents and the wider community will be invited to provide feedback on the draft document over a one month period during June – July 2015, through:
Notification of land owners and tenants within the study area. An update of the Banyule Website, including links to the draft HBSMPP. A consultation survey (to be available through the Banyule Website).
A final HBSMPP will consider and incorporate additional feedback obtained through the consultation process and is expected to be formally adopted by Council later in 2015. The draft HBSMPP includes the draft schedules to the PO as appendices. Consultation on the draft will help inform the preparation of the Planning Scheme Amendment to introduce these schedules to the Banyule Planning Scheme. Once the final HBSMPP is adopted, a report will be presented to Council to request the Minister for Planning to authorise exhibition of the Planning Scheme Amendment. It is planned that the Amendment be publically exhibited in late 2015.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 59
4.5
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.5
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
DRAFT HEIDELBERG AND BELL STREET MALL PARKING PLAN cont’d
FUTURE PARKING PLANS In line with the ACCPPS, the draft 2015/16 Council budget allocates funding for the preparation of the Greensborough Parking Plan, with future funding for the preparation of the Ivanhoe Parking Plan. Significant change is expected in the Greensborough Activity Centre over the next two years, including the co-location of the Ivanhoe, Rosanna and Greensborough Council offices into a new office above WaterMarc. This development is expected to significantly alter parking demand within the Greensborough Activity Centre. It is considered that the preparation of a Parking Plan in Greensborough should be deferred until parking has settled down following Council’s move to the One Flintoff office. To progress the delivery of the parking plans, it is proposed that the preparation of the Ivanhoe Parking Plan be moved forward to 2015/16, with the Greensborough Parking Plan prepared in following years. CONCLUSION The draft HBSMPP has been prepared in response to a key initiative in Council’s City Plan. The document provides an insight into car parking trends and issues within the Heidelberg Activity Centre, the Bell Street Mall area, and their immediate surrounds. The HBSMPP provides an evidence-based analysis of current parking demand in the area, and identifies strategies to better manage parking demand into the future. Further consultation is proposed to inform the final document. ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Draft Heidelberg and Bell Street Mall Parking Plan (Under Separate Cover)
2 3
Draft Parking Overlay - Heidelberg Activity Centre Draft Parking Overlay Map - Heidelberg Activity Centre
301 304
4
Draft Parking Overlay - Bell Street Mall
305
5
Draft Parking Overlay Map - Bell Street Mall
307
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page
Page 60
4.6
UPDATE ON THE NEIGHBOURHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONE
Author:
Klover Apostola - Strategic Planner, City Development
File:
F2015/117
4.6
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
Previous Items Council on 15 September 2014 (Item 4.2 - Work Program for Strategic Planning Unit) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The new residential zones were approved for the Banyule Planning Scheme last year. As part of the approval the previous Minister for Planning replaced the two tailored schedules Council proposed for the Neighbourhood Residential Zone (NRZ), with one neutral schedule. The two schedules proposed by Council were then referred to the Residential Zones Standing Advisory Committee (the Committee) for review as draft amendment C125. After the schedules were referred to the Committee, Council resolved that further analysis and consultation should be done before pursuing refinements to the NRZ. Council also resolved to request that the Minister abandon the draft amendment so this further work could be progressed. The Committee has since reviewed the draft amendment and has agreed with Council’s position that further analysis and community consultation should be done before any further changes are made to the NRZ. The new Minister for Planning has agreed with the Committee’s recommendations. While awaiting this decision, Council completed the first stage of its further analysis. The analysis report recommends that the existing schedule to the NRZ (as introduced by the previous Minister) be retained in the Banyule Planning Scheme and monitored for its effectiveness before any further analysis is done for any future changes to it. Concurrently, Council could advocate to the Victorian Government for a revised approach to the NRZ. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Retain the alignment between Council’s strategic direction and the Schedule 3 to the Neighbourhood Residential Zone (NRZ3) that has been achieved in the Banyule Planning Scheme. 2. Receive a further Council report in the future that considers a revised Strategic Planning Work Program with ‘Monitoring and Review of the NRZ’ included. 3. Advocate for changes to the Neighbourhood Residential Zone by writing to the: a) Minister for Planning seeking more information for future review of the new residential zones. b) Municipal Association of Victoria, asking them to coordinate a response by Councils to any Victorian Government progress on the new zones review.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 61
4.6
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
UPDATE ON THE NEIGHBOURHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONE 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 “maintain and improve Banyule as a great place to live”. BACKGROUND Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C100 for the new residential zones was approved by the previous Minister for Planning on Tuesday 15 July 2014. In the approved version, the Minister replaced the proposed Schedules 1 and 2 to the Neighbourhood Residential Zone (NRZ) with the neutral Schedule 3 to the NRZ (NRZ3). As shown in the map in attachment 1, the NRZ3 was applied to all areas that were proposed for Schedules 1 and 2 to the NRZ (NRZ1 and NRZ2). This includes all Limited and Limited Incremental Areas, as well as the Accessible Areas East of the Plenty River (as shown in the Residential Areas Framework Map at Clause 21.06 of the Banyule Planning Scheme). The Minister referred the NRZ1 and NRZ2 to the Residential Zones Standing Advisory Committee (the Committee) for review. The table in attachment 2 shows the differences between the proposed NRZ1 and NRZ2, and the approved NRZ3. In September 2014 Council became aware that the NRZ1 and NRZ2 had been referred to the Committee for review as Draft Amendment C125 (the draft amendment). At the Council meeting on 15 September 2014, Council received a report which recommended that Council should do its own analysis for the NRZ details to confirm the structure and mapping for NRZ schedules, rather than progressing the draft amendment to explore the Committee’s support. At this meeting Council resolved to write to the previous Minister for Planning, requesting that the draft amendment be abandoned so that Council could progress a future alternative amendment for the NRZ. Council also resolved to adopt a work program for the Strategic Planning Unit that included progressing further implementation of the NRZ in Banyule. THE RESIDENTIAL ZONES STANDING ADVISORY COMMITTEE The Minister did not respond to Council’s request to abandon the draft amendment, and the Committee was obliged to continue their process to consider the NRZ schedules. A hearing with the Committee was held on 6 November 2014. Council’s submission maintained the position of the 15 September 2014 Council resolution and stated that: It was acknowledged that since Banyule’s original request for C100 was made, further guidance on the use of the reformed zones and schedules has been made
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 62
UPDATE ON THE NEIGHBOURHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONE cont’d available through the of the recommendations of the Committee and decisions Victorian Government on other Council’s proposals. After reviewing this further information, Council decided that the best approach for implementing further local variations to the NRZ in Banyule, would be to conduct further future analysis and community consultation before proposing any changes for approval. Should the Committee’s previous recommendations to the Minister about the new zones be acted upon, this would greatly assist in the further implementation of the NRZ. These recommendations included to: update the practice notes regarding neighbourhood character and the application of the new residential zones, and; review the integration of the role of zones and overlays in the Victorian planning system and how they manage built form outcomes. The Committee finalised their recommendations on the draft amendment to the new Minister for Planning on 5 December 2014. Banyule City Council received the Ministers decision and a copy of the Committee’s report on 2 April 2015. A copy is given in attachment 3. The Committee’s report generally agrees with Council’s submission, and concluded that: Further analysis is required for the locally tailored details of the NRZ1 and NRZ2. Further strategic work and community consultation should be done to determine any future schedules for the NRZ. The locally tailored details of the schedules should also consider the housing supply and affordability implications, as well as the effectiveness of existing local policies and overlays. Council should consider an alternative approach for managing larger lots that may be able to accommodate more dwellings than the NRZ3 allows. The NRZ schedule is not designed to include a sliding scale, as proposed in the NRZ1 and 2. In conclusion the Committee recommended that the draft amendment not be progressed any further. The new Minister for Planning has agreed with this recommendation and has advised that no changes will be made to the Banyule Planning Scheme. This means that the neutral Schedule 3 will continue to apply across the NRZ in Banyule, which sets a: Permit trigger for single dwellings and additions for lots under 500sqm. Mandatory maximum of two dwellings per lot, regardless of the lot size. Mandatory maximum building height of 8 meters. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 63
4.6
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.6
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
UPDATE ON THE NEIGHBOURHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONE cont’d ANALYSIS OF THE NRZ Since the Council resolution of 15 September 2014, the consulting services of Planisphere were engaged to assist Council in reviewing and analysing the best approach for further refining the NRZ. This first stage of analysis has been done and found that: Rather than applying blanket mandatory controls across the NRZ, it could be divided according to the Residential Neighbourhood Character Areas in the zone. Determining appropriate variations such as the minimum lot size for each area, could be an effective approach for providing flexibility in the NRZ. However, this would introduce more complexity in the Planning Scheme. Further detailed analysis is required before any schedule boundaries and schedule variations can be determined. Further monitoring of the operation of the NRZ3 should form part of this further analysis as it may provide more useful information before any specific NRZ variations are proposed. The analysis report given in attachment 4, also indicates that further work for progressing changes to the NRZ should be put on hold so that Council can give priority to: Monitoring the existing NRZ3 to appreciate its effectiveness. This should be informed by the recommendations of the Committee on the draft amendment. Advocating for NRZ reform, to build some flexibility for the way the Councils can apply local variations to the existing mandatory controls in the NRZ. This could include pursuing changes to enable the use of a sliding scale or density approach for dwellings, rather than being restricted to simply setting one maximum number of dwellings regardless of lot size. This would be best progressed with the Municipal Association of Victoria and other like-minded Councils, to prompt a new approach for the NRZ schedules. Pursuing a monitoring approach would also enable the review of the NRZ in other Councils in similar circumstances, and would give Council the opportunity review the outcomes of the review of the NRZ by the new Victorian Government. The new Minister for Planning has recently said that a review of the new residential zones will be announced later in the year, after they have been in place for a period of time. The Minister has said he wants to consult with Councils about how they are working. The recommended approach outlined above would enable Council to advocate for some potential changes to the NRZ during this process. A ‘Draft Monitoring and Review Program’ is shown in attachment 5. This will be further developed by Strategic Planning in consultation with other relevant teams at Council and as part of a future Council report on the Strategic Planning Work Program. Some aspects of the review can commence straight away, while others will require more time before results are evident. A summary of the draft program is shown in the chart below:
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 64
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
0 - 5 years •Monitor Development outcomes. •Review aspects of Council decisions.
Depending on outcome of Step 1 •Prepare subdivision guidelines. •Consider alternative controls for larger lots.
•Monitor vacant land subdivisions.
4.6
UPDATE ON THE NEIGHBOURHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONE cont’d
Before proposing changes to the NRZ3 •Consider housing supply and affordability impacts. •Review the operation of local policies and overlays alongside NRZ.
Figure 1: Summary of Draft Monitoring and Review Program for the NRZ3
The monitoring program would review the operation of the NRZ3 over time to appreciate its effectiveness. It should also investigate alternative schedule options, and be informed by the direction provided by the new Victorian Government. CONCLUSION Given the current limitations in the structure of the NRZ, and the likelihood that this will be reviewed by the Minister for Planning, it is considered that the NRZ3 should be retained and monitored while zone reform is pursued. This approach will give the most effective means to: Retain the alignment between Council’s strategic direction and the NRZ outcome that has been achieved. Enable ongoing monitoring and review of the existing NRZ for possible future refinements that can be strategically justified. The detail and timing of this review will be considered as part of a review of the Strategic Planning Work Program. Prompt the Government to explore reasonable options for future use of NRZ schedules. ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Locations of the NRZ 1, 2 and 3
308
2
Summary table of NRZ1, 2 and 3
309
3
Residential Zones Standing Advisory Committee Report on Draft Amendment C125
312
4 5
NRZ Schedule Review Report Draft NRZ Monitoring and Review Program
335 413
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page
Page 65
4.7
BANKSIA REDEVELOPMENT SITE AND BANKSIA COMMUNITY STADIUM PRECINCT PROJECT UPDATE (FORMER BANKSIA SECONDARY COLLEGE)
Author:
Michael Hutchison - Projects Coordinator, City Development
Ward:
Olympia
File:
F2014/343
Previous Items Council on 13 April 2015 (Item 4.2 - Bellfield Redevelopment Site and Banksia Community Stadium Precinct Project update (Former Banksia Secondary College)) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Banyule City Council purchased three former school sites in November 2013 to amongst other things, secure an important community asset, the Banksia Community Stadium. The asset was until then, owned by the Victorian State Government forming part of the Banksia Secondary College. Given the closure of three schools within the municipality, in September 2014 Banyule Council resolved to retain the Bellfield site keeping it available for the State to purchase and re-establish as an educational facility following the 2014 State election. The current government has not expressed a desire to re-acquire the site. Following a series of investigations, it is now established that, consistent with Sport and Recreation Victoria guidelines, the existing stadium structure is not suitable for refurbishment. The building structure is in a state of disrepair and subject to ongoing vandalism. In readiness for a new purpose built facility, the delivery of a master planning exercise is now deemed appropriate parallel to the demolition of the existing structure. It is considered that any investment in undertaking short-term remedial works to the existing stadium would deliver limited community benefit and will still ultimately result in the structure being demolished. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Reconfirms its commitment to provide $7m towards the Banksia Community Stadium precinct project. 2. Continue to seek and investigate community, State and Commonwealth funding and support for the Banksia Community Stadium precinct project. 3. Initiate further consultation with the community and potential user groups explaining the unsuitability of the stadium for refurbishment in the short term and indicating an intention to undertake the demolition of remaining structures on its land located at 230-232 Banksia Street, Bellfield. 4. Consider a future report outlining the outcomes of the community consultation. 5. Subject to budget approval, begin preparation of a precinct master plan which
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 66
4.7
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
BANKSIA REDEVELOPMENT SITE AND BANKSIA COMMUNITY STADIUM PRECINCT PROJECT UPDATE (FORMER BANKSIA SECONDARY COLLEGE) cont’d considers the area bounded by Darebin Creek, Ford Park, Waterdale Road, Banksia Street and Perkins Avenue, including the multipurpose stadium site. 6.
OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “maintain and improve Banyule as a great place to live”. BACKGROUND The Department of Education and Early Childhood Development decommissioned and sold three school sites to Banyule City Council in November 2013. As illustrated in the locality map below, the three former school sites are situated in Heidelberg Heights, Bellfield and Ivanhoe.
Figure 1 – Former school sites located in the Olympia Ward (top to bottom) 1. 2. 3.
Former Haig Street Primary School site: 52 Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights (Haig Street site). Former Banksia Secondary College site: 228-230 Banksia Street, Bellfield (Bellfield site). Former Bellfield Primary School site: 229 Banksia Street, Ivanhoe (Ivanhoe site).
Following a comprehensive community consultation exercise, the former Haig Street site was sold by Council for development purposes to Metricon. The former Bellfield site was later sold to Stockland. Development is likely to begin on these sites over the coming months. The former Banksia Secondary College in Bellfield was acquired by Council primarily to secure an important community asset, the Banksia Community Stadium. Acknowledging community concern following the closure of three educational facilities in December 2011, at its meeting held on 1 September 2014, Council resolved that it:
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 67
4.7
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.7
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
BANKSIA REDEVELOPMENT SITE AND BANKSIA COMMUNITY STADIUM PRECINCT PROJECT UPDATE (FORMER BANKSIA SECONDARY COLLEGE) cont’d
1.
Reconfirms its position that the land known as crown allotment 2081 will remain available for a new educational facility until the state election on 29 November 2014.
2.
Continues to work with Darebin Council and the Metropolitan Planning Authority on community infrastructure capacity and the planning framework for the LaTrobe Employment Cluster including future educational needs in the area.
Consistent with this resolution, Council has retained the site for potential State Government acquisition and continues to work with Darebin City Council and the Metropolitan Planning Authority in the preparation of an employment cluster planning framework for inclusion in the Banyule Planning Scheme. Locality Plan
Figure 2 –
Bellfield Redevelopment site and proposed Banksia Community Stadium site (shown hatched)
CURRENT SITUATION Council has undertaken a thorough assessment of the existing stadium on the Bellfield site. The assessment included working with Sport and Recreation Victoria (SRV) to assess the potential refurbishment of the existing stadium, the result of which established: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
The current stadium building is in a state of disrepair; The building has sustained a high degree of vandalism; The current building currently houses two courts; Local demand warrants at least four courts with a need to grow to six courts; The current siting of the existing building constrains potential expansion and impacts on operational efficiency in a four court arrangement;
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 68
BANKSIA REDEVELOPMENT SITE AND BANKSIA COMMUNITY STADIUM PRECINCT PROJECT UPDATE (FORMER BANKSIA SECONDARY COLLEGE) cont’d 6.
Consistent with SRV stadium standards, the building does not have sufficient run off space required for Netball use; 7. A new multi-purpose building is deemed the only available option to cater for community needs and growth demand into the future; 8. No State or Commonwealth Government funding has been made available to Council at this stage for the stadium project; 9. A new multi-purpose facility is likely to require an estimated $11.5m (including the provision of car parking), in capital funds for a new four court facility of which Council has committed $7m; 10. A two-court facility is not financially sustainable; 11. The site and plans were also assessed by the Victorian Architect Panel, which confirmed its current restrictions. In the lead up to the 2014 Victorian State election, the then State Government made an election promise of $3m towards the Banksia Community Stadium precinct project. Following the outcome of the election, the current State Government has not been forthcoming with a similar proposition. Furthermore, Commonwealth Government funding is not currently available under existing programs at this time. In 2014, Council initiated negotiations with the private sector for sponsorship rights in lieu of capital funds to construct the facility. The outcome of these negotiations, unfortunately, has not resulted in a commitment. However, Council has continued its exploration of alternate opportunities consistent with sponsorship or other development outcomes. Local community organisations have also recently expressed a high degree of commitment to raising funds; however it is acknowledged that the timing of this would be more appropriate and relevant once substantive funding from the State and Commonwealth is secured. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION Following the closure and decommissioning of the former State Government Banksia College in December 2011, the structures on the site remained unoccupied and unavailable for public use for nearly two years before Council acquired the site. Since then, the remaining structures on the site have degraded considerably and despite security fencing and securing entry points, unauthorised entry of the buildings is ongoing. The frequent breaches to the fence and buildings usually result in acts of vandalism, contributing to the current state of disrepair. Having established that the current stadium structure is not appropriate to accommodate the multi-purpose needs of the community, it is now considered prudent to demolish the existing structure in readiness to explore opportunities for a purpose built facility. An alternative to immediate demolition is to undertake remedial works to provide limited access to the existing two courts, therefore facilitating short-term use. Regardless of whether the existing structures are demolished or temporarily reactivated, given the strategic nature of the site and nearby community facilities, it is also considered appropriate that a master planning exercise be initiated to establish the best use of the land and to assess nearby community facility needs in parallel.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 69
4.7
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.7
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
BANKSIA REDEVELOPMENT SITE AND BANKSIA COMMUNITY STADIUM PRECINCT PROJECT UPDATE (FORMER BANKSIA SECONDARY COLLEGE) cont’d
Figure 3 – Locality plan and site context for proposed area for master plan
Several planning zones exist across the identified master planning precinct illustrated above in Figure 3: Zone code PPRZ UFZ PUZ-LG GRZ1 RGZ2 PUZ – E
Zone Public Park and Recreation Zone Urban Floodway Zone Public Use Zone – Local Government General Residential Zone – Schedule 1 Residential Growth Zone – Schedule 2 Public use Zone - Education
FUNDING IMPLICATIONS The anticipated cost of constructing a new multi-purpose centre featuring four courts and associated car parking is currently estimated at $11.5m, of which Council has committed $7m. This translates to a funding gap of approximately $4m. The approximate cost of demolishing the existing stadium structure is $300k, which has been factored in the 2014/15 Budget. The estimated annual current maintenance costs associated with retaining the current stadium structure is $26,520. The total cost of modestly refurbishing the existing structures for limited short-term use is estimated at $1.6m. Such investment would deliver: Provision of public building needs, including accessible toilet and access path Two courts for training – one timber and one “pulastic” (an indoor cushioned synthetic floor for multi-purpose uses) Renew one small office Provision of storage room for each court Basic renewal of existing toilets (in the context of limited change room space)
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 70
BANKSIA REDEVELOPMENT SITE AND BANKSIA COMMUNITY STADIUM PRECINCT PROJECT UPDATE (FORMER BANKSIA SECONDARY COLLEGE) cont’d
The above refurbishment will not deliver viewing areas primarily due to the existing building footprint. Furthermore, the refurbished courts will not meet relevant netball standards for games but will suffice for training purposes. CONSULTATION Prior to acquiring the former school sites, Council engaged with the community and delivered:
Community information sessions held in April 2014 at the Bellfield Community Centre. The establishment and formation of a Community Reference Group. Ward newsletter updates and Banyule Banner articles. Regular website updates. Reports to Council.
Council has consistently maintained that the scale, timing and delivery of the Banksia Community Stadium Project is based on the level of support provided by the State and Commonwealth Government. The proposed Precinct Master Plan will provide Council an opportunity to further engage with all stakeholders to better understand precinct aspirations and to gather feedback, thoughts and comments. DISCUSSION In light of the factors referenced in this report, it is timely that the following steps be considered to further progress the future of the site: 1. Demolish and tidy up site Council should immediately take to demolishing the existing stadium structure on the Bellfield site. As well as being regularly vandalised and further degraded despite security fencing, continuing unauthorised access presents a safety risk. The current structures on site are also inherently unsuitable to cost effectively be utilised as a genuine future multi-purpose stadium. Further consultation with the community and user groups is warranted to better understand the unsuitability of the stadium for refurbishment in the short term indicating an intention to commence demolition of remaining structures on Council’s land located at 230-232 Banksia Street, Bellfield. 2. Secure funding for the Banksia Community Stadium project The scale of the future Banksia Community Stadium project is dependent on future funding but is premised on a four or six court facility and guided by principles in Council’s adopted community needs infrastructure study “3081 Community Services Strategy and Facilities Plan”. 3. Master plan A new precinct-wide master plan that considers the area bounded by Darebin Creek, Ford Park, Waterdale Road, Banksia Street and Perkins Avenue (shown in figure 3) will provide Council an opportunity to develop a broader
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 71
4.7
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.7
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
BANKSIA REDEVELOPMENT SITE AND BANKSIA COMMUNITY STADIUM PRECINCT PROJECT UPDATE (FORMER BANKSIA SECONDARY COLLEGE) cont’d vision that could better consolidate and integrate land uses for the different stakeholders in the affected area. The affected stakeholders in this greater precinct include:
Council Operations Centre and Waste Recovery Centre; Council Parks and Gardens Depot; Visy Materials Recovery Centre Bellfield Community Centre and centre user groups; Department of Education and Training; HiCity; Royal District Nursing Service; Several sporting clubs including Bellfield Cricket Club, Ivanhoe Junior Football Club, St. James Tennis Club, Yarra Valley Hockey Club; Ivanhoe Netball Club, Banyule Hawks Basketball Club and Ivanhoe Knights Basketball Club; Waterdale players theatre group;
There are a number of further challenges associated with this approach which need to be further understood. The initial stages of the project would seek to establish the relationship between:
Various current zonings and uses of land; Diverse number of stakeholders and differing needs; Consideration of any existing agreements with stakeholders.
4. Confirming land available for redevelopment Undertaking a master planning exercise may also uncover and examine other potential uses, including the identification or confirmation of alternate land appropriate for redevelopment which will assist in offsetting some of the costs associated with the Banksia Community Stadium project. 5. Redevelopment after confirming Banksia Community Stadium precinct development timing Following the outcome of the above steps, Council could investigate the sale of the development land through a two-phase Expression of Interest (EOI) and Request for Tender (RFT) process. Prior to the commencement of this process, community engagement would be undertaken, the outcomes of which would be used to inform Development Guidelines for the site, similar to those applied at the Heidelberg Heights and Ivanhoe school site redevelopments. The repair and refurbishment of two courts would allow some limited short-term use while the master plan is being developed and the funding gap is being addressed. However, the opportunity cost of providing a short-term repair for limited use requires attentive consideration. An evidence based planning and research approach has been undertaken to confirm that the refurbishment of the two courts would: a) Not provide a facility that meets contemporary standards due to courts dimension standards and access for all provision.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 72
BANKSIA REDEVELOPMENT SITE AND BANKSIA COMMUNITY STADIUM PRECINCT PROJECT UPDATE (FORMER BANKSIA SECONDARY COLLEGE) cont’d b) Provide no opportunity for future expansion. c) Be contrary to the advice from Sport and Recreation Victoria and the Victorian Architect Panel. d) The Victorian Architect Panel confirmed the restriction of the current facility and encouraged Council to take a long term view in relation to any potential development. On this basis, further consultation will provide an opportunity for Council to articulate the specialist advice received, indicating the unsuitability of the stadium for refurbishment. TIMELINES The following table provides an indication of timelines: Table 1: Indicative timelines
Steps Demolition consultation Report to Council Demolition works Secure funding Master planning Confirming land available for development Prepare land for redevelopment
Timelines July 2015 – September 2015 October 2015 October 2015 – November 2015 Ongoing October 2015 – May 2016 Early 2016 2016-2017
CONCLUSION The immediate demolition of the existing structure is considered necessary and the most financially prudent option moving forward. However, further consultation with the community and user groups may be warranted to explain the Council position. Subject to regular and ongoing vandalism, the existing stadium has been further degraded and continues to present a safety risk. Given that the building is not conducive to being expanded and converted into a new multi-purpose facility, its demolition parallel to the preparation of a precinct master plan will provide a sound basis for exploring all opportunities available to Council in delivering an optimal solution for the community. The interim repair of the existing building, making it available for interim use, will not deliver sufficient return to the community. This is particularly important to note as the building will ultimately need to be demolished rendering any interim investment futile.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 73
4.7
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.8
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG
Author:
Una McCafferkey - Development Planner, City Development
Ward:
Grimshaw
File:
P1345/14
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The applicant, Cartmell Street Joint Venture, seeks to build a five story building plus basement, with 66 one and two bedroom apartments. The building is attached at the basement and is then separated into two distinct forms; the separation between buildings increases with height. Car parking is provided in a basement accessed from Cartmell Street. All resident parking is provided on-site, however a reduction of five (5) visitor car spaces is required. There is no significant vegetation on the site. The design of the building provides a positive response to the intentions of the DDO5 however there is a variation to the preferred overall building height and height of the podium façade. The variation is supported because:
Due to the slope of the site the building will have a maximum height of 16.5m above street footpath level. This is only 3.5m higher than the 13.0m suggested for Precinct Plan 3 at section 8 of the DDO5.
The upper two levels are well recessed from all sides of the building and occupy only the central part of the overall site.
The building setbacks are considered to be responsive to the streetscape and abutting land uses.
A comprehensive assessment has been made with regard to topography and public views of the Burgundy St valley. The overall height of the building will not significantly impact views of the valley.
The modest shortfall in visitor car parking is also considered acceptable given the location of the site within walking distance of the Heidelberg Train Station, Smart Buses along Burgundy St and adjoining public car park. There is however substantial community interest in this proposal with 38 objections received. The majority of these objections are from surrounding properties in Cartmell, Hawdon, and Darebin Streets. It is recommended that the application is approved with appropriate conditions. RECOMMENDATION That Council having complied with Section 52, 58, 60, 61 and 62 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit in respect of Application No. P1345/2014 for Multiunit development - 62 Apartments and a reduction in the standard number of car spaces required at 13 -17 Cartmell Street HEIDELBERG, subject to the following conditions: Plans
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 74
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d 1.
Before the development permitted by this permit starts, amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the advertised plans submitted with the application but modified to show: (a)
Clarification of the ‘open’ notation on the rear elevation at basement level;
(b)
Car park level fenestration treated to prevent overlooking towards the south and the west Use Standard B22 of Clause 55 as guidance;
(c)
Architectural implementation of the recommendations of the Noise Assessment required by Condition 18 of this permit;
(d)
An additional 3 car parking spaces which can be provided using vehicle stackers;
(e)
Landscaping as required by Condition 2 of this permit;
(f)
Engineering plans showing a properly prepared design with computations for the internal drainage and method for of disposal of stormwater from all roofed areas and sealed areas including: (i)
The use of an On-site Stormwater Detention (OSD) system;
(ii)
The connection to the Council nominated legal point of discharge;
(iii)
The outfall drainage works necessary to connect the subject site to the Council nominated Legal Point of Discharge;
(iv)
The integration, details and connections of all Water Sensitive Urban Design features in accordance with the endorsed Sustainable Management Plan.
Please note the Engineering plans must show all protected and/or retained trees on the development site, on adjoining properties where tree canopies encroach the development site and along proposed outfall drainage and roadway alignments (where applicable) and every effort must be made to locate services away from the canopy drip line of trees and where unavoidable, details of hand work or trenchless installation must be provided. (g)
The Tree Preservation Fencing in accordance with Condition 26 of this permit;
(h)
A schedule of external building materials and colours, including details of cladding and roofing materials; the schedule should be presented on a separate sheet and must include colour samples.
(i)
Annotation as to how corridors will be ventilated - preferably naturally;
(j)
The location and sizing of the heat recovery ventilators to be indicated and annotated on the plans;
(k)
A minimum of 12 of the dwellings designed and annotated to meet the Banyule Council Liveable Housing Guidelines (available on Council website);
(l)
The location and sizing of any photovoltaic power generation systems;
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 75
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d (m)
2.
All sustainable design features indicated in the submitted Sustainability Management Plan submitted with the application. Where sustainable design features outlined in the SMP cannot be visually shown, include a notes table providing details of the requirements (i.e. energy and water efficiency ratings for heating/cooling systems and plumbing fittings and fixtures, etc). This must include water tanks with an effective capacity of 30 000L, plumbed to at least 27 bathrooms as outlined on page 26 the SMP.
The development permitted by this permit must not be commenced until a satisfactory detailed landscaping plan is submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. Such plan must be prepared by a person suitably qualified or experienced in landscape design and be generally in accordance with the Landscape Concept Plan by CCA Design Group submitted with the application (dated November 2014) but expanded to include a plan for vegetation at each level, and shall include: (a)
An indigenous and/or drought tolerant planting theme;
(b)
A schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground cover, which includes the location and size at maturity of all plants, the botanical names of such plants and the location of all areas to be covered by grass, lawn or other surface material as specified;
(c)
Location and details of paving, steps, retaining walls, fence design details and other landscape works including cut and fill.
(d)
Garden beds for the majority of balcony edges that are integrated in to the building structure in order that greenery of each façade is provided. Climbing plants on trellis structures are encouraged to maximise a ‘green façade’.
General 3.
The development as shown on the endorsed plans or described in the endorsed documents must not be altered or modified except with the written consent of the Responsible Authority.
4.
Before the development permitted by this permit starts, all lots comprising the subject land must be consolidated into one lot under the Subdivision Act 1988.
5.
Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority the development permitted by this permit must not be commenced until: (a)
6.
The tree protection measures required by Condition 26 are installed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority the development permitted by this permit must not be occupied until the development has been completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority in accordance with the permit and endorsed plans (including, but not limited to built form and layout, parking, landscaping, drainage, street numbering, replacement of street trees).
Section 173 agreement
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 76
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d
7.
Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, prior to the commencement of works the owner/s of the land at 13-17 Cartmell St Heidleberg must enter into an agreement with the Responsible Authority pursuant to Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Such agreement shall require that all waste collection from the land will be carried out by a private waste collector in accordance with the Waste Management Plan endorsed as part of Planning Permit P1345/14. A memorandum of the Agreement is to be entered on title and the cost of the preparation and execution of the Agreement and entry of the memorandum on title is to be paid by the owner.
8.
The waste bin area must be provided prior to the occupation of the development permitted by this permit, maintained and used to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and must not be used for any other purpose.
Urban Design / External Appearance 9.
The walls of the development on the boundary of adjoining properties must be cleaned and finished in a manner to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
10.
Any air-conditioning or cooling units, condensers and the like must not be located on external walls or on balconies without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.
11.
All pipes (except down-pipes), fixtures, fittings and vents servicing any building on the site must be concealed in service ducts or otherwise hidden from external view to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
12.
All telecommunications and power connections (where by means of a cable) and associated infrastructure to the land must be underground to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
Graffiti prevention measures 13.
Any walls or spaces accessible to the public must be treated in accordance with Safer Design and CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) Principles. Where appropriate the following measures must be implemented to the satisfaction of the responsible authority: (a)
textured or rough services that make it difficult to apply graffiti;
(b)
permeable fencing instead of solid walls;
(c)
buildings with high-density, low absorbency materials;
(d)
anti-graffiti coating to protect the surface when building or revitalising the walls (including façade);
(e)
sensor lighting and/or enhanced surveillance to deter graffitists;
(f)
the break up of large surfaces to minimise the canvas available for graffitists; and
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 77
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d (g) 14.
measures to make surfaces less liable to graffiti.
The permit holder/occupier must promptly remove or obliterate any graffiti on the subject site which is visible to the public and keep the site free from graffiti at all times to the satisfaction of the responsible authority
Environmentally Sustainable Design 15.
All works must be undertaken in accordance with the endorsed Sustainability Management Plan (SMP) and STORM report prepared by Northern Environmental Design, dated 28 May 2014 to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. No alterations to the SMP may occur without prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.
16.
Prior to the occupation of any dwelling approved under this permit, a statement from the author of the SMP report, approved pursuant to this permit, or similarly qualified person or company, must be submitted to the Responsible Authority. The statement must confirm that all measures specified in the SMP have been implemented in accordance with the approved plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Bicycle Parking 17.
Unless otherwise agreed in writing, three bicycle hoops providing secure lock up parking for 6 bicycles are to be provided to Council satisfaction within the road reserve (nature strip) in front of the site in proximity to the building entrances.
Noise Assessment 18.
A Noise Assessment prepared by a suitable qualified person or company must be provided to Councils satisfaction. This report must take account of all noise associated with the use of the basement car park including noise resulting from use of the vehicle stackers. Noise impacts on abutting dwellings is to included and recommendations for any preventative structural measures to reduce noise transfer must be included.
Construction Management Plan 19.
Before the development starts, a construction management plan must be prepared and submitted to the Responsible Authority for approval. The plan must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Once approved, the plan must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The plan must address the following issues: (a)
measures to control noise, dust and water runoff;
(b)
prevention of silt or other pollutants from entering into the Council’s underground drainage system or road network;
(c)
the location of where building materials are to be kept during construction;
(d)
site security;
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 78
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d (e)
maintenance of safe movement of vehicles to and from the site during the construction phase;
(f)
on-site parking of vehicles associated with construction of the development;
(g)
wash down areas for trucks and vehicles associated with construction activities;
(h)
cleaning and maintaining surrounding road surfaces;
(i)
measures to maintain access for pedestrians and road users along Cartmell Street and the adjoining Council Car Park during construction; and
(j)
compliance with Banyule City Council General Local Law No. 1 (2015)
Car Parking / Access 19.
Areas set aside for the parking of vehicles together with the aisles and access lanes must be properly formed to such levels that they can be utilised in accordance with the endorsed plans and must be drained and provided with an all-weather seal coat. The areas must be constructed, drained and maintained in a continuously useable condition to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
20.
Areas set aside for the parking and movement of vehicles as shown on the endorsed plan(s) must be made available for such use and must not be used for any other purpose.
21.
The boundaries of all car spaces, access and egress lanes and the direction in which vehicles should proceed along the access lanes must at all times be clearly indicated on the ground to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
22.
Vehicular access or egress to the subject land from any roadway or service lane must be by way of a vehicle crossing constructed in accordance with Council’s Vehicle Crossing Specifications to suit the proposed driveway(s) and the vehicles that will use the crossing(s). The location, design and construction of the vehicle crossing(s) must be approved by the Responsible Authority. Any existing unused crossing(s) must be removed and replaced with concrete kerb, channel and naturestrip to the satisfaction of the Council prior to occupation of the building. All vehicle crossing works are to be carried out with Council Supervision under a Memorandum of Consent for Works which must be obtained prior to commencement of works.
23.
Unless otherwise agreed in writing, prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a Car Park Management Plan must be prepared and approved to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Such a plan must clearly identify, although is not limited to outlining: (a)
(b)
Unless otherwise agreed in writing, parking must be allocated as follows: (i)
1 space to each dwellings.
(ii)
4 spaces for visitor parking.
Details of any warning light / boom gate systems etc. to control and
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 79
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d manage the movement of vehicles to and from the basement. (c)
Where storage enclosures are provided at the end of a car space, the enclosure must be allocated to the dwelling that has been allocated the car space.
(d)
Details as to how the following matters will be brought to the attention of prospective purchasers: (i)
That occupants of the dwellings on the land have no entitlement to on-street or off-street parking by way of a resident vehicle parking permit.
Tree Protection / Landscaping 24.
Except with the further written consent of the Responsible Authority, no vegetation (other than that indicated on the endorsed plan, or exempt from planning permission under the provisions of the Banyule Planning Scheme) shall be damaged, removed, destroyed or lopped.
25.
Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, prior to the commencement of works (including demolition) on the site Tree Preservation Zones must be established around the Street trees. You must contact Council’s Development Planning Arborist on 9457 9878 once the Tree Preservation Fencing is erected so that an inspection of the fencing can be carried out. Once installed and inspected the Tree Preservation Zones must be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, and meet the following requirements: (a)
Extent Tree Preservation Zones are to be provided to the extent of the canopy of the street trees (within the nature strip) indicated as being retained on the endorsed plan
(b)
Weed control Any weeds located within the Tree Preservation Zone are to be removed and the area mulched with 100mm of composted coarse grade woodchips.
(c)
(d)
Fencing (i)
Vegetation Preservation fences with a minimum height of 1.2 to 1.5 metres and of chain mesh or like fence with 1.8 metre posts (e.g. treated pine) or like support every 3-4 metres and a top line of high visibility plastic hazard tape must be erected around the perimeter of the zone.
(ii)
The posts must be strong enough to sustain knocks from on site excavation equipment.
(iii)
The fences must not be removed or relocated without the prior consent of the Responsible Authority.
Signage Fixed signs are to be provided on all visible sides of the Tree Preservation Fencing, stating “Tree Preservation Zone – No entry without permission from the City of Banyule”.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 80
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d (e)
Irrigation The area must be irrigated during the summer months with 1 litre of clean water for every 1 cm of trunk girth measured at the soil / trunk interface on a weekly basis.
(f)
Access to Tree Preservation Zone (i)
(ii)
(iii) (iv)
No persons, vehicles or machinery are to enter the Vegetation Protection Zone except with the consent of the Responsible Authority; No fuel, oil dumps or chemicals are allowed to be used or stored within the Vegetation Preservation Zone and the servicing and refuelling of equipment and vehicles must be carried out away from the root zones; No storage of material, equipment or temporary building is to take place within the Vegetation Preservation Zone; Nothing whatsoever, including temporary services wires, nails, screws or any other fixing device, is to be attached to any tree.
NOTE: Requests for consent of the Responsible Authority (City of Banyule) pursuant to this Condition should be directed to Council’s Arborist – Development Planning on 9457 9878. Consent for the conduct of works within the Tree Protection Zone, where granted, may be subject to conditions. Such conditions may include a requirement that: Any underground service installations within the Tree Protection Zone be bored to a depth of 1.5 metres;
26.
All root excavation be carried out by hand digging or with the use of ‘AirExcavation’ techniques; Roots required to be cut are to be severed by saw cutting and undertaken by a qualified arborist.
Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, the landscaping areas shown on the endorsed plans must used for landscaping and no other purpose and any landscaping must be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.
Time Limits 27.
In accordance with section 68 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, this permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies: (a)
The development is not commenced within two years of the date of this permit;
(b)
The development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit.
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:
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 81
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d (a)
Before the permit expires, or
(b)
Within six months afterwards, or
(c)
Within 12 months afterwards if the development started lawfully before the permit expired.
PERMIT NOTES (A)
Expiry of Permit In the event that this permit expires or the subject land is proposed to be used or developed for purposes different from those for which this permit is granted, there is no guarantee that a new permit will be granted. If a permit is granted then the permit conditions may vary from those included on this permit having regard to changes that might occur to circumstances, planning scheme provisions or policy.
(B)
Additional approvals required Building Permit Required A Building Permit must be obtained prior to the commencement of any works associated with the proposed development. Building over Easements No structure (including but not limited to sheds, retaining walls, eaves, water tanks, paving and landings) shall be built over any easement on the subject land except with the consent of the relevant Responsible Authority. Access to Council Reserve No permission can be granted either temporary or otherwise by Council and/or its employees with respect to access to the adjacent Council owned land (including the road reserve and Council carpark) for any purposes relating to the proposal (eg. parking of surplus vehicles, delivery of materials etc.), without application being made for the requisite permit (ie. Local Law Permit). Supervision of works undertaken on Council Assets Council’s Construction Department must supervise all works undertaken on Council assets within private property, Council Reserves, easements, drainage reserves and/or road reserves, including connection of the internal drainage system to the existing Council assets. Prior to the commencement of any works, an application must be made and a permit received for:
A “Memorandum of Consent for Works” for any works within the road reserve; and/or
A “Drainage Connection Permit” for any works other than within a road reserve.
Asset Inspection Fee Prior to the commencement of building works on site in accordance with Local Law 1, a non-refundable Asset Inspection Fee is payable to Council for the inspection of existing Council assets. For further information in relation to this
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 82
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d process and the relevant fee please contact Council’s Construction Department on 9490 4222. Removal of Street Tree For the required process and any information concerning the removal of a street tree, enquiries should be directed to Banyule Tree Care Department. (D)
Action on/for completion Completion of Development Immediately upon completion of the development permitted by this permit, the owner or developer of the subject land must notify Council’s Development Planning Section that the development is complete and complies with all requirements of the permit. The development will then be inspected to ensure compliance. An early inspection process will ensure that the subdivision approvals including the Statement of Compliance can be issued without delay. Residential Noise (/air-conditioning unit/vacuum unit etc) The operation of the (/air-conditioning unit/vacuum unit etc) shall comply with the Environment Protection (Residential Noise) Regulations 1997. Prohibited times of use as specified by the Regulations are Monday to Friday before 7am and after 10pm & Weekends and public holidays before 9am and after 10pm (if audible from a habitable room of a neighbouring property).
(E)
Previous Planning Approvals This Planning Permit must be read in conjunction with previous permits that may affect the site.
Planning Permit Application:
P1345/14
Development Planner:
Matt Dobson
Address:
13-17 Cartmell Street Heidleberg
Proposal:
Multiunit development - 62 Apartments and a reduction in the standard number of car spaces required
Existing Use/Development:
Three lots with single dwellings
Applicant:
Cartmell Street Joint Venture
Zoning:
Residential Growth Zone – schedule 1
Overlays:
Vegetation Protection Overlay- schedule 5 (VPO5) Design and Development Overly –schedule 5 (DDO5)
Notification (Advertising):
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Public notification was conducted by means of erecting three signs on the site and posting notices to the owners and occupiers of surrounding properties.
Page 83
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d Objections Received:
A total of 38 objections have been received.
Ward:
Griffin
PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION The proposal comprises two main buildings connected at basement level. The buildings have a 2.0m setback to Cartmell St at ground, first level and second level, with balconies protruding into this space. The third level is setback 2.6m. The fourth level is setback 4.6m, with the balcony setback by 2.0m from the street. The front section of the building is built to boundary on the east and west sides before stepping back to between 3.0m and 4.5m at the ground level, with slightly deeper setbacks at the higher levels. The rear setback is 3.0m at the basement level (which sits above ground at the rear due to the fall of land) and then stepped, with the setback increasing at each level. The buildings present a podium façade to Cartmell St with a maximum height of 11.03m and an average height of 10.4m. The maximum overall height of the building is 19.5m at the centre of the site. The sheer wall on the east boundary close to Cartmell St is 11.0m high and 6.5m in length. The equivalent wall on the west boundary is a maximum of 11.6m high and 6.5m in length. The building has two entrances, located roughly centrally to the site frontage, either side of the car park entrance, and leading directly into a foyer and then to lift and stairwell. Access is also provided from the basement carpark. The basement provides one car space for each unit using vehicle stackers, and four visitor car spaces. Twelve bicycle spaces are provided as well as areas for services and waste bins. There are 23 two bedroom and 39 one bedroom apartments. Each apartment has a balcony or terrace ranging in size from 8 to 44 square metres. The rear of the building is stepped significantly as it rises with a small amount of landscaped area at ground level at the rear. The building has a contemporary design with the street façade, and east and west facades having a high degree of articulation using timber detailing, smooth render, stucco render, and stacked face brick. A copy of the advertised plans is included as Attachment 1 to this report. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. BACKGROUND/HISTORY There have been no planning permits issued previously for any of the three lots.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 84
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d LOCALITY PLAN
SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA The 1724sqm site comprises three lots, being 13, 15 and 17 Cartmell Street located on the southern side of Cartmell Street, Heidelberg between Cape and Hawdon Streets. At present there is a free-standing single storey dwelling on each lot and no significant vegetation. There is a cross-fall of approximately 6.2m (from the front north-western corner towards the rear south-eastern corner), and a fall of 2.2m along the actual street frontage. Adjoining land to the east is developed as an at grade, 94 space Council car park which provides short stay parking. Adjoining to the west is a single storey dwelling in a large garden lot at 100 Hawdon Street, and a three dwelling, double storey development at 98 Hawdon Street. To the rear of the site is an apartment building with 31 dwellings across four levels, including a raised basement. Set higher above the subject site, on the northern side of Cartmell Street are a mix of single storey and double storey dwellings with south views over the subject site to the Burgundy Street valley and towards the south-east. The site is located approximately 65 metres from Burgundy Street and 450 metres from Heidelberg Train Station. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION It was considered that the proposal may cause material detriment to surrounding properties, and as such public notification was conducted by means of erecting three
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 85
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d signs on the site and posting notices to the owners and occupiers of surrounding properties. A total of 38 objections have been received. Grounds of objection are summarised as follows:
Inadequate on-site car parking/demand pressures on nearby public car parking. A reduction in the required car parking is inappropriate.
Visual bulk of the development is excessive for the locality.
Loss of light and overlooking
Proposal does not comply with the relevant planning policy framework in the Banyule Planning Scheme.
Proposal does not meet Clause 55 objective – B17 for side setback.
Proposed works on the site’s western boundary may have a detrimental effect on vegetation on the adjoining property.
Concerns over the construction phase. Noise and construction vehicles
Building height, mass and density are excessive – the proposal dominates the site and the street.
The small units will attract renters and ‘low calibre’ neighbours
Proposal does not respect the heritage characteristics of the street and neighbourhood.
Proposal does not comply with height and setback guidelines within the DDO5.
Overshadowing, overlooking and noise potential from balconies.
Inconsistent with garden streetscape character. More landscaping/green areas are required.
Potential social issues with future occupants, including increased rates of crime.
Pedestrian safety risks associated with additional traffic.
Poor design quality.
Rubbish collection along street will be affected by increased parking.
Loss of views.
Shadow diagrams should demonstrate shadowing impacts throughout the year.
Lack of on-site car parking will have a detrimental impact on availability of parking for existing residents.
Devaluation of properties in the area.
Overdevelopment.
Private open spaces are inadequate and onsite amenity is poor.
Inadequate/misleading plans and reports supplied with application.
Increased noise from traffic and air-conditioning units.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 86
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d
Wall on west boundary is too high.
Ridgeline views impacted contrary to policy
Balcony setbacks to street are inadequate.
Use of car stackers is slow and will cause vehicles to back up into street when entering building.
Numerous hard rubbish collections will mean constant rubbish on verge.
Light and heat reflection towards the western neighbours.
Telecommunication signals will be interrupted.
Building appears to be outside property boundaries.
REFERRAL COMMENTS The proposal was referred externally to Public Transport Victoria as the proposal is for more than 60 dwellings. Public Transport Victoria did not object and did not request any conditions to be applied to any permit that may issue. The proposal was also referred to the following Council departments for comment: DEVELOPMENT PLANNING ARBORIST
There are no trees on the site that require a permit for removal under the provisions of the Vegetation Protection Overlay –schedule 5 (VPO5). Council’s Arborist concurs with the findings of the Project Arborist. ENGINEERING SERVICES (DRAINAGE AND TRAFFIC)
No concerns were raised, however standard conditions are requested in relation to drainage. The shortfall of eight visitor car spaces was considered acceptable given the site’s location and short term parking availability for visitors within the area. The mechanical parking (vehicle stackers) provided meet the relevant Standards and it was noted that Council has adopted a car parking policy and strategy, which will restrict residents and visitors of new developments from obtaining permits for parking in restricted areas. The 12 onsite bicycle spaces and three hoops for six bicycle spaces on the nature strip are considered acceptable. The cost of installing these will be borne by the developer as reflected by way of condition on permit. COUNCIL’S ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE DESIGN (ESD) CONSULTANT
The ESD qualities proposed are found to be acceptable, with minor conditions to be included on permit in regard to ventilation of corridors and adherence to the Sustainable Management Plan that was submitted with the application. Importantly, a condition is proposed requiring an ESD assessment to be made at the completion of construction to ensure that the proposed measures have been implemented. PLANNING CONTROLS The planning controls applicable to the site are outlined in Table 1 below:
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 87
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d Table 1: Applicable Planning Controls Control Residential Growth Zone – schedule 1 Vegetation Protection Overlay – schedule 5 (VPO5) Design and Development Overlay (DDO5) Car Parking Bicycle facilities Integrated public transport planning
Clause 32.07 42.02 43.02 52.06 52.34 52.36
Permit Triggered Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes
POLICIES CONSIDERED Relevant policies considered in the assessment of this proposal are outlined in Table 2 below: Table 2: Relevant Planning Scheme Policy Policy SPPF Settlement Built Environment and Heritage (including sub clauses) Housing (including sub clauses) LPPF Land Use Built Environment (Diversity area) Local Places –Heidelberg Specialised and Major Activity centre Safer Design Policy
Clause 11 15 16 21.04 21.06 21.08 22.03
Planning controls are detailed in Attachment 2 to this report. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION THE POLICY CONTEXT
The provisions of Clauses 21.04-1 Land use, Clause 21.06 Residential Areas Framework, and Clause 21.08-2 Heidelberg Specialised and Major Activity Centre clearly contemplate significant change for the subject site rather than merely minimal or moderate change. High density dwellings and intensification of use are encouraged. The strong messages (which build upon State Policies for housing that emphasise land in and around higher order activity centres as a focus for increased housing opportunities) are echoed in the Residential Growth Zone objectives and Design and Development–schedule 5 (DDO5) provisions which are based in the sound strategic work undertaken as part of the Heidelberg Structure Plan process. The siting and design parameters have been set for the subject site and surrounding area by DDO5, particularly as to building heights, and street setbacks The remaining policy issues are essentially urban design related. Consideration of the proposal should focus specifically on Clause 52.35 Urban Context report and design response for residential development of five or more storeys (including an assessment against the Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Development) and the Design and Development Overlay-schedule 5.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 88
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d An assessment against the Residential Neighbourhood Character policy has not been made as it does not apply within the Residential Growth Zone. HEIGHT AND FORM OF THE BUILDING
The maximum height of the proposed building is 19.5m which is reached roughly central to the site. Due to the slope of the site the building will have a maximum height of 16.5m above street footpath level. This is 3.5m higher than the 13.0m suggested for Precinct Plan 3 at section 8 of the DDO5. The maximum podium height is 11.03 metres which is 1.03 metres above the preferred height of 10.0m. The average height of the podium is 10.4m.The development is regarded to meet the Objectives of the DDO5 despite the overall building height and podium height exceeding the Standards provided within the DDO5. This is substantiated in light of the following considerations: The building is consistent with the preferred future for the south side of Cartmell St as expressed in the DDO5 and the site’s Residential Growth Zone status. The fall of the land results in a building that is 6.5 metres taller than the 13.0 metre Standard sought within the DDO5, however the overall height in relation to ground level at street frontage is 16.5 metres which is only 3.5m taller than the Standard. The top two levels of the building produce a softening of the upper level form of the building as they are recessed from all sides and add to the mosaic of materiality and form. The upper levels will be seen from across the Burgundy St valley, so this level of articulation and detail is important and preferred to simply a flat roof form. The impact is acceptably managed through deep recession at the rear where the new building addresses the rear portion of the Hawdon St apartment building. The proposed height and setbacks are appropriate for the site bearing in mind that this is a consolidation of three residential lots. While the adjoining sites to the side have not been developed and the site at the rear is occupied by a 4 storey (including basement) apartment building, the overall built form of the new building is consistent with an approved apartment building at 3-5 Cartmell St. This approved building has a height of 19.5m, with a podium height, and height above footpath level matching the building proposed for the subject site. A comprehensive assessment has been made with regard to topography and public views of the Burgundy St valley. The overall height of the building will not significantly impact views of the valley. It is noted that ground floor side setbacks were increased by the proponent after concern was raised by Council in regard to future access to light, in the event of future development of adjoining sites. The setbacks provided will provide for sufficient light under current conditions. The setbacks set a reasonable precedent for any future adjoining development which will maintain an acceptable level of light into apartments on the lower levels. GUIDELINES FOR HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 89
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d
In assessing the acceptability of the more detailed design elements of the proposal, Council is required to consider the Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Development. An assessment against the Guidelines is included as Attachment 3. The proposal responds positively to the guidelines as summarised below: The design response results in a building that is suited to the preferred future of the area as guided by the Precinct Plan 3 at Section 8 of the DDO5; The building is considered to respect the preferred scale and character of the Activity Centre despite being higher than the 13.0m Standard. This is because the upper two levels are well recessed from all sides of the building and occupy only the central part of the overall site; The proposal is considered to balance the objective seeking to protect views from the public realm along and across the Burgundy St valley with the desire for increased building sizes; The building has been thoughtfully designed to include a high degree of articulation, and use of multiple materials and colours that will create visually interesting building that exhibits a high standard of urban design; The building setbacks are considered to be responsive to the streetscape and abutting land uses; Access to sunlight and daylight by abutting dwellings has been achieved with reference to Clause 55, and overlooking issues are well managed; The building achieves a high ESD rating as evidenced by the Sustainable Management Plan submitted with the application; Vegetation in the form of medium sized trees along the rear boundary, and green balconies will be provided. The impact on neighbouring vegetation will be limited to the likely loss of small trees of low retention value. Overlooking to within 9.0 metres is achieved which is consistent with the residential standard within Clause 55. This is by way of 1.7m high screening or wide balcony edges. Overshadowing in accordance with the equinox standard of Clause 55 is provided by significant setback of the rear of the building from neighbouring dwellings to the south. TRAFFIC AND CAR PARKING
Each apartment is provided with one car space which is consistent with the standard requirement for a one or two bedroom apartment. The use of car stackers to achieve this is now commonplace in apartment buildings and considered acceptable. Vehicle movement is well managed and the double width ramp will provide convenient access and egress.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 90
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d A reduction in the number of required visitor spaces from 12 to four is considered reasonable given the availability of public transport within the Heidelberg Major Activity Centre and the benefits associated with multi-purpose trips. A condition on permit to increase by three the number of car spaces provided will result in an overall shortfall of 5 spaces only. The adjoining public car park provides opportunity for short term parking. Council’s Activity Centre Car Parking Policy is to not issue visitor or resident parking permits for new multi dwelling developments. LIVEABLE HOUSING
In accordance with Council’s Liveable Housing Guidelines, a minimum of 20% of the apartments should be suitable for people with limited mobility. This can be achieved by a permit condition. ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE DESIGN (ESD)
The ESD qualities proposed were found to be acceptable, with minor conditions to be included on the permit in regard to ventilation of corridors and adherence to the Sustainable Management Plan which was submitted with the application. A condition can also be included requiring an ESD assessment to be made at the completion of construction to ensure that the proposed measures have been implemented. RUBBISH AND RECYCLING COLLECTION
A Waste Management Plan was submitted with the application. A condition should be included on permit regarding the need for private waste collection in accordance with the Waste Management Plan. OBJECTORS CONCERNS The majority of objectors’ concerns have been addressed above and in the attached Higher Density Guidelines assessment, however the following require further discussion: Lack of car parking The applicant has offered to provide an extra 3 car spaces in vehicle stackers. This reduces the parking shortfall to 5 spaces and can appear as a condition on permit. Proposal does not respect the heritage characteristics of the street and neighbourhood. The site and surrounding area is not within a Heritage Overlay. Noise potential from balconies. Typical residential noise is to be expected from any new dwellings and a Noise Assessment can be required by condition on permit to ensure that any noise associated with use of the basement car park and vehicle stackers has acceptable impacts on the dwellings to the rear and the west of the site. Construction phase issues Noise and dust in the short term are matters which are not controlled by the Planning Department and are policed by Council’s Local Laws and Environmental health Departments and through the building regulations. A Construction Management Plan will be required.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 91
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.8
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING AT 13-17 CARTMELL ST HEIDELBERG cont’d Devaluation of properties No evidence has been provided that properties will lose value as a result of the proposed development. It has long been accepted that a perceived devaluation of properties by objectors is not a relevant planning consideration. Telecommunication signals will be disrupted This is outside the remit of planning consideration. CONCLUSION The proposed development is consistent with State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks, the Residential Growth Zone-schedule 1, the Design and Development Overlay-schedule 5, the Vegetation Protection Overlay-schedule 5, Clause 52.06 Car parking, and is generally in accordance with the Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Development. The proposal should be supported with appropriate conditions.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Architectural Plans
422
2
Background Information
465
3
Assessment against Higher Density Guidelines
478
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page
Page 92
4.9
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C93 IVANHOE ACTIVITY CENTRE
Author:
Anne North - Senior Strategic Planner, City Development
Ward:
Griifin & Olympia
File:
F2013/267
4.9
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The development of the Ivanhoe Structure Plan and preparation of the associated planning scheme amendments have occurred over a four year period and have included extensive community consultation and a Panel Process. Although there were interim controls in the planning scheme to guide development in Ivanhoe in the form of schedules 11 and 12 to the Design and Development Overlay (DDO), these controls expired on 31 May 2015. This report advises Council that Amendment C93 for permanent controls has been approved by the Minister for Planning. The Amendment came into effect when notice of the approval was published in the Victoria Government Gazette on Thursday 28 May 2015. This report also outlines the changes that the Minister has made to the Amendment since it was adopted by Council on 1 December 2014. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Note that the Minister for Planning has approved Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C93 and that notice of the approval was published in the Victorian Government Gazette on Thursday 28 May 2015. 2. Acknowledge the work of the Ivanhoe Community Consultative Committee and the wider Ivanhoe community in achieving these permanent planning scheme controls for the Ivanhoe Activity Centre. 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 “strengthen local activity and employment areas”. BACKGROUND The Ivanhoe Structure Plan and the associated planning scheme changes have been developed through an extensive consultation process with the local community. More than 1600 people have participated over the last four years. This happened
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 93
4.9
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C93 - IVANHOE ACTIVITY CENTRE cont’d after community feedback on the initial 2011 structure plan, when people said that it did not have enough detail, was too open ended and did not involve enough consultation. There were more than 700 written submissions to this initial plan, many expressing these concerns. Council then started work for a new structure plan with a renewed commitment to design evaluation, expertise and consultation. Although wary, the Ivanhoe community worked with Council to develop a new plan with details to guide change and respect the desired character of the area. 80 written submissions were received to the draft new plan. Further refinements were then made so Council could adopt a revised Ivanhoe Structure Plan in June 2013. This plan included much detail to guide the design of development. These details were translated into planning scheme language, to shape the content of two schedules to Design and Development Overlay (DDO). These two schedules are part of Amendment C93. The Centre’s core precincts (Precincts 1 – 6) are in Schedule 11 and the surrounding, accessible residential precinct (Precinct 7) is in Schedule 12. The framework of precincts is shown in Figure 1 below.
Progress on the structure plan prompted Council to pursue temporary planning scheme controls, to help manage development, until such time as an outcome was achieved through public exhibition and a Planning Panel process for permanent planning scheme changes. The Minister for Planning supported two temporary DDO schedules that expired on 31 May 2015.
Planning Scheme Amendment C93, for the permanent planning scheme changes, was exhibited from 5 December 2013 to 13 February 2014. A total of 13 written submissions were received. This result reflects general community support for the structure plan and amendment proposal for the planning scheme. The remaining concerns raised in submissions, were heard by a Planning Panel on 13 and 14 May 2014.
The Panel’s recommendations were given in the Panel Report of 1 July 2014. At its meeting on 1 December 2014, Council resolved to adopt Amendment C93 and to forward it to the Minister for Planning for approval. The adopted amendment varied slightly from the Panel’s recommendations, particularly in relation to some building heights and setbacks in Precinct 1, the Darebin Station Precinct.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 94
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C93 - IVANHOE ACTIVITY CENTRE cont’d
Locality Plan
Figure 1: Framework Plan for the Ivanhoe Activity Centre 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.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 95
4.9
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.9
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C93 - IVANHOE ACTIVITY CENTRE cont’d 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. DISCUSSION On 20 May 2015 the Minister for Planning advised Council that Amendment C93 had been approved with some changes. The changes are as outlined below: Changes to maps Map Ivanhoe Framework Plan in Clause 21.08
Diversity Area Precincts in Schedule 11 to Clause 43.02
Changes Changed to designate a Precinct area for the southernmost part of the Activity Centre. Changed to designate the appropriate precinct to three areas which are currently not designated a precinct as follows: A northern area bordered by Studley Road, Marshall Street and Ivanhoe Girls Grammar. A central area bordered by Precinct 5, Precinct 4, and Ivanhoe Girls Grammar School. A southern area bordered by Kingsley Street, Heidelberg Road and the Railway Line.
The areas referred to have always been part of the activity centre but had not been designated as being in a precinct. The changes proposed by the Minister clearly designate a Precinct for those properties that are located within the Activity Centre boundary. The changes to the maps as described in the Table above are shown on the Precincts Plan located at Figure 2.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 96
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C93 - IVANHOE ACTIVITY CENTRE cont’d
Figure 2: Precincts Plan with changes shown
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 97
4.9
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.9
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C93 - IVANHOE ACTIVITY CENTRE cont’d Changes to diagrams – heights and setbacks Plan Darebin Precinct Built Form Plan (DDO11-1) in Schedule 11 to Clause 43.02 (DDO11
Changes Increase the preferred height for sites at 1045-1065 Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe from 12 metres to 15 metres. Replace the ‘Standard D’ setback controls for the sites at 1011 and 1065 Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe with ‘Standard A’ setback controls.
The changes to heights and setbacks in Precinct 1 were recommended by the Planning Panel in their report dated 1July 2014. At its meeting on 1 December 2014 Council resolved not to accept these recommended changes. In deciding to approve Amendment C93 the Minister has accepted the Panel’s recommendations and made these changes to the Amendment. While this is not the preferred outcome it is considered that these are small changes in the context of a large and complex planning scheme amendment involving many properties and a great deal of public consultation. There have also been recent decisions from the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) that have challenged Council’s position in relation to heights and setbacks in Precinct 1 and therefore many of the redevelopment sites within the precinct already have approvals in place. CONCLUSION The approval of Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C93 finalises four years of work with the Ivanhoe community to achieve permanent planning scheme controls to implement the Ivanhoe Structure Plan. The Amendment appropriately provides for more intensive uses and development in the Diversity Precincts while having a more limited approach in the Accessible Area, maintaining residential character and amenity and encouraging modest change in density.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Approval Letter from Minister for Planning
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 490
Page 98
5.1
SCHEDULED SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING FOR 22 JUNE 2015 - CHANGE TO ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING
Author:
Vivien Ferlaino - Governance Co-ordinator, Corporate Services
File:
F2015/1752
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council annually sets Council meeting dates for the following year. In August 2014 Council resolved meeting dates for the 2015 year and a Special Meeting was set for 22 June 2015 for the adoption of the Council Budget and City Plan. A special meeting is no longer required for the sole consideration of the City Plan and Budget and it is proposed to convert the meeting to an Ordinary meeting of Council. The Local Government Act 1989 (Act) provides for the setting of meeting dates and Council is required to give public notice of the proposed change. RECOMMENDATION An Ordinary Meeting of Council be set for 22 June 2015 to allow for ordinary business items to be transacted and a public notice advising of the Ordinary Meeting date be published in the local newspapers. 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 “engage meaningfully with our community”. BACKGROUND Council adopted the 2015 dates on 18 August 2014. When scheduling meeting dates, the current year is taken into consideration along with public holidays and the legislative requirements for the Election of Mayor. In 2014 the statutory process involving the hearing of section 223 submissions for the City Plan and Budget and the actual adoption were both considered on the same evening. An improved process was implemented this year to provide Council an opportunity to fully consider the submitters including written submissions. This meeting was held on 25 May 2015. The consideration of the adoption of the City Plan and Budget is scheduled for the 22 June 2015.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 99
5.1
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
5.1
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
SCHEDULED SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING FOR 22 JUNE 2015 - CHANGE TO ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING cont’d As the consideration of submissions has already occurred the meeting scheduled for the 22 June is no longer required to be a Special meeting. It is proposed to declare it an Ordinary Meeting. LEGAL CONSIDERATION The requirements for Special Meetings are specified in section 84 of the Local Government Act 1989. This section requires only the business specified in the notice or resolution to be transacted unless resolved to admit other business. Council’s Meeting Procedures Code (2015) requires: The dates, times and place of all Council Meetings to be fixed by Council Notice of all meetings must be made in accordance with the Act Council may by resolution change the date, time and place of any Council Meeting which has been fixed and must provide reasonable notice of the changes to the public In the case of an emergency, the Chief Executive Officer or his or her delegate, may postpone a Council Meeting, and reasonable attempts are to be made to notify every Councillor of the postponement Pursuant to the Act Council is required to give 7 days’ notice. ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 100
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.1
REVIEW OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVERTISING SIGNS ON COUNCIL LAND
Author:
Kerryn Woods - Executive Assistant/Project Officer, City Development
File:
F2014/676
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 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. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1)
Examine the current bus shelter contract with JCDecaux to consider whether there is an opportunity to add additional bus shelters including those displaying advertising, as well as the addition of ‘poster board’ style signs in key locations throughout the municipality for a commercial return or additional public assets such as bus shelters.
2)
Undertake a ‘pilot’ project for a future commercial advertising program on Council land by initially focusing on a single ‘Promotion Sign’ on the corner of Para Road and Flintoff Street Greensborough. The pilot project should include: i.
Engagement of an appropriate consultant to assist in preparing the necessary documentation for a planning permit application and any subsequent commercial arrangements associated with leasing of the sign; ii. Preparation of plans for a promotion sign on the corner of Para Road and Flintoff Street, Greensborough; iii. Obtaining a planning permit for the sign; iv. Undertaking an Expression of Interest (EOI) process seeking interest in the leasing of the sign to the commercial advertising industry (subsequent to a planning permit being issued). 3)
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
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 101
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
REVIEW OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVERTISING SIGNS ON COUNCIL LAND cont’d 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 brought back to Council for approval. 4)
Amend the Outdoor Advertising Policy in regard to temporary community notice boards to: a.
Include the following sites as additional designated locations for the display of temporary community notice boards:
b.
5)
AK Lines Reserve Greensborough Park Ivanhoe Park De Winton Park Warringal Parklands Heidelberg Park Ford Park
Grimshaw Street, Watsonia Diamond Creek Road, Greensborough Lower Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe East Grove Road, Rosanna Beverley Road, Heidelberg Beverley Road, Heidelberg Banksia Street, Bellfield
Allow ‘two’ temporary signs to be displayed at each of the approved sites including existing and additional.
Following the approval of additional sites for temporary community notice boards, proactive enforcement action is to occur to ensure the removal of unlawfully erected and displayed notice boards.
OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “maintain and improve Banyule as a great place to live” and “use our resources wisely”. 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 or enhance the setting on which they appear. It sets out clear requirements and guides the decision making process. At its meeting on 2 June 2014 Council requested that a further review of the policy be undertaken to examine the opportunities to achieve a commercial return for advertising on Council land. At the meeting it was resolved as follows:
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 102
REVIEW OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVERTISING SIGNS ON COUNCIL LAND cont’d “That Council Officers investigate and report back to Council on a range of opportunities to expand the revenue that Council generates from outdoor advertising. The report should include investigation of: 1. the opportunities and challenges for a range of possibilities including but not limited to: Advertisements on existing Council-owned outdoor assets, such as bins in shopping strips, on a fee-foradvertisement basis. Expand the number of available sites on Council-owned buildings and land across the municipality that support large advertising signs and billboards. Increase the number of advertising signs that clubs and sporting groups are permitted to display on pavilions. 2. the most appropriate means by which each opportunity could be advanced within the requirements of the Banyule Planning Scheme and Council Policy. For some opportunities this could involve the establishment of a carefully constructed Expression of Interest (EOI) process to optimally engage interested service providers.” Four types of advertising within the municipality have been investigated, to establish whether there is an opportunity to pursue commercial or expanded advertising on Council land. The greatest commercial opportunities to generate financial return are through ‘Promotion Signs’. Promotion Signs are defined in the Banyule Planning Scheme as: ‘A sign of less than 18 square metres that promotes goods, services, an event or any other matter, whether or not provided, undertaken or sold or for hire on the land or in the building on which the sign is sited’. The four types of signs investigated are in regard to: Council assets such as bus shelters and other Council furniture, for commercial purposes Council owned buildings and land primarily in commercially suitable locations for business advertising or promotional purposes such as billboards on a roadside or carpark Temporary signage – for advertising temporary events or public notice purposes often for non-profit and community groups Sponsorship signage - usually associated with a sporting clubs or other community purpose. This report outlines further where the opportunities and challenges are in relation to commercial and expanded advertising within Banyule.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 103
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
REVIEW OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVERTISING SIGNS ON COUNCIL LAND cont’d
DISCUSSION Council Owned Outdoor Assets Council has a number of small assets located throughout the municipality mainly located on public land. These include bus shelters, public bins, light poles, shelters and canopies which are often located in prominent locations adjoining main roads or shopping strips. The provision of advertising on these assets is not common with the exception of bus shelters. A number of Council’s have historically allowed advertising on smaller assets like rubbish bins, however many appear to have moved away from the practice over the last decade. This is in response to clearer planning policies which seek to avoid advertising clutter and the low value in the commercial return which has been achieved by making them available commercially. Whittlesea Council allowed commercial advertising on street bins a number of years ago but was under pressure to place the bins in high exposure locations rather than where they were most needed by the public. Whittlesea Council has subsequently moved away from such arrangements and have no current intention to enter into arrangements for commercial advertising on Council assets. Darebin, Nillumbik and Manningham Councils have no commercial advertising on Council assets and no current plans to provide such arrangements. Banyule Council currently has a contract with JCDecaux to install and maintain bus shelters with the inclusion of commercial advertising. The current arrangement with JCDecaux will expire in 2021 and is a straight forward contract which places minimal administrative burden on Council resources in terms of managing the contract or the asset. If a similar contract arrangement could be set up for advertising on other assets or with ‘poster board’ free standing structures it is estimated that 40-50 sites may be required throughout the municipality to get the necessary scale of advertising roll out to interest the commercial advertising industry. The advertising industry has significantly diversified over recent years with significantly increased competition for static signs and a shift to the internet. Poster boards are becoming more common in town squares and other public places. A large scale roll out of commercial advertising on Council assets or in the form of ‘poster board’ signs may dilute the commercial market for such signs and undermine the commercial relationship with JCDecaux. Therefore, it may be advantageous to consider a smaller number of additional poster boards as part of a future package with JCDecaux in addition to bus shelters. This could be achieved by examining the existing contract with JCDecaux and the possible expansion of sites to include poster board style signs and additional bus shelters. If a suitable arrangement cannot be negotiated then a full commercial expression of interest process may be warranted. Council Owned Buildings and Land Council owned buildings and land present the best opportunity for larger scale promotional advertising. There may be scope to expand the number of available sites on Council owned buildings and land.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 104
REVIEW OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVERTISING SIGNS ON COUNCIL LAND cont’d Whilst some Council buildings provide a limited range of opportunities for promotional advertising given their location, building design and land zoning they are not considered the most commercially viable for increased revenue through the display of promotional signs. There may be more opportunity on properties owned by Council for commercial purposes, car parks and possibly road reserves. Some open space reserves are in ideal locations from a commercial perspective due to the exposure to adjoining main roads, however the current zoning provisions restrict the opportunity for commercial advertising. There may be benefit in undertaking a pilot focused on a single ‘viable’ site and then using the knowledge gained to expand to other sites. The site at the corner of Para Road and Flintoff Street, Greensborough is a Council owned carpark and is an ideal site for the pilot. The site is identified as a prominent location that carries large amounts of both vehicle and pedestrian traffic, given its proximity to the Greensborough Activity Centre and the Greensborough Train Station. A ‘Promotion Sign’ in this car park would have no amenity impacts and preliminary advice from within the commercial advertising industry indicates that the site would be sought after and could provide a financial return.
Proposed site for promotion sign – Corner Flintoff Street and Para Road Greensborough
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 105
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
REVIEW OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVERTISING SIGNS ON COUNCIL LAND cont’d
Imagery for proposed promotion sign – Corner Flintoff Street and Para Road Greensborough
The promotion sign would require Council to engage the appropriate consultants to assist with the preparation of the necessary documentation for a planning permit application. Subject to a planning permit being issued Council will need to undertake an Expression of Interest (EOI) process seeking interest in the sign from within the commercial advertising industry.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 106
REVIEW OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVERTISING SIGNS ON COUNCIL LAND cont’d Sponsorship Signs at Sporting Clubs The municipality has a strong sporting culture, with a wide range of different sporting facilities being offered. Sporting clubs are usually not-for-profit organisations that rely on small membership fees and sponsorship for income to assist with the many costs associated with their day to day running. Sponsorship generally consists of local businesses promoting their goods or services and in turn provides the sporting club with a nominal payment, although for some of the high profile clubs this can be a substantial sponsorship arrangement. Clubs located in prominent locations have the potential to receive a higher income from sponsorship at their venues. These signs can appear on the pavilion (maximum four signs), and at the entrance to the reserve with the name of the sporting club and the name of the sponsorship on the one sign. There is also scope for signs to be located at sporting grounds on ‘Match Days’. An inspection of a number of sporting reserves throughout Banyule has shown that advertising on pavilions is not being utilised to its full potential. This raises questions as to whether it is the best approach to advertising depending on which way the pavilion faces. For example, where the pavilion faces into the ground and has no exposure to the abutting roadway often advertising signs are not present. Similarly where sporting ground fences face the roadway advertising is more attractive. Under the current policy advertising on fences and coaches boxes is only allowed on ‘match day’, this is an area that could be expanded. Long term advertising signs on structures such as coaches’ boxes and fences is not currently supported within the policy (with the exception of securely fenced facilities such as tennis or bowls clubs), however it appears that this is being undertaken at a number of sporting grounds without approval. This is possibly a more attractive manner in which to advertise for sporting groups. There may be further scope for stand-alone signs on roadways. A good example of this is the signage that currently exists at the entrance of AK Lines Reserve. The sign has a shared tenancy depending on the season with the Watsonia Football Club and Plenty Valley Cricket Club. In this instance both clubs currently receive sponsorship funds for their respective signs. This is supported by the Outdoor Advertising Policy which states that: ‘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’. A consistent approach to the larger advertising signs in prominent locations near sporting ground entrances should be adopted. There is the possibility for these signs to be large and prominent but they should be a permanent sturdy structure. Guidelines could be implemented to ensure the sign includes the club identification, sponsorship advertising and Banyule City Council identification in a standard format including the Banyule branding and logo.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 107
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
REVIEW OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVERTISING SIGNS ON COUNCIL LAND cont’d Temporary Signs on Council Owned Land Temporary signs are signs that are allowed on Council owned land to promote a local educational, cultural, religious, social or recreational event not held for commercial purposes. Council’s Local Law Department issue permits to community groups, which are only allowed a permit for a temporary sign on Council’s land once in any six month period. The signage wording cannot be indecent, insulting or offensive and the organisation or event being advertised must be located within the municipality to be eligible for a permit. No fee applies to the application or for the sign to be displayed. Council currently allows one temporary sign to be placed on 11 Council managed locations. A number of these sites display more than one sign which indicates that the correct process isn’t being followed. There is scope for additional signage on these sites. There is also potential for the following sites to be added to the list:
AK Lines Reserve
Grimshaw Street, Watsonia
Greensborough Park
Diamond Creek Road, Greensborough
Ivanhoe Park
Lower Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe East
De Winton Park
Grove Road, Rosanna
Warringal Parklands
Beverley Road, Heidelberg
Heidelberg Park
Beverley Road, Heidelberg Banksia Street, Bellfield
Ford Park
This site usually accommodates three temporary signs at any one time, by adding it to the list of approved sites it would formalise current practices. This site could accommodate one or two temporary signs and is exposed to high volumes of traffic with the Greensborough Activity Centre being in close proximity. This site could accommodate one or two temporary signs and again is exposed to high volumes of traffic. This site could accommodate one or two temporary signs, whilst not exposed to a main road Grove Road carries a considerable amount of traffic. This reserve is large and could potentially accommodate temporary signs at the Buckingham Drive and Burgundy Street ends. This site could accommodate one or two temporary signs. This site could accommodate one or two signs at the corner of Banksia Street and Oriel Road.
These sites are all in prominent locations and some are currently being used for temporary signs. Including these sites on the list would be formalising common practice.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 108
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.1
REVIEW OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVERTISING SIGNS ON COUNCIL LAND cont’d It will also enable better management of the many unlawful signs that have been displayed over recent years. CONCLUSION A comprehensive examination of opportunities available to improve the revenue stream through commercial and expanded advertising on Council land has been undertaken. There is an opportunity to enable a number of processes to commence that will lead to commercial advertising on Council land being more viable and visually attractive and to also expand other types of advertising on Council land for the benefit of the community.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Outdoor Advertising Policy Part 1 & 2 Feb 2010
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 492
Page 109
6.2
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.2
CARBON TAX REPEAL ASSESSMENT
Author:
Tania O'Reilly - Manager Finance & Procurement, Corporate Services
File:
D14/38372
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Clean Energy Act 2011 has been repealed. This abolishes the carbon pricing mechanism (CPM) from 1 July 2014. The Clean Energy Regulator is the Government body which administers the CPM and legislation to reduce carbon emissions and increase the use of clean energy. On 17 July 2014 the Clean Energy Legislation (Carbon Tax Repeal) Act 2014 amended the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (the CCA) to include a new Part V – Carbon Tax Price Reduction Obligation. The carbon tax price reduction obligation requires suppliers of regulated goods to pass through all cost savings relating to the regulated supply that are directly or indirectly attributable to the carbon tax repeal (s.60C of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) CCA). The focus of the carbon tax repeal is on regulated goods because these were the goods most significantly affected by the carbon tax. Regulated goods are: natural gas electricity synthetic greenhouse gas (SGG), or synthetic greenhouse gas equipment (s. 60B of the CCA). Suppliers of regulated goods have since passed through their cost savings attributable to the carbon tax repeal to Banyule City Council. The Council will pass through the total cost saving, estimated to be $480,344, back into the community. There are no specific legal obligations on, or requirements of, Councils in relation to how they will pass on cost savings. A number of options have been presented for consideration to effect a pass through of cost savings to the community: Option 1 - refund to the individual rate payer Option 2 – credit offset against future rate charges of the individual rateable property Option 3 - reduction in future rate increase by the value of the cost saving Option 4 - allocation to an environmental reserve to fund future projects The options to refund or credit the individual (option 1 & 2) are not considered equitable options. The amount to be returned will need to be calculated as an equal share across all rateable properties and will not reflect the proportion actually paid by each individual. These options will also incur an administration cost which will dilute the amount available to return back to the community If Council was to apply the option to reduce future rate increases (option 3) there would be a potential delay in submitting the budget to Parliament. Council would also incur additional costs. The 2015/2016 budget has been prepared and is awaiting adoption. Any change to the rate increase may require the draft budget 2015/2016 to be re-worked and re-issued for public consultation. A cost neutral and equitable approach would be to apply option 4, and apply the
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 110
CARBON TAX REPEAL ASSESSMENT cont’d funds to an environmental reserve for future community investment. It is envisage that the funds would be held in reserve (carried forward) for allocation by Council towards environmentally sustainable projects. Option 4 being recommended as the preferred option. RECOMMENDATION That Council: note that $480,344 is the projected saving to Banyule City Council as a result of the Carbon Tax Repeal (effective 1 July 2014) approve that the amount of $480,344 be transferred to an environmental reserve for future community investment approve and prioritise the individual projects to be funded from the reserve at a future meeting of Council
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 directions to “provide responsible financial management and business planning processes” and “protect and enhance our natural environment”. BACKGROUND Background The carbon tax repeal is retrospective as of 1 July 2014. Local government is a purchaser of: electricity and gas; goods and services which have energy costs imbedded within the prices of those goods and services; goods and services which include a carbon price component (eg landfill gate fees). As a result of the Carbon Pricing Mechanism (CPM) repeal, electricity and gas prices have reduced, and it is anticipated that other prices of goods and services which include a carbon price component will also reduce. The only sectors which are legally obliged to reduce their prices are: suppliers of natural gas;
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 111
6.2
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.2
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
CARBON TAX REPEAL ASSESSMENT cont’d suppliers of electricity; suppliers of synthetic greenhouse gases; or suppliers of synthetic greenhouse gas equipment. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has directed that entities in these sectors must pass through all of their cost savings that are directly or indirectly attributable to the CPM repeal. As Banyule City Council is not in the sectors noted above, it will be a matter for individual councils to decide how they will incorporate reduced electricity and gas costs (or other costs which are lower following the CPM repeal) into their budgeting process. When the carbon tax was repealed it was anticipated that landfill facility gate fees or associated waste management charges would generally reduce, or would not rise by as much as they otherwise have. ACCC expects that local councils will use the future cost savings from such activities for the benefit of rate payers. In its quarterly carbon monitoring report the ACCC suggests that this could be though expending the money on projects or infrastructure benefiting their communities, or through setting their future fees and charges lower than they otherwise would have been. Discussion Banyule City Council is directly impacted by the repeal of the carbon tax through its utility providers (gas and electricity) and disposal of waste collected through the: kerbside service and transfer station. The estimated Carbon Tax Saving is $480,344 in the below proportions. The majority of the saving is related to the kerbside waste service.
Carbon Tax Savings Kerbside waste service 19% Gas 9% 12%
60%
Electricity Council building Electricity Street lighting
Kerbside service The Metropolitan Waste and Resource Recovery Group (MWRRG) and Hanson Landfill Services Pty Ltd have agreed to refund all participating Councils, calculated in accordance with the statutory obligations of the Clean Energy Legislation (Carbon Tax Repeal) Act 2014, the provisions of the executed Carbon Agreement and
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 112
CARBON TAX REPEAL ASSESSMENT cont’d councils’ verified waste tonnages and carbon tax payments. A refund of $286,899 (excluding GST) was received by Banyule City Council in September 2014. A further, but less significant amount, may be pending after a final potential payment adjustment process is undertaken by Hanson Landfill Services Pty Ltd. Transfer station gate fee The transfer station sets the gate fees to cover the: Cost of carbon (now repealed) Landfill levy (set by the State Government) and Operator charges (growth in line with CPI) The transfer station gate fees are representative of movements from all costs (not just carbon tax) and in maintaining a competitive service. The gate fees were not increased for 2014/2015 from 2013/2014 on the basis of the carbon tax repeal, although the cost savings are not directly attributable to the planned increase. The proportion of the gate fee representing the actual carbon tax cannot be determined. The impact on the overall budget for the transfer station is zero, as Banyule City Council has effectively decreased both income and expenditure equally. Utility costs Communication with our utilities service providers, a thorough review of the invoices, pre and post carbon tax repeal, have identified a permanent saving on: gas charges of $55,786 public lighting of $93,122 and domestic electricity bills of $44,537 related to council buildings. The gas and electricity saving noted above represents approximately 10.3% and 9.70% of the respective utility costs. The peak and off-peak rates varied significantly and were difficult to assess, however the overall estimated savings were verified through the review of individual invoices throughout the past 20 months. No additional saving will be realised on our commercial electricity bills as these are on a bundled carbon product rate until 30 June 2016. Banyule City Council has opted for a lower bundled rate compared to market uplift rates. Market uplift shows the carbon tax as a separate line item, resulting in a higher bill. The utility service provider has quoted that the bundled carbon rates cannot be removed and will remain the same until a new contract is generated after 30 June 2016. Options (issues and implications) Permanent savings for the above total $480,344 have been identified in the financial forecast for 2014/2015 and also used in setting the direct costs for the draft budget 2015/2016. Option 1 - refund to the individual rate payer A refund to the individual rate payer would be an amount spread evenly against all current rate payers. Banyule City Council had 51,884 rateable assessments at 1 July 2014 (52,316 at 7 May 2015). A cheque would be distributed to each rate payer
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 113
6.2
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.2
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
CARBON TAX REPEAL ASSESSMENT cont’d equivalent to the proportion of the net cost savings (as banking details are not recorded to process direct debit transactions). Administration costs will be incurred with this option. Is has been anticipated that this cost could be up to $41,661. This amount will be applied to reduce the amount of the refund and represents the printing of cheques, the accompanying notification letters, postage, administration of bank reconciliations, unpresented cheque monitoring, lost cheques, unclaimed money processing, and the increased customer service resource required to deal with queries. The administration cost does not factor in the time it may take for each rate payers to deposit their cheques into the bank upon receipt. An inequity could be argued with this option as rate payers are charged based on the value of each property and this will vary across the municipality. To allocate the refund in proportion to the amount charged per rateable property would be unrealistic and absorb significant human resources in the process for what may only represent a variance of $1.00. The net saving (after adjusting for the administration costs) represents $8.46 per rateable assessment based on the number of rate payers as at 1 July 2014. Option 2 – credit offset against future rate charges of the individual rateable property A credit offset will be allocated and spread evenly against all rateable assessments effective 1 July 2015. At the end of July 2015 Banyule City Council will issue the first assessment notice. The assessment notice will show the total amount assessed less the credit offset equivalent to the proportion of the net cost savings. Administration costs will be incurred with this option. Is has been anticipated that this cost will be approximately half of the costs associated with option 1 (Approximately $20,830). This amount will be applied to reduce the amount of the refund and represents the printing of the accompanying notification letters, and the increased customer service resource required to deal with queries. Similar to option 1 an inequity could be argued with this option as rate payers are charged based on the value of each property and this will vary across the municipality. The net saving (after adjusting for the administration costs) represents $8.78 per rateable assessment based on the number of rate payers as at 7 May 2015 (this number will change until 30 June 2015).
Option 3 - reduction in future rate increase by the value of the cost saving The impact of the net saving on a rate increase is approximately 0.61% (adjusted for administration costs). Noting that if applied to the 2014/2015 rate increase of 7.95% the rate increase required would have been 7.34%. The same projected saving should not be applied to the proposed 4.95% rate increase in the 2015/2016 budget, as the future cost savings have already been applied, to determine the proposed rate increase over the next 4 years.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 114
CARBON TAX REPEAL ASSESSMENT cont’d The permanent cost saving for 2014/2015 has been quarantined in the forecast. Once this is released it will be available as additional surplus. Surpluses are available in reserve to support future capital spending. An adjustment to the draft budget would not be necessary to still achieve the required outcome of carried forward funding. A reduction in future rate increases at this stage of the budget may result in a delay in the lodgement of the budget 2015/2016 with Parliament. A significant adjustment will require the re-issue of the budget for consultation for a further 28 days. Prior to the re-issue resources would need to be applied to amend and reconcile the data contained therein. The budget is to be lodged with Parliament by 30 June each year. Option 4 - allocation to an environmental reserve to fund future projects The total amount of $480,344 is recommended to be transferred to an environmental reserve. These funds would be fully allocated (no administration costs) to projects that directly benefit the community with the endorsement of Council. The equivalent amount per rateable assessment is $9.18 based on the number of current rate payers. Funds could be used immediately if Council has projects it requests to commence. A decision by Council would be required to identify, agree and prioritise the projects to be funded from the environmental reserve. No administration costs are associated with this decision. Funds will be used in support of the principle of a cleaner environment for our community’s and a key reason for why the carbon tax was initially introduced. Legal Considerations Council rates are not covered by the carbon tax price reduction obligation. Further, council rates are not covered by the CCA, because setting and levying rates is a statutory function imposed by the relevant state or territory local government Acts, and is not considered carrying on a business in trade or commerce. The function of councils is to provide municipal services for their community, so the ACCC expects any gains not returned directly to ratepayers to be utilised in some form for the benefit of ratepayers. A report by Norton Rose Fulbright ‘Implications of Carbon Price Repeal for Local Government’ states that “at present there are no specific legal obligations on, or requirements of, Councils in relation to how they will pass on cost savings. It will be a matter for individual councils to decide how they will incorporate reduced electricity and gas costs (or other costs which are lower following the CPM repeal) into their budgeting process and setting of rates”. Based on the above there is no legal requirement for local government to pay back the cost savings directly to individuals within the community and each option as presented is open to Council to determine the preferred approach.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 115
6.2
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.2
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
CARBON TAX REPEAL ASSESSMENT cont’d What Are Other Councils Doing
The ACCC has observed significant efforts by various entities to ensure they are passing through carbon tax cost savings. 12 local council liable entities that hold excess funds advised that they do not intend to provide any refunds of this money, rather they intend to use it in the following ways: to fund waste related environmental management programs, to fund the installation and operation of landfill gas collection and flaring infrastructure, or other emissions abatement measures, to lower operating or capital costs for the landfill facility in the future, to fund future improvements or redevelopments to the landfill facility, such as waste diversion facilities, to offset against loan debt in its waste business functions, or to fund environmentally sustainable design initiatives in new council developments.
Reference can be made to the ACCC website for a link to the quarterly carbon monitoring reports. Monitoring of the carbon tax scheme in Australia Details of the actions of local councils are briefly noted within these reports. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. CONCLUSION Council officers have assessed the impact on the budget 2014/2015 and future years, as a result of the removal of carbon tax effective 1 July 2014. It is estimated that the permanent saving that can be realised is $480,344 and that these funds will be returned back to the community. It is recommended that the funds are transferred to an environmental reserve for future funding of projects that support the community. Allocating the funds to an environmental reserve: is in correlation with the original concept of the carbon tax to promote and fund clean energy is the most cost effective approach and meets the requirements of the ACCC to use the funding to benefit the community. ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 116
6.3
ADDITIONAL PAID PARKING LOCATIONS
Author:
Ana Caicedo - Traffic & Transport Team Leader, City Development
Ward:
City Wide
File:
F2015/57
6.3
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
Previous Items Council on 20 October 2014 (Item 4.1 - Paid Parking in Banyule) Council on 18 August 2014 (Item 4.4 - Additional Paid Parking Locations in Heidelberg) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Approximately $70,000 of savings were generated by the changes in the scope for the 2014/15 paid parking projects and a successful tender process for the supply and installation of ticket machines. This offers the opportunity to expand the paid parking systems in Banyule. The parking occupancy levels for 12 locations across the municipality have been assessed, with results showing high usage across most locations. The cost of the installation of paid parking systems in half of the locations can be covered using the savings from the 2014/15 paid parking projects. The remaining locations are estimated to generate sufficient revenue to cover the cost of installation within a 1218 month period. The Heidelberg Car Parking Reserve has sufficient funds to cover the costs of installing paid parking systems at these locations. While it is appropriate to allocate revenue from paid parking systems into reserves for parking management, it is also appropriate that a portion of such revenue be allocated to General Revenue to provide for Council’s broader services. Therefore 33% of the paid parking system revenue is proposed to be allocated to General Revenue. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Installs a paid parking system to operate weekdays between 8am and 5pm on Para Road, Greensborough, at the south-east corner of the intersection with Main Street. Initial parking fees to be $1 per hour, up to $5 per day, to be managed in accordance to Council’s Rates and Charges. 2.
a.
b.
Modifies parking restrictions along Poulter Avenue, Greensborough, adjacent to the Poulter Avenue Reserve, to allow parking only on the east side of the road between 8am and 5pm on weekdays. Installs a paid parking system to operate weekdays between 8am and 5pm on the east side of Poulter Avenue, adjacent to the Poulter Avenue Reserve. Initial parking fees to be $1 per hour, up to $5 per day, to be managed in accordance to Council’s Rates and Charges.
3. Installs a paid parking system to operate weekdays between 8am and 5pm on
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 117
6.3
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
ADDITIONAL PAID PARKING LOCATIONS cont’d Somers Avenue, Macleod, adjacent to Macleod College. Initial parking fees to be $1 per hour, up to $5 per day, to be managed in accordance to Council’s Rates and Charges. 4. Installs a paid parking system to operate weekdays between 8am and 5pm on Turnham Avenue, Rosanna, south of Station Road. Initial parking fees to be $1 per hour, up to $5 per day, to be managed in accordance to Council’s Rates and Charges. 5. Installs a paid parking system to operate weekdays between 8am and 5pm on Station Road, Rosanna, west of Grove Road, adjacent to the Station Road Reserve. Initial parking fees to be $1 per hour, up to $5 per day, to be managed in accordance to Council’s Rates and Charges. 6. Installs a paid parking system to operate weekdays between 8am and 5pm in the on-street car park on the north side of Burgundy Street, Heidelberg, north of Jika Street. Initial parking fees to be $1 per hour, up to $5 per day, and to be managed in accordance with Council’s Rates and Charges. 7. Installs a paid parking system to operate weekdays between 8am and 4pm in the off-street car park in Heidelberg Park, Heidelberg. Initial parking fees to be $1 per hour, up to $5 per day, and to be managed in accordance with Council’s Rates and Charges. 8. Installs 2-hour parking restrictions to operate weekdays between 8am and 5pm in the gravel area off Burgundy Street, opposite to Heidelberg Park. 9. Installs 2-hour parking restrictions to operate weekdays between 8am and 4pm, or a paid parking system in the off-street car park on Warringal Park, Heidelberg. Initial parking fees to be $1 per hour, up to $5 per day, and to be managed in accordance with Council’s Rates and Charges. 10. Installs a paid parking system to operate weekdays between 8am and 5pm on the south-east side of Sherwood Road, Eaglemont, between Thoresby Grove and Studley Road. Initial parking fees to be $1 per hour, up to $5 per day, to be managed in accordance to Council’s Rates and Charges. 11. Installs a paid parking system to operate weekdays between 8am and 5pm on the east side of Salisbury Avenue, Ivanhoe. Initial parking fees to be $1 per hour, up to $5 per day, to be managed in accordance to Council’s Rates and Charges. 12. Installs a paid parking system to operate weekdays between 8am and 5pm on the south side of Norman Street, Ivanhoe, between Noel Street and Marshall Street. Initial parking fees to be $1 per hour, up to $5 per day, to be managed in accordance to Council’s Rates and Charges. 13. Authorises the purchase of ten parking ticket machines to be installed throughout the Municipality in the 2015/16 financial year utilising the savings
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 118
ADDITIONAL PAID PARKING LOCATIONS cont’d from the 2014/15 Capital Works Projects related to paid parking systems in Heidelberg. 14. Authorises the use of available funds in the Parking Meter Reserves for the installation of paid parking systems in the locations approved. 15. Transfers annually 33% of the profits (revenue minus operating expenses) of paid parking systems into Council’s Main Revenue Account. 16. Notifies the relevant traders associations and sports clubs of the relevant paid parking system in the vicinity of their respective activity centre or sporting club location. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “develop and deliver best value services and facilities”. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. BACKGROUND Council allocated $132,000 in the 2014/15 Capital Works Program Budget to install and modify paid parking systems in Heidelberg, and at its meeting on 18 August 2014 resolved to re-scope the projects to implement paid parking systems to provide a more efficient use of resources. In December 2014, a tender process took place for the supply and installation of Pay and Display Ticket Machines at different locations. This process resulted in lower costs for the installation of paid parking systems for Council, and thus, additional savings for the 2014/15 paid parking Capital Works Projects. A report to Council in October 2014, highlighted that the existing paid parking spaces in Heidelberg and Greensborough are generally well utilised, with an average occupancy of 83%. This report suggests the use of the savings from the 2014/15 paid parking Capital Works Projects for the purchase of ticket machines to be installed at different locations within the next financial year.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 119
6.3
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.3
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
ADDITIONAL PAID PARKING LOCATIONS cont’d
PROPOSED LOCATIONS Greensborough With an important number of medical, educational and recreational services, significant retail activity, and a busy Railway Station, the demand for all-day parking in the Greensborough Activity Centre is high. Figure 1 shows the locations where it is proposed that paid parking systems are introduced in order to better manage the demand for long-term parking and encourage the use of alternative modes of transport to travel to Greensborough.
Figure 1. Proposed Additional Paid Parking Locations in Greensborough Parking is free and unrestricted on the identified parking areas for the Greensborough Activity Centre. The parking occupancy for each parking area has been assessed and is shown in Table 1. Overall the occupancy rate for these areas is 97%. Table 1. Occupancy Rates for Proposed Additional Paid Parking Areas in Greensborough Parking area (as shown in Figure 1)
Available Average number parking of occupied spaces spaces
Occupancy rate
1 2
6 34
94% 98%
5.6 33.3
It is considered appropriate to install paid parking systems in Greensborough to operate weekdays between 8:00am and 5:00pm, with a $1/hour and up to $5/day fee. Currently, there are two indented parking bays on the east side of Poulter Avenue adjacent to the Reserve (area 2) with the capacity to accommodate 11 parked vehicles. South of these parking bays, parking is only allowed on the west side of the road on weekdays (Figure 2). It is recommended that the parking restrictions be modified to allow parking on the east side of the road only, where pedestrian facilities are available.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 120
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.3
ADDITIONAL PAID PARKING LOCATIONS cont’d
Figure 2. Parking on the west side of Poulter Avenue, opposite to the footpath The cost of the proposed modifications to the parking arrangements in Greensborough is summarised in Table 2. Table 2. Cost estimates for proposed works in Greensborough Parking area (as shown in Figure 1) 1 2
Proposed works Installation of one ticket machine Installation of signs Installation of three ticket machines Installation of signs
TOTAL
Estimated Cost $
7,000
$
21,500
$
28,500
Macleod A mix of commuters, and staff and visitors to the Banyule Netball Stadium, Macleod College, Macleod Village and Macleod Preschool use Somers Avenue (Figure 3) to park their vehicles for long periods of time.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 121
6.3
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
ADDITIONAL PAID PARKING LOCATIONS cont’d
Figure 3. Proposed Additional Paid Parking Location in Macleod The parking occupancy rates for Somers Avenue, north to the access point to the NETS Stadium and south of Melrose Avenue has increased from 50% in September and October 2014, to 85% in February 2015, with an average occupancy rate over the last year of 62%. In order to manage the increasing demand for parking in this location, it is recommended that a paid parking system is installed to operate weekdays between 8:00am and 5:00pm, with a $1/hour and up to $5/day fee. With approximately 55 parking spaces available on Somers Avenue, adjacent to Macleod College, the installation of four ticket machines and parking signs is estimated at $28,000. Rosanna Following recent changes to the myki fare structure, a higher demand for parking for commuters has been evident around Rosanna Railway Station. Concerns have been raised by, and a great number of residential streets in the vicinity of the Railway Station have had timed parking restrictions installed in the last three months.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 122
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.3
ADDITIONAL PAID PARKING LOCATIONS cont’d
Figure 4. Proposed Additional Paid Parking Location in Rosanna The occupancy rate for long-term parking on Turnham Avenue, south of Station Road (area 4 in Figure 4), and on Station Road, adjacent to the Station Road Reserve (area 5 in Figure 4) is about 100% during weekdays. Table 3 shows the average occupancy rate for these areas. Table 3. Occupancy Rates for Proposed Additional Paid Parking Areas in Rosanna Parking area (as shown in Figure 4)
Available Average number parking of occupied spaces spaces
Occupancy rate
4 5
31 9
100% 96%
31.0 8.6
With the objective of better managing the existing demand for long-term parking, the installation of paid parking systems in the identified areas in Rosanna is recommended. It is proposed that long-term parking is initially charged at a $1/hour and up to $5/day fee, weekdays between 8:00am and 5:00pm. The total cost for the installation of the proposed paid parking systems in Rosanna is approximately $21,000 as detailed in Table 4. Table 4. Cost estimates for proposed works in Rosanna Parking area (as shown in Figure 4)
Proposed works
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Estimated Cost
Page 123
6.3
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
ADDITIONAL PAID PARKING LOCATIONS cont’d Installation of two ticket machines Installation of signs Installation of one ticket machine Installation of signs
4 5 TOTAL
$
14,000
$
7,000
$
21,000
Heidelberg While paid parking systems in Heidelberg have been implemented around Heidelberg’s Medical Precinct, the Heidelberg Structure Plan identified an increase in parking demand at the office and commercial precinct to the east of Rosanna Road and recommended that “parking management embeds the philosophy that parking is a privilege within a highly sought after location”.
Figure 5. Heidelberg office and commercial precinct parking areas The supply for the Heidelberg office and commercial precinct parking demand is concentrated in the four car parking areas shown in Figure 5. Parking is free and unrestricted on the identified parking areas. Table 5 shows the occupancy rate for each parking area. Overall, the occupancy rate for the area is about 38%. Table 5. Occupancy rates for parking areas in the Heidelberg office and commercial precinct Parking area (as shown in Figure 5)
Available Average number parking of occupied spaces spaces
Occupancy rate
6 7 8 9
13 172 27 197
69% 60% 71% 12%
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
9.0 102.8 19.3 24
Page 124
ADDITIONAL PAID PARKING LOCATIONS cont’d In order to better manage parking demand and to embed the philosophy that parking is a privilege (as identified in the Heidelberg Structure Plan) some paid parking systems have already been installed in Heidelberg. As highlighted in Table 5, the demand for long-term parking (over four hours of stay) is high in the areas marked 6 and 8 in Figure 5. It is considered that drivers are attracted to the on-street parking on Burgundy Street (area 6) due its proximity to the core of the Heidelberg Activity Centre. Given that the occupancy rate with the existing parking restrictions is at an acceptable level, no time restrictions are proposed at this location. It is considered appropriate to install a paid parking system to operate weekdays between 8:30am and 5:00pm, with a $1/hour and up to $5/day fee. The available kerb space allows for 13 vehicles to be accommodated, and the nature strip width allows for a ticket machine to be installed serving these spaces. The Heidelberg Park off-street car park (area 7) is well utilised during work hours by all-day parkers, and on the weekends and after work hours by people visiting the sports ground. It is recommended that the parking spaces are delineated and that six ticket machines are installed in the area. It is considered appropriate to install the paid parking system with the same fee structure as the proposed for the 13 on-street spaces on Burgundy Street (area 6). A modified end time of 4pm is considered to accommodate needs for the sports facilities in this location. Although the gravel area off Burgundy Street (area 8) has the highest occupancy rate, the parking demand is considered temporary. It is considered that the high occupancy levels are due to a private building project in the area, and that most of the cars belong to tradesmen working on the developments (see Figure 6).
Figure 6. Large vehicles in the parking area off Burgundy Street, Heidelberg (area 8, Figure 5) Given the proximity of area 8 to the shared trails and tennis courts in the area, and the low occupancy rates of area 9 it is considered appropriate to install 2-hour parking restrictions to operate weekdays between 8:00am and 5:00pm, to provide parking opportunities for visitors to the parklands and tennis courts. The cost of the proposed modifications to the parking arrangements is estimated at $52,000 and summarised in Table 6. Table 6. Cost estimates for proposed works in Heidelberg Parking area (as shown in Figure 5)
Proposed works
Estimated Cost
6
Installation of one ticket machine Installation of signs
$
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
7,000
Page 125
6.3
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.3
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
ADDITIONAL PAID PARKING LOCATIONS cont’d
7 8 9 TOTAL
Installation of six ticket machines Installation of signs Installation of line marking Installation of signs Installation of signs
$
42,000
$ $ $
500 2,500 52,000
Eaglemont A combination of staff from the Heidelberg medical precinct and commuters park in Sherwood Road (Figure 7).
Figure 7. Proposed Additional Paid Parking Location in Eaglemont The lack of kerb on the south-east side of Sherwood Road, between Marshall Street and the southern leg of Thoresby Grove, allows motorists to park their vehicles on the road reserve. The section of road between the northern leg of Thoresby Road and Studley Road does have a kerb and a footpath is provided (Figure 8).
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 126
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.3
ADDITIONAL PAID PARKING LOCATIONS cont’d
Figure 8. Road configuration for Sherwood Rd, Eaglemont between Marshall St and Studley Road The average occupancy rate in the area between Studley Road and Thoresby Grove (with kerb and nature strip) for the last year was 72%. It is recommended that a paid parking system is installed to operate weekdays between 8:00am and 5:00pm, with a $1/hour and up to $5/day fee. With approximately 13 parking spaces available on this section, the installation of one ticket machine and parking signs is estimated to cost $7,000. Ivanhoe With a high level of retail, education, and recreation activity in addition to two Railway Stations, the parking demand around the Ivanhoe Activity Centre is increasing.
Figure 9. Proposed Additional Paid Parking Location in Ivanhoe Parking around the Darebin and Ivanhoe Railway Stations is free and unrestricted, with an average occupancy rate of 66%. Table 7 shows the parking rates on
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 127
6.3
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
ADDITIONAL PAID PARKING LOCATIONS cont’d Salisbury Avenue (area 11 in Figure 9), and on Norman Street, between Noel Street and Marshall Street (area 12 in Figure 9). Table 7. Occupancy Rates for Additional Paid Parking Areas in Ivanhoe Parking area (as shown in Figure 9)
Available Average number parking of occupied spaces spaces
Occupancy rate
11 12
48 18
63% 74%
30.2 13.3
The road configuration of Salisbury Avenue allows for vehicles to be parked parallel to the kerbed areas and angled parking elsewhere (Figure 10). It is proposed that the angled bays are delineated using yellow round pavement markers.
Figure 10. Road configuration for Salisbury Ave, Ivanhoe between Rockbeare Grove and Buchanan Street The installation of a paid parking system for Salisbury Avenue and Norman Street is recommended. It is proposed that the system operates weekdays between 8am and 5pm with an initial fee of $1/hour and up to $5/day. Table 8 summarises the cost of the supply and installation of the ticket machines, and related sign works. Table 8. Cost estimates for proposed works in Ivanhoe Parking area (as shown in Figure 4) 11
12
Proposed works Installation of four ticket machines Installation of signs Installation of yellow round pavement markers Installation of two ticket machines Installation of signs
TOTAL
Estimated Cost
$
30,000
$
14,000
$
44,000
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The estimated total cost to install paid parking systems at the proposed locations is $180,500.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 128
ADDITIONAL PAID PARKING LOCATIONS cont’d It is recommended that the savings from the 2014/15 Capital Works Projects are utilised to purchase ten ticket machines, with the remainder of the cost being covered from funds from the Car Parking Reserves. The Reserve has sufficient funds to cover for the costs of installing paid parking systems at these locations, and it is estimated that the new paid parking systems will generate sufficient revenue to cover the cost of installation within a 12-18 month period. Currently, over 80% of the revenue from the paid parking systems in the Municipality is generated in Heidelberg. In accordance to previous Council Resolutions, these funds are transferred into the Heidelberg Car Parking Account and are used to improve parking management in the area. While it is appropriate to allocate revenue from paid parking systems into reserves for parking management in the area, it is also appropriate that a portion of such revenue be allocated to General Revenue to provide for Council’s broader services. Therefore 33% of the paid parking system profit (revenue minus operating expenses) is proposed to be allocated to General Revenue. CONCLUSION The redefinition of the 2014/15 paid parking projects, and the successful tender process for the supply and installation of ticket machines, led to an efficient use of the allocated funds for Capital Works Program, and offer the opportunity to expand the paid parking systems in Banyule. The parking occupancy levels for 12 locations across the municipality were assessed, with results showing high usage across most locations. The cost of the installation of paid parking systems can be covered using the savings from the 2014/15 paid parking projects and available funds from the Parking Reserve. It is considered appropriate that a portion of the revenue from paid parking systems be allocated to General Revenue to provide for Council’s broader services. Therefore 33% of the paid parking system profits (revenue minus operating expenses) is proposed to be allocated to General Revenue. ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 129
6.3
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.4
ITEMS FOR NOTING
Author:
Catherine Simcox - Community Planning Consultant, Community Programs
File:
F2015/167
6.4
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
RECOMMENDATION That Council note the following minutes/reports: 1.
The Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee meeting held 10 April 2015.
The following Minutes or Reports are presented for noting: 1
Report/Committee Name: .
Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee (BAFCAC)
Officer:
Catherine Simcox
Brief explanation:
The BAFCAC held its third meeting on Friday 10 April 2015 at the Tom Roberts Room, Ivanhoe. The minutes from the meeting are in attachment 1. The aim of BAFCAC is to provide Council with advice on older adult issues and ageing well in Banyule. The BAFCAC will oversee Councils involvement in the World Health Organisations Global Network of Agefriendly Cities. Councillor Mulholland chaired the meeting and Councillor Langdon also attended the meeting. Eight committee members attended the meeting. There were no recommendations for Council’s consideration from this meeting.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Banyule Age-friendly City Advisory Committee Minutes April 2015
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 529
Page 130
6.5
ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS
Author:
Cindy Ho - Governance Officer, Corporate Services
File:
F2014/337
6.5
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Under the Local Government Act 1989 an Assembly of Councillors is defined as: A meeting of an advisory committee of the Council, if at least one Councillor is present or; A planned or scheduled meeting of at least half of the Councillors and one member of Council staff which considers matters that are intended or likely to be: a) b)
the subject of a decision of the Council or; subject to the exercise of a function, duty or power of the Council that has been delegated to a person or committee.
In accordance with Section 80A of the Local Government Act 1989 Council is required to report as soon as possible to an Ordinary Meeting of Council a record of any assemblies of Councillors held. Below is the latest listing of notified assemblies of Councillors held at Banyule City Council. RECORD OF ASSEMBLIES 1
Date of Assembly:
18 May 2015
Type of Meeting:
Councillor Briefing
Matters Considered:
1. 2. 3. 4.
Councillors Present:
Staff Present:
Montmorency RSL Gaming Machine Proposal Integrated Transport Plan Draft for Consultation Banksia Street, Bellfield – Multipurpose Stadium Summary of submissions to the Draft Budget and City Plan
Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Craig Langdon Tom Melican Wayne Phillips Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Scott Walker – Director City Development Allison Beckwith – Director Community Programs Geoff Glynn – Director Assets & city Services Peter Utri – Acting Director Corporate Services Daniel Kollmorgen – Manager Transport, Sustainability & Municipal Laws Darren Bennett – Manager Leisure, Recreation & Cultural Services David Bailey – Engineering Services Coordinator Bailey Byrnes – Transport Planning Team Leader
Others Present:
Nil
Conflict of Interest:
Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 131
6.5
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d
2
Date of Assembly:
15 April 2015
Type of Meeting:
Disability & Inclusion Advisory Committee
Matters Considered:
Conflict of Interest:
Previous Minutes Disability Action Plan Local Report Watch Council presentations Next meeting & Committee Photo Craig Langdon Jenny Mulholland Shawn Neilson – Community & Social Planner Theonie Tacticos – Team Leader, Community & Social Planning Lisa Raywood – Manager, Health & Aged Services Helen Parker - Community & Social Planner Arun Chopra – Manager, Capital Projects Kate Chapell – Greensborough Office Project CoOrdinator Ana Caicedo – Team Leader, Traffic & Transport Nancy Sadka Anna Constas Simon Chong Louise Pearson Stephanie Krt Luke Nelson Jeff Walkley Janice Castledine Sherridan Bourne (MetroAccess) Nil
Date of Assembly:
25 May 2015
Type of Meeting:
Councillor Briefing
Councillors Present: Staff Present:
Others Present:
3
Matters Considered:
Items on the Council Agenda for the Ordinary Meeting of 25 May 2015 (excluding confidential items) as listed below: 2.1 World Health Organisation Developing Indicators for Age-Friendly Cities - Pilot Project Meeting 2.2 Community Buses Review 4.1 Notice of Intention to Declare a Special Rate Bell Street Mall 4.2 Update on the Vision for Watsonia Village 4.3 Planning Permit Application for an additional 15 Electronic Gaming Machines and associated building and works at Montmorency Eltham RSL (P1143/2014) 5.1 Proposed City Plan & Budget - Consideration of Submissions Received 6.1 219 Southern Road Heidelberg West - Proposed Sale of Land 6.2 Responding to the MAV invitation to join a proposed local government workers'
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 132
ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d
Others Present:
compensation mutual scheme 6.3 Assembly of Councillors 6.4 Challenges, Workload and Initiatives in Development Planning 6.5 29 Alamein Road Heidelberg West - Proposed Sale of Land 6.6 Shop 201 Greensborough Plaza and Shop 378A Greensborough Plaza 7.1 Sealing of Documents 8.1 Review of Council Committees 8.2 Greensborough College Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Wayne Phillips Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Scott Walker – Director City Development Allison Beckwith – Director Community Programs Geoff Glynn – Director Assets & City Services Peter Utri – Acting Director Corporate Services Daniel Kollmorgen – Manager Transport, Sustainability & Municipal Laws Vivien Ferlaino – Acting Manager Governance & Communications Emily Outlaw – Council Governance Liaison Angela Johnson – Manager, Human Resources Tania O’Reilly – Manager, Finance & Procurement Joseph Tabacco – Manager, Property & Economic Development Jackie Bernoth – Co-Ordinator – Development Planning Chris McInnes – Development Planner Nil
Conflict of Interest:
Nil
Date of Assembly:
1 June 2015
Type of Meeting:
Councillor Briefing
Matters Considered:
Webcasting of Council Meetings Corporate Identity Ivanhoe Grammar Development Heidelberg Parking Plan & Future Parking Changes Garage Sale Trail Presentation Carbon Tax Repeal Assessment Financial Assistance Grants Budget Submissions Consideration Craig Langdon Jenny Mulholland Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Rick Garotti
Councillors Present:
Staff Present:
4
Councillors Present:
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 133
6.5
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.5
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d
Conflict of Interest:
Tom Melican Wayne Phillips Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Scott Walker – Director City Development Allison Beckwith – Director Community Programs Geoff Glynn – Director Assets & City Services Gina Burden - Acting Director Corporate Services Vivien Ferlaino – Co-Ordinator, Governance Tania O’Reilly – Manager, Finance & Procurement Daniel Kollmorgen – Manager Transport, Sustainability & Municipal Laws Luca Verduci – Digital Communications Officer Trish Hosking – Co-Ordinator, Communications Joel Elbourne – Manager, Urban Planning & Building Andy Wilson – Team Leader, Development Planning Bailey Byrnes – Transport Planning Team Leader Ana Caicedo – Team Leader, Traffic & Transport James Kelly – Manager, Assets & Infrastructure Russell Darling – Manager, Operations Megan McLean – Garage Sale Trail Andrew Valder – Garage Sale Trail Nil
Date of Assembly:
1 June 2015
Type of Meeting:
Confidential Councillor Briefing
Matters Considered:
Confidential Contractual Matters
Councillors Present:
Craig Langdon Jenny Mulholland Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Rick Garotti Tom Melican Wayne Phillips
Staff Present:
Others Present:
Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Scott Walker – Director City Development Allison Beckwith – Director Community Programs Geoff Glynn – Director Assets & City Services Gina Burden - Acting Director Corporate Services Joel Elbourne – Manager, Urban Planning & Building James Kelly – Manager, Assets & Infrastructure Russell Darling – Manager, Operations Tania O’Reilly – Manager, Finance & Procurement Giovanni Savini – Manager, Youth & Family Services Nil
Conflict of Interest:
Nil
Staff Present:
Others Present:
5
RECOMMENDATION That the Assembly of Councillors report be received.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 134
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.5
ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 135
6.6
1 KALPARRIN AVENUE GREENSBOROUGH NEW LEASE - COMMENCE STATUTORY PROCEDURES
Author:
Jeanette Kringle - Property Co-ordinator, City Development
Ward:
Beale
File:
F2013/1022
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council owns and currently leases the land and improvements known as 1 Kalparrin Avenue Greensborough (subject site) to Kalparrin Early Childhood Intervention Program Inc (Kalparrin) under a three year lease, which is due to expire on 29 June 2015 (existing lease). The existing lease does not provide an option for a further term. Kalparrin is seeking to enter into a new lease with Council. The proposal triggers the need to give public notice under sections 190 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989. For the purposes of giving public notice for this proposal it is noted that the “Diamond Valley Leader” is the newspaper that is generally circulated in the Greensborough area. The purpose of this report is to seek authorisation to commence the statutory procedures to give public notice of Council’s intention to grant a new lease of the subject site to Kalparrin for the term of three years with options for two further terms of three years each for the purpose of operating a Limited Hours Type 1 Children’s Service. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Acknowledge that Kalparrin Early Childhood Intervention Program Inc (Kalparrin) is seeking to enter into a new lease in respect of the Council-owned land and improvements known as 1 Kalparrin Avenue Greensborough (subject site) and that Kalparrin will remain in occupation of the subject site overholding under the terms and conditions of the existing lease until satisfactory completion of the matters relating to items 3 and 4 below have been completed. 2. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer and/or the Director City Development to finalise negotiations to grant a new lease to Kalparrin for the term of three years with options for two further terms of three years each for the purpose of operating a Limited Hours Type 1 Children’s Service from the subject site. 3. In accordance with sections 190 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act), authorises the commencement of the statutory procedures to give public notice of Council’s intention to grant to Kalparrin a new Lease and inviting written submissions from the public on the proposal in the “Diamond Valley Leader” on 17 June 2015. 4. Receive written submissions on the proposal, and hear from persons who have
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 136
6.6
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
1 KALPARRIN AVENUE GREENSBOROUGH - NEW LEASE - COMMENCE STATUTORY PROCEDURES cont’d made a written request to be heard in person or by a party representing them as specified in their submission and in accordance with the Act, at its ordinary meeting of Council on 6 July 2015 beginning at 7.45 pm to be held in the Council Chambers, 275 Upper Heidelberg Road Ivanhoe. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “develop and deliver best value services and facilities”. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. Section 20 provides that “A person must not be deprived of his or her property other than in accordance with the law.” It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. Council has the legislative power to lease land owned or vested in Council’s name. Section 223 of the Act provides that a person may make a submission in respect of a proposal by Council to grant a lease. BACKGROUND Council currently owns and leases the land and improvements known as 1 Kalparrin Avenue Greensborough (subject site) to Kalparrin Early Childhood Intervention Program Inc (Kalparrin) under a three year lease, which is due to expire on 29 June 2015 (existing lease). Under the existing lease the permitted use of the subject site is for the operation of a Limited Hours Type 1 Children’s Service, which is defined as follows: “a service providing care and education for four or more children with a disability or developmental delay from birth to school entry and their families in the absence of their parents or guardians(a) for fee or reward; or (b) while the parents or guardians of the children use services or facilities provided by the proprietor of the service; and (c) for no more than two hours per day and six hours per week.”
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 137
6.6
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.6
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
1 KALPARRIN AVENUE GREENSBOROUGH - NEW LEASE - COMMENCE STATUTORY PROCEDURES cont’d
The existing lease does not provide an option for a further term. Kalparrin is a non-profit organisation, overseen by a Board of Management that receives the majority of its funding from the (State Government) Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. The funds are supplemented by fees from activities and programs and support from the local community, service organisations and business. Kalparrin provides services to families residing in the Banyule, Whittlesea and Nillumbik areas and has been operating from the subject site since the late 1970’s. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION The improvements on the subject site were originally constructed as two buildings. One of the buildings, having an area of approximately 440m2, was constructed with a combination of state and local government funding (from the former Diamond Valley Council) and fund raising by Kalparrin. The construction of the second building, which has an area of approximately 225m2, was fully funded by the former Diamond Valley Council. The second building was occupied by the Banyule Community Health Centre until 2006. Kalparrin now occupies and leases both buildings, i.e. approximately 665m2 of floor space, and the portable building, as shown on the plan in Figure 1.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 138
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.6
1 KALPARRIN AVENUE GREENSBOROUGH - NEW LEASE - COMMENCE STATUTORY PROCEDURES cont’d
Figure 1: Locality Plan The existing lease provides an entitlement to use, in common with the public, the car parking area immediately adjacent to the subject site. The subject site comprises part of the land in certificate of title volume 9153 folio 876 registered in Council’s name. CURRENT SITUATION Kalparrin is seeking to enter into a new lease with Council in order to facilitate the expansion of its services to the community in preparation for the introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme in 2016. The proposed expansion of the service has led to Kalparrin seeking a lengthier tenure, rather than a single term of three years, as is the term under the existing lease. PLANNING CONTROLS The subject site is included in the Public Park and Recreation Zone (PPRZ) under the Banyule Planning Scheme (BPS) and is affected by Schedule 8 of the Design and Development overlay control and Schedule 1 of the Environmental Significance overlay control. The purpose of the PPRZ is to recognise areas for public recreation and open space and to protect and conserve areas of significance where appropriate. It also allows for the provision of commercial uses where appropriate. The granting of a new lease for the current permitted use will not necessitate the need for a planning permit. LEGAL CONSIDERATION Kalparrin is seeking to enter into a new lease with Council. The proposal triggers the need to give public notice under sections 190 of the Act. Council is obliged to invite submissions from members of the public in accordance with the Section 223 of the Act. POLICY IMPLICATIONS PUBLIC NOTICE Council’s Official Newspaper Policy provides as follows: “The Heidelberg Leader and/or Diamond Valley Leader and/or the Heidelberg and Valley Weekly, where appropriate be appointed as Council’s official newspapers for the purpose of providing public notice except where circumstances may be deemed appropriate to use The Age and/or the Herald/Sun for particular public notices.” For the purposes of giving public notice for this proposal it is noted that the “Diamond Valley Leader” is the newspaper that is generally circulated in the Greensborough area.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 139
6.6
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
1 KALPARRIN AVENUE GREENSBOROUGH - NEW LEASE - COMMENCE STATUTORY PROCEDURES cont’d DISCUSSION As previously indicated, Kalparrin is expanding its services to the community in preparation for the introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme in 2016. Whilst there is still uncertainty in relation to how this scheme will operate, Kalparrin have indicated that the granting of a lease with an extended tenure will provide it with a secure platform to make submissions and applications for additional government and philanthropic funding. CONCLUSION In light of the above, commencement of the statutory procedures, to grant a new lease to Kalparrin for the purposes of operating a Limited Hours Type 1 Children’s Service for the term of three years with options for two further terms of three years each, should be supported by authorising the giving of public notice of Council’s intent in the “Diamond Valley Leader”. ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 140
7.1
SEALING OF DOCUMENTS
Author:
Jeanette Kringle - Property Co-ordinator, City Development
Ward:
Hawdon
File:
F2015/1652
7.1
Sealing of Documents
RECOMMENDATION That the Common Seal of the Banyule City Council be affixed to the following documents: 1.
Instrument of Authorisation for Planning Officers Amanda Opie and David Moon and they be appointed and authorised as set out in the Instrument.
2.
Licence agreement between Banyule City Council and the Minister Administering the Education and Training Reforming Act 2006 (Schools) in relation to the occupation of part of the Council owned land known as Simms Road Reserve by the Montmorency Secondary College.
1.
The following documents require the affixing of the Common Seal of Council: 1
PARTY\PARTIES: .OFFICER: FILE NUMBER: DOCUMENT: BRIEF EXPLANATION:
Banyule City Council Ellen Kavanagh F2015/1774 Instrument of Authorisation Pursuant to section 224 of the Local Government Act 1989 a Council may appoint any person other than a Councillor to be an authorised officer for the purposes of the administration and enforcement of any Act, regulations or local laws which relate to the functions and powers of the Council. Officers who undertake the Statutory role of Planner and Planning Enforcement Officers require Authorisation pursuant to the Local Government Act and Planning and Environment Act. An authorised officer has the power to: Demand the name and address of a person who has committed, or who the authorised officer reasonably suspects has committed or is about to commit, an offence against any Act, regulation or local law in respect of which he or she is appointed. To enter land at any reasonable time and to enforce the Planning and Environment Act. The Instrument of Authorisation requires the Council Seal for Amanda Opie and David Moon.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 141
7.1
Sealing of Documents
SEALING OF DOCUMENTS cont’d 2
PARTY\PARTIES: . OFFICER: FILE NUMBER: DOCUMENT: ADDRESS: WARD: BRIEF EXPLANATION:
Banyule City Council and Minister Administering the Education and Training Reform Act 2006 (Schools) Jeff Parkes/Jeanette Kringle F2015/1652 Licence Agreement 31 Simms Road Greensborough being part of the Council-owned land known as Simms Road Reserve Hawdon During the planning phase of the upgrading a section of the Plenty River Trail it was identified that part of Council-owned land, known as the Simms Road Reserve, had been fenced within the boundary of, and occupied by the Montmorency Secondary College (School). The land in question is located at the rear of the School through the Simms Road Reserve to the Willinda Park Bridge and is currently being used by the School as part of the School grounds. The School has been using and maintaining the land for many years. In discussions with the School Principal and the Education Department agreement has been reached in relation to the realignment of the fencing to allow Plenty River Trail works to proceed. The realignment of the fencing will result in part of the Simms Road Reserve, namely 414m2, still being fenced within the School grounds. A Licence has been prepared to formalise this arrangement. The Licence provides amongst other things for Council to give three months written notice in the event that it wishes to terminate the Licence. The proposal to enter into the Licence should be supported by Council resolving to affix its common seal to the Licence.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 142
8.1
REQUEST MEETING WITH THE MINISTER FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Author:
Cr Jenny Mulholland
File:
F2014/492
TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move:
“That Council write to the Minister for Local Government The Hon. Natalie Hutchins MP inviting the Minister to a meeting to update Council on future directions for the sector and discuss Banyule’s current position.” Explanation The Minister for Local Government, The Hon. Natalie Hutchins has been visiting local councils as part of her portfolio. A meeting with the Minister is requested to enable Council to receive an update on matters affecting local government including future directions for the sector, ongoing funding arrangements and any other matters that may impact on Banyule and the local government sector.
CR JENNY MULHOLLAND Griffin Ward
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 June 2015
Page 143
8.1
Notice of Motion