Banyule City Council Agenda 14 June 2016 - Attachments only

Ordinary Meeting of Council Council Chambers, Service Centre 275 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe 14 June 2016 commencing at 7.45pm

ATTACHMENTS 4.1 91 Darebin Street, HEIDELBERG - Construction of a multi level mixed use development Attachment 1.

Attachment 1 - Background information - P1135/2015 pt1 ....................3

Attachment 2.

Attachment 2 - Assessment against Higher Density Design Guidelines - P1135/2015 pt1 ................................................................9

Attachment 3.

Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans.........................................................19

4.2 Infrastructure Victoria 30 Year Strategy - Draft Submission Attachment 1.

Infrastructure Victoria Options Paper - Council Submission June 2016...........................................................................................57

5.1 Petrie Park and Rattary Reserve Master Plan Attachment 1.

Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve - Summary of Key Themes ..............................................................................................65

Attachment 2.

Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016.........................................................................................67

6.2 Adoption of Banyule's Budget for the period 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017 Attachment 1.

Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4)) ..........................................................................89

6.3 Return of the 2016 General Re-valuation Attachment 1.

Statutory Declaration of the return of the 2016 General Revaluation for the Municipality of Banyule.......................................105

6.4 Items for Noting Attachment 1.

Banyule Environment Advisory Committee BEAC April 2016 Meeting notes ..........................................................................107

Attachment 2.

Banyule Environment Advisory Committee (BEAC) May 2016 Notes .......................................................................................111

Attachment 3.

Chandler Highway Widening - Hon Bruce Atkinson MLC response...........................................................................................115

Attachment 4.

Chandler Highway Widening - Mr Colin Brooks MP ..........................117

Attachment 5.

Planning Infringement Penalties For Illegal Tree Removal The Hon Richard Wynne...................................................................119

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 2

Attachment 1: Attachment 1 - Background information - P1135/2015 pt1

91 Darebin Street HEIDELBERG

Attachment 1

PROPOSAL IN DETAIL Bedrooms Two Two Two Two Two Two Two Two One Two Two Two Two Two Two Two Two One Two Two Two Two Two Two Two Two One Two Two Two Three Two Two Three Three Three Three

Open space 39 m2 44 m2 36 m2 79 m2 23 m2 40 m2 29 m2 12 m2 12 m2 12 m2 10 m2 63 m2 23 m2 12 m2 30 m2 29 m2 12 m2 12 m2 12 m2 10 m2 13 m2 12 m2 12 m2 30 m2 29 m2 23 m2 18 m2 47 m2 13 m2 12 m2 133 m2 19 m2 19 m2 113 m2 72 m2 44 m2 68 m2

Open space location Ground level, Darebin St frontage Ground level, east Ground level, east Ground level, east & south Ground level, west Ground level, north & balcony, west Balcony, north & east Balcony, east Balcony, east Balcony, east Balcony, east Balcony, west Balcony, west Balcony, west Balcony, north & west Balcony, north & east Balcony, east Balcony, east Balcony, east Balcony, east Balcony, west Balcony, west Balcony, west Balcony, north & west Balcony, north & east Balcony, east Balcony, east Balcony, east & south Balcony, west Balcony, west Balcony, north, east & west Balcony, west Balcony, west Balcony, south, east & west Balcony, north, east & west Balcony, west Balcony, south, east & west

Attachment 1

Apartment G01 G02 G03 G04 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 401 402 403 404 501 502 503

Due to the varied width of the proposed balconies (which reduces down to as low as 700mm in places), the usable open space areas for Dwellings 107, 201, 207-209, 301 and 307-309 is in the order of 6 m2 each.

In addition to the open space areas nominated, a 34m2 communal roof terrace is indicated at Level 4.

Dwelling Density Impervious Site Coverage

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

4.1

Item: 4.1

1:m2 78%

Page 3

Attachment 1

4.1

Item: 4.1

Attachment 1: Attachment 1 - Background information - P1135/2015 pt1

PLANNING CONTROLS IN DETAIL SPECIAL USE ZONE SCHEDULE 3 The purposes of Schedule 3 to the Special Use Zone are: •

To implement the Heidelberg Precinct Structure Plan.

•

To encourage the consolidation of medical services within this precinct.

•

To enable a mix of uses within developments that provides dwellings within upper levels of buildings.

•

To protect the amenity of patients and residents within and around this precinct.

A permit is required to use land for a dwelling, unless it is located more than 10m above ground level. No planning permit is required for a medical centre (save for any reduction in the standard parking provision).

Decision guidelines include: •

All floor to ceiling heights within buildings, must be adequate to enable the conversion of other uses, (such as a dwelling) to Medical Centre.

•

Whether the proposed development provides an appropriate level of amenity to nearby dwellings, medical centres and hospitals.

DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY Schedule 5 to the Overlay outlines that it seeks: •

To promote new development that provides a positive contribution to the built form and public realm by: o

Respecting the preferred scale and character of the Heidelberg Activity Centre.

o

Protecting views from the public realm along and across the Burgundy Street valley.

o

Incorporating a combination of articulation, materials and colours to create visual interest.

Providing façade treatments that are sympathetic with nearby areas of parklands and vegetation.

Providing a sympathetic design response to nearby sites of known heritage value.

o o

o

Providing building setbacks that create a sense of openness within the streetscape environment and maintain the amenity of peripheral residential and other sensitive uses. …

Encouraging development to provide passive surveillance to the streetscape and other public areas.

Maintaining sunlight and daylight access to adjoining private open spaces of dwellings in accordance with clause 55.

Locating living areas, windows and private open spaces to minimise the potential for overlooking in accordance with clause 55.

Ensuring ground-level street frontages have activity and interest for pedestrians.

o

Ensuring car parking is appropriately screened by buildings and landscaping.

o

o o o

•

To promote design that enables environmentally sustainable development.

•

To discourage the underdevelopment of land by not permitting buildings or entrenching uses that are inconsistent with the preferred scale and character, identified by the maximum building heights and setbacks detailed in this Schedule

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 4

Attachment 1: Attachment 1 - Background information - P1135/2015 pt1

A planning permit is required for buildings and works pursuant to the Design and Development Overlay. The Overlay outlines for this site that: •

A preferred maximum height of 10m applies; and

•

Street frontage should be consistent with Clause 55.03-1 (ResCode)

4.1

Item: 4.1

•

Whether the proposed heights and setbacks are balanced, in relation to the preferred maximum built form of the site and adjoining sites.

•

Whether building height greater than the standard provides a positive contribution to the form of the building.

•

Whether building height greater than the standard unreasonably reduces opportunities for adjoining buildings to make effective use of natural light.

•

Whether building height greater than the standard respects the scale of surrounding development and the topography of the surrounding land.

•

Whether the proposal provides for an appropriate scale of development in order to accommodate the preferred mix and intensity of use.

Attachment 1

Decision guidelines with respect to built form include:

…

•

Whether building height that is less than the preferred maximum height respects the scale of preferred maximum built form and the topography of the land.

•

Whether the facades of new development that is visible from nearby parklands provide treatments that are sympathetic with the parklands environment.

•

Whether the development provides adequate opportunities for natural light to penetrate to lower levels of buildings.

VEGETATION PROTECTION OVERLAY None of the trees on site have a height of 12m or more and a trunk circumference of more than 400mm, meaning that no permit is required for the proposed tree removal.

CLAUSE 52.06 – CAR PARKING

Clause 52.06 outlines that parking facilities are required as follows: Rate

No. proposed

Parking requirement

32 5 37

32 spaces 10 spaces 7 spaces

Dwelling 1-2 bedrooms 3 bedrooms Visitor parking

1 space/dwelling 2 spaces/dwelling 1 space/5 dwellings

Total Medical centre

49 spaces 5 spaces for the first practitioner, 3 spaces thereafter

2 practitioners

8 spaces

The proposal incorporates 47 parking spaces, with the reduction sought identified as being seven (7) residential visitor parking spaces and three (3) medical centre spaces.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 5

4.1

Item: 4.1

Attachment 1: Attachment 1 - Background information - P1135/2015 pt1

HEIDELBERG STRUCTURE PLAN The Heidelberg Structure Plan underpins Schedule 5 to the Design and Development Overlay, and is reflective of the provisions of the Local Places Policy contained in Clause 21.08. The Plan indicates the site as being within an area which will support both health care land uses and residential mixed use development (Plan 17). Objectives of the Plan include to improve the image and identity of the medical precinct. It is policy that medical uses are clustered around the existing hospitals. Witrh respect to built form it notes:

Attachment 1

To ensure the built form responds positively to sensitive interfaces, commercial, retail and service imperatives, landscape and topography and housing needs and character the following strategic objectives have been identified: 1.

To ensure that new residential development is an appropriate scale and is sensitive to the interface with the Yarra River open space environment and floodplain.

2.

To encourage high quality commercial buildings of appropriate height and scale.

3.

To ensure Burgundy Street retains its primary retail form.

4.

To ensure that new development makes a positive contribution to the existing streetscapes and urban form.

5.

To respond to and respect the character of urban form in residential areas adjoining the precinct.

6.

To allow for built form that signifies the importance of the medical services precinct, whilst not detracting from the high quality low scale residential development in the precinct.

7.

To encourage a more diverse housing stock to enable and facilitate people to reside in or adjacent to the centre such as in upper floors above retail or commercial spaces in well designed mixed use buildings.

8.

To develop dwellings compatible with the prevailing residential built form.

9.

To use environmentally sensitive and sustainable design and building technologies.

The Plan outlines with respect to Setback Standard 4, which applies to this site and other sites with a 10m height nominated (but not to any sites which have a preferred maximum height of greater than 10m): Setback Guideline 4 •

Setback to be consistent with Clause 55 of the Banyule Planning Scheme.

•

Façade can be as high as 10 metres.

•

2 further levels (6m) above 10 metres, setback 1.5 metres per 3 metre floor. This maintains the feeling of openness while, in east-west streets, it is sufficient to ensure at least 3 hours of sunlight per day in the middle of winter reaches the first floor windows of the building across the street.

•

Street façade can extend across full width of the frontage at the lower two levels but may have side setbacks at the 3rd level.

•

Balconies should be recessed into the front of the 3rd level. A framework of balustrades, fin walls and verandas should extend to the front boundary to define the street façade.

BACKGROUND/HISTORY There have been no previous planning applications for this site

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 6

Item: 4.1

Attachment 1: Attachment 1 - Background information - P1135/2015 pt1

4.1

REFERRAL COMMENTS ENGINEERING SERVICES Council’s Engineering Services Section have reviewed the proposal and advised as follows: Stormwater detention A minimum of 10.27m3 of on-site stormwater detention will be required to be provided.

Car parking provision •

Car parking spaces adjacent to storage cages are allocated to the dwellings to which the car parking spaces are allocated to.

•

A minimum of three car parking spaces are allocated to the medical centre for long term users.

•

A minimum of eight spaces in Basement 1 (including the proposed accessible bay) are allocated to visitors to the building (to be shared between the residential and medical centre components)

Car parking design The car park generally complies with the design standards.

The applicant is to provide further details in relation to the operation of the proposed “stop and go” system to manage vehicular movements between Basement 1 and Basement 2.

Bicycle parking The plans indicate that the statutory requirement for bicycle parking is met. However, it would be preferable to have the visitors’ spaces close to the main pedestrian access to the building, at street level.

Waste collection The proposed collection of waste and recyclables off the kerbside is not supported as it reduces on-street parking availability on Darebin Street.

DEVELOPMENT PLANNING ARBORIST Council’s Development Planning Arborist has advised that the proposed tree removal is acceptable, and that the proposal incorporates sufficient separation from the existing street trees (including at basement level) to ensure their protection.

BUILDING PERMITS AND INSPECTION SERVICES Council’s Building Permits and Inspection Services section advises that the minimum floor-ceiling height for medical centres within the Building Code is 2.4m, with a 3.0m floor-ceiling height required if operations are to be conducted.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 7

Attachment 1

The reduction in the number of car parking spaces is acceptable provided that:

Attachment 2: Attachment 2 - Assessment against Higher Density Design Guidelines - P1135/2015 pt1

91 Darebin Street HEIDELBERG

Attachment 2

ASSESSMENT AGAINST GUIDELINES FOR HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO.: PROPOSAL:

4.1

Item: 4.1

P1135/2015 Buildings and works to construct a multi dwelling development (up to 6 storeys) including 37 apartments within a Design and Development Overlay; removal of vegetation; and, a reduction in the standard car parking requirements Element 1: Urban context

1.1

To ensure buildings respond creatively to their existing context and to agreed aspirations for the future development of the area. This should take the form of an urban context report.

Complies

Design Response 1.2

To provide a creative design response that is based on a clear understanding of the urban context and neighbourhood character.

Complies

The proposal is accompanied by an appropriate site analysis and design response, including consideration of the site, character of the neighbourhood, and its strategic context.

The suitability of the proposal to the character of the area is influenced by the provisions of the Design and Development Overlay, and the existing surrounding development to the south and east. The boundary of the DDO is indicative of the fact that it is anticipated that there will be a distinct character difference between development on the eastern and western sides of Powlett Street, and between the northern and southern sides of Darebin Street.

Element 2: Building envelope Height and massing 2.1

To ensure that the height of new development responds to existing urban context and neighbourhood character objectives of the area.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Complies

The proposal incorporates a height of 17.4m to 19m above natural ground level (or 17m – 19.8m above street level), with the slope of the site meaning that the building is at its highest along the eastern façade. This represents a height of 2.5 – 3 storeys over the preferred maximum of 10m for this precinct, with the 16m height to Powlett Street being comparable with both the existing hospital car park at 230-232 Burgundy Street and the approved development at 12 Powlett Street (the latter is currently subject of an objector appeal).

Page 9

Attachment 2

Neighbourhood character and strategic context

Attachment 2: Attachment 2 - Assessment against Higher Density Design Guidelines - P1135/2015 pt1

4.1

Item: 4.1

The upper levels of the proposal are apparent from Darebin Street, where the top two levels will be visible save from the footpath and parking lane on the southern side of the street, and from surrounding properties. The impact upon Powlett Street is less pronounced, with the slope of the land reducing the apparent height of the building from both the street and properties on its western side.

By way of absolute comparison, the height to AHD of the proposal and existing/approved development in the vicinity is as follows:

Attachment 2

Proposal 230-232 Burgundy Street (Hospital Car Park) 10 Martin Street (constructed) 9-11 Martin Street & 12 Powlett Street (currently before VCAT)

90.2 85.9 92.1 90.5

It is considered that in light of surrounding development and the slope of the land away from Powlett Street the height of the proposal above street level is acceptable. The use of curved balconies, additional recession, clear balustrades and appropriate render colours to the upper level faรงade results in an upper portion which achieves an appropriate level of visual and physical recession. The absolute height of the building is also considered to be acceptable, and will not result in an unacceptable impact upon view-lines from key vantage points, including the intersection of Upper Heidelberg Road and Burgundy Street/the Bell Street off-ramp.

2.2

To ensure new development is appropriate to the scale of nearby streets, other public spaces, and buildings.

Complies

It is considered that the form of the proposed building, associated balconies, and choice of materials and colours results in a building which will be appropriate to the developing character of this section of Heidelberg.

2.3

To protect sunlight access to public spaces.

Complies

The orientation of the site ensures that the proposal will not have an inappropriate impact upon the level of sunlight enjoyed by Darebin Street or the Powlett Street road reservation (including the grassed section adjoining the site).

Variation to Standard

Both the DDO and the Heidelberg Structure Plan outline that in this location a building should be set back in accordance with Clause 55 (ie. 7m to Darebin Street and 2m to Powlett Street), however the Structure Plan also refers to the potential to provide an additional 6m in height provided that an additional setback of 1.5m to each storey (3m height) is provided.

Street setbacks 2.4

To respond to existing or preferred street character.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 10

By comparison the proposal incorporates the following setbacks: Levels G-3 Level 4 Level 5

Darebin Street 6m to façade, minimum of 4m to balconies 7.7m to façade, minimum of 4m to balconies Minimum of 8.85m to façade and 6.55m to balcony

Powlett Street 3.5m to façade, minimum of 1.5m to balconies 4.3m to façade, minimum of 1.5m to balconies Minimum of 5.6 to façade, 3.5m to balconies

The proposal incorporates a 1m reduced setback to the proposed façade and 3m to the balconies when compared with the adjoining development to the east. It is noted, however, that other development in the immediate vicinity has setbacks in the order of 5m.

In this context, and given the use of sections of clear balustrading and the break in the mid-point of the balconies results in a built form which is acceptable in terms of presentation to and setback from Darebin Street. The proposed setback at the upper levels includes an appropriate amount of recession from the street when compared with the levels beneath.

With the exception of relatively small sections of the curved balconies, the proposal complies with the setbacks outlined to Powlett Street for Levels 1-3, with the balconies intruding into the setbacks at Level 4 and 5. The curvature of the balconies, the narrow break provided between them mid-way along the façade, and the topography of the land combine to form an acceptable outcome, however.

Relationship to adjoining buildings 2.5

To ensure building separation supports private amenity and reinforces neighbourhood character.

Ability to comply

It is considered that, subject to minor modification, the proposal will not result in an unacceptable impact upon the amenity of adjoining properties: Shadowing The proposed southern and western boundary setbacks assist in reducing the amount of shadow cast by the proposal upon the adjoining properties at 16 Powlett Street and 85-89 Darebin Street. As a result, and due to the orientation of the land, the proposal will result in:

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

•

Minimal shadowing to the adjoining property at 16 Powlett Street at 9am and noon on 22 September;

•

Overshadowing of the entire yard of Units 5 and 6, 85 Darebin Street at 3pm on 22 September;

Page 11

4.1

Attachment 2: Attachment 2 - Assessment against Higher Density Design Guidelines - P1135/2015 pt1

Attachment 2

Item: 4.1

4.1

Item: 4.1

Attachment 2: Attachment 2 - Assessment against Higher Density Design Guidelines - P1135/2015 pt1 •

Shadowing of approximately half of the rear yard of 16 Powlett Street at 3pm on 22 September.

The information supplied indicates that the existing fencing on site also currently shades the entirety of the private open space at Units 5 and 6, 85 Darebin Street.

It is considered that these shadow impacts are acceptable in this setting, and do not overly restrict future development of the adjoining property at 16 Powlett Street. It is noted that whilst the adjoining property owner has raised concern about the level of shade cast by the proposal over 16 Powlett Street during winter, winter shade is not ordinarily considered when assessing a planning application. Existing buildings, landscaping and fencing also currently cast significant levels of shade to the yard areas concerned.

Overlooking

Attachment 2

The plans indicate screening to selected balconies on the eastern side of the proposed building. This is restricted to Levels 1-3, and does not include the balconies which wrap around the north of the building or the entirety of balconies to the dwellings located at the southern end of the building.

An assessment of the plans indicates that:

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

•

The use of appropriately angled louvres would allow longer-range views from Balconies 107 and 207 to the south-east whilst ensuring appropriate levels of privacy are maintained by 16 Powlett Street and 5/85 Darebin Street.

•

Screening is necessary to the Communal Roof Terrace;

•

Screening to the narrow (1.2m – 1.4m wide) section of east facing balcony at Level 5 is not considered to be necessary, given the horizontal and vertical separation of the balcony from the adjoining property and the anticipated low utilisation of this section of balcony.

•

Screening to restrict overlooking should be provided to: o

The south facing Apartment 207 dining room window;

o

The south-east facing section of balcony to Apartment 207;

o

Extend the proposed screening to Balcony 306 to the south and south-east (but not necessarily the curved section facing south-west)

o

The balconies of Apartments 401 and 404, from a point approximately 14m from the Darebin Street frontage, along the eastern façade and to a point approximately 10m from the Powlett Street frontage.

Page 12

Attachment 2: Attachment 2 - Assessment against Higher Density Design Guidelines - P1135/2015 pt1

Screening should be designed to focus views toward the broader area, rather than preventing outlook. In some instances, use of planter boxes or similar to prevent access to the outer edge of a balcony may be sufficient to screen overlooking.

4.1

Item: 4.1

The plans should also be annotated to reflect the screening indicated to the south facing balcony of Apartment 306 that is shown on the southern elevation.

Noise

2.6

To ensure areas can develop with equitable access to outlook and sunlight.

Complies

Refer above.

2.7

To ensure visual impacts to dwellings at the rear are appropriate to the context.

Complies

Whilst the proposed building is undeniably larger than the existing three level dwelling to the rear and the single and double storey dwellings to the east, this is anticipated by the DDO affecting the land, and the proposed boundary setbacks are sufficient to allow appropriate levels of daylight access and outlook from the adjoining properties.

Views to and from residential units 2.8 To maximise informal or passive surveillance of streets and other public open spaces.

Complies

The proposal incorporates good levels of surveillance of both Darebin Street and Powlett Street.

2.9

Complies

As detailed above, measures to restrict overlooking of the adjoining properties should be designed to direct views to the longer-distance views available, rather than restricting outlook from the dwellings and balconies. This can be achieved through measures such as appropriately angled slat screens, or use of planter boxes to prevent access to the edge of balconies.

Wind protection 2.10 To ensure new tall buildings do not create adverse wind effects.

Complies

The proposal incorporates steps in the built form, which will assist in addressing any wind impacts.

Roof forms 2.11 To treat roof spaces and forms as a considered aspect of the overall building design.

Complies

The proposed flat roof form is appropriate to the dwelling style proposed.

To maximise residential amenity through the provision of views and protection of privacy within the subject site and on neighbouring properties.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 13

Attachment 2

The proposal will not result in an unacceptable impact upon surrounding properties by means of vehicular noise. Any permit issued should include a requirement to show facilities, with these to be commonly located and screened, so as to prevent individual air conditioning units resulting in amenity impacts to both existing and future residents.

Attachment 2: Attachment 2 - Assessment against Higher Density Design Guidelines - P1135/2015 pt1

4.1

Item: 4.1

Element 3: Street pattern and street-edge quality

Attachment 2

Street pattern and street edge integration 3.1

To create walkable areas within a safe and interesting public setting.

Complies

The form of the building and the level of overlooking of public areas afforded from it will assist in providing a safe and interesting public setting.

3.2

To closely integrate the layout and occupation patterns of new development with the street.

Complies

Good levels of integration, including access to Powlett Street from individual private open space areas, are proposed.

3.3

To ensure car parking does not dominate the street frontage.

Complies

A single access point from Darebin Street is proposed.

Building entries 3.4

To create street entrances with a strong identity that provide a transition from the street to residential interiors.

3.5

To ensure car park entries do not detract from the street.

Ability to comply

The proposal incorporates the provision of gas and water meters and booster facilities within the frontage setback to the medical component of the building. These have the potential to have a significant impact upon the streetscape presentation of the building, and will need to be appropriately detailed.

Complies

The proposed narrowing of the driveway at the entrance to the car park results in an ability to provide appropriate landscaping to soften the driveway as viewed from Darebin Street.

The slope of the driveway down from the street also assists in ensuring that garaging will not be dominant or detract from the streetscape presentation of the site.

The proposal incorporates curved sections of 2.2m high fence to Powlett Street, with landscaping to soften them as viewed from the roadway. The curvature of the fence and provision of landscaping ensures that the fence, whilst higher than a traditional side paling fence, will be acceptable within the neighbourhood setting. Importantly, the fencing does not prevent surveillance of the roadway.

Front fences 3.6

To avoid creating inactive frontages as a result of fencing private open spaces.

Complies

3.7

To ensure that front fences respect and contribute to the neighbourhood character.

Ability to comply

Fencing to Darebin Street is set 2.4m from the street, although screening to the facilities outlined above may extend closer to the street (the elevations indicate a booster cabinet height of up to 1.7m at the frontage). Again, view to the street is not prevented by this fencing.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 14

Attachment 2: Attachment 2 - Assessment against Higher Density Design Guidelines - P1135/2015 pt1

4.1

Element 4: Circulation and services Parking layout 4.1

To provide adequate, safe and efficiently designed parking layouts.

Ability to comply

Council’s Traffic Engineers have advised that the porposed parking layout is acceptable, provided that more information is provided in relation to the operation of the proposed “stop and go” system to manage vehicular movements between Basement 1 and Basement 2.

4.2

To provide safe and convenient access between car parking and bicycle areas and the pedestrian entry to buildings.

Complies

The proposal incorporates an appropriate number of bicycle parking spaces. Whilst Council’s Traffic Engineers have highlighted a preference for visitor parking spaces to be located close to the main pedestrian access to the building, at street level, the proposed parking spaces are located at the upper basement level and close to the point of entry.

This is considered to be acceptable. Access from both car and bicycle parking areas in the basement to the building proper is appropriate in terms of safety and convenience.

Complies

The proposal incorporates a communal gym (at Ground Level) and ‘rooftop’ terrace (at Level 4).

The Sustainable Management Plan submitted with the application indicates the use of: • Passive cooling through the use of ventilation and fans, a potential to provide a minimum star rating of 6.5 stars, with an average of 7.3 (no undertaking is given to provide more than the minimum required by the Building Regulations – 5 star minimum, 6 star average - however).

• Individual air conditioning units for dwellings (to provide residents with greater control over their own environment), • Daylight sensors/time clocks for external lighting, • Appropriate sensors to car park ventilation, • A rainwater tank, with water utilised in the ground level toilets.

Circulation spaces 4.3

To create shared internal spaces that contribute positively to the experience of living in higher density development.

Site services 4.4

To minimise running and maintenance costs.

Ability to comply

4.5

To minimise water use.

Ability to comply

It is considered that, from a neighbouring amenity point of view, use of air conditioning units on individual balconies should be replaced with rooftop plant. Similarly, the SMP should identify measures to minimise reliance upon clothes dryers. In addition, the requirements of the SMP should be shown on the plans. This can be required by permit condition.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 15

Attachment 2

Item: 4.1

4.1

Item: 4.1

4.6

Attachment 2: Attachment 2 - Assessment against Higher Density Design Guidelines - P1135/2015 pt1

To incorporate provision for site services in the building design to ensure good function and ease of service and maintenance.

Ability to comply

The proposal includes preliminary information in relation to site services required at the frontage. Additional details are required, however, to ensure that these services do not inappropriately detract from the streetscape presentation of the proposal.

The proposed lift is 1.4m in width as drawn on the plans, and the ability to transfer furniture from the ground level/basement of the building to upper levels by the stairs or (preferably) the lift should be verified.

Element 5: Building layout and design

Attachment 2

Dwelling diversity 5.1

To provide a range of dwelling sizes and types in higher density residential developments.

Complies

The proposal incorporates a mixture of one, two and three bedroom dwellings. Council’s Livable Housing Guidelines would indicate that at least 20% of dwellings should be designed to cater for those with limited mobility. An assessment of the plans supplied indicates that a majority of dwellings can be readily adapted to meet this requirement through the use of appropriate door widths, bathroom detailing, etc., although detailed annotations are required on the plans to ensure that occurs.

The proposal has been designed to give all dwellings access to daylight and an outlook, with no dwelling purely facing south. Saddleback bedrooms are largely avoided.

Appropriate levels of storage, car and bicycle parking are also provided.

Building layout 5.2

To optimise the layout of buildings in response to occupants’ needs as well as identified external influences and characteristics of a site.

Complies

5.3

To create functional, flexible, efficient and comfortable residential apartments.

Complies

5.4

To ensure that a good standard of natural lighting and ventilation is provided to internal building spaces.

Complies

5.5

To provide adequate storage space for household items.

Complies

Design detail 5.6

To promote buildings of high architectural quality and visual interest.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Complies

It is considered that the form and detailing of the proposed building is of high architectural quality, and that it will provide visual interest in its setting.

Page 16

Attachment 2: Attachment 2 - Assessment against Higher Density Design Guidelines - P1135/2015 pt1

4.1

Item: 4.1

Element 6: Open space and landscape design Private and communal open space To ensure access to adequate open space for all residents.

Ability to comply

6.2

To ensure common or shared spaces are functional and attractive for their intended users.

Complies

6.3

To allow solar access to the private and shared open spaces of new high density residential units.

Complies

6.4

To integrate the design of shared and private open spaces into the overall building design and faรงade composition.

Complies

6.5

To provide for greenery within open spaces.

Complies

Due to the varied width of the proposed balconies (which reduces down to as low as 700mm in places), the usable open space areas for Dwellings 107, 201, 207-209, 301 and 2 307-309 is in the order of 6m each. Whilst communal open space is provided, it is 2 considered that this does not compensate for the provision of less than 8m of balcony space to each dwelling, particularly for two and three bedroom dwellings. The shortfall 2 should be addressed by either an increase in balcony space to a minimum of 8m with a width of 1.6m, or through an increase in the minimum balcony width to 1.0m, without a reduction in street setbacks.

Attachment 2

6.1

Public open space 6.6

To create public open space appropriate to its context.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

N/A

Page 17

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 19

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 20

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 21

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 22

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 23

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 24

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 25

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 26

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 27

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 28

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 29

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 30

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 31

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 32

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 33

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 34

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 35

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 36

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 37

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 38

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 39

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 40

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 41

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 42

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 43

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 44

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 45

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 46

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 47

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 48

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 49

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 50

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 51

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 52

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 53

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 54

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 55

Attachment 3: Attachment 3 - Advertised Plans

Attachment 3

4.1

Item: 4.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 56

Attachment 1: Infrastructure Victoria Options Paper - Council Submission June 2016

4.2

Item: 4.2

All Things Considered – Options Paper

Submission to Infrastructure Victoria

By Banyule City Council 17 June 2016

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 57

Attachment 1

30 Year Infrastructure Strategy

4.2

Item: 4.2

Attachment 1: Infrastructure Victoria Options Paper - Council Submission June 2016

Table of Contents 1 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................3 2 Options Discussion................................................................................................................3 2.1 Overall.............................................................................................................................................................. 3 2.2 Cultural, Civic, Sporting, Recreation and Tourism................................................................................ 3 2.3 Education and Training ................................................................................................................................. 4 2.4 Transport ......................................................................................................................................................... 4

Attachment 1

Road Congestion and Freight ...................................................................................................................... 4 Active Transport............................................................................................................................................. 5 Mobility and Accessibility Projects.............................................................................................................. 5 Public Transport Improvements.................................................................................................................. 6 2.5 Water and Waste .......................................................................................................................................... 7 3 Conclusions............................................................................................................................7

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 58

Attachment 1: Infrastructure Victoria Options Paper - Council Submission June 2016

4.2

Item: 4.2

1 Introduction Local government is a major provider of infrastructure within Victoria, including roads, footpaths, community halls, leisure facilities, bicycle paths, libraries, waste management and parks. All of these facilities have a significant contribution to public life, and there is increasing demand on providing suitable and fit-for-purpose facilities for the growing population.

Banyule City Council is pleased to have the opportunity to comment on the 30 year infrastructure options paper, and has provided commentary on a number of initiatives identified in the options paper in the following sections.



Council’s City Plan (2013-2017)



The Banyule Integrated Transport Plan



Northern Regional Trails Strategy



Recreation Strategy (2013 – 2017)



Arts Plan (2013 – 2017)



Joint Community Infrastructure Plan (incorporating the Darebin Creek Masterplan)



Banyule’s Draft Public Open Space Plan (2016- 2031)

Attachment 1

The following documents provide further information on Council’s infrastructure priorities:

2 Options Discussion This section provides Council’s response to a number of initiatives under the topics identified in the Options paper. Similar initiatives have been grouped together under a mutual heading with the relevant code as appropriate.

2.1 Overall Centralised Planning Scheme (CPS1) State and local government planning is identifying preferred places for high growth within Melbourne’s established suburbs. These locations are linked with the Government’s Plan Melbourne strategy and known as National Employment Clusters (NEC). Banyule Council has been working collaboratively with the Metropolitan Planning Authority, Darebin Council and major stakeholders to setup a land use, development and transport planning framework for the LaTrobe NEC. Moving forward, Banyule welcomes the MPA’s ongoing leadership for the LaTrobe Cluster’s planning and their future relationship with Infrastructure Victoria for infrastructure that enables investment attraction to the cluster. Banyule also welcomes the MPA playing a role to do precinct planning inside the cluster in partnership with Banyule. For the planning scheme, Banyule believes it is best placed to manage decision-making for property development in the cluster. For the LaTrobe Cluster, there is no need for a centralised planning scheme that divests Banyule’s responsibility as a Planning Authority and Responsible Authority. Instead, Council encourages the State to focus on priority public-sector infrastructure investment that gives momentum to wider investment in the cluster.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 59

4.2

Item: 4.2

Attachment 1: Infrastructure Victoria Options Paper - Council Submission June 2016

Subregional infrastructure Planning (SIP) Council strongly supports formalising and simplifying a “whole of government� approach to sub-regional planning. Improved relationships and partnerships between State Government, State Government bodies and Local Government are important in ensuring the appropriate planning and delivery of infrastructure projects.

2.2 Cultural, Civic, Sporting, Recreation and Tourism

Attachment 1

Community space refurbishment or rationalisation (CSR) A significant portion of community infrastructure is not fit-for-purpose and requires significant investment to bring it up to the appropriate standard. Further development of this concept should be treated as a high priority.

Cultural and sports major infrastructure investment framework (CSM) Funding for community sports and cultural facilities should be guided by a transparent investment framework, including a methodology and criteria to prioritise investment decision-making, to ensure that infrastructure delivery can have the added benefits of supporting local sports and community arts participation. Council strongly supports this initiative and recommends its future development should be treated as a high priority.

Sport and recreational facility investment framework (SRF) As the state’s population continues to grow, significant investment is required to deliver new and upgraded facilities which can meet the needs of a growing and diverse population. This initiative is strongly supported and it is recommended further development of this concept be treated as a high priority.

Community space shared use agreements (CSS1) Community spare shared use agreements are vital in providing a greater number and variety of community activities to be held, particularly in areas with limited community space. Council strongly supports improving resources and governance processes to assist in establishing shared use agreements for community spaces and facilities between different agencies and associations across Victoria.

Integrated shared use community and recreation facilities (RFC) Council strongly supports the improvement in joint planning, coordination and governance processes to encourage the delivery of integrated facilities for cultural sporting and recreational activity in multipurpose, shared use facilities.

Community infrastructure accessibility (CIM) Council strongly supports using design principles that promote universal access, and provide a design solution that can accommodate and include all people irrespective of mobility, gender or age. It is recommended that further development of this concept be treated as a high priority.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 60

Attachment 1: Infrastructure Victoria Options Paper - Council Submission June 2016

4.2

Item: 4.2

2.3 Education and Training Lifelong learning hubs (LLH) Council supports the provision of infrastructure that can provide learning across all age groups and benefit all generations. It is recommended that further development of this concept be treated as a high priority.

2.4 Transport Road Congestion and Freight

The North-East Link is Council’s highest transport priority. Banyule’s current arterial road network, including Rosanna Road and Greensborough Highway, is used as a link for freight and commuter traffic between the northern and western suburbs and the south eastern suburbs. Rosanna Road and Greensborough Hwy experience high levels of congestion, impacting on road user safety and the amenity of surrounding residents.

The Banyule Integrated Transport Plan (BITP) advocates for a North-East Link as a direct orbital link from the Metropolitan Ring Road to Eastlink. This would provide a direct link for freight and commuters travelling from the northern suburbs to the south eastern suburbs, and provide an alternative link for freight accessing the Hume Highway corridor.

A future North East Link is expected to have a greater impact on Rosanna Road, Greensborough Highway and Fitzsimmons Lane than on Plenty Road and Spring St/St Georges Road as identified in the Options paper. It is strongly recommended the Options paper be updated to reflect this.

Road space allocation changes (RSA) Council supports the allocation of road space to support a shift towards active and public transport, particularly within Activity Centres and on key routes to and from National Employment Clusters, such as the La Trobe Employment Cluster. Improving public transport service reliability along these areas will provide a greater level of service to the community.

Active Transport Active established areas (AEA) Council strongly supports and advocates for increased investment in cycling and walking infrastructure within established areas, including the completion of the Principle Bicycle Network and Strategic Cycling Corridors within and beyond Banyule. For walking and cycling to become mainstream transport modes, routes should be well connected, direct, and comfortable for people of all abilities.

Active lifestyle infrastructure provision and regulation (ALP, ALR) Council strongly supports using design principles that promote walking and cycling in neighbourhoods, such as the Heart Foundations ‘Healthy by Design’. End of trip facilities are essential in increasing use of active transport in our Activity and Neighbourhood Centres, employment locations, schools and public transport hubs, however more needs to be done to facilitate the provision of these facilities. As well as developing funding mechanisms to retrofit end of trip facilities, the Victorian Planning Scheme should be updated to ensure new developments in established areas improve active transport uptake through Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 61

Attachment 1

North-East Link (NEL)

4.2

Item: 4.2

Attachment 1: Infrastructure Victoria Options Paper - Council Submission June 2016

increased provision of end of trip facilities. The current requirements within the planning scheme are well below standard and best practice.

Bicycle and walking data and network expansion (BWP1, BWP2, BWP3)

Attachment 1

Council strongly supports the collection of active transport data to enhance understanding of these transport modes, and provide better planning of infrastructure to support increased uptake of active transport.

Council further supports and advocates strongly for the expansion of the on- and off-street cycling network, particularly along missing links within the identified strategic cycling corridors. However, further work needs to be undertaken prior to large scale separation of pedestrians and cyclists, to ensure the appropriate type of infrastructure is constructed. Outside of highly pedestrianised areas or along major cycling routes, Council encourages road users to share the road spare, and considers this approach to be suitable outside of the higher trafficked areas.

Mobility and Accessibility Projects Public transport accessibility (PTV) Council strongly supports the provision of universal access across the public transport system, as it provides people of all abilities with the opportunity to use public transport. Further investment is required to ensure railway stations and other transport interchanges are accessible, as the majority of railway stations within Banyule do not have suitable wheelchair access. In the interim, information should be made available to identify to passengers the accessibility arrangements at each station.

Public transport alternative use of taxis or hire cars (PTA) Community transport provides an important link for transport disadvantaged members of the community (those with limited or no access to cars and restricted access to conventional public transport), allowing those with limited mobility to connect to services, jobs, and social opportunities.

Council supports the development of a State Government community transport model, and considers changing the regulations to support and encourage alternative transport services in outer suburban, regional and rural areas to provide greater opportunity to those with poor access to public transport.

Public Transport Improvements Employment centre mass transit network (MTN) Work is currently underway to identify the transport needs of the Latrobe National Employment Cluster. Ensuring services are delivered to the required level of service is vital in ensuring ongoing growth and success of these clusters. Council strongly supports the provision of a mass transit network that connects heavy rail and outlying areas to the Latrobe cluster that complements the existing heavy rail system.

Doncaster Public Transport (DBI, DHR, DTS) Council strongly supports the provision of a heavy rail link to Doncaster via the Clifton Hill Loop. While DART provides a direct connection from Doncaster to the CBD as a ‘park and ride’ service, this does not offer or provide connections for other destinations along the route, including Bulleen, Ivanhoe East, Kew and the future development at the Alphington Paper Mill site at Chandler Highway.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 62

Attachment 1: Infrastructure Victoria Options Paper - Council Submission June 2016

Given the future and growing prominence of the Latrobe Employment Cluster, providing a heavy rail connection to link into the Heidelberg-Hurstbridge Link is considered to be an important link in reducing commuter traffic in the north east.

4.2

Item: 4.2

Metropolitan bus network reform and Smartbus service increase (MBN, SSP) Council strongly supports a reform of the metropolitan bus network to improve service reliability, coverage and improved timetable coordination between bus and rail services. Expansion of the SmartBus network is also supported, however it is important to tie the expansion into the emerging national employment areas, not just the inner and western suburbs. The introduction of a route hierarchy is also supported, as it is considered to lead to a better public transport network.

Council supports the Melbourne Metro 2 proposal, and its resulting frequency and service improvements to services along the Hurstbridge and South Morang rail lines. This project would remove the bottleneck at Clifton Hill, and allow for the future integration of the Doncaster Rail Line Upgrade of Public Transport modal interchanges It is disappointing there is no discussion or initiative within the options paper on the upgrading of public transport modal interchanges. Providing effective and efficient connection points between public transport modes improves the attractiveness of public transport, and enhances the coverage of the public transport network.

Within Banyule, both Greensborough and Heidelberg railway stations are serviced by a number of premium bus services (SmartBus services such as the 901, 902 and 903 routes) and neighbourhood bus services. However, connections between modes at these locations are limited due to the lack of integration between the bus stops and the railway stations.

Upgrading modal interchanges would work well in conjunction with a number of initiatives outlined above and would address the following needs identified within the Options Paper: -

Address infrastructure demands in areas with high population growth.

-

Respond to increasing pressures on health infrastructure, particularly due to ageing.

-

Improve accessibility for people with mobility challenges.

-

Meet growing demand for access to economic activity in central Melbourne.

-

Improve access to middle and outer metropolitan major employment centres.

-

Improve access to jobs and services for people in regional and rural areas.

Council strongly supports further consideration of this initiative as part of the final Infrastructure Strategy.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 63

Attachment 1

Melbourne Metro 2 (MMS)

4.2

Item: 4.2

Attachment 1: Infrastructure Victoria Options Paper - Council Submission June 2016

2.5 Water and Waste Stormwater Harvesting and Quality Management (SRH, SRQ) Council supports the harvesting of stormwater for use in a range of non-potable purposes, and has already invested $6 million over the past five years to provide a suitable water supply for a number of sporting reserves and parks. Further exploration of this initiative to provide large scale stormwater management projects across municipal boundaries is recommended.

Attachment 1

Wastewater system augmentation in high growth areas (WWS) Council supports increasing capacity for sewerage and wastewater treatment to manage the future demand in Melbourne and regional Victoria. The development of this concept should be treated as a high priority, particularly in relation to providing recycled water for sporting fields and parks.

3 Conclusions Council welcomes this opportunity to have its say and looks forward to working further with Infrastructure Victoria and the State Government to progress the initiatives identified within the options paper and the future infrastructure strategy.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 64

Attachment 1: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve - Summary of Key Themes

Attachment 1

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 65

Attachment 1: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve - Summary of Key Themes

Attachment 1

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 66

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 67

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 68

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 69

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 70

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 71

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 72

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 73

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 74

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 75

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 76

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 77

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 78

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 79

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 80

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 81

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 82

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 83

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 84

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 85

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 86

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 87

Attachment 2: Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve Master Plan - Final Report - June 2016

Attachment 2

5.1

Item: 5.1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 88

Attachment 1: Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4))

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 89

Attachment 1: Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4))

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 90

Attachment 1: Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4))

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 91

Attachment 1: Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4))

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 92

Attachment 1: Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4))

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 93

Attachment 1: Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4))

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 94

Attachment 1: Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4))

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 95

Attachment 1: Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4))

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 96

Attachment 1: Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4))

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 97

Attachment 1: Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4))

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 98

Attachment 1: Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4))

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 99

Attachment 1: Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4))

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 100

Attachment 1: Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4))

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 101

Attachment 1: Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4))

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 102

Attachment 1: Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4))

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 103

Attachment 1: Summary of Consideration of Submissions Received on the Proposed Budget 2016/2017 (and Proposed City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4))

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 104

Attachment 1: Statutory Declaration of the return of the 2016 General Revaluation for the Municipality of Banyule

Attachment 1

6.3

Item: 6.3

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 105

Attachment 1: Banyule Environment Advisory Committee BEAC April 2016 Meeting notes

6.4

Item: 6.4

Banyule Environment Advisory Committee Meeting Notes Wednesday 13 April, 2016 6.30PM (Refreshments) 7PM - 9PM Rosanna Meeting Room 1

Community Representatives: Kate Roberts (interim Chair), Alan Leenaerts, Matt Hall, Denise Fernando, Maree Keenan, Peter Castaldo. Guests The Wilderness Society Council Officers: Daniel Kollmorgen, John Milkins, Councillor Representatives/Attendees: Cr Mark Di Pasquale, CR Craig Langdon for item 16.01 Apologies: Jonathan Thom, John D’Aloia 2. Confirmation of March meeting notes AL / MK 3. Disclosures of Interests None 4. Matters arising from previous meetings

16.01 Beyond Paris BZE Case Study (AL) AL is seeking a presentation for next meeting.

Hazelwood advocacy (AL/PC) BEAC discussed a range of matters relevant to the operation of the Hazelwood power station.

AL provided the following links and examples of transition from coal: UK announces end of coal http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34851718 Dutch end of coal http://phys.org/news/2015-11-dutch-lawmakers-coal-power.html Belgium’s last coal power plant, Langerlo, closed on 30 March.2016 In July, Delta Energy announced it was closing the Munmorah coal power station on the NSW central coast.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 107

Attachment 1

1. Present

6.4

Item: 6.4

Attachment 1: Banyule Environment Advisory Committee BEAC April 2016 Meeting notes

America's Power Plant Problem - Pacific Standard www.psmag.com/.../what-to-do-with-americas-abandoned-power-plants?...

Feb 1, 2016 - More than 200 out of the 523 coal-fired power plants that were in operation five years ago are now closed or slated for closure.

The final coal plant in Ontario, Thunder Bay Generating Station, stopped burning coal in April 2014.[36]

Attachment 1

India's federal energy minister is planning to stop importing thermal coal by 2018.[39] In 2007, Germany announced plans to phase out hard coal-industry subsidies by 2018, a move which is expected to end hard coal mining in Germany.[41][42][43][44][45] In 2014, almost 80 per cent of the electricity produced in New Zealand was Sustainable energy.[51] On 6 August 2015,Genesis Energy Limited announced to closed its two last coal-fueled power stations.[52] In 2007, 154 new coal-fired plants were on the drawing board in 42 states.[60] By 2012, that had dropped to 15, mostly due to new rules limiting mercury emissions, and limiting carbon emissions to 1,000 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour of electricity produced.[61] Despite such pledges, a 2012 report by Oil Change International which analyzed 2011 spending by the world's wealthy nations found five times as much being spent on fossil fuel subsidies than climate aid: $58 billion was spent in fossil fuel subsidies that year, as compared with $11 billion spent by such nations towards climate adaptation and mitigation in developing countries, with figures for the U.S. at $13 billion in fossil fuel subsidies versus $2.5 billion in climate aid for 2011.[30] Recommendation BEAC recommended that Council consider writing to the State government urging the rapid decommissioning of Hazelwood and investment in renewable energy sources.

14.23 Urban Forest Strategy (DF) DF raised concern that the Urban Forest Strategy listed plane trees (Plantanus) as a species that sequesters carbon at a high rate. There is concern that this listing is based on European or North American data wholly inappropriate for Australian conditions, and may lead plane trees being planted in preference to local species.

JM noted Parks and Gardens department advice that approximately 10 Plane trees have been planted in the last decade as infill plantings in existing Plane tree avenues. There is no intent to plant beyond these areas and, and the development of the Urban Forest Management Plan and the Street Tree Master Plan under the overall Strategy.

Nonetheless, the underlying science must be relevant to the Australian context, which the consultant indicated was the case in the modelling tool used in the development Urban Forest Strategy.

Action Manager Parks and Gardens to facilitate a meeting with DF & colleagues and the Urban Forest Strategy consultants to discuss the scientific basis of carbon sequestration figures in the local Australian context.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 108

Attachment 1: Banyule Environment Advisory Committee BEAC April 2016 Meeting notes

6.4

Item: 6.4

5. Other Business 6. 16.08 Ethical Paper Pledge (All) Local members of the Wilderness Society (WS) were invited to speak to BEAC in reference to a Notice of Motion at Council’s meeting of 4 April 2016, which read:

In addition to the Wilderness Society presentation, a submission to BEAC was circulated from a local community member providing an alternative point of view.

BEAC discussed the WS presentation and additional submission and requested that the item be tabled for feedback at the May meeting following consideration of the points raised in the material provided.

7. 16.09 Great Forest National Park (All) Local members of the Wilderness Society (WS) were invited to speak to BEAC in reference to a Notice of Motion at Council’s meeting of April 2016, which read: That a report be presented to Council regarding the proposal to create a Great Forest National Park in the Central Highlands to the east of Melbourne. The report is to include consideration of advice from Council’s Environment Advisory Committee and Economic Development Department.

In addition to the Wilderness Society presentation, a submission to BEAC was circulated from a local community member providing an alternative point of view, as well as a letter to Council from the Institute of Foresters Australia, and a recent media article.

BEAC discussed the WS presentation and additional submissions and requested that the item be tabled for feedback at the May meeting following consideration of the points raised in the material provided.

Contact John Milkins on 9457 9834 for further information Next Meeting: May 18, 2016

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 109

Attachment 1

That a report be presented to Council regarding the use of ethical office paper in its operations and any implications of signing the Wilderness Society of Victoria’s Ethical Paper pledge. Such a report is to include advice from Council’s Environment Advisory Committee.

Attachment 2: Banyule Environment Advisory Committee (BEAC) May 2016 Notes

6.4

Item: 6.4

Banyule Environment Advisory Committee Meeting Notes Wednesday 18 May, 2016 6.30PM (Refreshments) 7PM - 9PM Rosanna Meeting Room 1

Community Representatives: Denise Fernando (interim Chair), Alan Leenaerts, Jonathan Thom, Matt Hall, Maree Keenan, Peter Castaldo. Guests Justine Holmes (BZE), MarieClaire Holm (CLS SHCP)

Council Officers: Daniel Kollmorgen, John Milkins, Councillor Representatives/Attendees: CR Craig Langdon for items 16.01, 16.08 CR Tom Melican for 16.09 16.11, 16.12,16.13 Apologies: Kate Roberts, John D’Aloia 2. Confirmation of March meeting notes MK / AL 3. Disclosures of Interests AL and PC noted that they were members of Beyond Zero Emissions (BZE).

4. Matters arising from previous meetings

16.01 Beyond Paris BZE Case Study (AL) Justine Holmes from Beyond Zero Emissions (BZE) (http://bze.org.au/) presented to BEAC on opportunities for the development and support of Zero Carbon Communities in Banyule. A range of BZE research and publications were covered including the Zero Carbon Australia Buildings Plan, Stationery Energy Plan, Renewable Energy Superpower and Energy Freedom. The concept of High Ambition Communities seeking to achieve zero carbon, zero net carbon or 100% renewable source power within a nominated timeframe was discussed.

Recommendation BEAC recommended that Council consider opportunities to support a suburb or defined area of the municipality in seeking to achieve the status of a High Ambition Community (zero carbon / zero net carbon emissions/100 % renewables)

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 111

Attachment 2

1. Present

6.4

Item: 6.4

Attachment 2: Banyule Environment Advisory Committee (BEAC) May 2016 Notes

16.08 Ethical Paper Pledge (All) Local members of the Wilderness Society (WS) were invited to speak to BEAC’s April meeting in reference to a Notice of Motion at Council’s meeting of 4 April 2016, which read:

Attachment 2

That a report be presented to Council regarding the use of ethical office paper in its operations and any implications of signing the Wilderness Society of Victoria’s Ethical Paper pledge. Such a report is to include advice from Council’s Environment Advisory Committee.

In addition to the Wilderness Society presentation, a submission to BEAC was circulated from a local community member providing an alternative point of view.

Over April, BEAC reviewed the presentation and submission and the item was discussed at the May meeting.

Recommendation BEAC recommended that Council sign the Ethical Paper Pledge, noting that Council’s paper usage is already in accord with the pledge.

16.09 Great Forest National Park (All) Local members of the Wilderness Society (WS) were invited to speak to BEAC in reference to a Notice of Motion at Council’s meeting of April 2016, which read: That a report be presented to Council regarding the proposal to create a Great Forest National Park in the Central Highlands to the east of Melbourne. The report is to include consideration of advice from Council’s Environment Advisory Committee and Economic Development Department.

In addition to the Wilderness Society presentation, a submission to BEAC was circulated from a local community member providing an alternative point of view, as well as a letter to Council from the Institute of Foresters of Australia, and a recent media article.

Over April, BEAC reviewed the presentation and submission and the item was discussed at the May meeting.

Recommendation BEAC supports the proposal for a Great Forest National Park and recommends that Council also indicate its support for the creation of a Great Forest National Park due to the direct and indirect benefits to Banyule residents. BEAC noted that the precautionary principle should be applied to facilitate benefit realisation in the areas of: • biodiversity • water quality • drinking water supply • tourism opportunities • wildlife corridor connectivity • mental health • clean air • the uniqueness of the old growth tall forests of SE Australia • inter and intragenerational equity • natural heritage

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 112

Attachment 2: Banyule Environment Advisory Committee (BEAC) May 2016 Notes

6.4

Item: 6.4

5. Other Business 16.11 Sister City proposal (Marie Claire Holmes Community Leaders, Sustainable Homes & Communities Program)

Action JM to circulate a Sister City MOU example between a local Melbourne Council and a European town.

Recommendation BEAC encouraged the development of community to community links with the Swedish town of Växjö, and will review further information to be provided on MOUsthat might facilitate Council to Council links.

16.12 Plastic Bag Free Victoria (DK) BEAC reviewed a recent Surf Coast Shire Policy relating to Plastic wise events on Council managed land.

Recommendation BEAC recommended that Council develop a policy addressing the use of single use plastics at events conducted on land, roads or buildings managed by Council.

16.13 Draft Banyule Open Space Strategy (JM) JM circulated a link to the draft Banyule Open Space Strategy for BEAC’s review and input at the June meeting. http://www.banyule.vic.gov.au/Council/Community-Consultation/DraftOpen-Space-Plan-2016-to-2031

Contact John Milkins on 9457 9834 for further information Next Meeting: June 8, 2016

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 113

Attachment 2

Marie Claire Holmes from the Community Leaders course running under Council’s Sustainable Homes & Communities Program presented to BEAC on the opportunity for a sister city relationship with the Swedish town of Växjö. This town has made significant progress with climate change adaptation and mitigation and has a strong Transition Town community.

Attachment 3: Chandler Highway Widening - Hon Bruce Atkinson MLC response

Attachment 3

6.4

Item: 6.4

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 115

Attachment 4: Chandler Highway Widening - Mr Colin Brooks MP

Attachment 4

6.4

Item: 6.4

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 117

Attachment 5: Planning Infringement Penalties For Illegal Tree Removal - The Hon Richard Wynne

Attachment 5

6.4

Item: 6.4

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 119

Attachment 5: Planning Infringement Penalties For Illegal Tree Removal - The Hon Richard Wynne

Attachment 5

6.4

Item: 6.4

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 June 2016

Page 120