Banyule City Council Agenda 9 May 2016

Ordinary Meeting of Council Council Chambers, Service Centre 275 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe 9 May 2016 commencing at 7.45pm Following the public forum commencing at approximately 7.30pm and may be extended to 8pm if necessary.

AGENDA

Apologies and Leave of Absence Confirmation of Minutes Ordinary Meeting of Council held 18 April 2016 Disclosure of Interests 1. Petitions 1.1 Request for Council to fund the continuation of JETS Programs and Services...........................................................................................................3 REPORTS: 2. People – Community Strengthening and Support 2.1 Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, Watsonia - Possible Treatment Options ..................................................................................................7 2.2 Draft Child Youth and Family Plan 2016-2020 ......................................................15 2.3 2016-2017 Community Sports Infrastructure Fund Application Outcome ..............................................................................................................18 2.4 Disability Review - Provision of services within the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) .....................................................................23 3. Planet – Environmental Sustainability Nil 4. Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment 4.1 Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020 .......................................................31 4.2 Progress report for a Development Contribution Plan ...........................................39 4.3 Chandler Highway Widening.................................................................................42 4.4 Metropolitan Over-Dimensional Vehicle Routes ....................................................45 4.5 Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan 2016 - 2026 .........................................................48

AGENDA (Cont’d) 4.6

Watsonia Railway Station Infrastructure and Amenity Improvements.......................................................................................................53 4.7 54-62 Main Street, Greensborough - proposed mixed use development (P1024/2015)...................................................................................57 4.8 Proactive Enforcement of Replacement Tree Planting - Results ...........................71 4.9 Public Open Space Plan .......................................................................................79 4.10 Greensborough War Memorial Sculptures ...........................................................84 5. Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life 5.1 Olympic Park - Sports Field Training Lights Upgrade............................................89 5.2 Seniors festival morning tea..................................................................................94 5.3 Defence Force School of Signals (DFSS) to exercise its right to march in Banyule City by Granting of Freedom of Entry (FOE) .............................98 6. Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely 6.1 Items for Noting ..................................................................................................101 6.2 Quarterly Financial Management Report - 31 March 2016..................................103 6.3 Assembly of Councillors......................................................................................118 6.4 Sale of 14A Bannerman Avenue, Greensborough ..............................................122 6.5 Extension for Banyule Support and Information Centre 's (BANSIC) use of 80 Hawdon Street until 31 July 2016........................................127 7. Sealing of Documents 7.1 Sealing of Documents ........................................................................................131 8. Notices of Motion 8.1 Spirit Walk Babarrbunin Beek .............................................................................133 8.2 Managing amenity impacts and construction activity for large development sites...............................................................................................134 8.3 Safety and Amenity Improvements - Rosanna Road and Station Street, Rosanna..................................................................................................135 8.4 Dedication and launch of new reserve celebrating Margaret Heathorn OAM....................................................................................................136 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 matters: 11. Confidential Matters 11.1 Contractual Matters 11.2 Contractual Matters 11.3 Contractual Matters 11.4 Contractual Matters 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 May 2016

Page 2

1.1

1.1

Petitions

REQUEST FOR COUNCIL TO FUND THE CONTINUATION OF JETS PROGRAMS AND SERVICES

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

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A petition with 25 signatures has been received.

The petition prayer is as follows: “We the residents of Banyule formally write to Council to raise our concerns and find a suitable solution for the continuation of the JETS Program and services.

JETS services provides a range of services and unique programs to youth including persons with disabilities. Programs have been running for several years do a diverse range of young people.

Currently the future of JETS is uncertain which has implications for participants and also for a large number of persons seeking to obtain placement and services.

We as parents and guardians of teenagers and young adults with disabilities bring to your attention the significant benefits that JETS services provides to participants and ask that the JETS program be financially supported by Banyule City Council with the intent that services can be continued in the future.

For a modest investment by council, BCC shall be supporting a unique program that has serviced a diverse range of local residents.

JETS provides a range services from ages 13 to 25 to over 40 participants and has been at maximum capacity for several years. All participants participate in achieving life, social and other goals that are not available from other programs or service providers.

Many goals involve the development of social integration which is a significant step for many young people to feel connected with their wider community and work towards greater life skills.

A significant benefit to JETS participants is continuation of activities which foster the social integration and lifelong learning approach, important aspects in people affected by significant disability.

In addition JETS have due to demand for its services been unable to provide additional places for a significant number of youth in the area for some time.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 3

1.1

Petitions

REQUEST FOR COUNCIL TO FUND THE CONTINUATION OF JETS PROGRAMS AND SERVICES. cont’d At the Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory committee meeting held on April 13th 2016, three major concerns were raised specific to the relevancy of the JETS program within NDIS, points raised are; 1. no youth specific social programs for transition 2. the impact of change on vulnerable young people at a critical life stage 3. people are seeking one on one support in individual profiling and goal setting.

We therefore ask for BCC to explore options and financial support to provide for the continuation of services given the difficulty faced under current guidelines for the NDIS which limit the financial capacity of individual packages.”

This petition has been received as the landscape of disability services in Australia is changing due to the introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) and associated disability reforms. Through the implementation of the NDIS, existing funding arrangements and service provision will undergo significant changes. This includes a direct impact on services currently provided by Council that are wholly or partially funded through other levels of government.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Receives and notes the petition.

2.

Strongly advocates to both the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Disability Insurance Agency for continued funding to support an extended transition period beyond December 2016 for current Jets Creative Arts clients until appropriate choices are available for Jets clients to receive similar services under the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

DISCUSSION The landscape of disability services in Australia is changing due to the introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) and associated disability reforms.

Through the implementation of the NDIS, existing funding arrangements and service provision will undergo significant changes. This includes a direct impact on services currently provided by Council that are wholly or partially funded through other levels of government.

These changes have required Council to give consideration to its involvement in disability services in an evolving landscape. Council staff have been undertaking a thorough review of Council’s disability services to better understand our current work in the disability space and to assist future planning.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 4

REQUEST FOR COUNCIL TO FUND THE CONTINUATION OF JETS PROGRAMS AND SERVICES. cont’d During March and April 2016, Council delivered an extensive communications program with current clients, state and federal governments, disability services and the general community. This program outlined Council’s disability review process and introduced the likelihood that Council would not provide its current services within the NDIS. The petition received relates to the services Council is funded to provide through the Jets creative arts space.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 5

1.1

Petitions

2.1

RUSHWORTH STREET AND REEVES STREET, WATSONIA - POSSIBLE TREATMENT OPTIONS

Author:

Justin Dynan - Senior Transport Engineer, City Development

Ward:

Grimshaw

Previous Items Council on 7 March 2016 (Item 8.2 - Traffic Investigation - Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, and Watsonia Primary School) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At its meeting on 7 March 2016 Council resolved to investigate road safety concerns at the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, Watsonia.

Investigations found that the speed and volume of traffic in Rushworth Street are within acceptable limits and consistent with other local residential roads of similar status within the municipality. There are many locations in Banyule which have more significant traffic issues and have a higher priority for road safety consideration.

Notwithstanding, due to the width and alignment of the intersection, modifications can be made to reduce the speed of turning vehicles and improve pedestrian facilities. It is proposed that alterations to the intersection layout be trialed using rubber kerbing and line marking, funded at a cost of $12,000 as part of the 2016-17 budget.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Notes that the installation of devices to reduce the speed of vehicles along Rushworth Street, Watsonia, or at its intersection with Reeves Street, is not warranted at this time.

2.

Considers allocating $12,000 in the 2016/17 Capital Works budget for trial road safety improvements at Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, Watsonia. The scope of the project would include the redesign and modification of the intersection by installing temporary kerb outstands, a splitter island and line marking.

3.

Notes the area bounded by Grimshaw Street, Watsonia Road and Greensborough Highway has no history of casualty crashes (crashes where people are injured) with speeds and volumes within acceptable limits, and other locations within the municipality having a greater need. Therefore it is not considered appropriate to pursue an area based 40km/h speed zone at this time.

4.

Informs residents adjacent to the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, Watsonia of this resolution.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 7

2.1

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2.1

People – Community Strengthening and Support

RUSHWORTH STREET AND REEVES STREET, WATSONIA - POSSIBLE TREATMENT OPTIONS cont’d OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

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

CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “develop and promote safety and resilience in our community”.

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

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

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

BACKGROUND At its meeting on 7 March 2016 Council resolved to: 1.

“Note the road safety concerns raised by residents at the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, Watsonia.

2.

Note the actions that Council officers are already pursuing in response to these concerns, namely to: a.

b. c. d. e.

3.

Seek approval from VicRoads to install 40km/h sign limits along Nell Street West, Knight Street and Meagher Street in Watsonia adjacent to Watsonia Primary School; Investigate introducing short-term parking at the southern end of Meagher Street between Nell Street West and the school crossing; Review the line marking, sight distance and turning circles at the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street; Undertake traffic speed and volume counts along Rushworth Street; Request from VicRoads an area-wide 40kph speed zone in local streets bounded by Grimshaw Street, Watsonia Road and Greensborough Highway.

Report back to Council on possible treatment options at the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, Watsonia that would be suitable for installation on a trial basis and to seek funding for a trial in the 2016-17 budget.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 8

People – Community Strengthening and Support

4.

2.1

RUSHWORTH STREET AND REEVES STREET, WATSONIA - POSSIBLE TREATMENT OPTIONS cont’d Write to local residents on this resolution and include the Ward Councillor’s contact details in the correspondence.”

This report responds to items 2 and 3 in the above resolution. A locality plan of the intersection is provided in Figure 1.

Figure 1 – Locality Plan BACKGROUND As part of Council’s Road Management Plan which was adopted in June 2013, all roads and pathways within the municipal road network were categorised in accordance to their specific function, types of users, user numbers and potential risk.

The hierarchy classification is used to assist in prioritising works programs and intervention responses to remedy infrastructure defects.

Both Rushworth Street and Reeves Street are classified as ‘residential’ roads which are generally expected to carry less than 2,000 vehicles per day. Their primary function is to provide access to properties and generally carry local traffic. These streets have a default speed limit of 50km/h.

The Rushworth Street and Reeves Street intersection is a T-intersection with Reeves Street intersecting Rushworth Street at an acute angle. Rushworth Street has a downward slope from Watsonia Road to Knight Street. Motorists on Reeves Street have to give way to traffic on Rushworth Street.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 9

2.1

People – Community Strengthening and Support

RUSHWORTH STREET AND REEVES STREET, WATSONIA - POSSIBLE TREATMENT OPTIONS cont’d CURRENT SITUATION Investigation into the actions outlined in Resolution 2 has been completed. The results are: Item 2a - Seek approval from VicRoads to install 40km/h sign limits along Nell Street West, Knight Street and Meagher Street in Watsonia adjacent to Watsonia Primary School.

VicRoads has indicated that it will approve 40km/h speed limits in Nell Street West and Knight Street adjacent to Watsonia Primary School, but has indicated that the issue of a speed zone should first be resolved.

Item 2b - Investigate introducing short-term parking at the southern end of Meagher Street between Nell Street West and the school crossing.

Consultation has been undertaken with Watsonia Primary School about possible short term parking at the southern end of Meagher Street. The school has indicated it would be supportive of 2-hour parking restrictions on the east side of Meagher Street, between Nell Street West and the children’s crossing, subject to consultation with residents in this section of the street. The installation of the parking restrictions is being pursued and residents will be consulted.

Item 2c - Review the line marking, sight distance and turning circles at the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street.

The intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street is currently a wide T-intersection due to the alignment of the two roads (Figure 2). It does not force motorists to slow down when conducting turning movements at the intersection and may also create conflict with pedestrians. The give way linemarking is non-standard and a painted splitter island is installed, however there are no physical treatments to prevent motorists cutting the corner or turning on the wrong side of the island. Due to the acute angle of the intersection, the site lines are restricted and traffic tends to cut the corner.

Figure 2 – Existing Layout of the Rushworth Street and Reeves Street Intersection

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 10

RUSHWORTH STREET AND REEVES STREET, WATSONIA - POSSIBLE TREATMENT OPTIONS cont’d A pedestrian count was undertaken on Wednesday 13 April 2016 between 3pm and 4pm to coincide with school finish time at nearby Watsonia Primary School. A total of five (5) pedestrians crossed Reeves Street at the intersection. The distance between kerb ramps at this location is approximately 21 metres, which is considered wide for pedestrians and creates safety concerns. Sight distance for pedestrians on the south-west corner of the intersection was found to be restricted due to the adjacent property fence.

Item 2d – Undertake traffic speed and volume counts along Rushworth Street.

In accordance with item 2d of the resolution, a traffic speed and volume survey was undertaken in Rushworth Street, immediately east of Reeves Street, for one week commencing on 18 March 2016, prior to the Easter school holidays. The surveys were conducted outside No 17 Rushworth Street, immediately east of the Reeves Street intersection.

Table 1 summarises the results of this survey.

Table 1 – Speed and Volume Count Results Street and Location Rushworth Street East of Reeves Street

Direction Combined East West

Average Weekday Volume (vehicles per day)

85th Percentile Speed* (km/h)

332 169 163

48 49 47

th

*The 85 percentile speed is the speed at which 85% of vehicles are travelling at or below.

Item 2e – Request from VicRoads an area-wide 40kph speed zone in local streets bounded by Grimshaw Street, Watsonia Road and Greensborough Highway.

Meagher Street currently has a 40km/h speed limit. VicRoads has advised that consideration could be given to an area wide 40km/h speed zone, but indicated that this approach is likely to generate requests for the installation of traffic management treatments so that motorists are physically forced to slow down to 40km/h.

In accordance with Australian Standards, traffic speeds may be controlled to less than the default built-up area limit of 50km/h by means of an area speed zone, if a Local Area Traffic Management scheme has been implemented. Given the lack of traffic management treatments in this residential area, it is considered that an area wide 40km/h speed zone is not appropriate at this time. It is estimated that the cost of the design and construction of suitable traffic safety measures would be around $465,000. This is based on the provision of treatments at appropriate locations in each of the ten (10) streets and selected intersections in the proposed speed zone, at an average cost of $20,000.

DISCUSSION The traffic speed and volume survey revealed that the average daily traffic volume on Rushworth Street was 332 vehicles and the 85th percentile speed (the speed at which 85% of the vehicles are travelling at or below) was 49km/h.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 11

2.1

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2.1

People – Community Strengthening and Support

RUSHWORTH STREET AND REEVES STREET, WATSONIA - POSSIBLE TREATMENT OPTIONS cont’d The 85th percentile speed is the recommended figure used in accordance with Australian Standards for Speed Controls as the primary determinant of the appropriate speed limit on roads. Further, the 85th percentile speed is taken as representative of drivers’ general perception of a reasonable travel speed on a particular section of road.

The traffic survey data indicates that the speed and volume of traffic in Rushworth Street are within acceptable limits and consistent with other local residential roads of similar status within the municipality. A review of VicRoads’ CrashStats data found there have been no reported casualty crashes in the past five (5) years at the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street.

Based on the available traffic data, the installation of devices to reduce the speed of vehicles along Rushworth Street, or at its intersection with Reeves Street, is not warranted at this stage. Further, there are many locations in Banyule which have more significant traffic issues and have a higher priority for road safety consideration.

The sight distance, width of the intersection for pedestrians, linemarking and alignment of the intersection warrant consideration to make the intersection safer for pedestrians and turning traffic. A proposed treatment to improve the intersection design is discussed below.

From a broader area perspective, the issues of rat-running and concerns of traffic speed and volume using this local street network to get from Grimshaw Street to Watsonia Road have been investigated in the last year or so. The outcome of the investigation was that traffic speeds and volumes are well within acceptable limits, and as such no further action was taken. Victoria Police were asked to enforce turn bans on Grimshaw Street, and they have as they have been able.

POSSIBLE TREATMENT The existing painted island at the intersection (Figure 2) does not provide protection for pedestrians crossing the road, or reduce the speed at which vehicles travel on the roads. Therefore, it is proposed that the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street be modified to control the movement of turning vehicles and improve pedestrian facilities.

Kerb outstands and a splitter island can be installed, on a trial basis, to control the movement of turning vehicles and reduce the width of road for pedestrians crossing Reeves Street. Any permanent modifications to the intersection would need to consider existing stormwater pits, kerb ramps and residential crossovers. A proposed trial layout of the intersection which takes in to consideration line marking, sight distance and turning circles is provided in Figure 3.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 12

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2.1

RUSHWORTH STREET AND REEVES STREET, WATSONIA - POSSIBLE TREATMENT OPTIONS cont’d

Figure 3 – Proposed Trial Layout of the Rushworth Street and Reeves Street Intersection It is recommended that funding be considered as part of the 2016-17 budget for the installation of temporary treatments. The estimated cost of the proposed trial works at the intersection is $12,000 which is based on the use of rubber kerbing, line marking and compliant give way markings. A typical example of this treatment is provided in Figure 4.

The trial is reasonably straightforward and could be implemented within three months. Drivers usually take several months to become familiar with changes to traffic layouts of this nature. It is proposed that the trial be monitored for six months and a report be provided to Council following an assessment of the trial, including a survey of local residents, and recommending further actions.

Figure 4 – Typical Example of Rubber Kerbing

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 13

2.1

People – Community Strengthening and Support

RUSHWORTH STREET AND REEVES STREET, WATSONIA - POSSIBLE TREATMENT OPTIONS cont’d CONCLUSION Following Council’s resolution on 7 March 2016, road safety concerns were investigated at the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street, Watsonia.

The speed and volume of traffic in Rushworth Street was found to be within acceptable limits and consistent with other local residential streets in the municipality.

No casualty crashes have been recorded. However, concerns were found to exist regarding the intersection alignment and speed of turning vehicles and pedestrian safety at the intersection of Rushworth Street and Reeves Street.

To address these concerns it is proposed to redesign the intersection through the installation of kerb outstands, splitter island and line marking, on a trial basis, at an estimated cost of $12,000 as part of the 2016/17 budget.

From an area perspective, there is no casualty crash history, traffic speeds and volumes are within acceptable limits, and other areas within the municipality have a greater need for intervention. Despite VicRoads support for a 40km/h speed zone, the cost to implement such a scheme would cost in the order of $400,000 - $500,000.

Therefore it is not considered appropriate to pursue an area wide 40km/h speed zone at this time.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 14

2.2

2.2

People – Community Strengthening and Support

DRAFT CHILD YOUTH AND FAMILY PLAN 2016-2020

Author: Giovanna Savini - Manager Youth & Family Services, Community Programs

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council has worked with the local community and other key stakeholders to prepare the draft Child, Youth and Family Plan 2016 – 2020. This draft document has been prepared to give long-term strategic direction for the coordination and development of programs, activities, services and facilities to support children, youth and families across the 0 – 25 years age continuum in the municipality.

The draft Child, Youth and Family Plan 2016 – 2020 has been shaped by community input and local expertise. Information collected through consultation to date has been used to develop the Plan’s objectives as well as the supporting strategic directions and actions.

The draft is now ready for further community consultation. Responses to the draft will help inform a final Child, Youth and Family Plan.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Approve the draft Child Youth and Family Plan 2016 – 2020 for consultation until 6 June 2016.

2.

Receive a further report on 11 July 2016, to consider the consultation received and adopt the final Child Youth and Family Plan 2016 – 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 Council’s Municipal Early Years Plan (0 – 8yrs) has expired and development has progressed on a new plan for the municipality.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 15

2.2

People – Community Strengthening and Support

DRAFT CHILD YOUTH AND FAMILY PLAN 2016-2020 cont’d Council has a key legislated role in working with local stakeholders to plan for their municipality. The plan is based on State and Federal government frameworks, current policy direction, best practice, current literature and local benchmarking and needs analysis.

In consultation with key internal and external stakeholders, the scope of the Plan has been widened to extend the age range to include 0 -25 years aligning to current best practice. This will allow the new Plan to be more effective and efficient across the early years and youth age continuum. It is proposed to call the new Plan the Child, Youth and Family Plan 2016 – 2020 (the Plan).

The Plan has been developed under a governance structure consisting of an internal and external stakeholder working group representing key members from Maternal and Child Health, Early Childhood services, Youth and Community Partnerships; other early years and youth sector non-government organisations and agencies, including the disability sector and members of the Early Years Advisory Network.

Community feedback also came in the form of surveys and information gathered at festivals and events.

The Plan articulates high level strategic direction for programs, services and the Banyule community. The actions will form the basis of organisational strategies that can be adopted by both internal and external groups, networks and relevant sectors.

This creates opportunities for: • • • •

Municipal wide shared approach/responsibility Multidisciplinary collaboration Bridge the gap between early years and youth Common language and shared understanding

Child, Youth and Family Plan Key Objectives 1.

Capacity Building 1.1. Support families to raise happy and confident children and young people.

1.2. Support children and young people to develop capacity and capability.

1.3. Support communities to protect and nurture vulnerable children and young people.

1.4. Build capacity of professionals to provide support, with a focus on vulnerable and at risk communities.

2.

Health, Well Being and Development 2.1. Work with the community to improve health, wellbeing and developmental outcomes.

2.2. Promote healthy lifestyle choices and positive health behaviours.

3.

Connections and Partnerships 3.1. Develop sustainable connections and partnerships between sectors and professionals.

3.2. Connect with young people and children in a meaningful way.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 16

People – Community Strengthening and Support

4.

2.2

DRAFT CHILD YOUTH AND FAMILY PLAN 2016-2020 cont’d Engagement 4.1. Create places, spaces and activities that encourage people to come together and build sustained connections.

4.2. In partnerships with families, children and young people, provide opportunities for celebrations and acknowledgement of our successes 4.3. Foster the next generation of environmental stewards.

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

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

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

CONSULTATION Consultation will commence in conjunction with the public release of the draft Child, Youth and Family Plan 2016 – 2020.

The community will be invited to provide feedback on the draft document over a four week period, through:   

The Banyule Website, including links to the draft Child, Youth and Family Plan 2016 – 2020 and the feedback summary paper.

Copies of the draft Child, Youth and Family Plan 2016 – 2020 being available at Council’s customer service centres and libraries.

Presentations to relevant sector Networks.

The draft Child, Youth and Family Plan 2016 – 2020 will be available for consultation until Monday 6 June 2016. The feedback will assist in the preparation of a final Child, Youth and Family Plan 2016 – 2020 for future Council adoption. It is expected that this document will be considered by Council on 11 July 2016.

CONCLUSION The draft Child, Youth and Family Plan 2016 – 2020 has been prepared after an extensive development and consultation process. Further consultation is proposed to inform the final document.

The Child, Youth and Family Plan 2016 – 2020 will give long-term strategic direction for the coordination and development of programs, activities, services and facilities to support children, youth and families across the 0 – 25 years age continuum in our municipality.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1

DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 138

Page 17

2.3

2.3

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2016-2017 COMMUNITY SPORTS INFRASTRUCTURE FUND APPLICATION OUTCOME

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

D16/66237

Previous Items Council on 17 August 2015 (Item 2.1 - 2016-2017 Community Sport Infrastructure Fund) Council on 19 October 2015 (Item 2.1 - 2016-2017 Community Sports Infrastructure Fund from the State Government Victoria) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Community Sports Infrastructure Fund (CSIF) for 2016-2017 was released on 19 July 2015. At the meeting of 19 October 2015, Council resolved to endorse seven (7) projects, based on the best fit with the grant funding criteria and the potential to address the highest community need.

The following four (4) applications were successful: • • • •

Minor Facilities: Cyril Cummins Reserve Hockey Pitch Replacement Female Friendly Facilities: Ivanhoe Park Pavilion Redevelopment Female Friendly Facilities: Olympic Park - Kelly Pavilion Change Rooms Redevelopment.

Planning: Regional Paddle Sports Centre Feasibility (Manningham CC lead)

The following four (3) applications have not been successful: • • •

Major Facilities: N.J Telfer Reserve Precinct Redevelopment Planning: Sub- Regional High Ball Court and Soccer Facility Plan Planning: Main Yarra Trail Bridge Feasibility Study

The four successful projects will result in $2,615,138M of community asset upgrades and development. Banyule City Council will be required to fund $1,832,638M for the four (4) projects. An allocation of $555,000 is required as matching funding for three of the projects within the 2016/17 draft budget. The matching allocation of $1,277,638 for Ivanhoe Park Pavilion has already been allocated in the 2014/15 and 2015/16 financial years. The 2016/17 CSIF will fund $337,500 towards the project through State Government funding and $445,000 will be provided from local clubs and external organisations.

On 12 April, the Minister for Sport John Eren also officially opened the 2017-2018 Community Sports Infrastructure Fund. Officers will provide a further briefing to Council regarding potential projects which meet the selection criteria within the 20172018 Community Sports Infrastructure Fund in May.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 18

2016-2017 COMMUNITY SPORTS INFRASTRUCTURE FUND APPLICATION OUTCOME cont’d RECOMMENDATION That Council 1.

Note the outcome of the funding applications within the 2016-2017 Community Sports Infrastructure Fund (CSIF).

2.

Confirm the allocation of $555,000 within the draft 2016/17 Budget for the matching funding requirement for the three following projects: a. b. c.

Cyril Cummins Reserve Hockey Pitch Replacement ($450,000) Olympic Park - Kelly Pavilion Change Rooms Redevelopment ($100,000) Regional Paddle Sports Centre Feasibility - Manningham CC lead ($5,000)

3.

Note the funding contribution of $100,000 from the Community Sports Infrastructure Fund (CSIF) towards Ivanhoe Park Pavilion redevelopment.

4.

Inform all stakeholders regarding the outcome of the funding applications.

5.

Note the time frames regarding the 2017-2018 Community Sports Infrastructure Fund.

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 The Community Sports Infrastructure Fund (CSIF) for 2016-2017 was released on 19 July 2015. The funding program is administered by Sport and Recreation Victoria (SRV) and provided grants for planning, building new, and improving existing facilities where communities conduct, organise and participate in sport and recreation.

Council officers identified potential projects and held several discussions with SRV representatives who have provided further advice during the project proposal development. At the meeting of 19 October 2015, Council resolved to endorse seven (7) projects, based on the best fit with the grant funding criteria and the potential to address the highest community need.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 19

2.3

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2.3

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2016-2017 COMMUNITY SPORTS INFRASTRUCTURE FUND APPLICATION OUTCOME cont’d On 12 April, the Minister for Sport John Eren officially opened the 2017-2018 Community Sports Infrastructure Fund. The Community Sports Infrastructure Fund aims to support the development of high quality, accessible community sport and recreation facilities across Victoria with a focus on increasing participation of all Victorians. The funding categories are similar to the 2016/17 funding round.

The application process requires both the submission of both a Project Proposal and Full Application for all categories. Project proposals are due on the 8 June 2016.

SRV will advise Councils of Project Proposals supported to Full Application stage by 18 July 2016 SRV and Full Applications must be submitted by 31 August 2016.

Funding announcements and notification of outcomes will be made from November 2016 onwards.

Officer will provide a further briefing to Council regarding potential projects which meet the selection criteria within the 2017-2018 Community Sports Infrastructure Fund.

CURRENT SITUATION The department of Sport and Recreation Victoria informed Council of the results of the applications on 12 April 2016. The results are outlined below: The following three (4) applications were successful: Category:

Facility and Project:

Minor Facilities

Cyril Cummins Reserve Hockey Pitch Replacement Ivanhoe Park Pavilion Redevelopment Olympic Park - Kelly Pavilion Change Rooms Redevelopment Regional Paddle Sports Centre Feasibility (Regional Planning Manningham lead)

Female Friendly Facilities Female Friendly Facilities

Planning

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

SRV Funding Contribution: $100,000

Council Contribution $450,000

$100,000

$1,277,638

$100,000

$100,000

$37,500

Banyule $5,000 Darebin $5,000 Nillumbik $5,000 Canoe Vic $10,000

Page 20

2016-2017 COMMUNITY SPORTS INFRASTRUCTURE FUND APPLICATION OUTCOME cont’d The following four (3) applications were unsuccessful.

Category:

Facility and Project:

SRV Funding Contribution:

Council Contribution

Major Facilities:

N.J Telfer Reserve Precinct Redevelopment

$500,000

$1,500,000m

Planning

Sub- Regional High Ball Court and Soccer Facility Plan

$40,000

Banyule $10,000 Darebin $10,000 Nillumbik $10,000

Planning

Main Yarra Trail Bridge Feasibility Study

$120,000

$30,000

Council officers have received feedback from SRV in relation to the unsuccessful application and have also made some further suggestions regarding each project.

Project N.J Telfer Reserve Precinct Redevelopment

SRV Feedback The project did not demonstrate the regional / sub-regional significance which is expected for projects from the Majors Category.

Officer Comment This project is a high priority and officers are currently re-scoping the project and will provide a further briefing to Council to confirm what can be delivered within the confirmed budget allocation.

Sub- Regional High Ball Court and Soccer Facility Plan

Football Federation Victoria (FFV) has been provided with funding for the State Facilities Plan.

Netball Victoria has also recently released its State Facilities Plan and Basketball Victoria is also undertaking some strategic facility planning. This project may duplicate the work being undertaken by the State Sporting Associations (SSA’s).

Even through the SSA’s are undertaking further State wide planning, officers believe there is still a need to undertake focused sub – regional planning for high ball facilities. Officer are recommending further discussions be held with neighbouring municipalities to confirm their interest in funding further planning within the 2016/17 financial year.

Main Yarra Trail Bridge Feasibility Study

Project did not align sufficiently with the objectives of the Community Sports Infrastructure Fund.

Council has included $75,000 in its 2015/16 budget and the money has been requested to be carried forward.

Manningham C.C has included $75,000 in its draft 2016/17 budget to match Banyule’s contribution which will enable the project to proceed in 2016/17.

Sport and Recreation Victoria will arrange funding arrangements for successful projects and Officers will contact relevant Clubs to confirm the outcome of each application.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 21

2.3

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2.3

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2016-2017 COMMUNITY SPORTS INFRASTRUCTURE FUND APPLICATION OUTCOME cont’d FUNDING IMPLICATIONS The four successful projects will result in $2,615,138 of community asset upgrades and development. Banyule City Council will be required to fund $1,832,638M for the four (4) projects. An allocation of $555,000 is required as matching funding for three of the projects within the 2016/17 draft budget.

The matching allocation of $1,277,638 for Ivanhoe Park Pavilion has already been allocated in the 2014/15 and 2015/16 financial years.

The 2016/17 CSIF will fund $337,500 towards the project through State Government funding and $445,000 will be provided from local clubs and external organisations.

CONSULTATION As previously mentioned in this report Council have held several discussions with SRV representatives who have provided guidance on the development and submission of proposals and also provided feedback following the assessment process. Detailed consultation was completed with key stakeholders during the application phase.

Officers will inform all stakeholders regarding the outcome of the funding applications and will hold further discussions regarding the delivery of projects which have been successful and also discuss the future of projects which have not been successful in attracting funding.

TIMELINES Successful projects will commence in the 2016/2017 financial year. Officers will provide a further briefing to Council regarding potential projects which meet the selection criteria within the 2017-2018 Community Sports Infrastructure Fund in May 2016.

CONCLUSION The SRV 2016/17 CSIF will assist Council in providing a total estimated cost of $2,615,138 of community asset upgrades and development.

This funding will assist in the delivery of key projects within Councils capital works program, and importantly will provide improved community access and participation opportunities across key recreation facilities within Banyule.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 22

2.4

2.4

People – Community Strengthening and Support

DISABILITY REVIEW - PROVISION OF SERVICES WITHIN THE NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME (NDIS)

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

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council has been conducting a review of its disability services in preparation for the introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) in Banyule from July 1st 2016.

The NDIS will directly impact the funding Council currently receives for some of its Disability Services. The review has been designed to assist Council to identify how it best supports people with a disability into the future within a NDIS environment.

Council is required to decide whether it registers as a NDIS scheme provider. This report outlines the key considerations that have emerged from the review and presents recommendations related to Council’s ongoing role in supporting people with a disability.

Some of the key considerations in deciding whether to register as a provider include: • • •

Council’s most effective role in supporting people with a disability the increased cost to Council of providing services within the NDIS whether Council is placed to be a specialist provider of its current disability services within an NDIS environment

The report recommends that Council not register as a National Disability Insurance Scheme service provider.

RECOMMENDATION That Council; 1.

Not register as a National Disability Insurance Scheme service provider.

2.

Assist the transition of current Home and Community Care clients that will be eligible for the National Disability Insurance Scheme through the support of a dedicated transition officer.

3.

Strongly advocates to both the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Disability Insurance Agency for continued funding to support an extended transition period beyond December 2016 for current Jets Creative Arts clients until appropriate choices are available for Jets clients to receive similar services under the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 23

2.4

People – Community Strengthening and Support

DISABILITY REVIEW - PROVISION OF SERVICES WITHIN THE NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME (NDIS) cont’d 4.

Continue to expand its core role to reduce barriers, advocate for and increase the inclusion of people with a disability in community life, including through; advocating to Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) for the continuation of the MetroAccess program and furthering Council’s partnership with the Brotherhood of St Laurence in the delivery of Local Area Coordination services within the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

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

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

CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “provide services for people at important life stages”.

BACKGROUND The landscape of disability services in Australia is changing due to the introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) and associated disability reforms.

Through the implementation of the NDIS, existing funding arrangements and service provision will undergo significant changes. This includes a direct impact on services currently provided by Council that are wholly or partially funded through other levels of government.

These changes have required Council to give consideration to its involvement in disability services in an evolving landscape. Council staff have been undertaking a thorough review of Council’s disability services to better understand our current work in the disability space and to assist future planning.

This report deals with the consideration relating the future of Council’s direct disability services including the Home and Community Care Service (HACC) for those under the age of 65 and the Jets Creative Arts Service, a fully funded creative respite program for people with a disability aged between 12 – 25.

A description of these services along with the key changes anticipated as a result of the introduction of the NDIS is contained in Attachment 1 of this report.

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 May 2016

Page 24

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2.4

DISABILITY REVIEW - PROVISION OF SERVICES WITHIN THE NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME (NDIS) 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 conflict with any human rights issues but supports the principles contained in the Charter by seeking to further Council’s support of people with a disability.

CURRENT SITUATION Outcomes of Disability Review The disability review highlighted that Council is involved in supporting people with a disability in a variety of ways including the delivery of direct services and working within the community to make Banyule more accessible and inclusive. The review also identified that as a result of the introduction of the NDIS Council needed to consider its future role in disability given significant changes to the funding arrangements for current services.

The review highlighted that Council was extremely well placed and legislatively required to continue its efforts to reduce barriers, advocate for and increase the inclusion of people with a disability in community life. It was highlighted that this important function should be the primary focus of how Council supports people with a disability.

The review also identified that while Council has received government funding to provide valued direct services (HACC & Jets Creative Arts) to people with a disability; continued provision of these services under the NDIS was not the preferred direction.

This conclusion was based on various factors including consideration of Council’s most effective role in supporting people with a disability, the increased cost to Council of providing services within the NDIS, and the fact that Council is not well placed to be a specialist provider of its current disability services within an NDIS environment.

FUNDING IMPLICATIONS Council’s current direct disability services are either fully or partially funded through other levels of government. The introduction of the NDIS will affect the funding Council currently receives for these services. This report outlines the key considerations and known impacts for Council associated with these changes.

CONSULTATION Extensive consultation has occurred in relation to the content of this report including several briefings with Council, workshops with Council’s Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee and individual surveys and follow up with clients directly affected.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 25

2.4

People – Community Strengthening and Support

DISABILITY REVIEW - PROVISION OF SERVICES WITHIN THE NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME (NDIS) cont’d DISCUSSION Communication with clients During March and April 2016, Council delivered an extensive communications program with current clients, state and federal governments, disability services and the general community. This program outlined Council’s disability review process and introduced the likelihood that Council would not provide its current services within the NDIS. The communications program included a detailed survey with current clients, designed to better understand the concerns, impacts and support required in the event that Council did not provide current services within the NDIS. The results of this survey were presented to Council briefing on April 11 along with considerations of how best to respond to the concerns that were raised.

While the concerns identified differed depending on what services individual clients accessed from Council, several key themes emerged: 1.

2.

3.

Most people knew little about the NDIS and look to Council for more information.

A large number of people have some concern with transitioning from receiving services from Council to receiving services from another provider under the NDIS. A large number of people are looking for individualised support from Council to make the transition to the NDIS as seamless as possible.

Transition Options The concerns raised around the transition to the NDIS vary between HACC and Jets Creative Arts and specific and tailored responses are required for each service area.

A summary of the key issues and proposed responses to support a smooth transition to the NDIS are outlined below. The following options have been presented within a guiding principle; people will not be left without a service that they are currently receiving.

HACC It is estimated that approximately 160 current HACC clients will be eligible for the NDIS and will have the option to transition to receive the services they require from registered disability service providers under the NDIS. It is expected that these clients will gradually transition into the NDIS from August/September 2016.

The key concern for many HACC clients relates to the relationship the individual has with the Council staff member providing services to them. Many people have received support from the same staff members for many years and are anxious about losing this relationship. Additionally, people expressed some concern and anxiety about knowing who they could access services from under the NDIS. Given the generalist nature of the services provided by HACC and the presence of many large organisations planning to offer these services under the NDIS it is seen that there will be varied and appropriate choices available for clients to receive services from other providers once the NDIS begins to roll out in Banyule.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 26

DISABILITY REVIEW - PROVISION OF SERVICES WITHIN THE NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME (NDIS) cont’d Given the concerns raised by clients and Council’s desire to support a seamless transition for current clients, the HACC area is exploring the option of a dedicated transition officer to work with individuals to assist them to address their concerns and transition to the NDIS. Jets Creative Arts It is estimated that all 35 current Jets clients will be eligible for the NDIS and will have the option to transition to receive the services they require from registered disability service providers under the NDIS. It is expected that these clients will gradually transition into the NDIS from December 2016.

The key concerns for all Jets families relates to there being no youth specific similar social programs to transition to, the negative impact of change on vulnerable young people at a critical life stage and ultimately the lack of continuity of service.

Delivering a diverse range of programs at Jets, all free to young people aged 13-25 years, the focus of Jets is to provide a safe place for young people of all backgrounds and abilities to build personal and technical skills, promote social connectedness and encourage self-expression through music and the arts.

Given the uniqueness of the services provided by Jets and the lack of existing organisations planning or able to offer these services under the NDIS it is seen that there will be no appropriate choices available for Jets clients to receive similar services from other providers once the NDIS begins to roll out in Banyule.

Given the concerns raised by Jets families and Council’s desire to support a seamless transition for current clients, it is on this value basis that a number of options have been explored for advocacy to Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) for consideration.

Most effective role of Local Government In addition to considering Council’s role in the delivery of direct services, the disability review project has required additional consideration to the most effective role of local government in supporting people with a disability. This includes the legislative requirements that apply to Victorian councils.

The Victorian Disability Act 2006 outlines Council’s responsibilities to; 1.

2.

3.

4.

reducing barriers to persons with a disability accessing goods, services and facilities; reducing barriers to persons with a disability obtaining and maintaining employment; promoting inclusion and participation in the community of persons with a disability; achieving tangible changes in attitudes and practices which discriminate against persons with a disability.

Similarly the National Disability Discrimination Act 1992 and the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities require Local Government to reduce discrimination and protect the human rights of people with a disability.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 27

2.4

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2.4

People – Community Strengthening and Support

DISABILITY REVIEW - PROVISION OF SERVICES WITHIN THE NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME (NDIS) cont’d Council’s has a strong history of meeting its requirements in this area. Local government is uniquely placed to address access and inclusion for people with a disability at this more strategic and systemic level.

Much of this work depends on the allocation of resources to directly meet the legislative requirements along with staff resources to direct and coordinate the planning and delivery of these efforts. In the event that Council chooses to not be a provider of direct services under the NDIS there is a need and opportunity focus resources to better address access and inclusion at a whole of community level.

Greatest Impact & Need Historically, Council has entered into the delivery of direct disability services based on gaps in existing service provision. As an example, Council’s Jets Creative Arts program which is funded by the DHHS was created as a unique program that responded to the needs of people with a disability and a gap in service delivery.

Similarly the HACC program was established to meet the needs of older people and later people with a disability who needed extra in home and respite support.

The NDIS is expected to bring about new and expanded service organisations and a greater range of choice and control over where people with a disability can access the supports they require.

While Council has been a provider of valued services that have responded to service gaps it is considered that under the NDIS a broader range of options will be available for people with a disability and Council may not have the same need to be a provider of direct services under the NDIS. Many people with a disability will not be eligible for the NDIS. The NDIS targets those with the most need for support. It is estimated that 2,200 Banyule residents under the age of 65 have a disability that requires assistance with daily living skills. Initial information from the NDIS suggests that approximately 1,650 people with a disability will be eligible for the NDIS in Banyule. The ABS survey of disability and carers estimates that 23,000 people (18.5% of the total population) in Banyule experience a disability of some kind.

While the NDIS represents an increase in the support available for people with the most significant disability it is considered that Council has a critically important role in supporting the whole population of people with a disability through meeting its broader responsibilities in increasing community inclusion, accessibility and advocacy.

The role that Council plays in supporting people with a disability through advocacy, community development and community planning work has been complimented through the MetroAccess Community Building Program, a partnership between DHHS and local government designed to make local communities more inclusive of people with a disability. Under the NDIS the future of this program and the funding Council receives is uncertain. The program is currently funded until July 2017.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 28

People – Community Strengthening and Support

2.4

DISABILITY REVIEW - PROVISION OF SERVICES WITHIN THE NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME (NDIS) cont’d The NDIS has also developed policies and frameworks that focus on the important work of building community inclusion. Some of this work is included in the scope of the Local Area Coordination program which is a service of the NDIS that will be delivered by the Brotherhood of St Laurence (BSL) in the North East Melbourne Area (NEMA) this includes Banyule.

Council has signed a statement of intent to work with BSL in the design and delivery of the Local Area Coordination services locally. A critical part of Council effectively focusing on its core role of supporting inclusion and access at the whole of community level is to work closely with BSL to further define how Council is specifically involved in these services.

CONCLUSION The Disability Review project has identified that Council is involved in supporting people with a disability in a variety of ways including direct and indirect disability services and projects. The introduction of the NDIS requires Council to consider its future role in disability particularly in relation to the delivery of direct services within the NDIS. The considerations presented in this report outline the critical steps required to support current clients through the introduction of the NDIS and to position Council to continue its essential work in reducing discrimination and increasing advocacy and support to ensure people with a disability are meaningfully included in community life.

The recommended direction is to not continue the provision of the services HACC and Jets Creative Arts services, this is based on various factors including consideration of Council’s most effective role in supporting people with a disability, the increased cost to Council of providing services within the NDIS, and the fact that Council is not well placed to be a specialist provider of its current disability services within an NDIS environment.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1

Disability Review - Stage One - SUMMARY - July 2015

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 205

Page 29

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.1

RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT POLICY 2016-2020

Author:

Bailey Byrnes - Transport Planning Team Leader, City Development

File:

D16/52521

Previous Items Council on 22 February 2016 (Item 4.2 - Draft Residential Parking Permit Policy) Council on 7 March 2016 (Item 4.5 - Draft Residential Parking Permit Policy Consultation Timeframes) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020 (RPPP) provides the framework to manage the availability of on-street parking spaces in residential areas through a Residential Parking Permit Scheme. This allows residents and their visitors a greater opportunity to park in areas of high demand, in accordance with the key directions set out in the policy.

The RPPP defines who is eligible for a parking permit, the type and number of parking permits available, where permits allow holders to park, and the cost of parking permits. The RPPP includes an expansion of the eligibility requirements to allow new medium density developments (no more than four dwellings on a lot) access to parking permits, the introduction of a free residential parking permit and the introduction of a residential permit area system, which will allow permit holders to park on-street within a defined area.

Consultation on the RPPP was conducted during March 2016, with 101 submissions received. A multi-signatory letter with 159 signatures was also received during the consultation period. A varied response both for and against the RPPP across a number of themes was received, including commentary on the provision of trader and staff parking permits, limiting non-residential parking within residential streets and the concerns on the introduction of a new residential permit area system. The feedback highlighted the importance of parking to the community, and the wide range of views on how parking within the municipality should be managed.

In consideration of the feedback received, the wording of the RPPP has been updated and the residential parking permit areas have been further refined to ensure that each parking permit area does not promote relocating parking from one location within the parking permit area to another location.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Adopts the Banyule Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020 (Attachment 1 of this report).

2.

Implements the Banyule Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020 as of 1 July 2016.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 31

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT POLICY 2016-2020 cont’d 3.

Promotes the new policy to explain changes to the public including the preparation of a brochure, details on the Council web site and an article in the Banyule Banner.

4.

Thanks submitters for their comments and feedback on the Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020.

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 “support sustainable transport”. One of the key initiatives is ‘Review the Residential Parking Permit Scheme’.

BACKGROUND The recently adopted Banyule Integrated Transport Plan 2015-2035 places significant emphasis on ‘managing road space to give priority to sustainable transport modes’, and ‘approaching parking as a limited, shared resource’.

The Banyule Activity Centre Car Parking Policy and Strategy (ACCPP) provides broad policy on the management of car parking in and around Activity Centres. A key objective of the ACCPP relating to car parking in residential areas is to help ‘protect residential areas close to Activity Centres from intrusion of car parking associated with commercial and higher density residential uses’.

Council’s current Banyule Residential Parking Permit Policy was adopted in August 2011. This policy includes provisions to assist in managing the availability of on-street parking spaces through a Residential Parking Permit Scheme in accordance with the key directions set out in the policy.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 32

RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT POLICY 2016-2020 cont’d Over the past nine months, the current policy and scheme have been reviewed and a draft Residential Parking Permit Policy prepared. At its meeting on 22 February 2016, Council considered a report on the draft Residential Parking Permit Policy and resolved: “That Council: 1.

Approve the draft Residential Parking Permit Policy for consultation until 18 March 2016;

2.

Propose the fees as follows: Permit Type First Residential Permit Second Residential Permit First Visitor Permit Second Visitor Permit

3.

Current Fee $25 per annum $40 per annum $40 per annum $60 per annum

Proposed Fee Free $25 per annum $40 per annum $60 per annum

Receive a further report on the feedback received during the consultation.”

The Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020 (Attachment 1) has been refined in response to the feedback received from the community and key stakeholders during the March 2016 consultation period.

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

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

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

CONSULTATION Current permit holders, residents and the wider community were invited to provide feedback on the draft RPPP over a one month period (23 February – 24 March 2016). During the consultation period, 79 responses were received to an online survey together with 22 written submissions.

A multi-signatory letter with 159 signatures was also received from Ivanhoe Primary School staff, volunteers and parents opposing the draft Residential Parking Permit Policy. The submission does not meet the requirements for a petition in accordance with Council’s guidelines, however it has been considered in the overall submissions received on the draft Residential Parking Permit Policy.

A comprehensive assessment of the consultation and the feedback received, including details on the multi-signatory letter, is provided at Attachment 2.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 33

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT POLICY 2016-2020 cont’d The consultation highlighted a varied response both for and against the draft policy across a number of themes. This includes: 

Significant support for the provision of parking permits for local traders, teachers and employees. In addition, there were a number of comments opposing non-residential parking within residential streets.



Many responses highlighted the importance to the community that developers include sufficient on-site parking.



There was concern over the relaxing of the permit restriction to multi-unit developments. A smaller amount of comments supported the provision of parking permits to multi-unit developments.



There were some reservations expressed over the new zonal permit system.

Concerns included congestion issues, a preference to be limited to a residential street and a general uneasiness with the change. Parking around Ivanhoe Primary School was of concern and the school community collected signatures to object to the draft policy and the use of permit zone restrictions.



On the positive side a few responses highlighted that a zonal system will remove the street identification currently included on the permit which is visible in the parked car.



The introduction of a first free residential parking permit was highly agreeable to most. However significant concern was raised over residents and especially concession card holders not obtaining a second permit free as well. A further breakdown of the responses around permit fees highlighted a number of respondents opposing the permit fees reside in the trial parking restriction area around Ivanhoe Grammar School, where residents were allowed access to free parking permits for the duration of the trial.



There were some concerns expressed over the current enforcement practices.

In terms of the new policy there were a small number of comments concerning operational issues including being able to apply for a permit on-line and concerns over parking restrictions.



There was in general agreement that the number of permits available was fair although there was some opinion either way that there are too many or too few available.

The feedback highlighted the importance of parking to the community, and the wide range of views on how parking within the municipality should be managed.

DISCUSSION On-street parking is a very important component of the overall parking supply within Banyule. There are many users competing for limited kerbside space, as such, Council is committed to encouraging the most efficient use of on-street parking, and carefully managing all day parking in streets where there are competing uses in a planned, fair and consistent way.

It is expected that there will be competition within high demand areas, such as within and around Activity Centres and around railway stations. However while permits provide greater opportunity for residents and their visitors to park, they do not guarantee an on-street parking space will be available.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 34

RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT POLICY 2016-2020 cont’d The eligibility requirements for parking permits, including the exclusion of new multidwelling developments from the RPPP, resulted from extensive community consultation during the development of the Activity Centre Car Parking Policy and the existing residential parking permit policy. These requirements help to provide residents with first priority for all-day parking in their local street and help parking in residential areas remain protected from higher density development and any impact on parking in residential streets.

The relaxation of the higher-density development requirement to allow smaller developments of 2-4 dwellings access to the scheme was introduced in response to concerns raised during the operation of the RPPP. It was identified that developments of this size are not required to provide visitor parking onsite in accordance with the planning scheme, and subsequently disadvantaged some residents beyond the intentions of the ACCPPS. The change aligns with the principles of the Activity Centre Car Parking Policy in protecting existing residential areas, as the number of permits to be issued would be equal to or less than existing permit eligibility levels.

Parking permit fees are set each year as part of the annual budget process. The current permit fee structure is a ‘user pays’ system to offset the costs of implementing the parking permit scheme, including recovering the administration cost of the permit. The fee structure has been in place since 2010.

Any change to the permit fees will impact the overall cost to Council in the operation of the permit scheme. The overall administration cost of the current permit scheme, and the expected cost of the updated scheme in alignment with the changes to the RPPP is discussed further in the sections following.

It is noted that a trial of parking restrictions around Ivanhoe Grammar also includes free parking permits during the trial, however if restrictions are maintained at the end of the trial then permit fees will be in accordance with the adopted RPPP at the time.

In consideration of the feedback received, the residential parking areas have been further refined to ensure that each parking permit area, in its location and sizing, does not promote relocating parking from one location within the parking permit area to another location. This considers the location of train stations and major bus stops, places of employment and activity centres, and the likely walking distance based on the principles of the Activity Centre Car Parking Policy and Strategy.

The wording within the RPPP has also been updated to remove confusion on the number of parking permits available to new medium density development, and clarify where permit holders are entitled to park within a residential parking area.

BANYULE RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT POLICY 2016-2020 The Residential Parking Permit Policy (RPPP) provides the framework to manage the availability of on-street parking spaces in residential areas through a Residential Parking Permit Scheme. The RPPP allows residents and their visitors greater opportunity to park in areas of high demand, in accordance with the key directions set out in the policy.

The RPPP details who are eligible for a parking permit, the type and number of parking permits available, where permits allow holders to park, and the cost of parking permits. These are further detailed in the sections following.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 35

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT POLICY 2016-2020 cont’d Eligibility Criteria The RPPP specifies three criteria that must be meet in order for residents to be eligible for parking permits. To be eligible for a permit as part of the Residential Parking Permit Scheme, an applicant must meet the following requirements: 1.

Be a resident of the municipality in a property adjacent to prohibitive parking restrictions (i.e. No Stopping, No Parking, or a Permit Zone) or adjacent to timed restrictions of one hour or greater.

2.

The ground floor frontage of the building must be residential in nature.

3.

For higher density development with an occupancy permit issued after 8 November 2010, there are must be four (4) or less dwellings on the lot.

Allowing new medium density development (i.e. four (4) or less dwellings on the lot) access to the RPPS with a reduced number of permits is a new criterion in the RPPP. This aligns with the principles of the Activity Centre Car Parking Policy in protecting existing residential areas, as the number of permits to be issued would be equal to or less than existing permit eligibility levels.

Type and Number of Parking Permits Available The RPPP allows eligible residents access to two types of parking permits; Residential Parking Permits (fixed vehicle permits) and Visitor Parking Permits (transferable permits). Table 1 summarises the type and number of permits available per dwelling type under the RPPP. Table 1: Number of Permits Available per Dwelling Number of dwellings Residential Visitor Maximum Parking Parking Number of Permits Permits Permits Single dwelling on a lot 4 Up to 2 Up to 2 Higher density developments built prior 4 Up to 2 Up to 2 to 8 November 2010 Higher density developments built after 8 November 2010, where there are no 1 1 OR 1 more than 4 dwellings on the lot Higher density developments built after 8 November 2010, where there are 5 or Not eligible for parking permits more dwellings on the lot Parking Permit Fees Residential and Visitor parking permit fees are set annually as part of Council’s annual budget. The RPPP amends the parking fee structure in alignment with Council’s resolution of 22 February 2016, as demonstrated in Table 2.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 36

RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT POLICY 2016-2020 cont’d Table 2: Number of Permits Available per Dwelling Permit Type Permit Fee First Residential Permit Free Second Residential Permit $25 per year First Visitor Permit $40 per year* Second Visitor Permit $60 per year *Concession Card Holders and Disabled Parking Permit Holders will be eligible for a reduced fee ($10 per annum) for the first Visitor Permit.

Parking Permits Entitlements The RPPP shifts from the current street-based permit system (i.e. permits which allow the holder to park on a specified street) to an area based system. This approach provides permit holders greater clarity in understanding where they are permitted to park, and allows greater flexibility in managing local parking demand.

Permit areas are defined by arterial roads, sub-arterial roads, collector roads and natural features such as rivers and parks to form area boundaries.

Permits allow the holder to park in any permissive parking space located in front of residential properties within the Residential Area for which it has been issued. They may be used in streets with permit zones or with timed restricted parking zones of 1 hour or greater, where the vehicles may remain for longer than the time limits shown on the parking sign and when used in accordance with the permit conditions.

Permits do not permit holders to park in No Stopping, No Parking or in any other location contrary to the Victorian Road Rules; on-street outside non-residential frontages for longer than the time indicated, for example outside schools, commercial properties or community centres; or exemption from paid parking fees or parking longer than the time indicated within Paid Parking Areas.

The definition of the parking areas can also be adjusted from time to time to fine tune any anomalies that arise from both the initial implementation and any land use or parking changes that may occur in the future. It is considered important to maintain this flexibility to respond to any issues that arise without having to revisit the actual policy.

IMPLEMENTATION AND FUNDING IMPLICATIONS In accordance with relevant Australian Standards it is not required to update parking signs to show residents are exempt from restrictions. However, to assist enforcement and new residents to identify the residential permit area they are in, plates and/or labels will progressively be installed below parking signs in residential areas.

The implementation of the RPPP will require changes to Council’s permit database to ensure properties are updated with the current permit area information. Further investigations are currently underway to identify improvements to the system, including providing a mechanism to allow online permit applications.

The introduction of a free parking permit is likely to increase the uptake of parking permits across the municipality, as residents may obtain a parking permit regardless of need. This aligns with the findings of the Ivanhoe Grammar parking restriction trial, where 58% of properties have applied for at least one free parking permit, in comparison to the 24% of eligible properties who have purchased a parking permit in other areas.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 37

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT POLICY 2016-2020 cont’d Table 3 identifies the overall cost of the administration of the parking permit scheme based on current parking permit levels, and the expected cost of the updated scheme in alignment with the changes to the RPPP. The updated scheme considers the uptake of the first free permit in line with the uptake of the Ivanhoe Grammar trial, and the uptake of the subsequent permits in line with current demand.

Table 3: Permit Scheme Cost and Recovery Comparison

Administration Cost Cost Recovery Overall Cost to Council

Current Scheme (inc. Ivanhoe Grammar Trial)

Current Scheme (exc. Ivanhoe Grammar Trial)

Updated Scheme

$ $ $

$ 30,718 $ 41,125 $10,408 (revenue)

$ $ $

59,372 41,125 18,247

102,685 28,415 74,270

It is recognised that with the introduction of a free parking permit Council is unlikely to recover the cost of administrating the parking permit scheme and therefore all rate payers subsidise the RPPP to some degree.

For ease of implementation and to allow an opportunity to promote the changes to the Policy it is proposed to commence operation of the Policy from 1 July 2016 and any permit rollovers that occur after that time. Education and promotional activities are proposed are a publicly available brochure, information via Council’s web site and the Banyule Banner.

CONCLUSION The Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020 has been prepared in line with Banyule’s Integrated Transport Plan and Activity Centre Car Parking Policy. It provides the framework to manage the availability of on-street parking spaces in residential areas and allows residents and their visitor’s first opportunity to park in areas of high demand, in accordance with the key directions set out in the policy.

The final policy considers over 100 submissions received during the consultation period, and has been further refined in response to the feedback received during this period.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1

Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020

219

2

Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

233

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page

Page 38

4.2

PROGRESS REPORT FOR A DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTION PLAN

Author:

David Cox - Strategic Planning Co-ordinator, City Development

Previous Items Council on 20 July 2015 (Item 4.1 - Development Contribution Schemes for land developers) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Investigation is continuing for a Development Contribution Plan (DCP) in Banyule.

By reserving the right for the final 2016/17 budget and future capital budgets to be considered for a future DCP, Council will be able to continue analysis for a future DCP to consider these budgets.

RECOMMENDATION That Council reserves the right for the final 2016/17 budget, and budgets for future years, to be considered for a future Development Contributions Plan.

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 Council previously received a report after preliminary investigation looked at different schemes for by land developers to financial contribute to local infrastructure, including public spaces and community facilities. This early work found that various funding mechanisms are available to Council to fund infrastructure commitments.

These include Development Contribution Plans (DCPs).

Further investigation has revealed that DCPs help to partially fund the cost of infrastructure, because a portion of total cost can be attributed to land development.

In established municipalities, such as Banyule, the portion of infrastructure cost that can be collected from development is informed by a projected rate for future development and the scope of works that is described in an approved Council budget.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 39

4.2

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.2

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROGRESS REPORT FOR A DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTION PLAN cont’d Investigation has also revealed that the mapping of DCP suitable, Council approved works items may be linked with a long-term timeframe, such as 20 years, to collect development contributions for infrastructure that is constructed early in the timeframe. Consequently DCPs in established municipalities enable partialreimbursement for constructed infrastructure over a long timeframe.

DCPs sit alongside other development contribution schemes in a strategic framework. This framework is shown below.

Figure 1: Strategic Framework for Contribution Schemes

The above framework highlights that DCPs sit alongside other development contribution mechanisms. Consequently the future creation of a Banyule DCP will need to be cognisant of other mechanisms that are being used, reviewed or under development. This includes separate progress being made for a specified contribution rate for public open space and a Parking Overlay for Heidelberg Central and Bell Street Mall, in the Banyule Planning Scheme.

CURRENT SITUATION To enable ongoing progress for a future DCP in Banyule, it is necessary for Council to reserve the right for its 2016/17 and future budgets to be considered for a DCP. By doing this, a future DCP can consider 2016/17 line-items that are appropriate for a future DCP and a contribution by land developers.

WHERE TO NEXT After Council has approved its 2016/17 budget, work can begin for the preparation of a Banyule DCP. Then, after Council has approved a DCP, a planning scheme amendment process can be pursued to introduce the DCP into the Banyule Planning Scheme. This would include public exhibition of the DCP proposal, and an opportunity for unresolved submissions to be referred to an independent Planning Panel that is appointed by the Minister for Planning.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 40

PROGRESS REPORT FOR A DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTION PLAN cont’d Successful preparation, operation, maintenance, review and the Government’s future auditing of a Banyule DCP requires alignment with legislation and Government guidelines to satisfy: Need, Nexus, Equity, Accountability and Transparency.

Future operation of a DCP will call for creation of workflow processes and systems that are linked with a council approved administration policy for the DCP. CONCLUSION Investigation has revealed the benefit of Council ‘reserving the right’ for its final 2016/17 and future years budgets to be considered for a future Banyule DCP. This will enable ongoing progress for the preparation of a DCP that will be reported to Council in the future, after a draft DCP has been prepared.

After Council has approved its 2016/17 budget, work can begin for the preparation of a Banyule DCP that includes this budget and future budgets.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 41

4.2

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.3

CHANDLER HIGHWAY WIDENING

Author:

Michelle Herbert - Senior Transport Engineer, City Development

4.3

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

Previous Items Council on 4 April 2016 (Item 3.1 - Chandler Highway widening) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The State Government made an announcement on 28 January 2016 that it will adopt VicRoads’ recommendation on widening Chandler Highway, Alphington which includes a new six lane bridge over the Yarra River on the west side of the existing bridge. Council has received letters from both Yarra City Council and Darebin City Council advising of their respective Council resolutions against the proposal.

The scope of the project appears to be inconsistent with the objectives of the Transport Integration Act (2009) and Banyule’s Integrated Transport Plan, as such it is considered reasonable to request a review of the project scope and an investigation of the concerns raised by both the Yarra City Council and Darebin City Council.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Writes to the Yarra City Council and Darebin City Council acknowledging their respective resolutions on the proposed widening of Chandler Highway, Alphington including the new six lane bridge over the Yarra River; and

2.

Writes to the Minister for Roads and Road Safety in relation to the six lane Chandler Highway proposal: a.

Identifying that it is inconsistent with the philosophy of the Banyule Integrated Transport Plan which looks to prioritise walking cycling and public transport over private cars and minimise any road widening in support of private cars; and

b.

Seeking a review of the scope of the project with the concerns raised Yarra City Council and Darebin City Council being fully investigated and considered.

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 May 2016

Page 42

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.3

CHANDLER HIGHWAY WIDENING cont’d CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “support sustainable transport”.

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

In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.

BACKGROUND The State Government made an announcement on 28 January 2016 that it will adopt VicRoads’ recommendation on widening Chandler Highway. The recommendation includes a new six lane bridge on the west side of the existing bridge (Plan attached).

Council has received letters from Yarra City Council and Darebin City Council outlining details of resolutions made on this topic (Attachments 2 and 3).

Yarra City Council’s resolution (in part) is that it: •

•

•

Does not support the construction of a six lane Chandler Highway widening or a six lane bridge which will encourage traffic, resulting in increased levels of congestion and cause environmental damage and air pollution, amongst other detrimental impacts.

Supports a road and bridge design that: o Primarily provides practical options for integrated public transport; and o Builds in future proofing design options for the construction of the Doncaster Rail.

Notes that the decision appears to fail to adhere to the Transport Integration Act (2009).

Darebin City Council’s resolution (in part) is that it: • •

Calls on the Minister for Roads to release the business case for the project in the interests of transparency; and Once more, calls on the State Government to: o respond to the concerns of residents on the west side of the proposal and along Grange Road who would bear the brunt of the current ‘preferred option’, and o produce a new design which protects amenity of existing residents to the west, protects the Yarra Corridor habitat and environs, moves people rather than just vehicles across the Yarra River and provides genuine options for local commuters, in particular, the construction of the Doncaster Rail.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 43

4.3

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

CHANDLER HIGHWAY WIDENING cont’d A report on the matter was on the Council agenda at its meeting of 4 April 2016.

Following debate Council deferred the item for consideration at a future Council meeting.

DISCUSSION The existing Chandler Highway Bridge provides for a single lane of traffic in each direction and connects to a surrounding arterial road network that is predominantly a four lane cross section. It is heavily congested during peak times and there is a need to widen the link at this location.

However; it is uncertain whether there is a need for a six lane cross section through this part of the network unless dedicated facilities (lanes and connections) are planned for public transport in accordance with the objectives of the Transport Integration Act (2009). The proposal does however include a Shared User Path to the west of the duplication, which will provide safer and more convenient access for cyclists, including removing the need to use the 70 steps at the Main Yarra Trail. The proposal does not appear to address public transport provision in terms of separate bus lanes. Consideration should be given to the movement of people and goods rather than individual vehicles, which includes buses travelling along the link and the potential for connections to a future Doncaster rail link.

The Banyule Integrated Transport Plan identifies a Road User Hierarchy that prioritises pedestrians, cyclists and public transport over private cars (Action 45) and seeks to minimise the construction of new roads or widening of existing roads to provide for private cars (Action 46). A six lane configuration for the Chandler Highway project is inconsistent with this philosophy. As such a review of the project, as called for by the Yarra City Council and Darebin City Council, is considered to be appropriate and worthwhile.

CONCLUSION Council has received letters from the Yarra City Council and Darebin City Council outlining their recent resolutions on the proposed Chandler Highway widening. It appears that the proposal for a six lane configuration does not meet the objectives of the Transport Integration Act (2009) or the philosophy of Council’s Integrated Transport Plan which looks to prioritise walking cycling and public transport over private cars and minimise any road widening in support of private cars.

Accordingly it is appropriate to acknowledge the positions of both Yarra City Council and Darebin City Council, and to write to the Minister for Roads and Road Safety seeking a review of the project scope and consider consideration of the concerns raised by both Yarra City Council and Darebin City Council.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1

Chandler Highway Duplication Plan

251

2

Yarra City Council Letter

252

3

Darebin City Council Letter

254

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page

Page 44

4.4

METROPOLITAN OVER-DIMENSIONAL VEHICLE ROUTES

Author:

David Bailey - Engineering Co-Ordinator, City Development

Ward:

All

4.4

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VicRoads is seeking Council endorsement of Victoria’s revised Over-Dimensional vehicle network to include Metropolitan Ring Road, Greensborough Highway, Rosanna Road, and Banksia Street.

Formally recognising Rosanna Road as an Over-Dimensional Route is inconsistent with VicRoads efforts to alleviate Rosanna Road residents’ concerns and Council’s position regarding the provision of a direct orbital route from the Metropolitan Ring Road to Eastlink to reduce through traffic and improve safety and amenity concerns in Banyule, particularly Rosanna Road.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Writes to VicRoads confirming that it does not endorse Greensborough Highway, Rosanna Road and Banksia Street being included in VicRoads’ revised Over-Dimensional vehicle network.

2.

Writes to VicRoads and the Minister for Roads and Road Safety requesting the development of a North-East Link as a direct orbital route from the Metropolitan Ring Road to Eastlink to cater for over-dimensional vehicles and reduce through traffic in Banyule.

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 VicRoads is seeking Council endorsement of Victoria’s revised Over-Dimensional (OD) vehicle network. OD Routes provide for the transport of vehicles and loads which exceed normal width, height, length and mass limits. OD vehicles travelling on these routes require VicRoads approval and authorised escort vehicles.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 45

4.4

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

METROPOLITAN OVER-DIMENSIONAL VEHICLE ROUTES cont’d The existing route OD1 through NE Melbourne (as shown in Melways – Appendix 1) is Mahoneys Road, High Street, Bell Street and Banksia Street. The proposed route (Appendix 2) is Metropolitan Ring Road, Greensborough Highway, Rosanna Road, Banksia Street.

Since the extension of the Greensborough Highway was completed about 10 years ago, and more recently since Darebin City Council altered the road infrastructure in High Street, Northcote and Preston, OD vehicles have been using Rosanna Road.

VicRoads has indicated that the OD vehicles are not subject to the overnight truck curfew on Rosanna Road.

VicRoads has carried out a review of the Rosanna Road infrastructure to confirm its acceptability for OD vehicles. VicRoads has indicated that the number of permits issued for vehicles using Rosanna Road is around two per month.

The amended route is proposed to be formalised by gazettal.

ADVOCACY Council has advocated for a North-East Link as a direct orbital link from the Metropolitan Ring Road to Eastlink, this is included in the Banyule Integrated Transport Plan (Action A50). The completion of this link would provide a suitable alternative OD Route for large freight movements in the north-east of Melbourne.

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

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

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

DISCUSSION While there are currently few OD vehicle movements through Banyule, there is significant community concern about freight vehicles using Rosanna Road. VicRoads is currently trialling a night time truck curfew to determine whether this will assist in alleviating residents’ concerns regarding amenity, environmental and noise issues along Rosanna Road. Although the number of OD vehicle movements along Rosanna Road is minimal, these vehicles often travel at night and could contribute to residents’ concerns.

Formally recognising Rosanna Road as an OD Route is inconsistent with VicRoads efforts to alleviate Rosanna Road residents’ concerns and Council’s position regarding the provision of an alternative route to reduce through traffic in Banyule, particularly Rosanna Road.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 46

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.4

METROPOLITAN OVER-DIMENSIONAL VEHICLE ROUTES cont’d CONCLUSION VicRoads request for Council to endorse the revised metropolitan Over-Dimensional network to include Greensborough Highway, Rosanna Road and Banksia Street is inconsistent with Council’s position regarding the completion of the North-East Link as a direct orbital route from the Metropolitan Ring Road to Eastlink to reduce through traffic in Banyule.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1

Existing OD Network

255

2

Proposed OD Network

256

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page

Page 47

4.5

DRAFT BANYULE SAFE TRAVEL PLAN 2016 2026

Author:

Michelle Herbert - Senior Transport Engineer, City Development

Ward:

All

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council has worked with the local community and other key stakeholders to prepare the draft Banyule Safe Trave Plan. This draft document has been prepared to give long-term direction to safe travel in the municipality.

The draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan 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 strategic directions and actions. The draft is now ready for further consultation.

Responses to the draft will help inform a final Banyule Safe Trave Plan. The final document will provide an overall framework to address safe travel issues, and create a more accessible, safe, liveable and sustainable community.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Approve the draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan for consultation for a four (4) week period.

2.

Receive a further report to consider feedback and submissions received during the consultation period and adopt the final Banyule Safe Travel Plan.

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”.

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 May 2016

Page 48

4.5

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.5

DRAFT BANYULE SAFE TRAVEL PLAN 2016 - 2026 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.

BACKGROUND Banyule has recently developed the Banyule Integrated Transport Plan (BITP) which encourages people to make a change from private vehicular transport to active transport – walking, cycling and using public transport. In aligning with the BITP, unless our transport network becomes safer, the safety of our transport users could become a barrier to sustainable transport. The Banyule Safe Travel Plan extends that plan and puts the focus on safety for walkers, cyclists and public transport users.

Action A56 of the Banyule Integrated Transport Plan states: Review and Update the Banyule Road Safety Plan Council’s Road Safety Plan 2010-2015 has expired. In September 2015, Council received a $25,000 funding grant from the Transport Accident Commission’s Community Safety Grants program to assist in the development of a new Road Safety Plan.

In subsequent discussions with key internal Council stakeholders, the scope of the Plan was widened to improve safety for all travellers and environments rather than limiting the Plan to road users and the road/footpath space. This allows the new Plan to align better with other Council plans such as the Banyule Integrated Transport Plan, Safer Banyule Plan and the Place: Health and Wellbeing Plan. It is proposed to call the new Plan the Banyule Safe Travel Plan 2016-2026.

The draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan has been developed under a Governance structure consisting of a Project Steering Group, Project Management Group, Key Stakeholder Group and a wider external reference group, similar to the process adopted for the Banyule Integrated Transport Plan.

Consultation was undertaken with key stakeholders including Council unit representatives, Victoria Police and VicRoads with a draft Vision, Themes and Objectives workshop undertaken on 8 December 2015. At this workshop, a draft vision and key themes were developed. Following consultation with the community, key stakeholders, wider reference group and Council advisory committees, the draft Vision, Themes and Objectives were changed slightly to read as follows: VISION - Pathways to safer journeys - moving freely via people-friendly streets.

KEY THEMES and OBJECTIVES SAFER WALKING, CYCLING AND TRAVELLING BY PUBLIC TRANSPORT Systematically improve the safety of walking, cycling and travelling by public transport in Banyule. Remove physical, logistical and perceived barriers to safe, convenient and confident local journeys on foot, by bike, and by bus/tram/train.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 49

4.5

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

DRAFT BANYULE SAFE TRAVEL PLAN 2016 - 2026 cont’d REDUCE VEHICLE IMPACTS Reduce towards zero the direct and indirect potential negative impacts of vehicular road traffic on the health, safety and well-being of local people and visitors to Banyule, and on the long term health of the planet. Action via a combination of infrastructure and road user behaviour improvements. Reduce the number, distance and speed of vehicular journeys within Banyule.

THINK SAFE TRAVEL Integrate safe travel thinking into all policy, planning and operational decisions within Banyule City Council, from long term planning to everyday decision making by Councillors, Officers, and Council’s partners. Include community groups who use Council facilities or engage with Council-led programs.

SHIFT COMMUNITY SAFETY CULTURE Shift community awareness towards a clearer and more realistic appreciation of the potential negative effects of vehicular transport in Banyule. Seek to obtain active support and participation by individuals, community groups and businesses in efforts to achieve safe travel and to make a shift to non-powered local transport.

On 8 March 2016, further consultation was undertaken with the wider Reference Group and other interested parties in the form of a Banyule Safe Travel Plan Forum.

The aim of the Forum was to give feedback on the outcome of the draft Vision, Themes and Objectives consultation and to commence discussion and drafting of the Strategic Directions and Actions of the draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan.

Approximately 900 people from a wide variety of community and agency backgrounds have had an input to the draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan. More information is available in the attached Consultation Paper – What you told us, Feedback Summary Paper March 2016 (Attachment 1).

DRAFT BANYULE SAFE TRAVEL PLAN The draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan (Attachment 2) aims to support the transition to active transport and public transport advocated through the Banyule Integrated Transport Plan, making it safer to walk, ride or use public transport. Vehicle drivers and passengers are not forgotten – their safety is a target of many of the actions in the plan.

In particular, the draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan invites the community – individuals, clubs, organisations and businesses – to play their part in encouraging safe local travel, and supporting a progressive change to walking, cycling and using public transport. A comprehensive listing of resources available to promote safe travel has been included as part of the plan.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 50

DRAFT BANYULE SAFE TRAVEL PLAN 2016 - 2026 cont’d The draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan details a number of Strategic Directions aligned to each key Theme as follows: Key Theme One: Safer Walking, Cycling and Travelling by Public Transport Strategic Directions: • • •

SD1: Remove physical barriers to safe, convenient and confident local journeys.

SD2: Remove logistical barriers to safe, convenient and confident local journeys.

SD3: Build confidence among local people to walk or ride instead of travelling by car.

Key Theme Two: Reduce Vehicle Impacts Strategic Directions: • • • • • •

SD4: Reduce vehicle speed limits in Banyule to speeds compatible with the design speed and safe use of roads by all road users, at each level of road hierarchy, according to the specific road use and conditions.

SD5: Encourage and enforce compliance with speed limits.

SD6: Support and educate young drivers.

SD7: Support and educate drivers with reduced capabilities.

SD8: Discourage high risk driving.

SD9: Discourage drink driving and drug driving.

Key Theme Three: Think Safe Travel Strategic Directions: • • • • • •

SD10: Incorporate safe travel considerations into all key planning documents of Council.

SD11: Include safe travel in relevant Council officers’ position descriptions and in operational work plans.

SD12: Ensure that safe travel considerations are included in all road works and new developments.

SD13: Promote safer vehicles and safer driving policies.

SD14: Promote safe cycling.

SD15: Identify and access relevant funding opportunities for improving safe travel.

Key Theme Four: Shift Community Safety Culture Strategic Directions: • • •

SD16: Promote safe travel through a range of communications and marketing activities.

SD17: Promote safe, active travel and road safety educational programs to families taking young children to school.

SD18: Promote safe, active travel and road safety educational programs to students and families accessing local primary schools and secondary schools.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 51

4.5

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.5

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

DRAFT BANYULE SAFE TRAVEL PLAN 2016 - 2026 cont’d •

SD19: Encourage local partners including community groups and schools to develop and promote safe travel initiatives.

Specific actions are identified to support the Strategic Directions.

CONSULTATION Consultation will commence with the public release of the draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan. 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 four week period, through:    

The Banyule Website, including links to the draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan and the feedback summary paper.

An article in the May/June Banyule Banner.

Copies of the draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan being available at Council’s customer service centres and libraries.

Presentations to relevant Council advisory committees.

The draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan will be available for consultation for a four (4) week period, until at least Monday 6 June 2016. The feedback will assist in the preparation of a final Banyule Safe Travel Plan for future Council adoption. It is expected that this document will be considered by Council on 27 June 2016.

CONCLUSION The draft BSTP has been prepared in response to a key initiative in Council’s Banyule Integrated Transport Plan, after an extensive consultation process.

Further consultation is proposed to inform the final document. The Banyule Safe Travel Plan will give long-term direction in safe travel in our municipality.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1

Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

257

2

Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

274

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page

Page 52

4.6

WATSONIA RAILWAY STATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND AMENITY IMPROVEMENTS

Author:

David Bailey - Engineering Co-Ordinator, City Development

Ward:

Grimshaw

4.6

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

Previous Items Council on 18 April 2016 (Item 8.3 - Watsonia Station Infrastructure and Amenity Improvements) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At its meeting on 18 April 2016, Council sought a report outlining the costs of undertaking a survey of local residents to identify opportunities for potential improvements to Watsonia Railway Station to assist in future advocacy for the improvements including the installation of a lift, improvements to toilet facilities and bicycle facilities.

Watsonia Railway Station is a State Government asset managed by Metro Trains under a PTV lease. It is a premium station with ramp access to the central platform.

The Station has good access from the arterial road and bicycle networks and forms a very significant link in Banyule’s transport network. Toilet facilities are provided on the platform and PTV is currently constructing a new Parkiteer bicycle parking cage.

The likely cost for resources associated with conducting a survey of local residents in Watsonia, Watsonia North, Bundoora and Yallambie to determine potential improvements is estimated to be $23,000.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Notes that Watsonia Railway Station is owned by the State Government and managed by Metro Trains under a PTV lease.

2.

Allocates $23,000 from its 2015/16 budget to send a survey to residents in Watsonia, Watsonia North, Bundoora and Yallambie to determine community support for potential improvements to Watsonia Station.

3.

Receives a further report on the outcomes of the community survey.

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 May 2016

Page 53

4.6

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

WATSONIA RAILWAY STATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND AMENITY IMPROVEMENTS 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 At its meeting on 18 April 2016, Council considered the potential for improvements at Watsonia Station. It was resolved: That Council seek a report, including costings and resources associated with points 2 and 3 below, at the next Council meeting: 1.

Noting that Watsonia Station is a State Government asset and responsibility.

2.

Considering writing to local residents in Watsonia, Watsonia North, Bundoora and Yallambie advise of its strong support for improvements to the amenities and infrastructure at Watsonia Station and the advocacy it is undertaking to see improvements delivered.

3.

The letter should include a brief survey, with a reply paid envelope for responses, on the nature and priority of potential improvements that could be considered at Watsonia Station including the installation of lift, improvements to toilet facilities and bike facilities. The survey results will inform future advocacy on this matter.

4.

The letter should be coordinated with the two Ward Councillors and distributed under their names on behalf of the Council.

Watsonia Railway Station is a State Government asset owned by VicTrack and managed by Metro Trains under a PTV lease. Metro Trains is responsible for the maintenance of the infrastructure and manages improvements in conjunction with PTV. A plan showing the location of Watsonia Station is provided at Figure 1.

Figure 1 – Watsonia Railway Station

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 54

WATSONIA RAILWAY STATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND AMENITY IMPROVEMENTS cont’d In late 2014 Council adopted a vision for Watsonia Village, “Picture Watsonia”, which identifies the importance of the railway station both as a transport hub and as a significant opportunity to improve the vibrancy of the neighbourhood centre.

ADVOCACY Council continues to advocate for improved public transport services and infrastructure. The Banyule Integrated Transport Plan 2015-2035 states in relation to public transport that ‘Council will work with State Government agencies to ensure the provision of a reliable public transport network across Banyule that meets the needs of the community’. The Plan includes the following strategic directions: • •

SD 13 - Public transport upgrades to will improve infrastructure and services.

SD 14 – The public transport system will be universally accessible.

Following Council advocacy, PTV has recently installed a Parkiteer bicycle storage cage at Watsonia Station.

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 right to freedom of movement (section 12) described below is supported by this report.

Your Right to Freedom of Movement (section 12).

People can stay in or leave Victoria whenever they want to as long as they are here lawfully. They can move around freely within Victoria and choose where they live.

CURRENT SITUATION Watsonia Station is a Premium Station staffed Monday to Sunday, from first train to last train. The Station has an island platform accessed by ramps from Watsonia Road and the car park adjacent to Greensborough Highway, which has 498 parking spaces and a bus interchange. It is understood that PTV is considering improvements and extensions to the car park. There is a public toilet and an indoor sheltered waiting room on the platform together with 4 bicycle lockers. There are also 5 bicycle racks adjacent to the Railway Station and, following discussion between Council and PTV, a new Parkiteer bicycle cage has recently been constructed using PTV funding.

DISCUSSION Watsonia Railway Station is a premium station that has significant provision for car parking, attracting many commuters from both within and outside Banyule. It has good access from the arterial road network and forms a very significant link in Banyule’s transport network. With improved passenger facilities, it has the potential to reduce the number of vehicles on the road due to people using their cars to commute through Banyule.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 55

4.6

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.6

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

WATSONIA RAILWAY STATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND AMENITY IMPROVEMENTS cont’d Providing improved passenger facilities at Watsonia Railway Station is consistent with Action 43 of the Banyule Integrated Transport Plan – ‘Work with State Government and other stakeholders to improve integration between public transport, walking and cycling’.

An assessment has been carried out of the costs and resources required to write to local residents in Watsonia, Watsonia North, Bundoora and Yallambie including sending out a brief survey and a reply paid envelope for responses. There are approximately 8,800 households in the nominated suburbs.

It is estimated that the total cost of the preparation of the letters, survey and distribution list in coordination with the two Ward Councillors, and receipt and analysis of the survey would be approximately $23,000. This includes contractor and staff costs of approximately $6,500 to prepare the letters and analyse the survey results; and outsourcing the printing and distribution of 8,800 letters (including postage) and postage of return surveys (based on a return rate of 35%) at a quoted cost of $16,500.

Other lower cost options are available; however these would achieve a lower response rate and potentially limit the number of potential improvements identified by the community for Watsonia Station. Options include: 1.

Letter drop 8,800 generic letters with a survey (rather than specifically addressed letters), with return envelopes and inviting residents to submit responses by email (indicative response rate 30%).

Estimated Cost $15,000

2.

Letter drop 8,800 generic letters with a survey (rather than specifically addressed letters), without return envelopes and inviting residents to submit responses by email (indicative response rate 25%).

Estimated Cost $13,000

CONCLUSION Watsonia Railway Station is a State Government asset under the control and management of Metro Trains. It is a Premium Station with ramp access to the platforms; a public toilet and an indoor sheltered waiting room are provided on the platform. A new Parkiteer bicycle storage cage has recently been constructed.

To obtain the maximum response to the survey, the preferred option would be personally address the letter and survey, including a reply paid envelope The indicative cost of this option, including writing to approximately 8,800 local residents in Watsonia, Watsonia North, Bundoora and Yallambie with a brief survey and reply paid envelope for responses, including contractor and staff time to prepare the letters in coordination with the two Ward Councillors and assess the results of the survey, is approximately $23,000. The results of the survey would assist in determining the nature and priority of potential improvements that could be considered to advocate for future at Watsonia Railway Station.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 56

4.7

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.7

54-62 MAIN STREET, GREENSBOROUGH PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (P1024/2015)

Author:

Andy Wilson - Development Planning Team Leader, City Development

Ward:

Bakewell

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY It is proposed to construct a mixed use development across 9 levels including 45 dwellings, residential building (63 serviced apartments), 2 office tenancies (including a bank), restaurant and 3 retail tenancies, reduction in car parking and use of the land for a residential building. The height of the building would exceed the preferred height by at least 11 metres at the front of the site and reduction of 39 car parking spaces is proposed.

It is considered that the proposal, in its current form, should not be supported.

However, in response to the concerns raised, the applicant has provided a concept plan which reduces the height of the building by 2 levels and sets the upper level further from the street frontage to ensure that what is viewed within the street is substantially compliant with the preferred height. In addition, the revised concept includes an additional basement level for car parking and reduces the number of dwellings and serviced apartments therefore seeking a smaller reduction in onsite car parking. The revised concept also introduces more appropriate materials and colours, consistent with the objectives of the Main Street precinct within the Activity Centre Zone.

On this basis a permit should be granted but acknowledging the extent of car parking reduction, the applicant should be required to make a contribution towards street scape improvement works in the locality to enhance the pedestrian experience along Main Street which is recognised as a Key Pedestrian Area within the Greensborough Activity Centre.

RECOMMENDATION That Council having complied with Section 52, 58, 60, 61 and 62 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, resolves that a Planning Permit be issued in respect of Application No. P1024/2015 for the construction of a mixed use development across 9 levels including 34 dwellings, residential building (42 serviced apartments), office tenancy (including a bank), cafĂŠ and retail tenancies, reduction in car parking waiver of loading requirements and use of the land for a residential building at 54-62 Main Street GREENSBOROUGH subject to the following conditions: 1

Before the use and 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 on 8 October 2015 but modified to show:

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 57

4.7

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

54-62 MAIN STREET, GREENSBOROUGH - PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (P1024/2015) cont’d (a)

The plans modified to accommodate the changes provided in the concept plans provided 19 January 2016 and 4 April 2016 including: (i)

A reduction in the height of the building by two levels;

(ii)

A recession of level 6 on the east and west elevations;

(iii)

The provision of three basement levels and at least 53 car parking spaces;

(iv)

The use of more earthy tones and colours, particularly on the front elevation;

(b)

The provision of at least 8m2 of outdoor space for each dwelling (measured inside the balcony) with a minimum depth of 1.6 metres;

(c)

An appropriately sized area for the storage of hard waste ready for collection in a convenient location with easy access from Grimshaw Lane to the satisfaction of Council;

(d)

An amended Sustainable Design Assessment which achieves at least a pass score for the Water category within the BESS assessment;

(e)

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 connection to the Council nominated legal point of discharge;

Landscaping Plan 2

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)

A schedule of all plants including the botanical names and location and size at maturity of such plants including planting within balconies or any vertical gardens;

(b)

Location, details and cross section drawings of all Water Sensitive Urban Design features in accordance with the endorsed Sustainable Design Assessment and STORM report, with reference to connection details on the engineering plans

Secondary Consent 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.

Prior to occupation 4

Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority the proposed development must not be occupied until:(a)

The parking area(s) shown on the endorsed plan(s) have been constructed to the requirements and satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 58

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.7

54-62 MAIN STREET, GREENSBOROUGH - PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (P1024/2015) cont’d (b)

The landscape areas shown on the endorsed plans have been planted to the requirements and satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;

(c)

Drainage works have been undertaken and completed to the requirements and satisfaction of the Responsible Authority; and

(d)

The bicycle parking area and end-of-trip facilities are made available for residents and commercial tenants.

(e)

The submission and approval of a Waste Management Plan in accordance with condition 11 of this permit.

(f)

Basement and under-croft lighting is installed in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards.

(g)

The contribution set out in condition 14 is provided.

Maintenance and Urban Design 5

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.

6

Any air-conditioning or cooling units, condensers and the like located on balconies must be concealed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

7

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.

8

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.

9

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.

Graffiti prevention measures 10

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

(g)

measures to make surfaces less liable to graffiti.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 59

4.7

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

54-62 MAIN STREET, GREENSBOROUGH - PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (P1024/2015) cont’d

11

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.

Waste Collection 12

Prior to the commencement of the development, an amended Waste Management Plan prepared by a suitably qualified person must be submitted to and approved to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Such plan must specify that collection is to be by way of private contractor and detail: (a)

Reflects the approved plans including number of dwellings and serviced apartments;

(b)

How waste and recycling materials are to be managed within the site and collected from the subject site;

(c)

Anticipated frequency, hours and duration of collection(s) having regard to the areas provided for bin storage.

(d)

How bin storage areas will be maintained to ensure there is no unreasonable emission of odour or noise;

Once approved, this management plan must be adhered to by the owner(s), permit holder(s) and operator(s) of the dwellings at all times unless otherwise approved by the responsible authority.

13

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.

Section 173 Agreement 14

Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority, prior to the occupation of the development, the owner of the land at 54-62 Main Street GREENSBOROUGH 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 must state: (a) The owner acknowledges that all waste collection from the land will be carried out by a private provider.

Contribution (b) A cash payment in-lieu of providing a full complement of car parking must be provided. The contribution details are as follows: (i)

(c)

The amount to be provided is for a reduction in 52 car parking spaces on site; The owner acknowledges that and will bring to the attention of all tenants or employees of the development on the subject site that there should be no expectation of obtaining permanent car parking, whether or not, in the vicinity of the development hereby approved and that there will not necessarily be any entitlement to on street parking by way of parking permits. Tenants and employees are encouraged to utilise alternative means of transport.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 60

54-62 MAIN STREET, GREENSBOROUGH - PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (P1024/2015) cont’d 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.

Construction Management Plan 15

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

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;

(e)

maintenance of safe movements 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)

maintenance of access along the full length of the laneway

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

Car Parking Management Plan 16

Unless otherwise agreed in writing, prior to the commencement of the use 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)

The 14 spaces on basement level 1 for short term parking

(ii)

16 spaces on basement level 2 for the serviced apartments and managed using a valet system.

(iii)

One space to each of the commercial and retail tenancies;

(iv)

9 spaces allocated to 9 of the two bedroom dwellings;

(v)

9 spaces allocated to 9 of the one bedroom dwellings;

Details of any warning light / boom gate systems etc. to control and manage the movement of vehicles in the basement.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 61

4.7

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.7

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

54-62 MAIN STREET, GREENSBOROUGH - PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (P1024/2015) cont’d (c)

Details as to how it will be brought to the attention of prospective purchasers that 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.

Car Parking / Access 17

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.

18

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.

19

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.

20

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.

Amenity 21

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

22

Noise emissions from the food and drink premises must comply with State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Noise from Commerce, Industry and Trade) No. N-1, State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Music Noise from Public Premises) No. N-2, the Environment Protection Authority’s Noise Control Guidelines Publication 1254, October 2008 and the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008.

23

Effluent or polluted drainage must not be allowed to discharge beyond the boundaries of the subject land onto other land or any street or road or directly or indirectly into any watercourse.

Time Limits 24

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;

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 62

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.7

54-62 MAIN STREET, GREENSBOROUGH - PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (P1024/2015) cont’d •

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 (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.

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

C.

Building over Easements No structure, including sheds and water tanks shall be built over any easement on the subject land except with the consent of the relevant Responsible Authority.

D.

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.

E.

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.

F.

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

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 63

4.7

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

54-62 MAIN STREET, GREENSBOROUGH - PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (P1024/2015) cont’d • •

G.

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.

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

Planning Permit Application:

P1024/15

Development Planner:

Andy Wilson

Address:

54-62 Main Street, GREENSBOROUGH

Proposal:

Construction of a mixed use development across 9 levels including 45 dwellings, residential building (63 serviced apartments), 2 office tenancies (including a bank), restaurant and 3 retail tenancies, reduction in car parking, waiver of loading requirements and use of the land for a residential building

Existing Use/Development:

Single storey shops

Applicant:

Fortune Alliance

Zoning:

Activity Centre Zone (ACZ1)

Overlays:

Parking Overlay (PO1)

Notification (Advertising):

Sign on site and notices to surrounding properties.

Objections Received:

Nil

Ward:

Bakewell

The application, which was formally amended on 8 October 2015, consists of a mixed use development of 9 levels and two basement levels of car parking. The building, as advertised, contains 63 serviced apartments across levels 1-3 and 45 apartments from levels 4-8. At ground level the building contains three retail tenancies, a bank, commercial tenancy and restaurant all in an arcade style layout.

Access to the serviced apartments and dwellings is gained through this arcade at the rear of the ground level.

Vehicle access to the building is gained from Grimshaw Lane to the rear of the site where vehicles would enter at basement level 1. A car lift provides access to basement level 2 below. 43 Car parking spaces are provided with 10 spaces shown in tandem.17 bike parking spaces are also shown in basement level 1.

The 63 serviced apartments consist of open plan studio style rooms with a separate bathroom and toilet. 27 of these serviced apartments also have access to a balcony or terrace ranging in size from 5.6m2 to 20m2 in area.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 64

54-62 MAIN STREET, GREENSBOROUGH - PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (P1024/2015) cont’d The 45 dwellings consist of 30 one bedroom apartments and 15 two bedroom apartments. Plans indicate that balconies range in size from 8.2m2 to as high as 44m2. However, when measured on the plans the smallest balconies are closer to 6.75m2.

The building is proposed to be approximately 29.2 metres in height at the Main Street frontage and 33 metres at the rear. The building is to be constructed to all boundaries at ground level and would include 2 metre setbacks to balconies at all levels above level 1 however, some apartments are still constructed to the boundary up until level 4. From level 4 and above, the building is setback two metres on the north and south elevations and 1.2 metres from the West (Main Street) frontage. The building is constructed to the boundary for its entire height on the East (rear) boundary.

For complete details of the advertised plans, refer to Attachment 1.

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 During the application process concerns were raised with the applicant regarding the height of the building and the use of materials and finishes and the way it presented to Main Street. Concern was also raised regarding the extent of car parking reduction sought by the applicant. No changes were made to the design prior to the public notification period.

A concept plan was submitted on 19 January 2016 following public notice which attempts to address concerns raised. This reduces the height of the dwelling by two levels and further sets back the top level. A further concept was provided on 4 April 2016 which introduces a third basement level for additional car parking. A copy of all these revised concept plans can be viewed at Attachment 2.

Permit P422/09 was granted in 2010 for a five storey mixed use development, reduction to the standard car parking and loading bay requirements. This permit was extended until December 2014 but has not been acted upon and has therefore expired.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 65

4.7

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.7

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

54-62 MAIN STREET, GREENSBOROUGH - PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (P1024/2015) cont’d

Figure 1. Locality Plan SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA The subject site sits on the southern side of Main Street within the centre of the strip shopping centre. The surrounding area is defined by commercial uses with Council’s One Flintoff building sitting behind the subject site. The site is located less than 500m to the Greensborough railway station.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION The proposal was advertised by way of 2 signs on site and notices to surrounding properties. No objections have been received to date.

REFERRAL COMMENTS ENGINEERING SERVICES Council’s traffic engineers were initially concerned about the proposed reduction in on site car parking. However, through discussions with the applicant including the provision of a modified layout, Council’s traffic engineers are comfortable with the proposed reduction on the basis that the proposed number of spaces are allocated in the following way: • • • • •

14 spaces for short term parking = 14 spaces in Basement Level 1 0.4 spaces per hotel room = 16 spaces in Basement Level 2, to be managed with a valet system 1 space per commercial/retail tenancy = 5 spaces in Basement Level 2 0.65 spaces for 2-bedroom dwellings = 9 spaces in Basement Level 3 0.5 spaces for 1-bedroom dwellings = 9 spaces in Basement Level 3

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 66

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.7

54-62 MAIN STREET, GREENSBOROUGH - PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (P1024/2015) cont’d PLANNING CONTROLS Table 1: Planning Controls Control Activity Centre Zone (ACZ1) Parking Overlay Car Parking Higher Density Residential Guidelines

Clause 37.08 45.09 52.06 52.35

Permit Triggered Yes Yes Yes No

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 Environmentally Sustainable Development

Clause 11 15 16 21.04 21.06 21.08 22.03 22.05

An assessment of the proposal against the relevant planning policy, including an assessment against the Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Development is detailed in Attachment 3 to this report.

TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION HEIGHT The subject site sits within precinct 1A of the Greensborough Activity Centre. The preferred maximum building height for this precinct is 11.5 metres within 8 metres of the Main Street frontage and 18.5 metres elsewhere. The preferred setback from the front and sides is 0 metres.

The proposed development seeks to exceed the preferred height by 11 metres at the frontage of the site and 14.5 metres at the rear. This is a substantial departure from the preferred heights outlined within the Activity Centre Zone.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 67

4.7

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

54-62 MAIN STREET, GREENSBOROUGH - PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (P1024/2015) cont’d Concerns were raised with the applicant regarding the height of the building and its likely dominant presence within the Main Street streetscape. In response to these concerns, the applicant has provided a concept plan which demonstrates how the proposal can be modified to achieve a more appropriate response. The concept reduces the building in height by two levels and further recesses the top level of the building from Main Street so that it will not be dominant when viewed within the street and slightly recesses the building at the rear. This will result in the building being approximately 5.5 metres (1.5 levels) above the preferred height at the Main Street interface and 8.3 metres (2.5 levels) at the rear of the building. A more appropriate material and colour palette has been used which responds to the relevant policy which seeks materials that are natural and subdued. By comparison with the approved building at 1 Flintoff Street, the proposed building will sit approximately 2.5 metre above this.

The modified concept, while still remaining above the preferred height specified under the Activity Centre Zone, will result in an acceptable outcome with regards to height. This is due in part, to the way in which the building has responded to the Main street interface, reducing the height of the building, recessing the upper level further from the street and incorporating more natural materials and colours which soften the appearance of the building.

It is also noted that the Greensborough Structure Plan is currently being reviewed.

Planning Scheme Amendment C110 is on public exhibition and seeks to introduce greater building heights to precincts 2, 5 and 6 on the southern side of the Greensborough Activity Centre. While no change in heights is proposed for Precinct 1A where the subject site sits, it is considered that greater flexibility can be exercised in this precinct given its location within the heart of the Activity Centre where a greater intensity of development is encouraged. Furthermore, the building sits in a context that has few sensitive interfaces, ensuring that it will not unreasonably overshadow or be overbearing to neighbouring properties.

CAR PARKING The proposal seeks a reduction in on site car parking from the statutory demand. A total of 43 car parking spaces are provided on site with 10 spaces in tandem. The statutory demand for retail, office, restaurant and residential is 82. No rate is specified for serviced apartments. The statutory shortfall is therefore 39 spaces.

As no car parking rate is specified for the serviced apartments, this must be provided to Council’s satisfaction. In determining an appropriate number of spaces, the most similar use listed in the planning scheme is Motel which has a rate of 1 space per room. This would generate a requirement for 63 spaces. However, an existing serviced apartment use in Ivanhoe is operating at a rate of 0.5 spaces per room. This would result in a requirement for 31 spaces for the serviced apartments. Adding this to the statutory requirement of 82 spaces would result in a total requirement of 113 parking spaces.

Council raised concern regarding the extent of reduction sought. This was responded to by the applicant in a modified layout, resulting in an additional basement level and a total of 53 on site spaces. This modified design also resulted in a reduction in the number of apartments to 34 and serviced apartments to 42.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 68

54-62 MAIN STREET, GREENSBOROUGH - PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (P1024/2015) cont’d The statutory requirement for the modified layout is 106 spaces (using the rate of Motel for the serviced apartments). The applicant has achieved 50% of this requirement outlined below in Table 1: Use Dwelling Serviced apartment Retail & Café Office Visitor Total

Spaces required Proposed 34 (1 x 34) 34 (1 x 34) 42 (1 x 42 based on 13 (0.3 x 42) Motel rate) 9 (4.6 x 218.4m2) 2 (1 x 219m2) 2 14 (3.5 x 421m ) 4 (1 x 422m2) 6 (0.2 x 34) 0 105 53

Shortfall 0 29 7 10 6 52

This remains a reduction from the statutory demand. However, it is thought that the modified layout including the provision of an additional basement level is an acceptable response given the location of the site having good access to public transport and ample short term parking nearby. In addition, the spaces provided for the serviced apartments can be managed through the use of a valet parking service which the applicant would accept as a condition of any approval granted.

Furthermore, staff employed at the new retail and commercial tenancies will be aware of the extent of onsite parking available and find alternative means of transport accordingly.

Council’s traffic engineers have assessed the revised concept plan and support the reduction on the basis that a sufficient number of short term spaces are provided on site. This will result in one space being provided for only 65% of the two bedroom dwellings and one space for 50% of the one bedroom dwellings. This is considered to be an acceptable outcome given the site’s access to public transport including Greensborough railway station and numerous bus services. This should also assist to reduce car dependency in the locality.

Encouraging investment in large scape redevelopment projects such as this is important to continue to see Greensborough revitalise. And while the proposal would result in a reduction of car parking, it is considered the site is appropriate for such development. However, it is also considered that to balance this outcome, the applicant should make a contribution towards improving the Main Street streetscape and car parking opportunities to help achieve some of the aims of the Activity Centre Zone. This should include improved urban design and landscaping works to enhance the pedestrian experience and encourage walking and cycling in the centre. A condition of any approval granted could require a contribution towards such works.

RESPONSE TO MAIN STREET PRECINCT GUIDELINES One of the objectives of the Activity Centre Zone is to ensure that access to sunlight is maintained throughout winter. Shadow diagrams provided by the applicant indicate that no unreasonable overshadowing will occur across the public spaces and footpaths along Main Street. The diagrams indicate that almost no shading will occur after 9am on 22 June (Winter solstice).

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 69

4.7

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.7

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

54-62 MAIN STREET, GREENSBOROUGH - PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT (P1024/2015) cont’d Furthermore, the revised concept shows the building as being much more of a pedestrian scale and incorporates vertical articulation with a clear podium treatment.

The recession of the top level ensures that the building as viewed from the street will largely be consistent with the preferred height for this precinct. The use of more natural materials including vertical timber battens is also welcomed and provides for a softer appearance than the original concept.

A combination of retail, commercial and food and drink is proposed at ground level, including a high use of glazing to ensure an activated frontage to the site. However, to further enhance the presentation of the building, as noted above, the applicant should make a contribution towards streetscape improvement works along Main Street to further the objectives of the Activity Centre Zone which identifies Main Street as a key pedestrian area.

CONCLUSION The proposed development in its form as submitted with the application is of a scale that is inappropriate for the site and seeks a reduction in car parking that would result in unreasonable impacts on the centre. However, the concept plan provided by the applicant that reduces the height of the building and provides greater articulation and use of appropriate materials, and increases the number of onsite car spaces is considered to be an acceptable response in the context of Main Street. Conditions of any approval granted can require the changes as shown on the concept plan.

Furthermore, while the scale of development is encouraged, the applicant should be asked to provide for a contribution towards streetscape improvement works to enhance the pedestrian experience along Main Street.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1

Advertised Plans

319

2

Revised concept plans

362

3

Planning Assessment

369

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page

Page 70

4.8

PROACTIVE ENFORCEMENT OF REPLACEMENT TREE PLANTING - RESULTS

Author: Amanda Cuxson - Development Planning Team Leader, City Development Previous Items Council on 19 October 2015 (Item 8.2 - Proactive enforcement of replacement tree planting) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Approximately 400 planning permits are issued for tree removal on private properties throughout the Municipality each year, and this number is growing. The replacement of the canopy trees with indigenous canopy trees ensures the long term benefit of vegetation on private land to Banyule’s Urban Forest continues. An Audit of 20% of the 400 permits issued in 2014 has recently been undertaken. Of the 80 inspections, only 27% were found to have replaced the vegetation removed. Of those, it was found that only seven of the plantings were in good condition, and 12 were in fair condition.

Banyule’s neighbourhood character is compromised when non-compliance with conditions is extensive, or the long term viability of vegetation is compromised. The degradation of the canopy tree cover will have long-term environmental, social and economic risks, and undermine the integrity and vitality of Banyule’s landscape and environment.

Whilst the compliance numbers are low, the Audit findings encouragingly revealed that when a combination of education and investigation techniques is used, the level of compliance increases. It is considered that refinement of the inspection regime should include permits issued in the previous year, but to also include permits issued 5 years prior is to ensure the long-term replacement planting is surviving and is being maintained. It is also considered that further opportunities for education be undertaken, through dissemination of information and advice on both the regular inspection program to increase compliance, and on caring and protecting trees to reach maturity.

RECOMMENDATIONS That Council: 1.

Notes the outcomes of the Proactive Enforcement of Replacement Tree Planting Audit.

2.

Enact a procedure to schedule regular proactive inspections for compliance with permit conditions on properties which have had permits issued for tree removal in the 12 months prior, in accordance with the Planning and Building Enforcement Framework.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 71

4.8

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.8

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROACTIVE ENFORCEMENT OF REPLACEMENT TREE PLANTING - RESULTS cont’d 3.

Expand the inspection program to schedule inspections of properties issued with a removal permit issued 5 years prior, (within a 12 month period), to check the level of compliance with conditions for trees to remain in place over the long term.

4.

Undertake a review to ascertain whether the replacement planting ratios and permit conditions are adequate to ensure the long-term contribution of vegetation on private properties to Banyule’s Urban Forest.

5.

Undertake an education program of owners, by sending out letters to all permit holders scheduled into the inspection program, advising of forthcoming audits specifying the requirement that plantings are to be in place. Education should also include availability of materials to raise awareness of the protection of existing vegetation and replanting requirements when vegetation removal is undertaken.

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 Council resolved on 19 October 2015 that: 1.

A report be prepared by the Development Planning Unit setting out a process to undertake a review of planning permits issued for tree removal during the 2014 calendar year, and to inspect a random sample of approximately 80 of the affected properties to ensure that the required replacement planting has been installed and maintained. This report was approved at the 9 November 2015 Council meeting.

2.

Council also resolved on the 19 October 2015 that a further report be prepared for Council to consider in the first quarter of 2016 to outline the action undertaken and the level of compliance achieved. This report is to provide and examine the results of the inspections undertaken in January and February 2016.

Approximately 400 planning permits were issued for vegetation removal (not associated with development) in 2014. To undertake the inspection Program, 80 properties were inspected for compliance with conditions for replacement planting.

This equates to approximately 20% of the total number of vegetation removal permits.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 72

PROACTIVE ENFORCEMENT OF REPLACEMENT TREE PLANTING - RESULTS cont’d Approximately 20% of the permits issued for each of the seven Wards were selected to ensure that there was a spread of sites across the Municipality. A letter was sent to both the property owner, and where different, the permit applicant, advising them of the planned inspection to be conducted. The letter introduced the Audit and outlined the reason for the inspection.

A briefing note was presented to Council on 7 April 2016 which provided the findings of the audit.

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

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

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

INTRODUCTION Private spaces and residential properties make up a larger percentage of the total area of the municipality than public areas and as such the scope for private trees to contribute to Banyule’s urban forest, and neighbourhood and landscape character is vast. However, the mechanisms to maintain and manage tree canopy cover in private space can be challenging.

All vegetation on private and public land needs management, and from time to time, removal and replacement is appropriate. Conditions are included on planning permits for tree removal to ensure that replacement vegetation is provided, and survives to maturity.

Inspections have been undertaken on 20% of the properties where a permit issued in 2015 for vegetation removal which required replacement planting. It did not include permits issued for development (i.e. a new or extended building) where there was associated vegetation removal, as replacement landscaping including canopy trees on development sites is managed through the endorsement of landscape plans, and compliance is managed through the development permit.

DISCUSSION Framework for data collection at inspections A total of 80 inspections were conducted, distributed across the seven Wards:

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 73

4.8

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.8

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROACTIVE ENFORCEMENT OF REPLACEMENT TREE PLANTING - RESULTS cont’d

Inspections Conducted - By Ward Inspections conducted - By Ward

20

16

15

13 9

9

Bakewell

Beale

10

14

10

9

5 0 Griffin

Grimshaw

Hawdon

Ibbott

Olympia

Figure 1: Number of inspection undertaken, by Ward.

The data collected evaluated the extent of compliance with permit conditions for replacement planting, including partial compliance. The condition of the replacement vegetation was examined, to enable a subjective analysis of the likely success of the replacement planting reaching maturity.

Partial compliance describes: • •

When only one or some of the new trees have been planted within the property, rather than all which were prescribed in the permit conditions; or Where one or some have died since planting.

Non-compliance was taken to be: • •

Where no replacement plantings were provided; or Where new plantings were recorded however these were not the species prescribed and the species planted would not reach the canopy dimensions required in the permit conditions.

The condition of the vegetation was rated as good, fair or poor, based on both the physical condition and vitality of the planting, and the conditions in which the vegetation has been planted.

RESULTS In all cases, the permit had been acted upon, and the tree or trees had been removed. Replacement planting was required, via permit conditions, for all properties.

Compliance Rate: A total of 34 of the 80 properties inspected had replacement plantings in place.

However, as Figure 2 shows, the level of compliance with the conditions for replacement planting was low, with only 27% achieving partial or full compliance with the conditions of the permit:

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 74

PROACTIVE ENFORCEMENT OF REPLACEMENT TREE PLANTING - RESULTS cont’d

Analysis of quality of Repacement Planting Tree is planted and the conditions are satisfied

19 3 46 12

One or some tree/s are planted and the conditions are partially satisfied Tree is planted however it does not meet the origin or dimensions required No trees planted

Figure 2: The extent of compliance with Replacement Planting requirements

Of the 58 properties which were deemed non-compliant, there were 12 where a tree had been planted, however the tree was not the species prescribed in the permit condition, and at maturity, the species planted would not reach the canopy dimensions of the prescribed tree.

Where replacement planting had occurred, 53% were estimated to have been planted in the previous 3 weeks, and 47% were estimated to have been planted within the previous 12 months, indicating a high proportion of replanting resulted from forewarning of the inspection. Whilst not ideal, if the advice that the inspection was to be undertaken resulted in compliance, then it is considered that the objective to have the replacement tree planted has been achieved. It is considered that this information is important to inform how the compliance rate can be improved in the future.

To determine the health of the planting in place, officers made an assessment of the health of the tree, in accordance with some established parameters (as outlined in the attachment at Appendix 1).

Figure 3 below provides an analysis of the condition of the plantings, which shows that there are no plantings in poor condition for the plantings undertaken in accordance with the permit conditions (possibly because they have already died and been taken out, however this was not established). The more recent plantings included some in poor condition, and it is expected that some of these will also die.

Permit conditions would require that they be replaced, however the level of compliance with this was not explored as part of this Audit.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 75

4.8

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.8

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROACTIVE ENFORCEMENT OF REPLACEMENT TREE PLANTING - RESULTS cont’d

Assessment of Replacement Planting Condition 10 8 6 4 2 0 FAIR

GOOD

Planted 3-6 months after tree removal

FAIR

GOOD

POOR

Planted after audit letter sent

Figure 3: Assessment of the condition of the replacement plantings, defined by the estimated planting timeframe.

The replacement plantings which were planted in accordance with the timeframes of the permit have had the benefit of time to adapt to their surrounding environment.

As shown in Figure 3, of the 10 trees which were planted in accordance with the permit conditions, a total of eight were in fair condition, and two were in good condition.

When this is expanded to include the plantings undertaken in the three weeks prior to the inspection, a total of 22 properties had undertaken the replanting. Seven of these were in good condition, 12 were in fair condition, and three were in poor condition.

When combined with the 46 properties where no plantings were provided at all, and ten where the plantings were the wrong species, this is a low success rate. The result, without investigation and follow up, is a compliance rate which is incompatible with the objective for protection and long term renewal of the urban forest on private properties.

Provision of satisfactory replacement planting outcomes Ultimately, the objective in including replacement planting conditions on any permit is to replace the tree with a canopy tree of an appropriate species, which will grow to long-term maturity.

Of the 34 occasions where a tree had been planted, 14 of those did not satisfy the requirements of the permit conditions, in that it comprised a species which is not indigenous, or the species selected will not meet the mature canopy dimensions sought to ensure the long term contribution of canopy trees on private land to Banyule’s neighbourhood and landscape character.

Overall, the results found only 20 of the 80 inspections where the condition of the permit had been completely satisfied and another three where the condition was partially satisfied.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 76

PROACTIVE ENFORCEMENT OF REPLACEMENT TREE PLANTING - RESULTS cont’d NEXT STEPS Following on from the findings of the Audit, the Development Planning Unit has already implemented a procedure to advise owners of their obligations for replacement planting when a permit for vegetation removal is granted. This has been included as a paragraph in the permit letter to remind owners of the replanting requirements, and also advise that future proactive inspection Audits may be undertaken to ensure compliance.

A number of further improvement opportunities to be considered include: 1.

Follow up on non-compliant properties The result of the Audit showed that compliance increased when notification of the Audit was undertaken. This would suggest that a second follow up letter sent to the owners should result in further improvement in the compliance rate.

The letter should advise the owners where the replacement planting had not been undertaken, of the Audit’s findings, reminding them of their obligation to do so, and requiring the replacement planting to be undertaken within one month of the letter.

2.

Introduction of a Regular Proactive Tree Inspection Audit Program – The results demonstrate that the level of voluntary compliance is low, however, increases when notice of the Audit was given. Scheduling a regular Audit, including a letter of advice to all permit holders of the upcoming Audit, should increase the impetus to comply with permit conditions for replacement plantings. Such a program will also enable Council to issue a PIN when noncompliance is found.

It is viable to inspect approximately 10% of permits issued between six and 12 months prior to the Audit date, to avoid expiry of any ability to undertake enforcement action A supplementary Audit program could include an inspections program for the permits issued five years prior. This would be a long-term follow up, to check the ongoing retention and maintenance of the replanted trees. It would also inform and educate owner of the ongoing obligations of the property owner to retain the tree in the long-term.

3.

A review of the replacement planting requirements – Given the moderate health of plantings of around 12 months old, and likely longer-term attrition rate, Council could review the replacement planting ratios to require a higher number of trees to be planted per tree to be removed, giving regard as to whether any increase in replacement planting ratios can reasonably be achieved based on the available landscape space on private properties.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 77

4.8

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.8

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PROACTIVE ENFORCEMENT OF REPLACEMENT TREE PLANTING - RESULTS cont’d 4.

Undertake a review of how Council provides information to owners relating to revegetation of their land – The Audit revealed that the compliance rate was increased after notification of the Audit, and discussions with owners at the time of inspections revealed that they were often either not aware of their obligations to replant after the vegetation was removed, or they did not know where to get the plantings. A positive information and education program could be developed, aimed at the permit holder and property owners of the obligation for planting, retaining and protecting planted trees. The information could include options of where to source indigenous plantings, how to manage the plantings into the future, and how the replacement planting on their land contributes to the urban forest, the neighbourhood and landscape character, and the environmental health of Banyule.

CONCLUSION The findings of the Audit undertaken suggest that, when a planning permit for vegetation removal is granted, the extent of voluntary compliance with conditions for replacement planting of canopy trees is low. Therefore the environmental, social and economic risk to Banyule is significant.

However, when proactive information and advice is disseminated and follow up investigation is undertaken, the level of compliance with the planning permit conditions is improved. This results in a higher rate of replacement planting, resulting in a better long term outcome for the neighbourhood and landscape character of Banyule.

The Audit also found that even when replacement planting has been provided, the long term viability of the planted vegetation is likely to be low. It is for this reason the provision of replacement planting, in accordance with conditions, is critical in Banyule, supported with information regarding sourcing, planting and maintaining canopy trees to reach maturity.

The Planning Enforcement Framework identifies the level of risk of vegetation removal as medium to high, depending on the circumstances, which requires management and implementation of controls. This loss of canopy cover on private land adversely impacts the community on a social, economic and environmental level.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1

Descriptor Table

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 381

Page 78

4.9

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.9

PUBLIC OPEN SPACE PLAN

Author:

Jeff Parkes - Open Space Planning Co-Ordinator, Assets & City Services

Previous Items Council on 9 May 2016 (Public Open Space Plan) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A draft Public Open Space Plan has been prepared after undertaking extensive public consultation. It is anticipated that the draft plan will update the previous Open Space Strategy which was developed in 2007. A key aim of the plan is the provision of public open space within a 5 minute walk for residents for the purpose of community health and wellbeing. The plan’s objectives replicate the six pillars which form the basis for the draft Melbourne Metropolitan Public Open Space Strategy, currently being prepared by the Metropolitan Planning Authority. These are: • • • • • •

Quantity Quality Access /Connectivity Equitable distribution Diversity Sustainably

The plan includes strategic actions that are intended to guide decision making in relation to public open over the next 15 years. It is proposed that the plan be placed on public exhibition for a period of four weeks to enable the community to review the proposed strategic actions prior to the plan being presented to Council for adoption.

RECOMMENDATION That: 1.

The draft Public Open Space Plan be placed on public exhibition for a period of 4 weeks.

2.

Following the public exhibition, the Plan be finalised based on comments received and presented to Council for adoption.

CITY PLAN In preparing this strategy, due consideration was given to strategic directions championed by the Banyule City Plan, Council’s existing Public Open Space Strategy, the Banyule Recreation Plan, Banyule’s draft Playspace Strategy, the State Government’s “Plan Melbourne Refresh 2016” document and the Metropolitan Planning Authority’s draft Public Open Space Strategy.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 79

4.9

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PUBLIC OPEN SPACE PLAN cont’d The Public Open Space Strategy has strong connections to the overall Banyule City Plan 2013-2017 at a number of levels. The stated vision of the City Plan is Banyule, a green, liveable and prosperous city, sustaining a healthy and engaged community.

This is extremely compatible with the vision, guiding principle and objectives of the draft Public Open Space Plan.

Ensuring Banyule has good quality accessible public open space available, now and into the future for all of its residents is supported by one of the City Plan’s fundamental principles; i.e. Community Health Wellbeing. It is also supported by a number of elements within of the City Plan’s key directions: • •

•

Place – “Enhance Banyule’s public open spaces” Planet- “Protect and enhance our natural environment” People – “Promote and support health and wellbeing”

BACKGROUND Banyule’s current Public Open Strategy was prepared in 2007 and is due to be updated. Council has provided funding to assist with a review and the preparation of a new Public Open Space Plan. The plan also includes strategic direction for playgrounds. An initial draft of the revised plan has now been prepared for consideration.

The aim of the review is to produce a plan which will guide Council’s decision making in relation to public open space provision for the next 15 years. During this time it is expected that there will be a significant growth in Banyule’s population, accompanied by an increase in population density as well as feeling the impacts of climate change.

DISCUSSION Importance of public open space There is an abundance of research, both in Australia and internationally, which confirms the important role green public open space has in the physical and mental health and wellbeing of urban communities. This research indicates that the majority of health problems society will face, now and into the future, are likely to be stress related illnesses, mental health problems and cardiovascular health problems. There is a growing body of research that indicates that access to green open spaces, be it for experiencing the natural environment, community based activities, or structured or unstructured physical activity enhances physical and mental health and helps reduce the risk of chronic diseases.

Guiding Principle, Vision and Objectives Guiding Principle - The overall guiding principle of the plan is “Community Health and Wellbeing.” Research throughout the world supports the significant health benefits of regular exposure to natural phenomena such as trees, plants and grass brings to humans. Visiting public open space is often the only regular opportunity many city dwellers have to experience such natural phenomena. In addition public open space provides opportunities for health giving passive and active recreation. In areas of high density public open space can provide respite for the effects of climate by providing cooling green spaces.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 80

PUBLIC OPEN SPACE PLAN cont’d The plan also recognises the importance play has in the health and wellbeing on the community generally, as well as in the physical, social and psychological development of children specifically.

Vision - A green City that provides high quality, sustainable, accessible and well maintained public open space within a 5 minute walk for residents The Six Pillars of Open Space (Objectives) - The Guiding Principle and Vision are supported by six objectives. These objectives replicate the six pillars which form the basis for the draft Melbourne Metropolitan Public Open Space Strategy, currently being prepared by the Metropolitan Planning Authority. These are: •

Quantity

•

Quality

•

Access /Connectivity

•

Equitable distribution

•

Diversity

•

Sustainably

Challenges The plan identifies a number of future challenges for Council in relation to public open space provision, these include: •

• •

•

•

Population growth & residential density - particularly as a number of areas within Banyule have been identified by the State Government’s “Plan Melbourne Refreshed 2016 Report as having increased residential density and higher population.

Climate change – Melbourne’s weather patterns have been trending for some time towards a warmer drier climate with more extreme weather events.

Barriers to Access – Banyule has a number of significant barriers that limit access to public open space. These barriers include major roads, the Melbourne Hurstbridge railway line, as well as a number of significant river and creek corridors.

Cost of land – The high cost of purchasing land in Banyule will make it increasingly expensive to purchase land to create new public open space should this be required. The challenge for Banyule is to identify creative ways to address this issue.

Environment – The potential for urban encroachment and predictions of harsher climate conditions will provide future challenges to Banyule to protect and enhance nature areas and native habitat.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 81

4.9

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.9

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

PUBLIC OPEN SPACE PLAN cont’d Opportunities The plan identifies a number of future opportunities for Council in relation to public open space provision, these include: •

•

•

• •

Community use agreements – There are a significant number of schools in Banyule, as well as land owned by a range of other public authorities, where joint community use arrangements could potentially be negotiated in order to added to the quantity of public open space in Banyule where and when required.

Road and/or intersection closures – there are opportunities to potentially create new open space by utilising road reserves, wide nature strips and in some instances through road and/or intersection closures. This has been successfully done in other cities around the world and there are some local examples in the Cities of Melbourne, Yarra and Maribyrnong.

Joint Projects – There are potential opportunities to work with neighbouring Councils and other public authorities controlling public open space, such as Latrobe University and Parks Victoria to improve the quantity and quality of public open space and associated facilities available for the benefit of Banyule residents.

Pop up parks – There are opportunities to create short term temporary parks and/or public urban spaces intermittently, for specific periods of time or for special events.

Trail Connectivity – There are opportunities to improve access by strengthen the connectivity of the Banyule Shared Trail Network with broader Metropolitan Trails Network.

Public Open Space Levy Since 2014 it has been Council practice to seek a 5% (of total land value) public open space contribution rate from subdivision applications. This is the maximum rate allowed through the Subdivisions Act. However, Council can require an open space contribution that is tailored to meet its local open space needs, provided the rate can be justified via a planning scheme amendment.

A priority implementation item for the draft Public Open Space Plan is securing an appropriate, specified public open space contribution rate in the Banyule Planning Scheme. Extensive analysis must be undertaken to determine a rate sufficient to meet increased demand for public open space, as described in this draft Public Open Space Plan. To identify the appropriate, specified rate a specialist consultant has prepared an Open Space Levy Analysis. The draft report has found that a 5% flatrate contribution across the municipality is strategically justified to meet future public space requirements.

For Council to achieve a specified rate for the planning scheme, the rate has to be underpinned by a Council adopted plan that gives the strategic high-priority to update the planning scheme for a specified rate.

Council’s consideration of a draft Public Open Space Plan includes a strategic action to progress a planning scheme amendment to ensure there is a sustainable level of development contributions to public open space to meet anticipated increased demand due to population growth and changing community profile.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 82

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.9

PUBLIC OPEN SPACE PLAN cont’d CONSULTATION A range of community engagement strategies were used during the consultation phase in order to ensure that the draft Plan reflects community views and needs. A summary of the engagement strategies included: 1.

Community on-line survey

2.

Interviews/surveys at Malahang & Banyule Festivals

3.

Community Workshops

4.

Youth Workshops

5.

Community Reference Group

6.

Council Reference Groups (a)

Multi-Cultural Reference Group

(b)

Disability Reference Group

(c)

GLBTI Reference Group

(d)

Age Friendly Reference Group

(e)

Internal Reference Group (relevant Council staff)

Future Consultation It is proposed that the draft Public Open Space Plan be placed on public exhibition for a period of 4 weeks. During this period it is proposed that it be placed on Council’s website and hard copies be placed in Council’s Customer Service Centres and at libraries within Banyule. It is also proposed to hold a public information session and advise the various reference groups involved in the preparation of the public exhibition period.

CONCLUSION It is anticipated that this Plan will build of the actions achieved in the previous Open Space Strategy that was adopted in 2007. The current draft plan was developed by undertaking a substantial public consultation process to ensure that the needs of the community were considered. The plan recognises the community health and wellbeing benefits of accessible public open space and replicates the draft Melbourne Metropolitan Public Open Space Strategy methodology. It is premised on 6 objectives that will provide a framework in order to assist in future decision making processes. The draft Plan is now ready to be placed on public exhibition for community comment prior to being presented to Council for adoption.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1

Draft Public Open Space Plan

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 382

Page 83

4.10

GREENSBOROUGH WAR MEMORIAL SCULPTURES

Author:

Colin James - Art & Cultural Team Leader, Community Programs

4.10

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

Previous Items Council on 19 October 2015 (Item 2.2 - Greensborough War Memorial Park Sculptures) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On 9 October 2015, Council resolved (CO2015/356) to apply for $50,000 funding through the Federal Government, ANZAC Centenary Arts and Culture Fund, to support the Greensborough War Memorial Park Sculpture Project, which seeks to renew the park sculptures.

Officers were notified on 12 April 2016 that Council was unsuccessful in its application for the ANZAC Centenary Arts and Culture Fund.

The total project cost was estimated at $158,000. Council’s commitment to the project was $83,000 ($60,000 cash which is included in the draft 2016/17 budget and $23,000 in kind which includes officer time). Greensborough RSL applied for $25,000 via the State Government’s Restoring Community War Memorials and Avenues of Honour Grants Program however the application was also unsuccessful.

The projects development was accelerated to take advantage of the above funding opportunity and to tie in with both the WW1 centenary commemorations and the 50th anniversary of the Battle of Long Tan. Council’s Public Art Policy is currently being developed and is scheduled to be presented to Council for adoption in August 2016. This policy is significant as it will provide further advice for Council in relation to how to appropriately respond to public art which has reached the end of its life.

Given the unsuccessful funding announcement it is suggested that Council continue with the project using the allocated funds of $60,000 listed in the 2016/17 Council draft budget and undertake the consultation and design phase of the project.

The consultation phase will include the development of a website which will be used to collect and present community stories and document the progress of the project.

The artists will also consult with key stakeholders through meetings and interviews with veterans, families, veteran support groups and local historical societies.

Once the concepts are developed a further report will be tabled to Council for consideration of the implementation phase. The concept plans will be revealed in an on-site event with the RSL and greater community.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 84

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.10

GREENSBOROUGH WAR MEMORIAL SCULPTURES cont’d RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

2.

Note the unsuccessful outcome of the application to the Federal Government, ANZAC Centenary Arts and Culture Fund, for $50,000 to support the Greensborough War Memorial Park Sculpture Project. .

Note that the Greensborough RSL was unsuccessful in obtaining State Government funding of $25,000 through the Restoring Community War Memorials and Avenues of Honour Grants Program towards the project.

3.

Continue to work in partnership with key stakeholders to commence the consultation and concept phase of the project, with a community launch to coincide with the Long Tan celebrations in August 2016.

4.

Consider a further report to consider implementation phase and costings for project construction

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

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

CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “enhance Banyule’s public and open spaces”.

BACKGROUND The Greensborough War Memorial sculptures have strong ownership by local residents using the park and the local veteran community and their families. They have reached the end of their contracted life and are showing signs of disrepair.

Some are at a stage of degradation where it will soon be impossible to maintain them and they will need to be removed, for both aesthetic and, in some cases, safety reasons.

On 9 October 2015, Council resolved (CO2015/356) to apply for funding through the Federal Government, ANZAC Centenary Arts and Culture Fund, to support the Greensborough War Memorial Park Sculpture Project, to maintain and renew the park sculptures.

The project was to build on the ownership and affection for these works and expand it to commemorate service in the Borneo, Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan conflicts.

This commemoration would be further enhanced with a unifying element which acknowledges the impact of this service at home, particularly on the returned service men and women and their families.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 85

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.10

GREENSBOROUGH WAR MEMORIAL SCULPTURES cont’d The total project cost was estimated at $158,000. Council’s current commitment to the project was $83,000 ($60,000 cash which is included in the draft 2016/17 budget and $23,000 in kind which includes officer time). Greensborough RSL also applied for $25,000 via the State Government’s Restoring Community War Memorials and Avenues of Honour Grants Program.

Two broader outcomes of the original project were: 1.

A sculptural outcome commemorating the service of residents of Banyule and surrounding suburbs in all major theatres of war over the last century as well as the impact of this service on their families and communities at home. The sculpture/s will be informed by a consultation process which includes the collection of stories of service men / women and their families from these areas and their subsequent distribution and archiving on a dedicated website.

2.

Through consultation and using the principles of place-making and community cultural development that the service of veterans from more recent conflicts will be more broadly acknowledged in the wider community and that through this process an environment will be created which supports improvements in their mental health.

The projects development was accelerated to take advantage of the above funding opportunity and to tie in with both the WW1 centenary commemorations and the 50th anniversary of the Battle of Long Tan. Given the delay in the funding announcement the delivery of key milestones of the project to coincide with these anniversaries will need to be adjusted.

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

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

It was considered that in its original form the project had the capacity to address issues considered under section 8 of the Human Rights charter – the right to recognition and equality before the law – by educating the broader community about the impacts on service men and women and their families of post-traumatic stress disorder.

CURRENT SITUATION Officers were notified on 12 April 2016 that Council was unsuccessful in its application for $50,000 via the Federal Government, ANZAC Centenary Arts and Culture Fund.

Greensborough RSL also applied for $25,000 via the State Government’s Restoring Community War Memorials and Avenues of Honour Grants Program - however this application was also unsuccessful.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 86

GREENSBOROUGH WAR MEMORIAL SCULPTURES cont’d LEGAL CONSIDERATION Officers have considered the legal implication of this report and are unaware of any legal issues which may arise.

FUNDING IMPLICATIONS As previously mentioned the $50,000 funding through the Federal Government, ANZAC Centenary Arts and Culture Fund has been unsuccessful and the Greensborough RSL were unsuccessful in their application for a $25,000 through the State Government’s Restoring Community War Memorials and Avenues of Honour Grants Program.

There is an allocation in the draft budget of $60,000 in 2016/17. Officers recommend that we proceed with the consultation and design phase of the project and that a further report be tabled after the completion of this stage to present Council with an implementation plan and funding considerations.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS While Council has an existing Public Art Strategy, a broader policy position is required and staff are currently developing a draft policy in consultation with the Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee.

The Public Art Policy is scheduled to be presented to Council for consideration in July and adoption in August 2016. This policy is significant as it will provide further advice for Council in relation to how to appropriately respond to public art which has reached the end of its life. Adoption of this policy will ensure the project has the best possible guidance with regards to decision making in this very complex environment.

CONSULTATION The Greensborough RSL and the artists who were involved in the development of the application have been informed of the funding application outcome. The Greensborough RSL is keen to remain a project partner however they are not in a position at this time to provide additional funding for the project.

Given the high level of community ownership that exists with the current sculptures, officers are planning to maintain the high level of consultation with key stakeholders including: • • • •

Greensborough RSL Veteran communities and representative organisations Local Residents The broader Banyule community

CONCLUSION This is a complex project with a high level of community engagement through local resident affection for the existing works and the interests of the RSL and veteran communities.

Given the unsuccessful funding announcement it is suggested that Council continue with the project using the allocated funds of $60,000 listed in the 2016/17 Council draft budget and undertake the consultation and design phase of the project.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 87

4.10

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.10

GREENSBOROUGH WAR MEMORIAL SCULPTURES cont’d The consultation phase will include the development of a website which will be used to collect and present community stories and document the progress of the project.

The artists will also consult with key stakeholders through meetings and interviews with veterans, families, veteran support groups and local historical societies. A community launch of the project to coincide with the Long Tan celebrations in August 2016will be held to signify the importance of the project.

This consultation will be used by the artist to create a design for the new sculptural works incorporating the themes and stories.

Once the concepts are developed a further report will be tabled to Council for consideration of the implementation phase.

The concept plans will be revealed in an on-site event with the RSL and greater community.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 88

5.1

OLYMPIC PARK - SPORTS FIELD TRAINING LIGHTS UPGRADE

Author: Darren Bennett - Manager Leisure, Recreation & Culture, Community Programs

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Heidelberg United Football Club (HUFC) has called the Olympic Park precinct home for over 35 years. The HUFC is now part of the Men’s and Women’s National Premier League Victoria which is one level below the A-League and provides a clear pathway to elite competition.

The supply of electricity to the area surrounding Olympic Park has been an ongoing issue for some time which may be caused by the number of infill residential development occurring in the immediate area. This issue is outside the jurisdiction of Council and HUFC however it has a profound effect on the ability for the HUFC to safely accommodate the training needs of its members.

This report specifically relates to the existing training lights which are used for women and junior training. A short term solution and can be delivered for an estimated $45,000 - $60,000. The HUFC have provided the technical documentation to deliver this work which has been reviewed and approved by officers. The HUFC have requested Council consider an allocation of funds to deliver this project in the short term.

While it is unusual for Council to consider a funding allocation outside of the budget cycle, on this occasions it is appropriate given the issue is created by outside influences, the preferred solution is not achievable in the short term, the HUFC will fund the majority of the project and the outcome will benefit predominantly junior and women members within the HUFC providing for safe training conditions.

Officers believe a contribution of $20,000 toward the cost of this project is appropriate which will be available at the completion of the project to Council’s satisfaction.

In order for the project to proceed as soon as possible, Council will be required to consider an allocation from the 2015/16 capital works program. There are sufficient surplus funds within the program to accommodate this allocation.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Allocate $20,000 from the 2015/16 capital works program to assist the Heidelberg United Football Club upgrade the sports field training lights at Olympic Park.

2.

Provide the funding on completion of the project to Council’s satisfaction.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 89

5.1

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.1

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

OLYMPIC PARK - SPORTS FIELD TRAINING LIGHTS UPGRADE cont’d OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

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

CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “promote and support health and wellbeing”.

BACKGROUND The Heidelberg United Football Club (HUFC) has called the Olympic Park precinct home for over 35 years. Following the formation of the National Soccer League in 1977, the club commenced negotiations with the City of Heidelberg to relocate from grounds in Fitzroy to Heidelberg.

The HUFC is now part of the Men’s and Women’s National Premier League Victoria which is one level below the A-League and provides a clear pathway to elite competition.

Council is currently preparing a Masterplan for Olympic Park which will help guide decision making regarding the overall the precinct into the future. Olympic Park has two distinct precincts, the main fenced football (soccer) precinct adjacent to Southern Road and the broader public open space area which incorporates multipurpose sports field, car parking, open space, playgrounds and the Darebin Creek environment. The Masterplan is scheduled to be finalised in the next few months.

The supply of electricity to the area surrounding Olympic park has been an ongoing issue for some time which may be caused by the number of residential infill development occurring in the immediate area. The Olympic Park Master Plan will provide some further recommendations for Council to consider which will address this issue in the longer term.

This issue is outside the jurisdiction of Council and HUFC however it has a profound effect on the ability for the HUFC to safely accommodate the training needs of its members.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 90

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.1

OLYMPIC PARK - SPORTS FIELD TRAINING LIGHTS UPGRADE cont’d Locality Plan

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

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

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

CURRENT SITUATION The football (soccer) precinct has a substantial amount of existing infrastructure within it which is detailed in Attachment One. This report specifically relates to the existing training lights in area 2 which is used for women and junior training. The Club erected training lights in this area many years ago. The Club applied to Council in 2014 to upgrade the lights in this area to accommodate their women’s and junior training requirement to support their application to the Women’s National Premier League bid to Football Federation Victoria (FFV).

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 91

5.1

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

OLYMPIC PARK - SPORTS FIELD TRAINING LIGHTS UPGRADE cont’d Over time the electricity supply in the area has become inadequate to accommodate the needs within the reserve and surrounding residential area. The most appropriate and preferred option is to Upgrade and Consolidate the supply coming into the reserve however this is very expensive (estimated at $500,000), will require detailed discussion with the energy supplier and is considered a long term option. A short term option has been identified which involves taking supply form the VIP facility (area 5) and connecting to the existing light poles in area 2.

This option provides a short term solution and can be delivered for an estimated $45,000 - $60,000. The HUFC have provided the technical documentation to deliver this work which has been reviewed and approved by Officers. The HUFC have requested Council consider an allocation of funds to deliver this project in the short term.

TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION Council and the Club jointly funded a site investigation and commissioned Rexel Holdings Australia to look at options to provide adequate supply to area 2. The outcome of this investigation identified a number of options which are included in the table below: Option 1 Load ‘Shedding’ – not recommended 2 Connection via VIP Room 3 Upgrading Existing Lighting on the main pitch to be more energy efficient 4 Creating New Title 5 Upgrade and Consolidation

Cost Estimate N/A $45 - $60K $400 – $850K $100K $500K

Option 2 is considered the most cost effective and presents the logical short term solution.

FUNDING IMPLICATIONS The total project cost is estimated to be $45,000 - $60,000. The HUFC are committed to delivering this sport filed light upgrade to meet demand for training facilities and have requested Council consider an allocation of funds to assist with the delivery of the project in the short term.

Officers believe a contribution of $20,000 toward the cost of this project is appropriate payable at the completion of the project to Council’s satisfaction.

CONSULTATION Officers, representatives from the HUFC and Jemena have met on a number of occasions to discuss the options presented prior and the specific details of this project. The project proposal has been reviewed and approved by the appropriate Officers within Council.

TIMELINES In order for the project to proceed as soon as possible, Council will be required to consider an allocation from the 2015/16 capital works program. There are sufficient surplus funds within the program to accommodate this allocation.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 92

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.1

OLYMPIC PARK - SPORTS FIELD TRAINING LIGHTS UPGRADE cont’d CONCLUSION While it is unusual for Council to consider a funding allocation outside of the budget cycle, on this occasions it is appropriate given the issues is created by outside influences, the long term solution is not achievable in the short term, the HUFC will fund the majority of the project and the outcome will benefit predominantly junior and women members within the HUFC.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1

Football Precinct - Existing Infrastructure

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 438

Page 93

5.2

5.2

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

SENIORS FESTIVAL MORNING TEA

Author: Catherine Simcox - Senior Community Services Development Officer, Community Programs

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The aim of the Aged Friendly Advisory Committee is to provide Council with advice on older adult issues and ageing well in Banyule. The Committee oversees Councils involvement in the World Health Organisations Global Network of Age-friendly Cities.

At its meeting of the 12 February 2016, the Banyule Age-Friendly Advisory Committee made a recommendation to Council seeking support for the consideration of holding a duplicate Seniors Festival morning tea to enable a higher number of older people (frail and more active residents) to participate in this event.

This recommendation was presented to Council at its ordinary Council meeting on 18 April as part of the minutes for the Aged Friendly Advisory Committee. This report details the resource allocation that is needed to hold a duplicate event and the duplicate event is costed at $8,000.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Consider a budget allocation of $8,000 as part of its 2016/17 draft budget for a duplicate event of the Seniors festival morning tea held at The Centre Ivanhoe in October 2016.

2.

Consider a further report after the 2016 event to evaluate and assess senior morning tea events provision for the future.

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”.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 94

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.2

SENIORS FESTIVAL MORNING TEA cont’d BACKGROUND Council enjoys supporting older people in celebrating the Seniors Festival held annually in October. It encourages local clubs to get involved through the implementation of small community grants and the publication of 4000 event programs. The costs are covered from an annual State Government grant, with minimal cost to Council.

In 2015 Council had over sixty five (65) free and low cost activities across the municipality as part of seniors week.

The main event conducted by Council is the Seniors Festival morning tea. Each year this event attracts a high level of interest from older residents living in their own homes and from frail older residents living in supported care facilities within Banyule.

The 2015 event was fully booked out. A number of residents reported that by the time they received the advertising material the event was already booked out.

Councillors and staff have taken numerous phone calls from disappointed residents who were unable to access tickets. For those who attended the event it was noted that there is a need for a larger dance floor space combined with the need to continue to offer space for mobility aids.

HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER 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.

CURRENT SITUATION The current cost of a single event (morning tea) to Council is approximately $6,000.

Nursing homes and Social Support groups are invited first in August each year to ascertain their seating requirements. The remaining seats at are then made available for the more active residents to book.

In 2016 Council will introduce an official opening booking date which will be the first Monday in September. Residents will also be only eligible to book up to four tickets.

This will reduce groups booking an entire table and assist in getting people to mix with others, as there will not be single group tables.

The exception to this will be the nursing home and social support group bookings.

As seen in previous years, the 2016 event includes a formal morning tea and entertainment for 350 people in the Grand Ballroom at Centre Ivanhoe. Guests will be seated at tables with waiter staff providing beverages and food to the tables.

The entertainment for 2016 is a Beatles tribute band and an area for dancing and room for people to move around the tables and for mobility aids has been accommodated for in the layout.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 95

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.2

SENIORS FESTIVAL MORNING TEA cont’d FUNDING IMPLICATIONS In previous years, Epicure has provided partial sponsorship of the morning tea event.

Epicure cover costs for the hall hire and setup, staff and morning tea for 200 people to attend. Council pays for the extra 150 places and Epicure offers us a subsidised cost for the additional food and beverages.

The event cost to Council in 2015 after sponsorship was $5,917.

If Council decide to offer a second event, it would need to be held on a different day of the same week. It would include the same band and set up, as it would be a duplicate event. It is anticipated that the event would be at full cost to Council.

The approximate cost for the second event would be $8,700. $1,700 for hall hire and set up, $4,200 for catering $2,800 for band hire Total cost for two events with the same set up and entertainment $14,617.

To successfully duplicate the Seniors Festival morning tea there is a requirement to increase the budget by $8,000 to ensure minimal impact on the Age-Friendly Banyule program.

CONSULTATION The Age-Friendly Banyule Advisory Committee at their December 2015 and February 2016 meetings considered the purpose of Seniors Month and the role of the Banyule Seniors festival morning tea.

After considering resident demand, the events ability to address age-friendly priorities and achieve positive outcomes for the community. At its meeting of the 12 February 2016, the Banyule Age-Friendly Advisory Committee made a recommendation to Council seeking support for the consideration of holding a duplicate Seniors Festival morning tea to enable a higher number of older people (frail and more active residents) to participate in this event.

TIMELINES The Banyule Seniors festival morning tea(s) will be the inaugural event of Seniors Month. This event will take place in the first week of October 2016.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 96

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.2

SENIORS FESTIVAL MORNING TEA cont’d CONCLUSION At its meeting of the 12 February 2016, the Banyule Age-Friendly Advisory Committee made a recommendation to Council seeking support for the consideration of holding a duplicate Seniors Festival morning tea to enable a higher number of older people (frail and more active residents) to participate in this event.

This recommendation was presented to Council at its ordinary Council meeting on 18 April as part of the minutes for the Aged Friendly Advisory Committee. This report details the resource allocation that is needed to hold a duplicate event and the duplicate event is costed at $8,000.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 97

5.3

DEFENCE FORCE SCHOOL OF SIGNALS (DFSS) TO EXERCISE ITS RIGHT TO MARCH IN BANYULE CITY BY GRANTING OF FREEDOM OF ENTRY (FOE)

Author:

Trish McEune - Communications Coordinator, Corporate Services

The EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council on April 4, 2016 resolved to invite the Defence Force School of Signals (DFSS) to exercise its right to march in Banyule City by Granting of Freedom of Entry (FOE) on Saturday 27 August 2016. The march and parade is proposed to take place in the forecourt of the Ivanhoe Service Centre and would be followed by a morning tea at The Centre Ivanhoe. As part of its resolution, Council requested that Officers report back on the costs associated with the event.

This report seeks Council endorsement for the event and approval of funding from the 2016/17 Budget.

RECOMMENDATION That Council approve a funding allocation of $11,000 from the 2016/17 Budget to cover traffic management and morning tea costs for granting of the Freedom of Entry for the Defence Force School of Signals.

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 In considering a notice of motion at its meeting on 4 April 2016, Council resolved that: •

The Defence Force School of Signals (DFSS) be invited to exercise its right to march in Banyule City by Granting of Freedom of Entry (FOE).

•

A report be presented to Council on the costs associated with the event.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 98

5.3

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

DEFENCE FORCE SCHOOL OF SIGNALS (DFSS) TO EXERCISE ITS RIGHT TO MARCH IN BANYULE CITY BY GRANTING OF FREEDOM OF ENTRY (FOE) cont’d Granting of Freedom of Entry upon Military Units is mostly ceremonial and gives the right of general entry to the Unit to parade through the streets on ceremonial occasions, and to be present at official functions and ceremonies such as Anzac Day and wreath laying services.

In accordance with military law and tradition, this gives the Unit the right to march through the streets with swords drawn, bayonets fixed, drums beating, bands playing and ensign flying.

DISCUSSION It is proposed the FOE parade would take place on Saturday, August 27 2016 with the DFSS marching up Upper Heidelberg Road to the Ivanhoe Service Centre. After forming up on the south of the Service Centre, it will come to halt in the forecourt where a short parade will take place.

The ceremony would be followed by a morning tea reception for approximately 250 people in the McCubbin Room, The Centre Ivanhoe.

The DFSS has previously been granted Freedom of Entry to the City in 1985, 1988 and 2014. It is anticipated that in future this ceremony will take place every two years.

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.

FUNDING IMPLICATIONS Indicative Costings: Traffic management for the rolling closure of Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe Morning tea for 250 in The Streeton Room @ $22 per head Streeton Room (room hire)

$5,000 $5,500 $500

The resolution of the 4 April 2016 sought consideration for the funding of the proposed event to be included in the 2016/17 budget allocations.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 99

5.3

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.3

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

DEFENCE FORCE SCHOOL OF SIGNALS (DFSS) TO EXERCISE ITS RIGHT TO MARCH IN BANYULE CITY BY GRANTING OF FREEDOM OF ENTRY (FOE) cont’d CONCLUSION Officers have undertaken discussions with the Defence Force School of Signals regarding the granting of its right to the March in Banyule City by granting of Freedom of Entry in line with Council’s previous resolution. The DFSS has previously been granted Freedom of Entry to the City in 1985, 1988 and 2014. This project provides Council with the opportunity to continue the tradition already given to the Defence Force. It is anticipated that in future this ceremony will take place every two years.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 100

6.1

ITEMS FOR NOTING

Author: Services

Gabrielle Hegarty - Council Governance Liaison Officer, Corporate

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

RECOMMENDATION That Council note the responses received on the Victims of Crime resolution of Council.

The following Minutes or Reports are presented for noting: 1

Noting of Responses: Officer: Brief explanation:

Victims of Crime - responses received Gabrielle Hegarty Council at its meeting 21 September 2015 resolved the following: “That Council write to the Prime Minister and Federal Attorney General as well as every State Premier and Attorney General seeking their support for banning publication of any material relating to any prisoners currently severing multiple life sentences for their horrific crime and stating: • That the publication of these stories does enormous harm to the surviving victims, family members, friends and associates.

• Governments have the responsibly to protect all victims of crime against unwanted and often selfseeking publicity of these criminals.”

Council has to date received responses (letters attached) from the following: • • • • • • • • •

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

The Hon Malcolm Turnbull MP Prime Minister Senator The Hon Mitch Fifield The Hon John Rau MP Government of South Australia The Hon Michael Mischin MLC Attorney General; Minister for Commerce.

The Hon Martin Pakula MP Attorney General The Hon John Elferink MLA Attorney General Minister for Justice (Northern Territory Government) The Hon Vanessa Goodwin MLC Attorney General, Minister for Justice (Tasmanian Government) The Hon David Clarke MLC Parliamentary Secretary for Justice The Hon Colin Barnett MLA Premier of Western Australia

Page 101

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ITEMS FOR NOTING cont’d ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1

Responses received relating to Victims of Crime

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 439

Page 102

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.2

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT - 31 MARCH 2016

Author:

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

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Quarterly Financial Management Report for March 2016 is presented in accordance with section 138 of the Local Government Act 1989 which requires quarterly statements to Council on the budgeted revenue and expenditure for the financial year with the actual revenue and expenditure to date.

Operational Performance: Banyule City Council (BCC) has forecast to deliver an operating surplus of $6.815m.

An Underlying surplus of $3.431m for 2015/16 after adjusting for capital grants and capital contributions.

The operating surplus is $4.898m higher than the previous quarter figure and represents a projected increase against the adopted budget of $4.086m Income and expenditure are favourable to budget by $3.013m and $1.073m respectively.

The significant contributions to the surplus are due to: • • • • •

a net gain on the disposal of assets after adjusting for property expenses investment income due to holding greater cash balances and obtaining competitive investment returns, and better than expected Public Open Space contributions from completed developments during 2015/16 Green waste disposal and waste recovery centre operating costs Fleet management costs including fuel and insurance premiums

The Victoria Grants Commission (Financial Assistance Grants) revenue in the current year $2.284 million partially offsets the above (and other) favourable movements due to receiving the 2015/16 payment in the 2014/15 financial year.

KEY variances are explained throughout the report under each activity type. (Refer Appendix: Profit & Loss Summary and Graphs – 31 March 2016) Capital Works and Initiatives Performance: At the end of March 2016 a total of $17.289m excluding committals has been spent on capital works and initiatives against the approved year to date budget of $34.282m (includes carry-forward projects).

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 103

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT - 31 MARCH 2016 cont’d Capital Works and Initiatives planned spend for the year is projected to be $42.225m.

The reduction in forecast against budget is partially due to projects being carried forward into the next financial year totalling $14.616m.

(Refer Appendix: Capital Works and Initiatives Report – 31 March 2016) RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1)

note that the Banyule City Council (BCC) has forecast to deliver an operating surplus of $6.815m and this represents a projected operating surplus increase of $4.086m against adopted budget of $2.729m. (An Underlying surplus of $3.431m for 2015/16 after adjusting for capital grants and capital contributions).

2)

note that the current position is a result of efficient and prudent expense management along with the ability to achieve higher than planned non-rate revenue.

3)

note that based on the current forecast the Council is in a good financial position leading into the 2016/17 budget and rate capping environment.

4)

receive the Operating Financial Report for the period 31 March 2016.

CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan objective to "manage our financial resources in a sustainable manner".

BACKGROUND REPORT The Quarterly Financial Management report comprises a review of the current performance against year to date budget, full year budget and full year forecast.

FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE – as at March 2016: YEAR TO DATE (YTD) VARIANCE The current year to date (YTD) surplus as at 31 March 2016 is tracking above YTD budget by $3.152m.

Income is currently 3.44% unfavourable to budget due to phasing of the property sales later in the financial year. The timing of property sales can occur during the year but are not known at the time of setting the budget. The full year forecast has been adjusted for actual proceeds and written down values to correctly reflect new projections. All other income variances of significance have resulted in a forecast adjustment and represent a net favourable variance YTD. Expenditure is 7.90% favourable to budget YTD with all operating expenditure currently favourable to YTD budget.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 104

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT - 31 MARCH 2016 cont’d FULL YEAR FORECAST VARIANCES Banyule City Council (BCC) has forecast to deliver an operating surplus of $6.815m.

The 2015/2016 adopted budget is for an operating surplus of $2.729m. The variance is $4.898m higher than the previous reported quarter and represents a full year projected operating surplus increase against budget of $4.086m.

The significant contributors to the movement in the operating surplus against budget are: Favourable variance: •

Adjusted Net Gain on Disposal of Assets - $3.118m (offset by a reduction in Rental Income and additional expenses within the category Materials, Contracts and Services expense related to the sale of the properties and legal costs)

•

Investment income $1.376m

•

Materials, Contracts and Services $1.343m

•

Public Open Space contributions $0.949m (this is incorporated into Contributions income however the impact has been offset by a number of unfavourable variances further explained throughout the report).

Unfavourable variance: •

Grants & Subsidies – $2.483m Recurrent: 50% of the Financial Assistance Grants for 2015/16 were paid to Banyule in June 2015 by the Victoria Grants Commission. This represented $2.284m reported as income in 2014/15 in accordance with the Legislative reporting requirements and Accounting Standards.

Capital Initiatives – Projects •

Capital initiatives An amount of $0.517m in expenditure within the category of materials, contracts and services expense is to be carried forward to next year and therefore will not be expensed this year. This will be offset by $0.693m capital initiatives grants & subsidies non-recurrent and contribution income that will also be carried forward to next year.

Explanations for key movements, variances since December 2015 report and other less significant variances are identified further within this report.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 105

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT - 31 MARCH 2016 cont’d Quarterly forecast movement (December 2015 to March 2016) Compared to the previous quarter, the forecast variance for both income and expenditure has been favourable by $1.589m and $3.309m respectively. This represents a total favourable movement of $4.898m against December 2015.

The forecast movement against budget for the quarter ending March 2016 are explained by: INCOME: • • •

the proceeds of $0.500m related to property insurance claims; $0.666m better than projected proceeds from property sales; and $0.889m increase in investment income.

These favourable movements are offset by: • •

$0.450m of contribution income that will be received next year after the completion of Ivanhoe Park redevelopment project; and $0.227m less income from waste disposal, in particular green waste.

EXPENDITURE: •

$2.912m favourable variance in Materials, Contractor, and Services category due to: o identified savings in vehicle insurance premiums and fuel costs; and o expenses against initiatives projected to be carried forward to next year.

•

Depreciation saving of $0.475m this year due to assets not completed as per budget; and a positive forecast review of $0.331m for Employee Benefit costs as a result of various units not filling vacant positions and other associated staff savings;

•

These favourable movements are offset by Property related expenses in other expense category of $0.561m

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 106

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT - 31 MARCH 2016 cont’d KEY FULL YEAR (FY) FORECAST VARIANCES ANALYSIS – MARCH 2016 The below key variances of significance for consideration are as follows: *figures provided are rounded to the nearest $’000 - small rounding differences exist across various categories

INCOME The total full year income forecast compared to annual budget reflects a favourable movement of $3.013m (2.24%). Details are noted below.

Description

General Rates & Charges

Annual Budget $’000 (89,555)

Forecast $’000 (89,949)

Variance $’000 394

(Movement from December: $0.010m favourable)

Favourable movements: o

Additional $0.394m from supplementary rates due to a number of long term developments within the municipality now completed.

Description

Grants & Subsidies – Recurrent

Annual Budget $’000 (13,637)

Forecast $’000 (11,153)

Variance $’000 (2,484)

(Movement from December: $0.060m unfavourable)

Unfavourable movements: o

Victoria Grants Commission payment of $2.284m was received last year (2014/15) which has resulted in an unfavourable movement for the current financial year. This amount represents 50% of the Financial Assistance Grants for 2015/16, which was reported as income in 2014/15 in accordance with the Legislative reporting requirements and Accounting Standards.

o

Child Care Centres: $0.091m due to delay in completion of additional room in Child Care Morobe Street; although partially offset by greater than budgeted grant income of $0.058m from Joyce Avenue (the full impact includes the movements in user fees and charges). A reduction in employee benefit costs has been forecast to manage the reduction in income.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 107

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT - 31 MARCH 2016 cont’d Description

Grants & Subsidies - Non-Recurrent

Annual Budget $’000 (626)

Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

(606)

(20)

(Movement from December: $0.089m unfavourable)

Favourable movements: o

$0.180m favourable variance due to several Government Grants received that were not budgeted (TAC, VicHealth Walk to School, HACC and Department of Justice).

Unfavourable movements: o

$0.200m unfavourable since the funding for the projects Anthony Beale Regional Play Space and Reconfiguration of Burgundy Street is expected to be received in 2016/17.

Description

User Fees & Charges Income

Annual Budget $’000 (16,427)

Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

(16,696)

269

(Movement from December: $0.227m unfavourable)

Favourable movements: o

$0.319m due to increased income and revised contract negotiated for WaterMarc (Refer also contributions income where an offset of $0.269m is also reported. Net impact on income is $0.050m favourable).

o

$0.120m due to additional income from larger bins and education programs in Waste Management area.

o

$0.290 increased usage from Recreation Centre income including Ivanhoe Aquatic, Banyule Netball Stadium and sport grounds.

Unfavourable movements: o

$0.058m due to a reduced number of home delivered meals being purchased than budgeted. A reduction in contractor costs has been reported within materials, contracts and services.

o

Child Care Centres: $0.094m reduction in user fees has been forecast due to Childcare Joyce Avenue low utilization and the delay in completion of additional room in Child Care Morobe Street. (Refer also to grants & subsidies recurrent income for the full impact).

o

$ 0.219m due to less waste disposal at the Waste Recovery Centre (Transfer Centre), in particular green waste.

o

$0.095m income reduction from the Centre Ivanhoe function centre which reflects the downturn in the wedding market.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 108

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT - 31 MARCH 2016 cont’d Description

Statutory Fees & Charges

Annual Budget $’000 (6,860)

Forecast $’000 (7,014)

Variance $’000 154

(Movement from December: $0.059m favourable)

Favourable movements: o

$0.146m favourable variance from undertaking a higher number of building inspections to cater for increased demand for these services.

Description

Interest income

Annual Budget $’000 (1,618)

Forecast $’000 (2,994)

Variance $’000 1,376

(Movement from December: $0.889m favourable)

Favourable movements: o

$1.376m due to greater funds available upon which to invest and penalty interest income from outstanding rates and arrears. The additional cash holdings are attributed to proceeds from the sale of properties and prepaid grant funding. Investment rates remain low.

Description

Annual Budget $’000 (1,926)

Rental Income

Forecast $’000 (1,683)

Variance $’000 (243)

(Movement from December: $0.009m favourable)

Unfavourable movements: o

$0.252m due to no longer receiving rental income as a consequence of the sale of 55 Main Street Greensborough. This commercial property was not budgeted to be sold. The profit on sale is reported under ‘net gain on disposal’.

Description

Contributions Income

Annual Budget $’000 (3,094)

Forecast $’000 (2,890)

Variance $’000 (204)

(Movement from December:$0.456m unfavourable)

Favourable movements: o

$0.949m favourable due to higher than expected open space contributions.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 109

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT - 31 MARCH 2016 cont’d Unfavourable movements: o

$0.269m unfavourable WaterMarc profit share (Refer also user fees and charges income where an offset of $0.319m is also reported. Net impact on income is $0.050m favourable).

o

$0.250m unfavourable Stormwater Management plan which was incorrectly budgeted as additional income of $0.750m instead of $0.500m which is for contribution from Ivanhoe Grammar School.

o

$0.450m unfavourable as it is forecast to receive the income after the completion of the Ivanhoe Park Redevelopment project.

o

$0.040m works for the renovation of the AK Lines oval and grounds (Plenty Valley Premier Cricket Club) will be deferred to next year due to external funding not yet being received

o

$0.150m carried forward income to the next year related to Seddon Reserve Netball Courts and the reconfiguration of the Burgundy Street initiative projects.

Description

Annual Budget $’000 (130)

Other Income

Forecast $’000 (777)

Variance $’000 647

(Movement from December: $0.668m favourable)

Favourable movements: o

$0.142m from sale of right of way.

o

$0.500m property insurance claims.

Description

Net Gain on Disposal Of Infrastructure, Properties, Plant & Equipment Income

Annual Budget $’000 (310)

Forecast $’000 (3,428)

Variance $’000 3,118

(Movement from December: $0.666m favourable)

Favourable movements: o

$3.118m due to known variations against the budgeted expected sale proceeds, written down value and/or timing related to properties held for sale.

The variance includes 2 properties that have been sold during the year but were not budgeted to be sold.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 110

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT - 31 MARCH 2016 cont’d EXPENDITURE The total full year expenditure forecast compared to annual budget reflects a favourable movement of $1.073m (0.81%). Details are noted below.

Description Employee Benefits

Annual Budget $’000 58,302

Forecast $’000 58,605

Variance $’000 (303)

(Variance to December: $0.331m favourable)

Favourable movement: o

$0.130m adjustment to salaries due to the delay in the completion of an additional room in Child Care Morobe Street. (Refer also to grants & subsidies recurrent income and users, fees & charges).

o

$0.261m savings are mainly due to a number of business units delaying the filling of vacant positions or when staff are acting in other position, not replacing these roles temporarily. These staff vacancies offset some of the net unfavourable movements noted below.

Unfavourable movements: Net divisional realignment costs within ‘Finance and Procurement’ and ‘Assets and Infrastructure’ $0.192m – This is anticipated to be a short term net effect where increased costs projected for 2015 and 2016 will be partially offset from savings in other areas across the respective divisions within the same financial year. A favourable variance, related to not filling of vacant position or backfill of staff, has significantly reduced the net impact of these realignments. Other reductions noted in employee benefits have been offset by an increase in contractor costs. The outputs from these realignments will be monitored to ensure benefits are realised in the longer term. o

o

Development Planning Unit $0.283m due to additional planning resources to cope with demand as authorised by Council.

o

Health and Aged Services: $0.381m includes newly State funded Aged Planning position $0.110m, and $0.271m due to additional salary and travel related costs for Home and Community Care services (the impact is offset in part by $0.180m from the reduction in contractor costs net impact on surplus position is $0.091m unfavourable).

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 111

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT - 31 MARCH 2016 cont’d Description Materials, Contracts & Services

Annual Budget $’000 37,415

Forecast $’000 36,072

Variance $’000 1,343

(Variance to December: $2.912m favourable)

Favourable movement: o

A significant overall saving at the Waste Recovery Centre (Transfer Station) of $1.118m is generated by external influences, such as extremely dry weather, low fuel price and insurance premium charges. This results in savings across the below areas: • • • •

Disposal of Waste to landfill, $0.131m Green waste disposal by Banyule and residents at the Waste Recovery Centre due to the dry weather conditions, $0.292m Fleet operating costs $0.492m - mainly due to continual low fuel prices and lower than expected fleet insurance premiums.

Waste Recovery Centre (Transfer Station) general operating costs, $0.302m

o

$0.517m is projected to be carried forward to next year for the initiative projects scheduled for this current year.

o

Insurance premium on property and public liability $0.276m, as a result of a change of insurer after a competitive procurement process was undertaken.

o

$0.180m from the permanent net saving several initiative projects in 2015/2016.

o

Only $0.080m of favourable movement contributed by the contractors cost.

Unfavourable movement: o

Capital projects expense of $0.384m included in the overall budget for – the Greensborough staff accommodation and community facilities – split between capital and operating costs of the project.

o

Sale of properties cost $0.275m in total. The unfavourable movements will be offset by capital sale proceeds reported within the category above ‘Net Gain on Disposal of Assets’ currently reported at $3.153m favourable variance to budget.

o

Unfavourable material cost of $0.112m is mainly due to the 40% increase in Australia Post charges ($0.070m).

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 112

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT - 31 MARCH 2016 cont’d Description Depreciation Expenses

Annual Budget $’000 19,594

Forecast $’000 19,119

Variance $’000 475

(Variance to December: $0.475m favourable)

Favourable movements: o

Depreciation can only be applied against assets that have been completed and are ready for use. For this year a variance to budget has been forecast for depreciation related to those assets that have been carried forward into the next financial year, or have been completed within the financial year but after their budgeted completion date.

Description

Other Expenses

Annual Budget $’000 1,839

Forecast $’000 2,434

Variance $’000 (595)

(Variance to January: $0.561m unfavourable)

Unfavourable movements: o

$0.581m associated property expenses incurred to support in a favourable net position for Council upon the sale and/or purchase of properties within the municipality.

CAPITAL WORKS AND INITIATIVES: The total Capital Works and Initiatives for the year 2015/16 is budgeted to be $45.55m plus a carry forward of $10.25m which makes the total capital works & initiatives budget for 2015/16 of $55.801m (including labour capitalisation of $0.900m and operating assets capitalisation of $0.769m). The budget, excluding labour capitalisation and operating assets capitalisation, is $54.132m.

At the end of March 2016 a total of $17.289m was spent on capital works and initiatives. This is behind scheduled spend by $16.992m of the YTD budget of $34.282m due to timing and delay in commencement of some projects.

In addition to the actual spend of $17.289m committals for works have been raised for $5.43m, total $22.72m, compared to YTD budget of $34.282m. An initial carry forward of $6.88m has also been predicted for various projects.

Refer attachment – Capital Works & Initiatives Report – 31 March 2016.

OTHER KEY INFORMATION Council Investments The official cash rate as set by the RBA is currently 2% which has been stable since 6 May 2015 (down from 2.25%). Council is placing its investments in Term Deposits with major and second tier banks.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 113

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT - 31 MARCH 2016 cont’d Despite the low interest rates Council’s investments have continued to be held in high rated short term Bank Term Deposits. Currently the Term Deposits are earning a weighted average of 2.97% as at 31 March 2016.

Council cash and cash equivalent investment comparison:

Cash and Cash Equiv. & Financial Assets Millions

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

120.00 100.00 80.00 60.00 40.00 20.00 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Restricted Funds

Available Funds

Closing Balance 2014/15 - Annual Report

Closing Balance 2015/16 - Budget

Note: Restricted Funds includes restricted funds and funds subject to future intended allocations

Contributing to the higher cash balances include last year school site sales and unexpended grants and contributions (included Victoria Grants Commission income received early in 2014/15). As such the cash balances are expected to reduce when the Greensborough office accommodation project and other capital projects are further advanced.

Competitive rates are actively sort when funds are to be invested. Tier 2 banks are, however, less competitive in their offering of term deposit rates as compared to larger providers.

Banyule City Council is compliant with its current investment policy.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 114

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT - 31 MARCH 2016 cont’d Term deposits are all currently held with A1+ and A2 rated banks (Standard & Poor’s Short Term Rating.) with an individual exposure to institutions as follows:

Bankwest 24%

Suncorp 5%

Bank of Melbourne 24%

CBA 7%

NAB 40%

Fossil Fuel Divestment: In line with the Council report item 3.2 ‘Fossil Fuel Divestment’ on the 9 November 2015 Council Agenda reaffirmed Council’s commitments to clean energy through its investments.

The paper stated that the City of Banyule has no direct investment (Shareholdings) in any fossil fuel companies or fossil fuel aligned companies. Council has committed to not directly invest in any fossil fuel or fossil fuel aligned companies into the future and is working towards reducing our indirect investment in fossil fuels; but also required to continue to deliver a competitive investment return.

Banyule City Council has made an assessment during the month of available investment returns as provided by some of the banks, credit unions and building societies that are not funding fossil fuels. The current investment made with these institutions is 5%.

Days Outstanding – Creditors / Debtors Rates Outstanding: Rate debtors include general rates, municipal charge, additional waste service charges and Fire Services Property Levy (FSPL) balances.

For the 2015/16 year Banyule City Council has levied in total $102.27m in rates revenue (including Fire Services Property Levy and supplementary charges) of which the total outstanding amount is $24.106m*. *includes arrears, interest and legal charges

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 115

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT - 31 MARCH 2016 cont’d The outstanding balance as at 31 March 2016 of $24.106m is 22.70% of adopted rate income. Rate payment trends are now forming a more defined pattern with instalment due dates, this is the third year rates have been payable by instalments only.

4th Instalment – 31 May 2016 Refer attachment 3 – Comparison of Rates Debtors Outstanding Debtors Ratios – Quarterly Update Accounts Receivable: The accounts receivable function of Council raises revenue and collects payments for Children's centres, HACC services, Health Department, Leisure bookings, Banyule BPI and sundry accounts. (This function does not include revenue for the Planning Department, Animal registrations, BLFM, and parking infringements as these are currently decentralised). o

The current accounts receivable turnover ratio is 11.87 (March 2016), this is a decrease from 12.45 (March 2015).

Accounts receivable turnover ratio is a measure of how efficiently an organisation performs in converting its credit sales/services to cash. A high ratio is preferred as a low ratio indicates that collection of payments may be lagging. 12-month rolling period is the basis of the calculation.

o

The current accounts receivable days are 30.76 (March 2016), this is an increase from 29.33 (March 2015).

Receivable days are a measure of the average number of days that an organisation takes to collect revenue after a sale/service has been made.

12-month rolling period is the basis of the calculation.

Creditors: all creditor invoices are paid within 30 days when received by accounts payable. Remaining invoices related to March 2016 will be keyed into the financial system and paid in the last week of April 2016.

CONCLUSION Banyule City Council (BCC) has forecast to deliver an operating surplus of $6.815m and this represents a projected operating surplus increase of $4.086m against adopted budget of $2.729m.

The current position is a result of efficient and prudent expense management along with the ability to achieve higher than planned non-rate revenue.

Based on the current forecast the Council is in a good financial position leading into the 2016/17 budget and rate capping environment.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 116

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.2

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT - 31 MARCH 2016 cont’d ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

1

Capital Works and Initiatives Report - 31 March 2016

450

2

Profit and Loss Summary and Initiatives - 31 March 2016

454

3

Rate Debtors Outstanding - 31 March 2016

456

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page

Page 117

6.3

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS

Author:

Ellen Kavanagh - Governance Officer, Corporate Services

6.3

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

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

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

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

RECORD OF ASSEMBLIES 1

Date of Assembly:

11 April 2016

Type of Meeting:

Council Briefing

Matters Considered:

1. One Flintoff Street Honour Boards & Meeting Room Names Disability Review 2. Disability Review Update 3. Strategic Planning Group 4. Heidelberg & Bell Street Mall Parking Plan 5. Chandler Highway Bridge Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Wayne Phillips Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Allison Beckwith – Director Community Programs Scott Walker – Director City Development Geoff Glynn – Director Assets & City Services Marc Giglio – Director Corporate Services Kate Chapell – Greensborough Office Project Coordinator Lisa Raywood – Manager Health & Aged Services Shaun Nielson – Community & Social Planner Giovanna Savini – Manager Youth & Family Services Rebecca Lonie – Jets Arts Respite Officer Frances – Co-ordinator Youth & Community Partnerships Michael Hutchison – School Sites Redevelopment

Councillors Present:

Staff Present:

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 118

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d

2

Others Present:

Project Coordinator Joseph Tabacco – Manager Property & Economic Development Jeanette Kringle – Property Co-ordinator Bailey Byrnes – Transport Planning Team Leader Daniel Kollmorgen – Manager Transport, Sustainability & Municipal Laws Nil

Conflict of Interest:

Nil

Date of Assembly:

18 April 2016

Type of Meeting:

Councillor Briefing

Matters Considered:

Items on the Council Agenda for the Ordinary Meeting of 18 April 2016 (excluding confidential items) as listed below:

Councillors Present:

1.1 Westley Avenue, Ivanhoe - Petition to Increase Parking Enforcement 4.1 Heidelberg and Bell Street Mall Parking Plan 4.2 Renaming the Reserve in Casey Crescent, Viewbank 4.3 Leith Walk, Macleod - Permanent Road Closure Between Munro Street and Braid Hill Road 5.1 Olympic Village 60th Anniversary History Project 6.1 Councillor Motions - Status Update 6.2 72 Turnham Avenue, Rosanna Widening of proposed accessway 6.3 Preparation of City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 4 6.4 Preparation of Budget for Period 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017 6.5 Items for Noting 6.6 Assembly of Councillors 6.7 Proposed Local Government (Electoral) Regulations 2016 – Submission 7.1 Sealing of Documents 8.1 Consideration of Air Conditioning units in development outcomes 8.2 Great Forest National Park 8.3 Watsonia Station Infrastructure and Amenity Improvements Mark Di Pasquale Rick Garotti Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Wayne Phillips

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 119

6.3

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.3

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d Staff Present:

3

Others Present:

Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Allison Beckwith – Director Community Programs Scott Walker – Director City Development Geoff Glynn – Director Assets & City Services Marc Giglio – Director Corporate Services Kellie O’Shea – Senior Governance Officer Daniel Kollmorgen – Manager Transport, Sustainability & Municipal Laws Bailey Burns –Transport Planning Team Leader Nil

Conflict of Interest:

Nil

Date of Assembly:

18 April 2016

Type of Meeting:

Multicultural Advisory Committee

Matters Considered:

Conflict of Interest:

1. Engagement with Victorian Multicultural Commission 2. Cultural Diversity Week 2016 – summary 3. Bell Street Mall Cultural Precinct 4. Northland Prayer Space 5. What Happened at the Pier – Exhibition of Migration Stories 6. Victorian Multicultural Commission Grants Mark Di Pasquale Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Theonie Tacticos – Team Leader Community & Social Planning India Mortlock – Community & Social Planner Lisa Raywood – Manager Health & Aged Services Bev Moss, Rosemary Crossthwaite, George Guiliani, Simeon Yang, Hussein Haraco, Jane Grace, Amina Gadid, Lela Carridi and Stavros Zikou Nil

Date of Assembly:

2 May 2016

Type of Meeting:

Councillor Briefing

Matters Considered:

1.

Councillors Present:

Staff Present:

Committee Members Present:

4

Councillors Present:

Metropolitan Planning – Latrobe Employment Cluster Framework Plan Consultation 2. Greensborough War Memorial Park Sculptures 3. Residential Parking Permit Policy 4. Child Youth & Family Plan 5. Disability Review 6. Open Space Strategy 7. Quarterly Financial Report Update Steve Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Rick Garotti Craig Langdon Tom Melican

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 120

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d

Staff Present:

Others Present: Conflict of Interest:

Jenny Mulholland Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Allison Beckwith – Director Community Programs Scott Walker – Director City Development Geoff Glynn – Director Assets & City Services Marc Giglio – Director Corporate Services Joseph Tabacco – Manager Property & Economic Development Colin James – Arts and Cultural Services Team Leader Michael Hutchison – School Sites Redevelopment Giovanna Savini – Manager Youth & Family Services Lisa Raywood – Manager Health & Aged Services Shawn Neilson – Community & social Planner Peter Benazic – Manager Parks & Gardens Jeff Parks – Open space Planning Co-Ordinator Fae Ballingall – Strategic Planner Members of the Metropolitan Planning Authority: Peter Seamer, Paul Burn, Lucy Botta Nil

RECOMMENDATION That the Assembly of Councillors report be received.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 121

6.3

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.4

SALE OF 14A BANNERMAN AVENUE, GREENSBOROUGH

Author:

Michael Hutchison - Projects Coordinator, City Development

Ward:

Bakewell

6.4

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

Previous Items Council on 14 December 2015 (Item 6.3 - Sale of 14A Bannerman Avenue, Greensborough) Council on 19 October 2015 (Item 6.1 - 14A Bannerman Avenue, Greensborough Notice of Intention to sell) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At its Ordinary Meeting of 14 December 2015 Council considered a report regarding the sale of a surplus drainage reserve known as 14A Bannerman Avenue, Greensborough. Council resolved that: 1.

Having complied with sections 189 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989: a. by giving public notice; b. providing an opportunity to be heard at Council’s Ordinary Meeting of 14 December 2015; c. and no submissions having been received; Council offers for sale of the former drainage reserve known as 14A Bannerman Avenue, Greensborough (the subject land) to the owners of 14 and 18 Bannerman Avenue, Greensborough.

2.

A further report be considered in relation to the sale terms associated with the land.

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Sell the 405m² of former drainage reserve land at the rear of 14 and 18 Bannerman Avenue, Greensborough (subject land), now known as Lot 1, 14A Bannerman Avenue (318m2) to owner of 14 Bannerman Avenue; and Lot 2, 14A Bannerman Avenue (87m2) to owner of 18 Bannerman Avenue.

2.

Consider a further report in relation to confirming the final negotiated price for the sale of the respective parcels of land.

3.

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 May 2016

Page 122

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.4

SALE OF 14A BANNERMAN AVENUE, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “provide responsible financial management and business planning processes”.

BACKGROUND Council is the owner of the land known as 14A Bannerman Avenue, Greensborough (subject land) which is situated between the Plenty River and the rear of 14 and 18 Bannerman Avenue, Greensborough.

The subject land, shown hatched in the plan in Figure 1, has an area of 405m² and is considered surplus to Council’s and the community’s needs. This is because the subject land is land locked, subject to significant overland flow, has negative topography and is inaccessible to Council for maintenance purposes.

Figure 1: Locality Plan of 14A Bannerman Avenue, Greensborough (hatched)

It is understood that the subject land was set aside as reserve in a plan of subdivision in 1979 (by the former Diamond Valley Council) for drainage and municipal purposes.

Whilst it is unclear why the subject land was set aside as a reserve in isolation, it is surmised that it was intended to reserve land along the river should subdivisions along the north side of the Plenty River continue.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 123

6.4

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

SALE OF 14A BANNERMAN AVENUE, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d Further subdivisions within the vicinity of the subject land did not occur over time and consequently, the subject land remains inaccessible and landlocked.

At its ordinary meeting of 14 December 2015 Council determined that there is no strategic or long term purpose for retaining ownership of the subject land.

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 the Charter and 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. In particular, Section 20 (Property Rights) which provides that “A person must not be deprived of his or her property other than in accordance with law”.

It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues because Section 189 of the Act gives Council the legislative power to sell land owned and vested in Council’s name. Section 223 of the Act also provides an opportunity for any person to make a submission with respect to such proposal.

CURRENT SITUATION Negotiations with the owners of number 14 and 18 Bannerman Avenue, Greensborough have progressed. The following has been proposed: • • • •

Sale of Lot 1 (318m2) as identified in Figure 2, to owner of 14 Bannerman Avenue.

Sale of Lot 2 (87m2) as identified in Figure 2, to owner of 18 Bannerman Avenue.

Each party be responsible for their own conveyancing and legal costs.

The title to the newly acquired land be consolidate with the respective adjoining titles as a condition of sale.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 124

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.4

SALE OF 14A BANNERMAN AVENUE, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d

Figure 2: proposed plan on subdivision 14 Bannerman Avenue, Greensborough

As both adjoining land owners are interested in purchasing parts of the subject land, a plan of subdivision was prepared and application lodged. Planning Permit P200/2016 was issued by Banyule City Council for the reservation removal and subdivision of the subject land on 14 April 2016. The plan is certified and a Statement of Compliance has been issued. It is now with Land Registry for registration via Council’s legal representative.

FUNDING IMPLICATIONS On 11 April 2016 Council’s City Valuer assessed the subject land, and highlighted the following: a)

b) c) d)

The subject land is “land locked” which restricts the options for alternative sale or transfer of the land via the market. Therefore, sale by negotiation is the only option.

The subject land is subject to controls under the Banyule Planning Scheme, in particular inundation overlay and significant overland flow.

The negative topography, shape and steepness of the site in close proximity to the Plenty River, would restrict any form of development.

Existing vegetation is likely to restrict any form of development.

Further discussion in relation to the valuation is reported to Council under a separate confidential paper.

TIMELINES After registration is completed at Land Registry, preparation documents to effect the sale completed and depending on the capacity of the purchasers, settlement could be achieved in during June 2016.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 125

6.4

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

SALE OF 14A BANNERMAN AVENUE, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d CONCLUSION It has previously been determined by Council that there is no strategic or long term purpose for retaining ownership of the subject land.

The proposal to offer for sale the subject land to the abutting owners 14 and 18 Bannerman Avenue, Greensborough, should be supported on the basis is surplus to Council’s and the community’s needs.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 126

6.5

EXTENSION FOR BANYULE SUPPORT AND INFORMATION CENTRE 'S (BANSIC) USE OF 80 HAWDON STREET UNTIL 31 JULY 2016

Author: Giovanna Savini - Manager Youth & Family Services, Community Programs File:

D16/71771

Previous Items Council on 22 April 2013 (Item 2.1 - Relocation of Banyule Support and Information Centre (BANSIC)) Council on 14 April 2014 (Item 6.3 - Community Information and Support Services Review) Council on 5 May 2014 (Item 6.3 - Community Information and Support Services Review) Council on 7 September 2015 (Item 5.2 - Community Information and Support Services - Integrated Service Model) Council on 21 September 2015 (Item 5.3 - Community Information and Support Services - Service Model) Council on 7 March 2016 (Item 6.6 - Community Information and Support Services Shop 48 The Mall, West Heidelberg) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council resolved on 21 September 2015 to reconfirm its commitment to a Community Information and Support Service model with a service presence in the geographic locations of Heidelberg West and Greensborough and seek a service provider for the new West Heidelberg site via a public tender process.

Following an unsuccessful public tender outcome, Council proceeded to engage a consultant as Facility Manager, to deliver on the Community Information and Support Service objectives for Shop 48 – The Harmony Centre in West Heidelberg, including the development of a strategic plan for the facility and overseeing the establishment of the overall service centre with co-located services providers at the site.

At its meeting of 7 March 2016 Council resolved to: 1.

Reconfirm its commitment to a consistent Community Information and Support Service model across Banyule municipality with a service presence in the geographic locations of Heidelberg West and Greensborough.

2.

Following the establishment of the new service centre in West Heidelberg, enter into new service level agreements across both service centres that ensure consistent service outcomes across the municipality for both the north and south service locations.

3.

In relation to the lease at 80 Hawdon Street, Heidelberg, currently occupied by Banyule Support and Information Centre (BANSIC) and Volunteers of Banyule (VOB), give formal notice of Council’s intent to extend the current lease arrangements for a further three months until 30 June 2016.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 127

6.5

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.5

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

EXTENSION FOR BANYULE SUPPORT AND INFORMATION CENTRE 'S (BANSIC) USE OF 80 HAWDON STREET UNTIL 31 JULY 2016 cont’d Since this time Council has undertaken an Expression of Interest (EOI) process between the 18 April and 2 May 2016 for community information service providers and volunteer organisation’s to be co-located at Shop 48 - The Harmony Centre to provide a full range of services to the community.

These submissions are currently being assessed.

Correspondence has been received from Banyule Support and Information Centre (BANSIC) on 28 April 2016, requesting Council consider an extension for them to vacate the premises at 80 Hawdon Street, Heidelberg from 30 June 2016 to 31 July 2016 to allow for the finalization of the EOI process.

RECOMMENDATION That Council give formal notice to Banyule Support and Information Centre (BANSIC) of its intent to extend the current arrangements for use of 80 Hawdon Street, Heidelberg, until 31 July 2016.

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

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

CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “develop and deliver best value services and facilities”.

BACKGROUND Council has made a number of resolutions over the past two years towards the establishment of an integrated community information and volunteer support service for Banyule. This was the result of a review in 2013 of the three Council funded agencies which delivered these services.

The overall objective of the new service model is to provide an integrated community information and volunteer support service in the City of Banyule that encourages collaborative partnerships in the sector and promotes community health and wellbeing, community connectedness and enjoyment of life.

Two satellite sites formed part of the new model one operating from Greensborough (currently serviced by DVCS) and the second located at Shop 48 The Mall West Heidelberg (Shop 48).

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 128

EXTENSION FOR BANYULE SUPPORT AND INFORMATION CENTRE 'S (BANSIC) USE OF 80 HAWDON STREET UNTIL 31 JULY 2016 cont’d Over the past two years, Council has worked closely with Volunteers of Banyule (VOB), Banyule Support and Information Centre (BANSIC) and Diamond Valley community Support (DVCS) to achieve a merger to a new service which would deliver the integrated community information and volunteer support service in Banyule. It was anticipated that Council funding allocated to each of the three agencies would subsequently be combined and redirected to the new ‘merged’ service. Unfortunately, the merger negotiations were unsuccessful.

As a result, in late 2015 Council resolved to continue with its decision to establish an integrated service model redirecting existing funding. DVCS was refunded to deliver the Greensborough satellite site for the next three years.

The remaining funds previously allocated to BANSIC and VOB have been allocated to the delivery of a satellite site at Shop 48. A public tender was offered for the management and delivery of a community information and volunteer support service from Shop 48 as the second satellite site. Ultimately, no suitable tenders were received, and as a result Council determined to abandon the tender process and establish and operate Shop 48 directly for the next 18 months during which time it will bring in and partner with a range of collocated services with the intention of transitioning the service to a full community based model from July 2017.

Council is committed to the implementation of a robust and dynamic community information and volunteer support service in Banyule. This is why it has included a community information, volunteer support and leadership service as a critical component of Shop 48 – The Harmony Centre.

It is also being planned for all current and past volunteers of VOB along with other volunteers to be invited to visit Shop 48 once operational in the coming weeks, presenting the space and inviting individuals to engage and express interest in volunteering through this new service centre.

Council has undertaken an Expression of Interest (EOI) process between the 18 April and 2 May 2016 for community information service providers and volunteer organisations to be co-located at Shop 48 - The Harmony Centre to provide a full range of services to the community.

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

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

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

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 129

6.5

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.5

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

EXTENSION FOR BANYULE SUPPORT AND INFORMATION CENTRE 'S (BANSIC) USE OF 80 HAWDON STREET UNTIL 31 JULY 2016 cont’d TIMELINES Council officers are working closely with the engaged consultant in the establishment of the community information and support service in West Heidelberg. The EOI for co-located services are currently being assessed and expect to be finalised by the end of May 2016 with intent to have services co- located as soon as possible.

CONCLUSION Correspondence has been received from BANSIC on 28 April 2016, requesting Council consider an extension for them to vacate the premises at 80 Hawdon Street, Heidelberg from 30 June 2016 to 31 July 2016 to allow for the finalization of the EOI process.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 130

7.1

SEALING OF DOCUMENTS

Author:

Vivien Ferlaino - Governance Co-ordinator, Corporate Services

7.1

Sealing of Documents

RECOMMENDATION That Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer, Simon McMillan to sign the agreement between the Victorian Electoral Commission and Council.

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

PARTY\PARTIES: OFFICER: DOCUMENT: ADDRESS: WARD: BRIEF EXPLANATION:

Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) and Banyule City Council Vivien Ferlaino Agreement N/A All The recent changes to the Local Government Act 1989 (Improved Governance Amendments) have made the Victorian Electoral Commission the statutory election service provider for Local Government elections. The changes have removed the requirements to publically tender for election services or seek exemptions from the Minister.

The VEC have issued Council with an agreement for four years commencing 1 July 2016. This includes any contingencies for by-elections.

The Quote for the election service is $720,910.75.

Council is required to authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign the agreement.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 131

8.1

SPIRIT WALK BABARRBUNIN BEEK

Author:

Cr Craig Langdon

8.1

Notice of Motion

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move: “That Council prepare a report for consideration on 30 May 2016 regarding the consideration of the employment of an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Development worker to assist with the further development of the Commemorative Spiritual Walk and the further activation of the Babarrbunin Beek Gathering Place.�

Explanation On 5 May 2014, Council resolved to establish Babarrbunin Beek Aboriginal meeting space at the Fred Howe Annex, and has since allocated more than $75,000 to the refurbishment of the building. The building is leased and managed by Banyule Community Health.

On 21 Sep 2015 a Notice of Motion was moved to cost, plan and if approved, construct a Commemorative Spiritual Walk at Babarrbunin Beek.

The Banyule Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee have advised that the best outcomes for the Spirit Walk will be achieved if the design and scoping of this project is undertaken by an Aboriginal cultural development worker in partnership with the local community. This way the project can also have a further benefit of supporting the activation of the Babarrbunin Beek space.

At its meeting of the 14 April 2016, the Banyule Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee has made a recommendation to Council to consider the employment of an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Development worker.

CR CRAIG LANGDON Olympia Ward ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 133

8.2

MANAGING AMENITY IMPACTS AND CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY FOR LARGE DEVELOPMENT SITES

Author:

Cr Jenny Mulholland

8.2

Notice of Motion

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move: “That a report be prepared which reviews the management of amenity impacts, car parking and construction activity for large development sites. The review should consider: • • • •

Construction management plans and when they should be used; Construction activity which impacts on Council assets and the functioning of roads, footpaths, car parks and other public spaces; Construction vehicle and worker car parking impacts; Resourcing required to better manage construction activity within the municipality.”

Explanation Council has a key role in the management of construction activity associated with development sites. With a significant increase in building activity in recent years, including large developments within activity centres there has been a noticeable increase in amenity impacts associated with these sites.

Whilst construction management plans are put in place and Council undertakes inspections and enforcement in accordance with the relevant legislation there is concern that the impacts are continuing and need to be further addressed. The ‘Evergreen’ development in Westley Avenue Ivanhoe is an example of a large multi level apartment development which is under construction at the moment and causing amenity impacts. There are times when Westley Avenue is blocked to the public and the streets are filled with construction vehicles, cranes, delivery vehicles and development materials. The adjoining public car park is also filled with construction worker vehicles from early in the morning which prevents visitors to the Ivanhoe Shopping strip from parking there. These sorts of activities are impacting not only the amenity of the area but also the customer base for the nearby Ivanhoe shops.

A review of how these large development sites are managed should be undertaken so that Council can consider whether there should be changes and improvements.

CR JENNY MULHOLLAND Griffin Ward ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 134

8.3

SAFETY AND AMENITY IMPROVEMENTS ROSANNA ROAD AND STATION STREET, ROSANNA

Author:

Cr Tom Melican

8.3

Notice of Motion

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move: “That Council writes to the Minister for Roads and Ports, Luke Donnellen, local State Members and senior VicRoads representatives, to organise an onsite meeting on Rosanna Road, to discuss possible safety and amenity improvements.�

Explanation VicRoads has undertaken a safety assessment of the Rosanna Road / Station Street intersection. At the same time, Council has done an assessment of issues at the Rosanna Road / Banyule Road intersection.

There have been some improvements at the Rosanna Road / Darebin Street intersection, however more improvements are still required.

Several recent accidents on Rosanna Road have further highlighted the safety and amenity concerns, and caused gridlock and damage in surrounding streets.

We need to work with the State Government to improve safety along Rosanna Road.

CR TOM MELICAN Ibbott Ward ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 135

8.4

DEDICATION AND LAUNCH OF NEW RESERVE CELEBRATING MARGARET HEATHORN OAM

Author:

Cr Craig Langdon

Ward:

Olympia

8.4

Notice of Motion

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move: “That a Report be presented to Council which considers: 1.

An appropriate event for the launch of the new park proposed to be located at the former school site at 229 Banksia Street, Ivanhoe, which invites the local surrounding community, family of Margaret Heathorn OAM and home purchasers from the new development.

2.

The most appropriate location within the development site for the reinternment of the time capsule.�

Explanation As part of the new development at the former Bellfield Primary School site, a new community reserve will be created. This reserve has been designed with the input of the local community.

The preferred name of the reserve is Margaret Heathorn Park. As many people know, Margaret was a local Ivanhoe identity and a tireless community volunteer who was recognised by receiving an OAM. Further, when demolishing the old school buildings on the site a time capsule was discovered. The capsule was buried in 1985 and is due to be opened in 2035. It is proposed that the new reserve will contain a unique designed quality colour interpretative piece with storyboard and photographs which highlights the life of Margaret Heathorn OAM. Consideration of the most appropriate location within the development site for installation of a gabion wall with an explanatory plaque that has the capacity to reintern the time capsule until 2035 should also be considered.

An event to event to launch and showcase the new reserve that includes local surrounding community, family of Margaret Heathorn OAM and home purchasers from the new development should be held.

CR CRAIG LANGDON Olympia Ward ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 9 May 2016

Page 136

ATTACHMENTS

2.2

Draft Child Youth and Family Plan 2016-2020 Attachment 1

2.4

Disability Review - Provision of services within the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) Attachment 1

4.1

Attachment 2

Football Precinct - Existing Infrastructure ...................................... 438

Items for Noting Attachment 1

6.2

Draft Public Open Space Plan ....................................................... 382

Olympic Park - Sports Field Training Lights Upgrade Attachment 1

6.1

Descriptor Table ............................................................................ 381

Public Open Space Plan Attachment 1

5.1

Advertised Plans ........................................................................... 319 Revised concept plans .................................................................. 362 Planning Assessment .................................................................... 369

Proactive Enforcement of Replacement Tree Planting - Results Attachment 1

4.9

Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan .................................................................................... 257 Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan...................................................... 274

54-62 Main Street, Greensborough - proposed mixed use development (P1024/2015) Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3

4.8

Existing OD Network ..................................................................... 255 Proposed OD Network................................................................... 256

Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan 2016 - 2026 Attachment 1

4.7

Chandler Highway Duplication Plan............................................... 251 Yarra City Council Letter ............................................................... 252 Darebin City Council Letter............................................................ 254

Metropolitan Over-Dimensional Vehicle Routes Attachment 1 Attachment 2

4.5

Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020 ................................ 219 Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary....................................................................................... 233

Chandler Highway Widening Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3

4.4

Disability Review - Stage One - SUMMARY - July 2015............... 205

Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020 Attachment 1 Attachment 2

4.3

DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020 .............................. 138

Responses received relating to Victims of Crime .......................... 439

Quarterly Financial Management Report - 31 March 2016 Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3

Capital Works and Initiatives Report - 31 March 2016 ................... 450 Profit and Loss Summary and Initiatives - 31 March 2016 ............. 454 Rate Debtors Outstanding - 31 March 2016 .................................. 456

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 137

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 138

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 139

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 140

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 141

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 142

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 143

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 144

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 145

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 146

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 147

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 148

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 149

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 150

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 151

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 152

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 153

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 154

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 155

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 156

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 157

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 158

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 159

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 160

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 161

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 162

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 163

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 164

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 165

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 166

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 167

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 168

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 169

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 170

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 171

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 172

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 173

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 174

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 175

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 176

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 177

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 178

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 179

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 180

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 181

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 182

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 183

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 184

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 185

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 186

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 187

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 188

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 189

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 190

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 191

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 192

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 193

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 194

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 195

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 196

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 197

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 198

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 199

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 200

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 201

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 202

2.2

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 203

Attachment 1: DRAFT Child Youth & Family Plan 2016-2020

Attachment 1

2.2

Item: 2.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 204

Attachment 1: Disability Review - Stage One - SUMMARY - July 2015

Banyule Disability Review: Summary Report - Stage One August 2015

Attachment 1

2.4

Item: 2.4

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 205

Attachment 1: Disability Review - Stage One - SUMMARY - July 2015

2.4

Item: 2.4

Introduction

Attachment 1

Approximately 20% of Banyule’s residents identify as experiencing disability, and approximately 4.8% of residents experience disability that results in a need for assistance with core activities.

Council plays an important role in delivering direct and indirect services that support people with a disability and their families with their needs and create opportunities for people to participate in community life.

The landscape of disability services in Australia is changing due to the introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) and the associated disability reforms. Through the implementation of the NDIS, existing funding arrangements and service provision will undergo significant changes. This includes a direct impact on services currently provided by Council that are wholly or partially funded through other levels of Government.

These changes require Council to give consideration to how it wishes to be involved in direct disability service delivery in an evolving landscape. The existing systems, process and funding arrangements for Council disability services will not continue in their current form. Council will also need to give consideration to its broader role in creating inclusive and accessible communities for people with a disability.

To better inform Council’s understanding of its involvement in disability services, as well as the options and opportunities resulting from the impending introduction of the NDIS, a broad review of Disability Services has been undertaken.

In March 2015 Council commenced the review. Stage 1 of the review involved exploring the role of Council in the disability space, both through direct disability focused service delivery and indirectly through reviewing how service areas such as recreation and leisure, communications and buildings and civil works impact upon people with a disability.

The review outlines issues and considerations requiring Council direction that need to be made in the short term, as well as longer term decisions that Council needs to be made aware of, and explore further in detail. Regardless of which decisions Council makes, considerable preparation and transition is required.

This report is the first in a series of reports designed to assist Council understand the issues, implications and opportunities resulting from the disability reforms.

Methodology The central aspect of the disability review project involved:

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 206

•

Analysis and review of the current operations of Council disability services, including funding arrangements, service user analysis and prospective changes and opportunities resulting from the introduction of the NDIS.

•

Analysis and review of the indirect work undertaken by Council that aims to support the participation of people with a disability and their families.

The review included: o interviewing key staff involved in the delivery of Council services; o analysis of service data; o basic mapping of other local services; o case studies illustrating the impact of our current services.

National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) Following much discussion about the need to reform disability services in Australia, the National Disability Insurance Scheme was launched in various trial sites across Australia in July 2013. The introduction of the NDIS represents a fundamental shift in the way disability services are delivered across Australia. Some of the key changes are outlined below.

OVERVIEW OF CHANGES RESULTING FROM NDIS •

•

•

• •

2.4

Attachment 1: Disability Review - Stage One - SUMMARY - July 2015

Attachment 1

Item: 2.4

Currently disability services are funded by a variety of funding agreements, predominantly through the States to deliver programs and services to people with a disability. Services are a mix of non- profit, private, and State government services.

State Governments have committed to shifting their existing disability funding to the NDIS, and are currently in negotiations regarding specific service transition and delivery arrangements within each State.

The introduction of the NDIS presents a massive shift away from generic disability funded programs to individualised funding responses. For example group funded respite programs will move to a personalised service that is tailored to what an individual wants and needs.

Disability Services will move to an open market, where any organisation can offer services as long as they are registered as an NDIS service provider.

Within the NDIS, prices are set for all services. Current figures indicate that the unit prices for services are below the current actual cost of services for most disability service providers including councils.

Between now and 2019, the NDIS and associated disability reform will be progressively rolled out across Australia. While the exact timelines and processes for the roll out are unknown, Council will need to be aware of the roll out and plan to make key decisions accordingly. A summary of key dates and stages of the NDIS roll out and disability reforms is provided in Appendix 1 of this report.

Key Issues & Findings

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 207

Attachment 1

2.4

Item: 2.4

Attachment 1: Disability Review - Stage One - SUMMARY - July 2015

This review has provided Council with a clearer picture of its disability services, and anticipated changes requiring Council attention, due to the impending introduction of the NDIS. The review highlighted that Council’s involvement in supporting people with a disability and their families is broad and complex. Council provides a diverse range of direct and indirect disability services including: support for particular age cohorts; increasing access to the built environment; and increasing community accessibility and inclusion. Council also provides mainstream services such as early childhood services where support for people with a disability is an integrated part of the service. The complexity and interrelationship between these various roles is illustrated in a Mind Map included in Appendix 2 of this report.

While Council’s role as a provider of disability services will undergo significant change in line with the introduction of the NDIS, the review also highlighted the need to better understand and utilise Council’s broader roles in disability which are not affected by the NDIS introduction.

The review presents a holistic picture of Council’s current disability activities, and provides an opportunity for Council to understand and analyse where it is best placed to support people with a disability and their families.

Specific Service Area Key Issues and Findings The following information provides a brief overview of the various services and roles provided by Council. Known changes, challenges and opportunities are discussed for each area. A detailed review of each service area is provided within the full Disability review.

Direct Disability Services A key change resulting from the introduction of the NDIS is that the funding that currently goes to services will be redirected to individuals and families who can then purchase the services they require. Council is currently funded to deliver two key services that provide direct supports to people with a disability: Home and Community Care (HACC) and the Jets Creative Arts Respite program. Both of these services will be affected by the introduction of the NDIS. A brief profile of each service, and the emerging issues resulting from the NDIS are discussed below.

Home and Community Care (HACC) – Disability Service: HACC DISABILITY Service Types - Home Support - Respite Support - Personal Support - Delivered Meals - Property Maint.

Age Group Under 65.

Funding Nos. of Clients 340

Hrs of Service 16,431

BCC Cont. $547,000

12% of all HACC services

15.2% of all HACC services

$65 per Hr

Alternate providers Yes

Funded Until

EFT

June 2016

User Cont.

Yes

New DHHS service agreement due.

$2.95 – $11.80 per hr

15.2% of all HACC staff

5.34*

*HACC staff are employed across the whole of HACC services and are not dedicated to the disability component of the service.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 208

Council’s HACC service is currently provided through a mixture of Federal/State Government and Council funding. The majority of HACC disability clients are recipients under the age of 65. Currently this is a client group of 340 people which constitutes approximately 12% of total HACC service users. This client group includes families who have a child with a disability requiring support, and individuals with various disabilities. Currently Council contributes approximately $547,000 per annum to provide services to this cohort. This contribution allows the service to be delivered at a minimum cost to clients. Without Council’s contribution, the service could not be provided. Maximum user fees, funding (unit costs) and service targets are all set under the current funding agreements. The services delivered as part of the HACC disability program include: • •

direct respite to carers of people with a disability, and home and personal care, which provides people with a disability support with personal hygiene or duties such as cleaning and property maintenance.

The service works on a prioritisation of needs basis, to ensure that clients received the services required. As a result the overall service provision for both new and existing clients is managed within the existing resources. Historically this approach has meant that the service has not had a waiting list. Council is expecting to receive a State Government Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) service agreement in mid – 2016 to continue to provide services for people with a disability under the age of 65. To continue the service in its current form, Council will be required to contribute the same percentage of budget as it does now.

2.4

Attachment 1: Disability Review - Stage One - SUMMARY - July 2015

Attachment 1

Item: 2.4

It is anticipated that once the NDIS is introduced approximately 30% (102) of those accessing HACC services will transition to the NDIS. This will result in a reduction in the amount of funding received from the State Government consistent with the number of individuals who transition to the NDIS. Current Arrangements

340 (HACC) Disability Clients

Anticipated Arrangements under NDIS

238 Disability Clients (with block funding from the State)

102 Clients transferred to NDIS scheme (these clients may still wish to purchase services Council)

JETS Creative Arts Program Service: Jets Creative Arts Program Service Types

- Arts Activities - Respite

Age Grou p 12 – 25 year olds.

Funding

No. of Clients

Hrs of Service

BCC Cont.

Alternate providers

Funded Until

User Cont.

EFT

Approxi mately 40 per year.

3,500 hou rs Av: 80 hours per

Use of Jets facilit y

No

Fully DHHS funded until

No

1.41 EFT 9 casuals 2 Temp Part Time

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 209

Attachment 1: Disability Review - Stage One - SUMMARY - July 2015

Attachment 1

2.4

Item: 2.4

client

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 210

June 2018 subject to variation.

(all reliant on external funding)

JETS Creative Arts Program is a respite service funded by the DHHS. Council receives funding to provide a range of services to young people with a disability who are aged between 12 and 25 years. Council contributes the use of the Jets facility to host these programs. Over the years, Jets has received DHHS funding to offer School holiday programs on an ad hoc basis. In 2012 Jets was funded under an ongoing service agreement to offer a broader range of services. This service is unique and fills a gap in services for this age group. The funding that Jets currently receives from DHHS is confirmed under a funding agreement until June 2018.

During that period, if the NDIS is introduced in this region, funds will likely be redirected out of Jets. Under these changed conditions within the NDIS, individuals and families accessing Jets would receive direct funding to purchase services from Jets if it was offered. Jets would need to undertake preparations to become a service provider within the NDIS to accommodate clients accordingly.

Other Council Services – mainstream Council services that are used by people with a disability and are not immediately affected by NDIS.

2.4

Attachment 1: Disability Review - Stage One - SUMMARY - July 2015

Attachment 1

Item: 2.4

Council plays an important role in the provision of Maternal and Child Health and Early Childhood Services. These mainstream services are provided through a mixture of Council and State and Federal Government funding along with user fees and charges. These services engage children with a disability as part of their core service. There is strong demand for these services, but they experience challenges and limitations associated with unstable and inadequate Government funding. There is a potential that Early Childhood Services may have opportunities to interact with the NDIS in the future.

Indirect Disability Services In addition to the funding Council receives to deliver direct services to people with a disability, Council is also funded to provide services that focus on facilitating inclusive communities.

MetroAccess is a ‘community building program’ funded by DHHS. MetroAccess – Community Building Program Service: MetroAccess Service Types - Community Building projects - Increasing access to information - Increasing community awareness

Age Group Not specific.

Funding No. of Clients Not a direct service.

Hrs of Service 1 EFT

BCC Cont.

Hosts the program.

Alternate Funded Until Providers No Fully DHHS funded until June 2019 subject to variation.

User Cont.

No

EFT 1 EFT

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 211

Attachment 1

2.4

Item: 2.4

Attachment 1: Disability Review - Stage One - SUMMARY - July 2015

Council receives approximately $120,000 a year from DHHS to provide this service. Council hosts the MetroAccess program within the Youth and Community Partnerships team. MetroAccess implements projects and activities that aim to increase inclusion and participation in the community by building the capacity of communities to welcome and support people with a disability. MetroAccess is a unique program that is delivered in partnership with local government and it has been instrumental in increasing opportunities for people with a disability and their families to participate in community life. MetroAccess is currently funded under a three year agreement with DHHS until June 2018. This agreement includes a clause to enable change in light of the introduction of the NDIS. It is anticipated that under the NDIS, direct funding to Council’s for MetroAccess would cease and programs similar to MetroAccess could be subject to tender as part of the NDIS.

Other Disability Work Funded by Council Council has a legislated responsibly under the Victorian Disability Act 2006 to reduce barriers for people with a disability. This responsibility includes the requirement to develop a Disability Action Plan that outlines how Council improves issues such as building accessibility, accessible communication, transport planning, and making Council services inclusive. Council meets these responsibilities through the delivery of existing services across the organisation. As much of this work is embedded in existing service delivery across the organisation, it is difficult to place a dollar figure on the contribution Council makes to this area. However, a specific Capital works program and contribution exists to improve the accessibility of Council buildings and facilities.

Accessible Infrastructure – Capital Works Program Service: Accessible Infrastructure.

Service Types Increasing accessibility to Council buildings and infrastructure.

Age Group Not specific.

No. of Clients Not a direct service.

Hrs of Service N/A

BCC Cont. $110,000 (Capital)

Funding Alternate Funded providers Until No Annually through the Capital works program.

User Cont.

No

EFT N/A

It should be noted that Council’s improvements to the built environment are largely guided by accessibility requirements contained within relevant building legislation. These indirect services are key enablers to social and economic participation for people with a disability. While the specific capital budget to improve Council buildings facilitates some improvements, progress is extremely slow as the budget allocated is far below what is required for Council buildings to comply with current mandatory building standards.

Council’s role in indirect services is essential for the municipality and plays a critical role in increasing opportunities for people with a disability. It is also important to note that many issues ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 212

Attachment 1: Disability Review - Stage One - SUMMARY - July 2015

facing people with a disability are outside of Council’s control and Council has an important role in targeted advocacy.

2.4

Item: 2.4

Community expectation regarding the role of Council From monitoring the experience of other councils, and through feedback from the MAV and Council’s Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee, there is likely to be a strong community expectation that Council will: Continue to provide HACC services for those under 65, particularly respite at the same low- cost as it has historically provided to the community for many years.

•

Register to provide services within the NDIS.

•

Continue to provide the Jets creative arts programs for young people with a disability.

•

Within an NDIS environment, provide access to supports that are more resource intensive to complement the funding received by individuals such as support to attend a day activity and after hour’s supports.

•

Information provided from the MAV has also indicated that during the NDIS trials, some service users have stopped using Council services, as they shop around for alternative services, but then have returned to Council as a default provider.

Attachment 1

•

Current status of Council Services within the NDIS reform The introduction of the NDIS presents a massive shift in the way people with disabilities and their families will receive support and services. Council’s role in disability planning and coordination is increasingly important for people to have meaningful opportunities for community participation.

The status of Council’s externally funded specific disability services are directly affected and require further consideration. The introduction of the NDIS will present new challenges and opportunities for the provision of disability services. If Council wishes to position itself as a disability service provider under the NDIS, significant work will be required to reorient services to a new business model to operate within an open market.

Currently, Council is not well positioned to offer competitive and quality services within the NDIS reform. However, opportunity exists to explore this area further.

Next Steps Based on the findings of Stage One of the Disability Review, Council will be required to give further direction to inform the next steps of the project.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 213

2.4

Item: 2.4

Attachment 1: Disability Review - Stage One - SUMMARY - July 2015

Given the complexity of Council’s role in disability, and the variation in issues and options for each service area, a series of specific Council briefings will be held to provide an opportunity for a more in-depth review and analysis of the services discussed in this report.

Based on the directions received from Council, further work and preparation will be undertaken to present Council with recommendations relating to each service area. It is proposed that this work form Stage Two of the Disability Review project.

Attachment 1

Summary of Issues and Options Requiring Direction A summary of the key issues resulting from the review, along with options requiring further Council direction, is provided below.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 214

Summary of key issues and considerations to be explore through briefings and reports.

Item: 2.4 Attachment 1: Disability Reviewfuture - Stage One - SUMMARY - July 2015 CONSIDERATIONS

2.4

DIRECT DISABILITY SERVICES

ISSUES The NDIS will shift most funding from services and redirect it to individuals with a disability who will then “purchase” the services they need.

1. Council continues to provide HACC services to people with a disability under the age of 65.

New opportunities for Council to provide services will become available under the NDIS.

2. Council explores options services under the NDIS.

to

provide

Council faces a number of challenges to position itself to be a service provider under the NDIS. Significant planning is required to reconfigure current Council services to operate within the NDIS. Council currently contributes approximately 40% of the total budget to provide HACC services for those under 65.

It is anticipated that approximately 70% of people with a disability under 65 currently supported through HACC may not be eligible for services under the NDIS. Council’s HACC services are not currently set up to attract customers in an NDIS service environment.

There are industrial workforce issues to navigate with any changes to current HACC services.

Jets Arts programs currently fill a gap in the market that is not available elsewhere, however current funding arrangements are limited and expire in June 2018.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 215

Attachment 1

AREA

2.4

Item: 2.4

INDIRECT DISABILITY SERVICES

Attachment 1: Disability Review - Stage One - SUMMARY - July 2015 MetroAccess is currently funded until June 2018. Considerable uncertainty exists as to the future of the MetroAccess Community Building Program under the NDIS.

Attachment 1

Under the NDIS, broader indirect supports such as community development, disability awareness or strategic advocacy may be services that will be provided through tendered contracts.

Community organisations and possibly local government would likely be able to tender to provide these services.

OTHER DISABILITY WORK FUNDED BY COUNCIL

3. Council commits to continue advocating for the MetroAccess Community Building Program to be retained in partnership with local government.

4. Council continues to provide services such as MetroAccess if they are available to be provided by Council under the NDIS.

Council needs to monitor the NDIS roll out to identify changes and developments in policy.

5. Council explores opportunities for regional local government partnerships to better position for tender if relevant. It is currently not known if local or regional preferences will be sought in NDIS.

Council has a legislated role to remove barriers that restrict the participation of people with a disability in community life, including making physical spaces and services accessible to people and advocacy.

6. Council continues to use its Disability Action Plans as the key mechanism to coordinate and strengthen Council’s role in indirect services.

Council’s legislative role extends to making its own buildings accessible. The current program to improve physical accessibility of Council owned buildings does not allow Council to meet this requirement. The current program is very limited and requires immediate review.

7. Council strengthens its role in planning for and providing accessible buildings and public spaces to the municipality through increasing the annual access works budget.

Council’s role in indirect services is essential for the municipality. However, given many issues facing people with a disability are outside of Council’s control, this needs to be strengthened and complimented by targeted advocacy.

8. Council strengthens its advocacy role through developing an agreed advocacy framework and plan to respond to broader issues facing people with a disability.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 216

Attachment 1: Disability Review - Stage One - SUMMARY - July 2015

Appendix 1: Key Milestones for NDIS implementation as at August 2015.

JulyAugust 2015

2.4

Item: 2.4

•In late 2015, announcements expected as to the NDIS be rolled out across Australia.

•Current DHHS review of the future of Building inclusive communities program (Metro, Rural and Deaf access) presentation of findings due September 4.

2016

2017

2018

•In March, we receive a copy of agreement from State and Federal Government for HACC services.

•In July the NDIS trial ends and roll out commences across Victoria for the next 3 years.

•In July we will receive a new service contract for HACC aged over 65 (aged services) and people under 65. Decision required whether Council commit and sign.

•Roll out of the new State Disability Plan 2017-2020.

•NDIS Intergovernmental agreement between Commonwealth and Victoria ends.

•By December 2017 an independent review of the NDIS will be released.

•Commonwealth Home Care Program for aged services begins.

•NDIS housing strategy released.

•Kindergarten 15 hours Federal Funding decision will be announced.

•All Assessment services in Victoria will transiton to My Aged Care on the same day. (This could be brought forward) (This is the likely transition date but is not fixed) •Regional assessment services (RAS)commences with councils working from My Aged Care.

Council staff will now be assessing for CHSP, Residential and packaged care.

•July - Metro Access funding agreement may end or continue with new funding agreement.

•NDIS Bilateral launch agrement ends 30 June 2019.

•NDIS prices may become unregulated once it is determined by the NDIA that the market 2019-2020 has stabilised.

• When

the Banyule region will be asked to roll out the NDIS? • How services in Banyule are going to respond to the NDIS? • The level of demand for our disability services for those aged 65 and under once the NDIS is Unknowns rolled out in Banyule?

•Monitor updates to to policy and roll out announments.

To monitor

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 217

Attachment 1

•NDIS rolls out in Hunter Valley, NSW for children under 17. First non-trial site.

September •Banyule NDIS Forum September 16.

2015

Attachment 1: Disability Review - Stage One - SUMMARY - July 2015

Appendix 2: Mind Map of Disability Services

Attachment 1

2.4

Item: 2.4

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 218

4.1

Attachment 1: Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 219

Attachment 1: Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020

Attachment 1

4.1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 220

4.1

Attachment 1: Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 221

Attachment 1: Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020

Attachment 1

4.1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 222

4.1

Attachment 1: Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 223

Attachment 1: Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020

Attachment 1

4.1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 224

4.1

Attachment 1: Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 225

Attachment 1: Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020

Attachment 1

4.1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 226

4.1

Attachment 1: Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 227

Attachment 1: Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020

Attachment 1

4.1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 228

4.1

Attachment 1: Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 229

Attachment 1: Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020

Attachment 1

4.1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 230

4.1

Attachment 1: Residential Parking Permit Policy 2016-2020

Attachment 1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 231

4.1

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 233

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

4.1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 234

4.1

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 235

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

4.1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 236

4.1

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 237

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

4.1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 238

4.1

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 239

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

4.1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 240

4.1

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 241

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

4.1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 242

4.1

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 243

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

4.1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 244

4.1

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 245

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

4.1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 246

4.1

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 247

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

4.1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 248

4.1

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 249

Attachment 2: Residential Parking Permit Policy - Consultation Feedback Summary

Attachment 2

4.1

Item: 4.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 250

4.3

Attachment 1: Chandler Highway Duplication Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.3

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 251

Attachment 2

4.3

Item: 4.3

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 252

Attachment 2: Yarra City Council Letter

4.3

Attachment 2: Yarra City Council Letter

Attachment 2

Item: 4.3

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 253

Attachment 3

4.3

Item: 4.3

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 254

Attachment 3: Darebin City Council Letter

4.4

Attachment 1: Existing OD Network

Attachment 1

Item: 4.4

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 255

Attachment 2

4.4

Item: 4.4

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 256

Attachment 2: Proposed OD Network

4.5

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 257

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 258

4.5

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 259

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 260

4.5

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 261

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 262

4.5

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 263

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 264

4.5

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 265

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 266

4.5

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 267

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 268

4.5

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 269

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 270

4.5

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 271

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 272

4.5

Attachment 1: Consultation Paper - What you told us- Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 273

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 274

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 275

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 276

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 277

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 278

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 279

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 280

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 281

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 282

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 283

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 284

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 285

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 286

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 287

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 288

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 289

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 290

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 291

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 292

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 293

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 294

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 295

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 296

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 297

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 298

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 299

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 300

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 301

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 302

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 303

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 304

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 305

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 306

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 307

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 308

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 309

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 310

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 311

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 312

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 313

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 314

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 315

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

4.5

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 316

4.5

Attachment 2: Draft Banyule Safe Travel Plan

Attachment 2

Item: 4.5

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 317

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 319

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 320

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 321

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 322

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 323

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 324

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 325

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 326

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 327

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 328

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 329

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 330

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 331

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 332

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 333

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 334

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 335

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 336

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 337

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 338

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 339

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 340

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 341

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 342

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 343

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 344

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 345

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 346

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 347

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 348

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 349

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 350

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 351

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 352

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 353

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 354

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 355

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 356

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 357

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 359

Attachment 1

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 360

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

4.7

Attachment 1: Advertised Plans

Attachment 1

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 361

Attachment 2

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 362

Attachment 2: Revised concept plans

4.7

Attachment 2: Revised concept plans

Attachment 2

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 363

Attachment 2

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 364

Attachment 2: Revised concept plans

4.7

Attachment 2: Revised concept plans

Attachment 2

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 365

Attachment 2

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 366

Attachment 2: Revised concept plans

4.7

Attachment 2: Revised concept plans

Attachment 2

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 367

Attachment 2

4.7

Item: 4.7

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 368

Attachment 2: Revised concept plans

Attachment 3: Planning Assessment

P1024/2015: ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION

4.7

Item: 4.7

PLANNING CONTROLS The following planning controls are relevant to the assessment of this application: ACTIVITY CENTRE ZONE – SCHEDULE 1 (GREENSBOROUGH ACTIVITY CENTRE)

•

• • •

To encourage a mixture of uses and the intensive development of the activity centre: o As a focus for business, shopping, working, housing, leisure, transport and community facilities. o To support sustainable urban outcomes that maximise the use of infrastructure and public transport.

To deliver a diversity of housing at higher densities to make optimum use of the facilities and services.

To create through good urban design an attractive, pleasant, walkable, safe and stimulating environment.

To facilitate use and development of land in accordance with the Development Framework for the activity centre.

Planning approval is required for buildings and works within this zone.

A permit is required for the proposed use of the land for serviced apartments (Residential Building).

A permit is not required for a Bank to occupy more than 2m2 of frontage at ground level as this is exempt within this zone.

The subject site is located within Precinct 1 (Core Retail) of the ACZ1.

Precinct Objectives • • • • • • • •

To establish Main Street as an alternative type of experience to the Greensborough Plaza Shopping Mall and East Main Street precinct creating a dynamic precinct with day and night activities.

To encourage active frontages along Main Street with activities that require interaction with customers, visitors and passers-by.

To ensure that Main Street retains the character and characteristics of a main street retail strip with a high priority on pedestrian amenity.

To facilitate commercial investment in the precinct through the development of shopfronts and tenancies on Grimshaw Street.

To ensure development provides a well designed podium level edge treatment to The Circuit.

To ensure high quality building design on Grimshaw Street reflecting the ‘entry’ role of Sub-precinct 1C. To ensure development south of Grimshaw Street does not unreasonably impact on the amenity of residential properties to the south.

To provide for the physical and functional integration of Main Street with the Greensborough Plaza to the northwest and use and development in Precinct 3 including the new Town Square.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 369

Attachment 3

The purpose of this zone is to:

4.7

Item: 4.7 • •

•

Attachment 3: Planning Assessment To improve and enhance the streetscape character and pedestrian amenity in Main Street, south of Grimshaw Street and along The Circuit.

To maintain and encourage safe and easy pedestrian movement and improved linkages between Main Street to and from the West Main Street and East Main Street Precincts, the Plenty River Valley parkland and from the railway station to the top of Main Street.

To ensure that any development south of Grimshaw Street provides for the replacement of car parking lost through the redevelopment of sites.

Attachment 3

Precinct Requirements

Sub-precinct

Preferred maximum building height

Preferred setback

1A

11.5 metres within 8 metres of the Main 0 metre front and side Street frontage boundary, and 18.5 metres setbacks. elsewhere (excluding Key Development Sites shown on the Precinct Map).

Precinct Guidelines Sub Precinct 1A – Main Street • • • •

Development in the Main Street should include retail, commercial and food and drink premises that are distinctive from the Greensborough Plaza Shopping Mall and East Main Street precinct.

Development should ensure ongoing opportunities to access sunlight throughout winter, with wide footpaths and buildings that relate to the pedestrian scale.

Development along Main Street and Grimshaw Street should be of a pedestrian scale and vertical articulation should be provided on building forms.

South of Grimshaw Street, landscape upgrade works, including new street tree plantings, should be provided favouring native and indigenous species.

PARKING OVERLAY (SCHEDULE 1) The purpose of this overlay is: • • •

To facilitate an appropriate provision of car parking spaces in an area.

To identify areas and uses where local car parking rates apply.

To identify areas where financial contributions are to be made for the provision of shared car parking.

Schedule 1 to this overlay outlines the number of parking spaces required for specific uses.

Of relevance to this proposal is

Use

Rate

Measure

Dwelling Visitor Restaurant Shop

1 0.2 0.2 4.6

To each one and two bedroom dwelling To each dwelling To each seat To each 100m2 of leasable floor area

A planning permit is required to reduce the rates specified above. A permit is therefore required for the proposed reduction of spaces for dwelling, visitor, restaurant and shop.

CLAUSE 52.06 – CAR PARKING ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 370

Attachment 3: Planning Assessment

The purpose of this clause is to To ensure the provision of an appropriate number of car parking spaces having regard to the demand likely to be generated, the activities on the land and the nature of the locality.

4.7

Item: 4.7

To support sustainable transport alternatives to the motor car.

To promote the efficient use of car parking spaces through the consolidation of car parking facilities.

To ensure that car parking does not adversely affect the amenity of the locality.

A permit is required to reduce (including reduce to zero) the number of car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5.

Table 1 of this clause sets out the car parking requirement that applies to a use listed in the Table. A car parking requirement in Table 1 is calculated by multiplying the figure in Column A or Column B (whichever applies) by the measure (for example square metres, number of patrons or number of bedrooms) in Column C. The car parking requirements, provision and shortfall are set out in the table below.

Use Spaces required Proposed Shortfall Dwelling 45 (1 x 45)* 15 30 Serviced To satisfaction of RA 20 Apartment Retail 6 (4.6 x 137.7m2) 3 3 Office 14 (3.5 x 421.6m2) 4 10 Restaurant 8 (0.4 x 20)** 1 7 Visitor 9 (0.2 x 45) 0 9 82 43 39 Total * The proposal includes a mix of 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings which generates a requirement for 1 space per dwelling. ** An estimate of 20 seats has been used based on the provision of 1 seat per 2m2 of available floor area to the public.

CLAUSE 52.07 – LOADING AND UNLOADING OF VEHICLES The purpose of this clause is: To set aside land for loading and unloading commercial vehicles to prevent loss of amenity and adverse effect on traffic flow and road safety.

This clause specifies that: No building or works may be constructed for the manufacture, servicing, storage or sale of goods or materials unless: •

Space is provided on the land for loading and unloading vehicles as specified in the table below.

•

The driveway to the loading bay is at least 3.6 metres wide. If a driveway changes direction or intersects another driveway, the internal radius at the change of direction or intersection must be at least 6 metres.

•

The road that provides access to the loading bay is at least 3.6 metres wide.

A permit may be granted to reduce or waive these requirements if either: ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 371

Attachment 3

To ensure that the design and location of car parking is of a high standard, creates a safe environment for users and enables easy and efficient use.

4.7

Item: 4.7

Attachment 3: Planning Assessment •

The land area is insufficient.

•

Adequate provision is made for loading and unloading vehicles to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

Attachment 3

Floor are Floor area of building Minimum loading bay dimensions 2,600 sq m or less in single Area 27.4 sq m occupation Length 7.6 m Width 3.6 m Height clearance 4.0 m For every additional 1,800 sq m or Additional 18 sq m part The proposal has not provided any loading facilities on site. Therefore a permit is required to reduce this requirement.

CLAUSE 52.34 –BICYCLE FACILITIES Clause 52.34 states that a new use must not commence or the floor area of an existing use must not be increased until the required bicycle facilities and associated signage has been provided on the land.

Use Serviced apartment Dwelling Visitor Retail/café (including visitor) Commercial (including visitor) Total

Spaces required 1

Proposed 1

Shortfall 0

7 3 0

7 3 0

0 0 0

0

0

0

11

11

The revised concept plan includes a total of 34 bicycle parking spaces, far in excess of the statutory requirement.

POLICIES CONSIDERED STATE PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK The following policy is relevant to the assessment of the proposal and is outlined below and expanded on where considered appropriate: Settlement Clause 11.01- Activity Centre policy seeks to build up activity centres as a focus for highquality development, activity and living for the whole community by developing a network of activity centres. Policies on Metropolitan Melbourne also seek to encourage housing affordability and choice, job creation and liveable communities.

Built Environment and Heritage Clause 15.01-2 seeks to achieve high quality urban design and architecture. In assessing the design and built form of residential development of four or more storeys development must be considered under the Design Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Development (Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2004).

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 372

Attachment 3: Planning Assessment

Clause 15.01-5 seeks to recognise and protect cultural identity, neighbourhood character and sense of place.

4.7

Item: 4.7

Clause 15.02-1 seeks to encourage energy and resource efficiency.

Housing Clause 16.01 sets out objectives in relation to integrated housing, location of residential development, strategic redevelopment sites, housing diversity and housing affordability.

Relevant objectives include:

 To locate new housing in or close to activity centres and employment corridors and at other strategic redevelopment sites that offer good access to services and transport.  To identify strategic redevelopment sites for large residential development in Metropolitan Melbourne.  To provide for a range of housing types to meet increasingly diverse needs.  To deliver more affordable housing closer to jobs, transport and services.

Clauses 16.02-3 and 4 in relation to Residential aged care facilities set out the Objectives under is to facilitate the timely development of residential aged care facilities to meet existing and future needs and to encourage well-designed and appropriately located residential aged care facilities..

Economic Development The objective under Clause 17.01-1 for commercial activity is to encourage development which meet the communities’ needs for retail, entertainment, office and other commercial services and provides net community benefit in relation to accessibility, efficient infrastructure use and the aggregation and sustainability of commercial facilities.

LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK Municipal Strategic Statement Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement sets the direction for land use and development in Banyule by identifying key planning elements for consideration and nominating a series of objectives and strategies for each. The overarching vision of the Municipality is: Banyule will be regarded as a city offering a range of quality lifestyles in an urban setting enhanced by the natural environment, and served by an efficient and committed Council.

The relevant objective encompasses Environmental Management.

Housing Clause 21.04-1 seeks to encourage higher density housing close to activity centres and the Principal Public Transport Network and protect residential amenity and provide for the desired future neighbourhood character of residential areas.

Built environment

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 373

Attachment 3

 To promote a housing market that meets community needs.

4.7

Item: 4.7

Attachment 3: Planning Assessment

The objective in relation to Clause 21.06 is: To ensure that development respects and contributes to the desired future character of residential neighbourhoods and the identity of Activity Centres, in a manner that supports varying degrees of housing change.

Strategies include but are not limited to:

Attachment 3

• Promoting high quality design in all new residential development that makes a positive contribution to the desired future neighbourhood character.

• Encourage the retention and planting of significant trees, substantial trees and other vegetation to protect and improve the landscape character, streetscapes, habitat links and biodiversity of the area.

• Support residential development in accordance with the Residential Areas Framework which identifies varying degrees of housing change across the City’s residential neighbourhoods and Activity Centres.

In relation to sustainable design, strategies include: Support the retention of significant trees and the planting of trees and other vegetation.

In relation to housing, strategies include: • Encourage a substantial proportion of new housing to be located within or close to Activity Centres and the Principal Public Transport Network particularly where there is high frequency and quality of public transport services in operation.

• Encourage a range of types and sizes of housing, particularly in areas located close to public transport, services and facilities.

• Encourage development to provide a wider range of household types particularly smaller sized dwellings, including those with only one bedroom.

Clause 21.06-2 - Residential Areas Framework identifies that the site is located within a Diversity area in the indicative map forming part of Clause 21.06 of the Housing Framework Map. These areas typically have the following characteristics: •

Within the business core of an Activity Centre.

•

Some residential properties along streets that immediately surround the business core of an Activity Centre.

They will provide for shop-top and apartment living in higher density mixed use and residential developments. These areas include strategic redevelopment sites that provide for higher density housing.

Development will make a positive contribution to the identity of the Activity Centre and the desired future character of surrounding residential neighbourhoods.

In these areas people live close to train stations, transport interchanges, shops, services and nodes of employment. These areas include higher density and some medium housing opportunities.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 374

Attachment 3: Planning Assessment

Local Places Clause 21.08 seeks to provide guidance to the use and development of land within specified Activity Centres. Clause 21.08-1 provides specific guidance with respect to the Greensborough Activity Centre, of which the site forms part.

4.7

Item: 4.7

The Clause identifies that:

Greensborough is characterised by a mix of retail and commercial space, including a major enclosed shopping centre, Greensborough Plaza, a shopping strip along Main Street and Grimshaw Street, commercial development at Flintoff Street, combined with some medium low density residential properties south of Grimshaw Street and the railway station on Para Road. It is positioned within the green setting of the Plenty River Valley and has a unique topography that allows beautiful views over the valley from many locations within the centre.

As an Activity Centre, Greensborough is well placed to develop as one of Melbourne’s most desirable urban centres, able to provide its community with a range of residential, leisure, recreational, retail, health and wellbeing, and commercial opportunities. In addition, opportunity to expand the town appeal to visitors and patrons from well beyond the boundaries of both Greensborough and the City of Banyule is envisaged.

Plan 1 and 2 outline the Greensborough Activity Centre Structure Plan and Movement and Connectivity Plan for the centre.

ASSESSMENT The proposed use and development has been considered against the applicable State and Local planning policy including the ACZ and Parking Overlay and is considered to result in a height that far exceeds the preferred height for the Greensborough Activity Centre.

Furthermore, the provision of onsite car parking is considered to be unacceptable.

However, the applicant has provided a concept plan that attempts to address and resolve Council’s concerns with regards to the height of the building as well as providing a more appropriate number of onsite car parking spaces. This concept plan is considered to be an acceptable response due in part, to the way in which the design has responded to the Main street interface, reducing the height of the building, recessing the upper level further from the street and incorporating more natural materials and colours which soften the appearance of the building.

It is also noted that the Greensborough Structure Plan is currently being reviewed. Planning Scheme Amendment C110 is on public exhibition and seeks to introduce greater building heights to precincts 2, 5 and 6 on the southern side of the Greensborough Activity Centre.

While no change in heights is proposed for Precinct 1A where the subject site sits, it is considered that greater flexibility can be exercised in this precinct given its location within the heart of the Activity Centre where a greater intensity of development is encouraged.

Furthermore, the building sits in a context that has few sensitive interfaces, ensuring that it will not unreasonably overshadow or be overbearing to neighbouring properties.

With regards to car parking, it is thought that the modified layout including the provision of an additional basement level for car parking is an acceptable response given the location of the site having good access to public transport and ample short term parking nearby. In addition, the reduced number of spaces provided for the serviced apartments can be managed through the use of a valet parking service (to use the tandem parking spaces) which the applicant would accept as a condition of any approval granted. Furthermore, staff employed ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 375

Attachment 3

Greensborough Activity Centre is located in the heart of the suburb of Greensborough generally bound by the railway line to the north-east, Para Road to the north-west and Henry Street and Warwick Road to the south.

4.7

Item: 4.7

Attachment 3: Planning Assessment

at the new retail and commercial tenancies will be aware of the limited parking available onsite and find alternative means of transport accordingly.

Attachment 3

As no car parking rate is specified for the serviced apartments, this must be provided to Council’s satisfaction. In determining an appropriate number of spaces, the most similar use listed in the planning scheme is Motel which has a rate of 1 space per room. This would generate a requirement for 63 spaces. However, an existing serviced apartment use in Ivanhoe is operating at a rate of 0.5 spaces per room. This would result in a requirement for 31 spaces for the serviced apartments. Adding this to the statutory requirement of 82 spaces would result in a total requirement of 113 parking spaces.

Council’s traffic engineers have assessed the revised concept plan and support the reduction on the basis that a sufficient number of short term spaces are provided on site.

This will result in one space being provided for only 65% of the two bedroom dwellings and one space for 50% of the one bedroom dwellings. This is considered to be an acceptable outcome given the site’s access to public transport including Greensborough railway station and numerous bus services. This should also assist to reduce car dependency in the locality.

Encouraging investment in large scape redevelopment projects such as this is important to continue to see Greensborough revitalise. And while the proposal would result in a substantial reduction of car parking, it is considered the site is appropriate for such development. However, it is considered that to balance this outcome, the applicant should make a contribution towards improving the Main Street streetscape to help achieve some of the aims of the Activity Centre Zone including enhancing the pedestrian experience along Main Street. To this end, it is considered appropriate to include a condition of any approval granted that requires a contribution to be made towards streetscape improvement works along Main Street.

Ecologically Sustainable Design It is considered the proposed development would result in an appropriate response to Ecologically Sustainable Design principles, noting that With regards to orientation, many of the units have good access to northern solar access or to the east and west. No more than 10 of the dwellings are oriented to the south.

The Sustainable Design Report (prepared by Sustainable Built Environments dated 18 November 2015) submitted in support of the application confirms that the proposal has been assessed against the BESS tool and it is noted that the proposal would result in a best practice outcome, however it has failed to meet the minimum score for the Water category.

A condition of any approval granted should ensure that a minimum score is achieved for all of the fundamental components of the BESS scorecard.

Livability Guidelines In support of the application, a response to Council’s Livability Guidelines has been submitted by the applicant prepared by Peddle Thorp Architects dated 16 November 2015.

This outlines how the development performs against these guidelines, concluding that an appropriate response to these guidelines is provided.

Higher Density Residential Development Guidelines An assessment of the advertised proposal has been carried out against the Higher Density Residential Development Guidelines and found to be unacceptable. However, it is noted that the concept plan provided by the applicant would result in an acceptable response as outlined in the assessment below.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 376

Element 1: Urban context Complies The applicant has provided sufficient information to understand the neighbourhood context and has provided a written submission outlining the proposal’s compliance with the relevant State and Local planning policy.

Neighbourhood character and strategic 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.

Design Response Complies 1.2 To provide a creative design response that is based on a clear understanding of the urban context and neighbourhood character.

The proposed design response acknowledges the context of the site with the design having a high level of regard for the existing surrounding built form and land uses. The response is contemporary yet would be consistent with the eclectic mix of architectural styles within the locality. It is noted that the revised concept plan would provide for a more acceptable design response with more appropriate colours and materials.

Element 2: Building envelope Complies See main report.

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.

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

2.3 To protect sunlight Complies access to public spaces.

Street Setbacks Complies 2.4 To respond to existing or preferred street character.

2.5 To ensure building Complies separation supports private amenity and reinforced neighbourhood character.

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

2.7

To ensure visual N/A

For reasons given in the main report, the proposed concept plan is considered to be an acceptable response with regards to the building height and massing and would be acceptable with regards to the Main Street interface.

The reduced building height as outlined in the concept plan would result in minimal additional overshadowing of public spaces such as pedestrian paths at street level. This is considered to be an acceptable response.

The Activity Centre Zone specifies a preferred front setback of 0. The proposed concept plan provides for a setback of 6 metres at the top level to minimise its impact when viewed within the street. This is an acceptable response.

The proposal is considered acceptable

The building has been designed to provide for equitable access to outlook and light through the use of setbacks on the north and south sides of the building. This is considered to be an acceptable response.

There are no dwellings to the rear of the proposed ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 377

4.7

Attachment 3: Planning Assessment

Attachment 3

Item: 4.7

Attachment 3

4.7

Item: 4.7

Attachment 3: Planning Assessment

impacts to dwellings at the development. rear are appropriate to the context.

Views to and from Complies The proposed development would retain residential units opportunities for passive surveillance of the street 2.8 To maximise informal or and Grimshaw Lane as well as Greensborough passive surveillance of streets Walk to the rear. and other public open spaces 2.9 To maximise residential Complies An appropriate level of privacy would be afforded amenity through the provision to future occupants within the site. There are no of views and protection of other nearby residential properties at this stage. privacy within the subject site and on neighbouring properties.

Wind protection Complies It is not expected that wind will be a significant 2.10 To ensure new tall issue for this development. buildings do not create adverse wind effects Roof forms Complies The roof design is considered to be appropriate.

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

Element 3: Street pattern and street-edge quality Street pattern and street n/a The entry to the building is appropriate providing edge integration direct connection to Main street and easy access 3.1 To create walkable to the commercial and retail tenancies at ground areas within a safe and level. interesting public setting 3.2 To closely integrate the Complies The ground level space would be appropriately layout and occupation activated through the use of glazing to provide an patterns of new development attractive and activated entry. with the street.

3.3 To ensure car parking n/a Vehicle access is proposed to be gained from does not dominate the street Grimshaw Lane to the rear of the site. frontage.

Building entries Complies A distinct and clear entry is proposed for the 3.4 To create street frontage of the building. entrances with a strong identity that provide a transition from the street to residential interiors.

3.5 To ensure car park Complies The car park entry is not expected to detract from entries do not detract from the the Grimshaw Lane. street.

Front fences n/a 3.6 To avoid creating inactive frontages as a result of fencing private open spaces.

3.7 To ensure that front n/a fences respect and contribute to the neighbourhood character.

Element 4: Circulation and services ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 378

Complies

Complies

Council’s traffic engineers have reviewed the proposal and are satisfied the proposal is acceptable with regards to parking layout and movement.

The proposal would provide for safe and convenient movement between basement car parks or bicycle parking spaces and pedestrian entry to buildings via the lifts.

Complies

No shared internal spaces are provided for the dwellings however communal spaces are provided at each level of the serviced apartments.

Complies

An ESD report has been included which outlines energy saving measures.

Condition

An ESD report has been included which outlines water usage. However, an improved score in the Water category is required. This can be required as a condition of any approval granted.

Adequate space has been provided at ground level. A condition of approval will require the provision of an appropriate area for hard waste collection with easy access from the street.

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

Element 5: Building layout and design Dwelling diversity Complies The proposal would include a mix of one and two 5.1 To provide a range of bedroom dwellings.

This is considered dwelling sizes and types in appropriate given the context of the site within a higher density residential Activity Centre within close proximity to transport developments. and services.

Building layout Complies The proposed development would provide good 5.2 To optimise the layout of accessibility for people with limited mobility. buildings in response to Furthermore, as the site is located within an occupants’ needs as well as activity centre, the composition of one and two identified external influences bedroom units is considered appropriate. and characteristics of a site.

5.3 To create functional, Complies The apartments are compact but provide flexible, efficient and flexibility. comfortable residential apartments.

5.4 To ensure that a good Complies The orientation of the building ensures that most standard of natural lighting of the dwellings are provided with either a north, and ventilation is provided to east or west orientation. internal building spaces.

5.5 To provide adequate Complies The revised concept plan which introduces a third storage space for household basement level provides for sufficient storage items. space for each apartment.

Design detail Complies The revised concept provides for an appropriate 5.6 To promote buildings of mix of materials and colours, including use of high architectural quality and vertical timber (or timber like) battens below the visual interest. podium level and a mix of light and dark colours ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 379

4.7

Parking layout 4.1 To provide adequate, safe and efficiently designed parking layouts.

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

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.

4.5 To minimise water use.

Attachment 3: Planning Assessment

Attachment 3

Item: 4.7

Attachment 3

4.7

Item: 4.7

Attachment 3: Planning Assessment

above.

Element 6: Open space and landscape design Private and communal open Condition The proposal does not include any communal space open space but provides balconies for each 6.1 To ensure access to apartment. However, a condition should be adequate open space for all included on any permit issued to ensure that each residents. balcony has a minimum internal area of 8m2 and a minimum depth of 1.6 metres.

6.2 To ensure common or n/a No communal spaces are proposed. shared spaces are functional and attractive for their intended users.

6.3 To allow solar access to Complies Many of the proposed apartments would have the private and shared open direct northern orientation of private open space. spaces of new high density residential units.

6.4 To integrate the design Complies SPOS in the form of balconies are designed to of shared and private open integrate with the external faรงade of the building. spaces into the overall building design and faรงade composition.

6.5 To provide for greenery Condition No landscape concept plan has been provided within open spaces. but opportunities exist to provide for some greenery on balconies which can be required as a condition of any approval granted.

Public open space n/a No public open space is proposed as part of the 6.6 To create public open design. space appropriate to its context.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 380

Attachment 1: Descriptor Table

APPENDIX 1: DESCRIPTOR AND EXPLANATION OF TERMS Condition of specimen / Tree health

4.8

Item: 4.8

Descriptor Explanation The following terms refer to the trees’ physical condition or vitality.

Full crown with good foliage density. Indicators such as annual shoot growth, leave size and colour are as expected. Good wound wood development may be observed.

No remedial pruning or other related tree works are required.

Fair

Tree may display some deadwood or may have minor canopy dieback. Canopy density may be slightly below average for the species. Minor discolouration or grazing of the leaf may be observed or the tree may display average wound wood development.

Poor

Significant dieback may be present. Leaves may be discoloured and often smaller than average. Excessive epicormic growth may be present. There are pathogens or stresses evident which could lead to tree decline. Significant remedial work or entire tree removal may be required.

Dead

Tree is dead. Its leaves, stems and roots no longer function. Excluding habitat contribution, tree should be removed.

Condition of planting Descriptor Explanation The following terms refer to the condition of the planting. Factors such as; planting depth, location within the site and if the tree has been staked and mulched are considered.

Good

Tree is ideally located in context to surrounding vegetation and built structures there is sufficient soil volume and space for it to mature. It has settled level to the ground and is staked and mulched.

Fair

Tree may be intermittently shadowed by surrounding vegetation. Its future growth may impact on built below and above ground structures. Tree may sit slightly above or below the soil surface. Tree may not be staked or mulched.

Poor

The tree’s future growth will likely impact on built below and above ground structures. It is considerably shadowed by surrounding vegetation and is being outcompeted for required resources such as soil volume and adequate space. Tree is not staked or mulched.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 381

Attachment 1

Good

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 382

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 383

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 384

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 385

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 386

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 387

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 388

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 389

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 390

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 391

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 392

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 393

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 394

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 395

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 396

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 397

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 398

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 399

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 400

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 401

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 402

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 403

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 404

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 405

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 406

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 407

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 408

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 409

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 410

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 411

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 412

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 413

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 414

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 415

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 416

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 417

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 418

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 419

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 420

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 421

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 422

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 423

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 424

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 425

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 426

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 427

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 428

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 429

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 430

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 431

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 432

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 433

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 434

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 435

Attachment 1

4.9

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 436

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

4.9

Attachment 1: Draft Public Open Space Plan

Attachment 1

Item: 4.9

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 437

Attachment 1: Football Precinct - Existing Infrastructure

5.1

Item: 5.1

Attachment 1

Attachment One

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 438

6.1

Attachment 1: Responses received relating to Victims of Crime

Attachment 1

Item: 6.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 439

Attachment 1: Responses received relating to Victims of Crime

Attachment 1

6.1

Item: 6.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 440

6.1

Attachment 1: Responses received relating to Victims of Crime

Attachment 1

Item: 6.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 441

Attachment 1: Responses received relating to Victims of Crime

Attachment 1

6.1

Item: 6.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 442

6.1

Attachment 1: Responses received relating to Victims of Crime

Attachment 1

Item: 6.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 443

Attachment 1: Responses received relating to Victims of Crime

Attachment 1

6.1

Item: 6.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 444

6.1

Attachment 1: Responses received relating to Victims of Crime

Attachment 1

Item: 6.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 445

Attachment 1: Responses received relating to Victims of Crime

Attachment 1

6.1

Item: 6.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 446

6.1

Attachment 1: Responses received relating to Victims of Crime

Attachment 1

Item: 6.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 447

Attachment 1: Responses received relating to Victims of Crime

Attachment 1

6.1

Item: 6.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 448

6.1

Attachment 1: Responses received relating to Victims of Crime

Attachment 1

Item: 6.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 449

Attachment 1: Capital Works and Initiatives Report - 31 March 2016

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 450

6.2

Attachment 1: Capital Works and Initiatives Report - 31 March 2016

Attachment 1

Item: 6.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 451

Attachment 1: Capital Works and Initiatives Report - 31 March 2016

Attachment 1

6.2

Item: 6.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 452

6.2

Attachment 1: Capital Works and Initiatives Report - 31 March 2016

Attachment 1

Item: 6.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 453

Attachment 2: Profit and Loss Summary and Initiatives - 31 March 2016

Attachment 2

6.2

Item: 6.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 454

6.2

Attachment 2: Profit and Loss Summary and Initiatives - 31 March 2016

Attachment 2

Item: 6.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 455

Attachment 3: Rate Debtors Outstanding - 31 March 2016

Attachment 3

6.2

Item: 6.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 456

6.2

Attachment 3: Rate Debtors Outstanding - 31 March 2016

Attachment 3

Item: 6.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 9 MAY 2016 Page 457