Ordinary Meeting of Council Council Chambers, Service Centre 275 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe 30 November 2015 commencing at 7.45pm Following the public forum commencing at approximately 7.30pm and may be extended to 8pm if necessary.
AGENDA
Acknowledgement of the Traditional Owner, the Wurundjeri willam people "Our meeting is being held on the Traditional Land of the Wurundjeri willam people and, on behalf of Banyule City Council, I wish to acknowledge them as the Traditional Owners. I would also like to pay my respects to the Wurundjeri Elders, past and present, and to the Elders of other Aboriginal peoples who may be here today� Apologies and Leave of Absence Amendment of Minutes Ordinary Meeting of Council held 19 October 2015 The minutes for the 19 October 2015 were confirmed at the Council meeting held on the 9 November 2015. Council received a letter requesting that the minutes be amended to reflect all the speakers for item 4.2 – Studley Road, Ivanhoe. At the meeting Council resolved to have items 1.1, 1.2 and 4.2 considered together, these items related to Studley Road. The speakers were listed seprately for these items and were shown seperately in the minutes. In this instance to reflect the procedural motion all 3 speakers should be taken as having spoken on all 3 items and the minutes should reflect this. Ordinary Meeting of Council held 9 November 2015 Correction to item 6.3 Watsonia Pool: 20 Liat Way Greensborough, Notice of Intention to Lease, in point 1 of the resolution the date should read February 2016 not 2015, the minutes be amended and confirmed with this change.: That: 1. Council acknowledges that Yarra Plenty Swimming Club Inc. seeks to lease from Council the Council-owned land and improvements known as Watsonia Pool, 20 Liat Way Greensborough for a five (5) year term commencing on 15 February 2016 (the Lease).
AGENDA (Cont’d) Confirmation of Minutes Ordinary Meeting of Council held 9 November 2015 Special Meeting of Council held 16 November 2015 Special Confidential Meeting of Council held 18 November 2015 Disclosure of Interests 1. Petitions 1.1 Divest Banyule City Council from Fossil Fuels ........................................................ 5 REPORTS: 2. People – Community Strengthening and Support 2.1 Supervised Children's Crossings ............................................................................ 7 2.2 Traffic Investigation - Frye Street, Meakin Street and Trist Street, Watsonia North ..................................................................................................... 12 3. Planet – Environmental Sustainability Nil 4. Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment 4.1 State Government Review of Metropolitan Planning Strategy Plan Melbourne Refresh ....................................................................................... 21 4.2 Martins Lane, Viewbank - Proposed Children's Crossing ...................................... 26 4.3 Planning Scheme Amendment C110 – Greensborough Activity Centre Review ...................................................................................................... 34 4.4 Alphington Paper Mills Proposal - Revised Development Plan.............................. 45 4.5 Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough - Proposed Traffic Treatment .................................................................................................. 51 5. Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life 5.1 Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre Master Plan ........................................... 57 5.2 General Code of Conduct - Public Meetings ......................................................... 62 5.3 Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee - appointment of members............................................................................................................... 67 6. Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely 6.1 Section of Road (RW028) Adjacent to the Rear of 4/98 Lower Heidelberg Road Ivanhoe - Proposed Discontinuance and Sale Hearing of Submissions ........................................................................................ 71 6.2 The rear of 43 Haig Street Heidelberg Heights - Proposed Road Discontinuance and Sale of Land ......................................................................... 77 6.3 Creation of Plantation Lane................................................................................... 83 6.4 Proposed Lease to Montmorency, Ivanhoe and Rosanna Bowling Clubs Permission - commence statutory procedures ........................................... 90 6.5 Air rights over Forge Lane between 37 Burgundy and 4 Villa Street Heidelberg - Licence ............................................................................................. 94 6.6 Assembly of Councillors...................................................................................... 101 7. Sealing of Documents Nil 8. Notices of Motion 8.1 Annual Somali Community Festival..................................................................... 105
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 2
AGENDA (Cont’d) 9. General Business 10. Urgent Business Closure of Meeting to the Public That in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989, Council close the Meeting to members of the public and adjourn for five minutes to allow the public to leave the Chamber prior to considering the following confidential matter 11. Confidential Matters 11.1 contractual matters 11.2 contractual matters 11.3 personnel matters; AND contractual matters 11.4 contractual matters s:
Matters Discussed in Camera That all confidential matters and reports related to the above items remain confidential unless otherwise specified. Closure of Meeting
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 3
1.1
Petitions
1.1
DIVEST BANYULE CITY COUNCIL FROM FOSSIL FUELS
Author:
Tania O'Reilly - Manager Finance & Procurement, Corporate Services
File:
F2015/3
Previous Items Council on 9 November 2015 (Item 3.2 - Fossil Fuel Divestment) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A petition with over 1000 signatures has been received requesting Banyule City Council to divest from fossil fuels investment. The petition prayer is as follows: ‘We request that Banyule City Council: 1) Investigate and disclose the full carbon exposure of Councils investments 2) Stop any new investments in fossil fuel extraction 3) Develop a plan to move the council portfolio away from institutions and companies involved in fossil fuel extraction and supply’ Council considered Fossil Fuel Divestments at its meeting held 9 November 2015. The report to Council addressed the request made in the petition prayer. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.
Receives and notes the petition.
2.
Advise the primary petitioner accordingly that Council addressed this matter at its meeting on the 9 November 2015.
DISCUSSION The Council report item 3.2 ‘Fossil Fuel Divestment’ of the 9 November 2015 Council Agenda reaffirms Council’s commitment to clean energy through its investments. The paper states that the City of Banyule has no direct investment (Shareholdings) in any fossil fuel companies or fossil fuel aligned companies. Council commits to not directly investing in any fossil fuel or fossil fuel aligned companies into the future and will make immediate changes to Banyule City Council’s Investment Policy as follows: a) Banyule City Council will not knowingly invest in an Organisation that operates at the expense of the environment, human rights, the public
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 5
1.1
Petitions
DIVEST BANYULE CITY COUNCIL FROM FOSSIL FUELS cont’d safety, or the dignity of its employees. Specifically, there will be no direct investment in fossil fuels. b) Banyule City Council will actively invest with fossil free financial institutions within the Banyule City Council Policy parameters and the interest rate provided by financial institutions is no worse than other investments available to Council at the time. c) Update Table A - Direct Investments to allow for long term ‘BBB’ credit rated financial institutions according to the credit rating agency Standard and Poor’s. The long term BBB credit rating is consistent with an organisation that has adequate capacity to meet its financial commitments in the long term.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 6
2.1
SUPERVISED CHILDREN'S CROSSINGS
Author:
Ana Caicedo - Traffic & Transport Team Leader, City Development
File:
F2015/57
2.1
People – Community Strengthening and Support
Previous Items Council on 21 September 2015 (Item 4.1 - Children's Crossing at Fernside Avenue, Briar Hill) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A review of the number of children crossing and the volume of traffic at every children’s crossing is undertaken every three years as part of the application that Council submits to VicRoads for the subsidy of providing school crossing supervisors. The subsidy for supervisors is considered at locations where the number of children crossing and the volume of traffic meet the required warrants, or where conditions on the road suggest that the safety risk for pedestrians crossing is high. Recent surveys reveal that five crossings in Banyule do not meet VicRoads’ warrants. Council has made decisions on four of these sites previously: on three locations the supervision will be maintained on safety grounds, at one location the supervision will be removed, and the remaining location at Plenty Road / Bent Street Bundoora discussed within the report. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Continue to advocate to VicRoads on behalf of the Sherbourne Primary School community to reinstate the subsidy for the supervision at the children’s crossing at Fernside Avenue, Briar Hill. 2. Continue to fully fund on safety grounds the supervision of the children’s crossings at: a. Grimshaw Street, Greensborough, east of the Greensborough Bypass. b. Mountain View Road, Briar Hill, between Campbell Road and Fernside Avenue. c. Wungan Street, Macleod, between Portree Street and Highview Crescent. 3. Maintains the supervision of the crossing at the Plenty Road/Bent Street intersection, Bundoora, on road safety grounds. 4. Regularly monitors the use by school-aged children of the crossing at the Plenty Road/Bent Street intersection, Bundoora. 5. Writes to VicRoads requesting a review of the safety of the crossing on the north-east slip lane of the intersection at the Plenty Road/Bent Street intersection, Bundoora. 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 - 30 November 2015
Page 7
2.1
People – Community Strengthening and Support
SUPERVISED CHILDREN'S CROSSINGS cont’d 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 Council is responsible for the installation of children’s crossing and for the employment of crossing supervisors. On a yearly basis, the State Government through VicRoads provides a subsidy to Council to offset part of the cost associated with the employment of supervisors at the crossings. Accordingly, Council submits an application for such subsidy at the end of each calendar year. The installation of infrastructure and employment of supervisors at children’s crossings is considered at locations where the number of children crossing, and the volume of traffic meet the required criteria. Children’s crossings may also be installed and supervised at sites where conditions on the road suggest that the risk for pedestrians crossing the road is high. The State subsidises the employment of crossing supervisors for sites that serve primary schools when the number of children crossing (minimum 20) multiplied by the number of vehicles (minimum 100) exceeds 5,000. For crossings close to secondary schools, the State provides a subsidy when the number of children crossing (minimum 20) multiplied by the number of vehicles (minimum 250) is higher than 25,000. Pedestrian and vehicle volumes are collected at every crossing at least every three years. The employment of supervisors at children’s crossings that fail to secure funds through the VicRoads’ scheme is managed in accordance to Council’s Crossing Supervisor Policy. At locations where numerical warrants are not met, the Policy states that Council may agree to continue funding up to 50% of the supervisor costs for three years when an agreement has been reached to fund the balance through non-Council sources. CURRENT SITUATION The application for the 2016/17 children’s crossing supervision subsidy was submitted to VicRoads at the start of November 2015. In comparison to the 2015/16 application, no sites were added or removed.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 8
SUPERVISED CHILDREN'S CROSSINGS cont’d This year, five children’s crossings did not meet the VicRoads warrants for the subsidy of supervisors. Table 1 summarises these sites and indicates, in four cases, Council’s previous resolutions on the provision of funds for supervision. Table 1. Children’s Crossing Sites not Meeting the Warrants for Subsidy
Crossing Location Grimshaw Street east to the Greensborough Bypass
Name of School(s) Served
St Mary's Primary School
Pedestrian (P) and Vehicles (V) count
P: 10 V: 2,520
Reason for not meeting warrants for subsidy
Latest Resolution on Crossing Supervision
Lower than required children crossing (20)
21 November 2014 -Continue to fully fund the supervision for road safety reasons or until the appropriate warrants are met.
Mountain View Road Between Campbell Rd and Fernside Ave
Briar Hill Primary School
P: 18 V: 545
Lower than required children crossing (20)
21 November 2014 -Fully fund the school crossing supervisor given safety concerns at the location -Work with Briar Hill Primary School to encourage walking as a means of accessing the school
Wungan Street between Portree St and Highview St
Macleod College
P: 1 V: 917
Lower than required children crossing (20)
21 November 2014 -Continue to fully fund the supervision for road safety reasons or until the appropriate warrants are met.
Fernside Avenue between Hyacinth St and Outlook Cr
Sherbourne Primary School
P:63 V:61
Lower than required vehicle numbers (100)
21 September 2015 -Remove supervision at the end of 2015 -Continue advocating to the State for funds for the employment of a supervisor at the crossing
Plenty Road at Bent St
St Damian's Primary School
P: 6 V: 254
Lower than required children crossing (20)
No resolution to date
Consistent with Council’s previous resolutions; given the road safety concerns at the Grimshaw Street, Mountain View Road, and Wungan Street children’s crossings, it is considered that Council should continue to fully fund the employment of supervisors at these sites until the appropriate warrants are met. PLENTY ROAD, BUNDOORA, AT BENT STREET The supervised crossing is located at the signalised north-east slip lane of the intersection of Plenty Road and Settlement Road/Bent Street, approximately 200 metres from the entry gate to St Damian’s Catholic School. The crossing supervisor aids students who walk to and from the Yulong Reserve car park, and the north side of Bent Street. Figure 1 indicates the exact location of the crossing in relation to the intersection.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 9
2.1
People – Community Strengthening and Support
2.1
People – Community Strengthening and Support
SUPERVISED CHILDREN'S CROSSINGS cont’d
Figure 1. Location of the supervised crossing on Plenty Road and Bent Street, Bundoora Table 2 details the results of the five most recent pedestrian and vehicle counts at this location. While the number of vehicles at the crossing has not increased significantly, the number of children crossing has declined. Table 2. Pedestrian and Vehicle Counts – Plenty Road and Bent Street, Bundoora
Hourly Ped Count (P)
Hourly Vehicle Count (V)
2 6 9 31 21 20
201 254 219 291 490 Warrants 100
PxV
Date of Count
402 1,524 1,971 9,021 10,290
24-Nov-15 4-Nov-15 28-Oct-15 23-Oct-12 6-Oct-10
5,000
The supervised crossing is at the same location as the signalised crossing. Generally, signalised intersections provide one of the highest levels of safety for pedestrians. However, the speed at which vehicles travel through Plenty Road and enter the slip lane combined with the poor sightlines at the corner increase the risk of an incident at this location. Accordingly, the application for subsidy to VicRoads for this crossing has been made on road safety grounds. In accordance with the Banyule School Crossing Supervisor Policy, should VicRoads not provide a subsidy for this location, it is considered that Council should continue to fund the provision of the supervisor at the site on road safety grounds.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 10
People – Community Strengthening and Support
2.1
SUPERVISED CHILDREN'S CROSSINGS cont’d Observations during school drop-off and pick-up times suggest that the majority of children walking towards St Damian’s Catholic School from the north-east side of the Plenty Road/Settlement Road/Bent Street intersection cross Plenty Road at a signalised intersection 200 metres to the north of the supervised crossing. It is considered that pedestrian counts should be conducted more regularly to assess the use of the crossing by school-aged children. As this intersection is under the control and management of VicRoads, and in order to address the road safety concerns related to the infrastructure, it is proposed that Council writes to VicRoads requesting the review of safety issues related to the sightlines at the north-east slip lane. CONCLUSION On a yearly basis, the State Government provides a subsidy to Council to offset part of the cost associated with the employment of supervisors at children’s crossings. The State subsidises the employment of crossing supervisors for sites when a certain number of children crossing and a minimum number of vehicles use the crossing. Pedestrian and vehicle volumes are collected at every crossing at least every three years. This year, the following five children’s crossings did not meet the warrants established by VicRoads for the subsidy of the employment of supervisors: 1. Grimshaw Street, Greensborough, east of the Greensborough Bypass; 2. Mountain View Road, Briar Hill, between Campbell Road and Fernside; Avenue; 3. Wungan Street, Macleod, between Portree Street and Highview Crescent; 4. Fernside Avenue, Briar Hill; and 5. Plenty Road, Bundoora, at Bent Street. Council has previously made resolutions to retain the crossing supervisor at the first four locations in the list above on safety grounds, it is proposed that the crossing supervisors continue to be retained. It is proposed that Council maintains the supervision at the Plenty Road/Bent Street intersection on safety grounds in accordance with Council’s Crossing Supervisor Policy.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Submission to VicRoads for the 2016/17 Children's Crossings Subsidy
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 107
Page 11
2.2
People – Community Strengthening and Support
2.2
TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION - FRYE STREET, MEAKIN STREET AND TRIST STREET, WATSONIA NORTH
Author:
Sanjev Sivananthanayagam - Transport Engineer, City Development
Ward:
Grimshaw
File:
F2015/128
Previous Items Council on 17 August 2015 (Item 8.1 - Traffic Investigation - Frye Street, Meakin Street and Trist Street, Watsonia North) Council on 9 November 2015 (Item 2.1 - Traffic Investigation - Frye Street, Meakin Street and Trist Street, Watsonia North) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council at its meeting on 17 August 2015 considered a Notice of Motion in relation to traffic speed and volume on Frye Street, Meakin Street and Trist Street, in Watsonia North. Investigations indicate that the 85th percentile speed in all the streets is below the legal speed limit of 50 km/h and the peak traffic volumes are within what is expected in these streets. However, it was found that northbound speeds on Frye Street were a little high, volumes on Kempston Street are more aligned with a ‘CollectorDistributor’ road, and residents have reported a number of vehicles performing Uturns on Frye Street. It is considered that the local road network could benefit from the installation of a ‘No U-turn’ sign on Frye Street and the modification to the wide intersection at Grimshaw Street and Frye Street. The matter was deferred at the Council meeting of 9 November 2015 to allow for consideration of suggestions made from residents. While the suggestions have been investigated changes to recommendations were not considered warranted on traffic engineering grounds.
RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Install a ‘No U-turn’ sign on Frye Street, between Trist Street and Grimshaw Street, Watsonia North. 2. Following the installation of the ‘No U-turn’ sign on Frye Street (item 1), request frequent enforcement by Victoria Police. 3. Consider the redesign and reconstruction of the intersection of Frye Street and Grimshaw Street, Watsonia North, as part of a future Capital Works budget, including the removal of the slip lanes with the approval of VicRoads. 4.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 12
People – Community Strengthening and Support
2.2
TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION - FRYE STREET, MEAKIN STREET AND TRIST STREET, WATSONIA NORTH 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. It is noted that the Director City Development, Scott Walker, resides in the residential area between Watsonia North and Greensborough accessed via the roads referred to in this report therefore he did not contribute or review this report. 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 Council at its meeting on 17 August 2015 considered a Notice of Motion in relation to traffic in Watsonia North. At the meeting, Council resolved: “That Council officers investigate and report on traffic and speed and volumes on Frye Street, Meakin Street, and Trist Street, Watsonia North.” This report responds to the above resolution. A locality plan for the roads included in the investigation is provided in Figure 1.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 13
2.2
People – Community Strengthening and Support
TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION - FRYE STREET, MEAKIN STREET AND TRIST STREET, WATSONIA NORTH cont’d
Figure 1 – Locality Plan ROAD CLASSIFICATION As part of Council’s Road Management Plan (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 defects. A collector or distributor road is expected to carry between 2,000 and 10,000 vehicles each day. Their primary function is to provide access to the network by linking residential areas to arterial roads, with limited through traffic expected. Residential roads are expected to carry less than 2,000 vehicles per day. Their primary function is to provide access to properties and generally carry local traffic. The section of Trist Street east of Frye Street, and Frye Street are classified as “Distributor” roads. The section of Trist Street west of Frye Street, and Meakin Street are classified as “Residential”. All of these streets have a default speed limit of 50km/h. North of Grimshaw Street, the only vehicular link between the east and west sides of Greensborough Highway is Kempston Street. Classified under Council’s road hierarchy as “Residential”, it provides a direct route between Greensborough and Watsonia North. TRIP GENERATORS To the west of Greensborough Highway, Loyola College, Watsonia Primary School, Watsonia North Primary School, and the Watsonia Shopping Precinct and Railway Station are major attractions.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 14
TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION - FRYE STREET, MEAKIN STREET AND TRIST STREET, WATSONIA NORTH cont’d To the east, the Kalparrin Early Intervention Centre, Kalparrin Gardens, BMX and Skate Park, Partingtons Flat, Greensborough and Whatmough Parks, and the Greensborough Shopping Precinct and Railway Station are major trip generators. This section of Greensborough, bounded by the Greensborough Bypass, the Plenty River, the Hurstbridge Railway Line and the Greensborough Highway, with over 440 residential properties, has only two access points to the road network: the Yando Street-Kalparrin Avenue connection on the east, and the Kempston Street-Trist Street-Frye Street connection to the west, as highlighted in Figure 2.
Figure 2 – Trip Generators Given the road configuration and trip generators in the areas west and east of the Greensborough Highway, higher than expected volumes of traffic can be expected on these roads. INVESTIGATION To determine the volume of traffic and the speed at which vehicles are travelling in this area, traffic speed and volume counts were undertaken for one week in August/September 2015. Table 1 summarises the results of these surveys. Table 1 – Speed and Volume Count Results
Street and Location
Frye Street Midsection Meakin Street East of Middleton Street Trist Street
Direction
Combined North South Combined East West Combined
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Average Weekday Volume (vehicles per day) 3,753 1,753 1,999 1,853 1,002 851 1,594
85th Percentile Speed* (km/h) 50.0 52.0 48.0 46.3 47.6 43.9 45.5
Page 15
2.2
People – Community Strengthening and Support
2.2
People – Community Strengthening and Support
TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION - FRYE STREET, MEAKIN STREET AND TRIST STREET, WATSONIA NORTH cont’d East of Thaxted Court
Kempston Street West of Boyd Street
East West Combined East West
852 742 3,268 1,612 1,656
46.0 44.3 45.9 46.2 45.4
th
*The 85 percentile speed is the speed at which 85% of vehicles are travelling at or below.
DISCUSSION Speed and Road Safety The 85th percentile speeds of 50km/h for Frye Street, 46.3km/h for Meakin Street, 45.5km/h for Trist Street and 45.9km/h for Kempston Street are within the legal speed limit. This was somewhat expected considering the speed reduction measures already implemented on Trist Street and Kempston Street and the alignment of these streets. The 85th percentile speed northbound on Frye Street at 52.0km/h is higher than the speed limit and is likely to be due to the large radius sweeping entry from Grimshaw Street. Modifications to this entry point would likely slow vehicles and improve safety in the area. Approximately two years ago, residents raised concerns in relation to U-turning traffic on Grimshaw Street at Frye Street intersection, particularly in the morning peak. Motorists performed the U-turns to avoid the queue at the signalised intersection of Greensborough Highway and Grimshaw Street, to have a quicker access towards north. The request for an installation of a ‘No U-turn’ sign was supported by VicRoads, to prevent this from occurring. More recently, residents have reported that now vehicles are performing U-turns on Frye Street, north of Grimshaw Street. A request to VicRoads was made to modify the program of the signals at the Grimshaw Street and Greensborough Highway intersection to reduce queue lengths and waiting times. The request was not supported by VicRoads due to the adverse impacts on north-south traffic on Greensborough Highway.. Daily Traffic Volumes Frye Street had the overall highest average daily volume of 3,753 vehicles. Taking into consideration its classification as a distributor road within the network, and the connection it provides between the east and west sides of the Greensborough Highway, the daily volumes are within an acceptable range. The overall daily traffic volumes of 1,853 on Meakin Street and 1,594 on Trist Street are also considered to be within acceptable limits for local streets and are comparable to streets of similar nature within the municipality. The traffic volume of 3,268 vehicles per day on Kempston Street is higher than expected for a road classified as Residential. It is estimated that the residential properties in the area bounded by the Plenty River, the Hurstbridge Railway Line, the
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 16
TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION - FRYE STREET, MEAKIN STREET AND TRIST STREET, WATSONIA NORTH cont’d Greensborough Highway and the Greensborough Bypass, generate in the order of 4,400 car trips per day. It is unlikely that 75% of the traffic volumes generated by the area west of the Greensborough Highway would use Kempston Street and only 25% of volumes use the Kalparrin Avenue-Yando Street link. A more balanced distribution would be expected indicating a level of through traffic estimated to be in the order of 1,000 vehicles per day. Some through traffic is expected due to the congested nature of the arterial road network in the area. If the route were not so circuitous it would likely attract a much greater level of through traffic. Overall Kempston Street appears to perform the role of a ‘Collector / Distributor’ road and as such traffic volumes are considered to be acceptable. Peak-Hour Analysis While the average daily traffic is a good indication of the overall usage of the road, further analysis into ‘peak-hours’ determines whether intervention is needed to reduce heavy loads of traffic at concentrated time periods. An hourly traffic volume between 10% and 15% of the expected daily values on the road is considered acceptable. This means that between 200 to 300 vehicles per hour in residential streets is acceptable and up to 1,000 vehicles per hour on distributor roads. During the morning peak (8am to 9am), the majority of traffic in the area travels in a south-west direction, as shown in Figure 3. It is suspected that the majority of the users of these streets are likely accessing: • The arterial road network (Grimshaw Street, Greensborough Highway and the Metropolitan Ring Road), • The schools west of the Greensborough Highway, or • The Watsonia Shopping Precinct/Railway Station.
Figure 3 – Morning Peak Volumes (8am-9am)
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 17
2.2
People – Community Strengthening and Support
2.2
People – Community Strengthening and Support
TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION - FRYE STREET, MEAKIN STREET AND TRIST STREET, WATSONIA NORTH cont’d The morning peak hourly volumes on Meakin Street, Trist Street and Frye Street are within an acceptable range. However, as discussed above the peak hour volume on Kempston Street is more aligned with a Collector-Distributor road. The afternoon peak occurs between 5pm and 6pm with the majority of traffic flowing in a north-east direction. The level of traffic indicates a mixture of local residents accessing their properties as well as some through traffic. Figure 4 shows the peak afternoon traffic volumes for each of the streets. During the afternoon peak the concentration of traffic is lower than the morning peak and the volumes in all the streets are within the acceptable range.
Figure 4 – Afternoon Peak Volumes (5pm-6pm) PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS Following the analysis of the traffic data collected in August/September 2015 for Meakin Street, Trist Street, Frye Street and Kempston Street, it is recommended that appropriate solutions are found to: - Reduce the number of vehicles entering Frye Street from Grimshaw Street, to perform U-turns to return to the Grimshaw Street and Greensborough Highway intersection; and - Reduce the volume and speed of vehicles travelling during the morning peak on Kempston Street. To reduce the number of vehicles entering Frye Street to perform U-turns, the installation of a ‘no U-turn’ sign on the north end of the traffic island on Frye Street is recommended. Frequent enforcement from the Victoria Police will be required to modify drivers’ behaviour in the area. The intersection of Frye Street and Grimshaw Street provides fast and attractive access from Kempston Street into the arterial road network. To decrease the number of vehicles travelling on Kempston Street during the morning peak, measures to reduce the attractiveness of Frye Street to access the arterial network are proposed.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 18
TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION - FRYE STREET, MEAKIN STREET AND TRIST STREET, WATSONIA NORTH cont’d The intersection of Grimshaw Street and Frye Street could be modified by removing the slip lanes. Such a reconfiguration would make the Kempston-Trist-Frye link a less attractive route for traffic accessing Grimshaw Street in the morning, would reduce the speed of vehicles travelling north along Frye Street, and discourage ‘through’ vehicles using Kempston Street. Furthermore, the existing design is considered unusual for a residential road. Figure 6 shows a diagram for the existing and proposed configuration at the intersection. The estimated cost for the proposed works at the intersection is $80,000. It is recommended that funds be provided in a future Capital Works budget.
Figure 6: Proposed Layout for the Frye Street-Grimshaw Street Intersection
As Frye Street (up to the back of the median island from Grimshaw Street) is the responsibility of VicRoads, Council will need approval from VicRoads for any modification to the road design. The proposed improvement will downgrade the intersection, giving it a local road impression to drivers and aligning it with the treatment of other similar intersections around the municipality. When considering the observations undertaken and the volume data obtained from the investigation, there are no concerns in relation to queuing length in Frye Street at peak times. As indicated, the proposed change will improve local access to properties and discourage through traffic. Options such as time restricted turn bans to stop through access to Kempston Street would severely restrict access to local residents, given they only have limited access points to the road network. Furthermore, access to facilities such as the Kalparrin Early Intervention Centre, Kalparrin Gardens, BMX and Skate Park, Partingtons Flat, and Greensborough and Whatmough Parks would also be severely restricted. As such, the installation of time restricted turn bans is not considered appropriate.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 19
2.2
People – Community Strengthening and Support
2.2
People – Community Strengthening and Support
TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION - FRYE STREET, MEAKIN STREET AND TRIST STREET, WATSONIA NORTH cont’d CONCLUSION Council at its meeting on 17 August 2015 considered a Notice of Motion in relation to traffic, speed and volume on Frye Street, Meakin Street and Trist Street, in Watsonia North. Traffic data was collected during August/September 2015 in the area to assess the road network performance and safety. The speed at which most vehicles travel in the area is within the speed limit, and the number of vehicles on Frye Street, Meakin Street and Trist Street are generally in accordance with their function as per Council’s Road Management Plan. However some concerns exist in relation to vehicles performing U-turns on Frye Street, the speed of northbound vehicles along Frye Street, and the volume of vehicles during the morning peak on Kempston Street. ‘No U-turn’ signs are proposed to be installed to prohibit U-turns on Frye Street, between Trist Street and Grimshaw Street, and that the intersection of Frye Street and Grimshaw Street be redesigned and reconstructed at an estimated cost of $80,000.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 20
4.1
STATE GOVERNMENT REVIEW OF METROPOLITAN PLANNING STRATEGY PLAN MELBOURNE REFRESH
Author:
David Cox - Strategic Planning Co-ordinator, City Development
File:
F2015/5041
4.1
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Government is reviewing the metropolitan land use and transport strategy, known as Plan Melbourne. This review, known as ‘Plan Melbourne Refresh’, is limited and will include the current Government’s transport priorities. There is an opportunity for Council to make a submission to a discussion paper that is informing the reviewed strategy. A submission outline has been prepared to give direction to Council’s submission before the 18 December 2015 deadline. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Approves preparation and giving a response to the Government’s discussion paper for the ‘Plan Melbourne Refresh’, that is consistent with the outline in the report, with emphasis on: a) Greater public investment for the Hurstbridge railway line b) Future North-East link as an orbital ring road, with an Eastlink connection at Ringwood c) Premium public transport services achieving a 10 minute frequency d) LaTrobe Cluster being widely defined and the Metropolitan Planning Authority prompted to continue involvement for priority precincts in the Cluster and for infrastructure contributions e) Looking outside the planning system to explore incentives and funding mechanisms for investment in activity centres f) Housing growth estimates included as background information in a metropolitan housing strategy g) Potential for legislative and planning system reform for environmental sustainable development and implications for climate change on built environments h) Government ensuring a suite of funding programs and access to resources for any local government implementation items. 2. Writes to the Minister for Planning, advising of Banyule’s priorities for the Government’s ‘Plan Melbourne Refresh’ as described in point 1 above. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 21
4.1
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
STATE GOVERNMENT REVIEW OF METROPOLITAN PLANNING STRATEGY PLAN MELBOURNE REFRESH cont’d Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. 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. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “maintain and improve Banyule as a great place to live”. BACKGROUND The Government is undertaking a review of the metropolitan planning strategy, Plan Melbourne. This review is being informed by a Ministerial Advisory Committee. The updated strategy will be called ‘Plan Melbourne Refresh’ and is scheduled for release in 2016. To make progress, the Government has produced a discussion paper and seeks feedback before their 18 December 2015 deadline. The discussion paper and supporting material can be accessed from the Government’s website at http://refresh.planmelbourne.vic.gov.au/. The paper indicates that a reviewed strategy will: • • •
Retain most key policy priorities, whilst focusing on stronger policies for housing supply, diversity and affordability as well as climate change implications. Reflect current government transport commitments and priorities Document progress for implementing initiatives and actions.
SUBMISSION OUTLINE Council’s previous 2013 submission to Plan Melbourne is in Attachment 1. This earlier submission and consideration of the discussion paper has informed the following outline. Growth, Challenges, fundamental principles and key concepts • Effectively managing metropolitan population growth is supported. Banyule continues to guide growth to preferred places and protect more sensitive neighbourhoods. • Integrating metropolitan land use and transport planning is supported. Government investment should be geared to public transport priorities. • Enabling better housing affordability is supported. Improved Government investment in public and social housing is needed. • Integrating the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals is supported. Legislative review of the Planning and Environment Act can imbed these objectives and give clearer effect to review of VPPs and the State Planning Policy Framework.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 22
STATE GOVERNMENT REVIEW OF METROPOLITAN PLANNING STRATEGY PLAN MELBOURNE REFRESH cont’d • • • •
Securing a permanent urban growth boundary is supported. Urban growth boundaries around urbanised rivers and creeks may also be needed, to protect their long-term environmental and other public interests. Policies and priorities for Clusters should be given greater weight, particularly for emerging clusters where short-term impetus for greater investment is needed. The 20 minute neighbourhood concept should have a focus on walking to local services and facilities and retain reference to local employment. Opportunities for the local government sector to partner with the Government are supported. This includes supporting the Government’s ongoing responsibility for delivering transport infrastructure, enabling public and social housing outcomes and leading on policy and regulatory change for climate change.
Delivering jobs and investment • Enabling innovation for National Employment Cluster is supported. For emerging clusters this concept must also support neighbourhood renewal for access to local, knowledge-based and service industry employment. • Broadly defining the boundaries of emerging National Employment Clusters is necessary. Along with Darebin, Banyule continues to apply this approach in its work with the Metropolitan Planning Authority for the La Trobe Cluster. • Some revised designation for activity centres in Banyule is sought. This includes greater recognition for Heidelberg, Watsonia and for the Bell Street Mall’s growth potential. Council’s 2013 submission also flags that restricted growth should be more clearly enabled for Eaglemont, East Ivanhoe, Montmorency, Lower Plenty, St Helena, MacLeod and Diamond Village. A More Connected Melbourne • Including the Principal Public Transport Network is supported, if coupled with further discussion with Councils. • Walking and cycling networks can influence land use planning, if coupled with a linking mechanism. This mechanism can be Pedestrian Priority Precincts for activity centres. These precincts can define 40/km/hr speed limit environments and steer investment and decision making to re-engineer these public environments for walking and cycling priorities. • Any future North-East link must be a direct orbital link from the Metropolitan Ring Road in Greensborough, direct to Eastlink at Ringwood. • Greater priority is needed for the Hurstbridge line, in conjunction with grade separation of Lower Plenty Road at Rosanna station, double tracks along all sections and upgrading the signalling systems is needed. These changes are needed to support the emerging La Trobe Cluster and the northern region’s growth potential. • Enabling further planning for the public transport network, along with policy recognition for 10 minute service frequencies on premium public transport services. Housing • Developing a metropolitan Housing Strategy for activity centres is supported. This strategy must inform future planning for Centres. This includes information for retail and commercial floor space projections, to assist housing outcomes that are delivered with mixed-use projects. • Enabling housing growth in activity centres should look outside the planning system. Incentives, discounts and exemptions should be considered, to fasttrack land consolidation and housing investment decisions in activity centres.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 23
4.1
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.1
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
STATE GOVERNMENT REVIEW OF METROPOLITAN PLANNING STRATEGY PLAN MELBOURNE REFRESH cont’d •
•
Council supports the mapping outcome for the new residential zones in Banyule. This outcome was balanced and recognised neighbourhood diversity. Further refinement of the Neighbourhood Residential Zone’s provisions should be pursued. Avenues for housing affordability should focus on learnings from initiative projects. This should include innovative (eco and co-housing) social housing projects, such as Common Equity Housing’s Murundaka project in Heidelberg Heights.
A more resilient and environmentally sustainable Melbourne • Introducing Strategic Environmental Principles is supported. To be effective, these principles should be considered for any future legislative review of the Planning and Environment Act. • Reviewing policy and hazard management tools is supported. This review should look to lead Government departments and agencies, to coordinate implementation across metropolitan Melbourne. • Better consideration for climate change is supported. This approach could consider a precautionary approach for flora and fauna corridors and habitats on private land in urban areas and also highlights the merits of limiting further urban encroachment within corridors along creeks and rivers. • Strategies, improved legislation and planning scheme changes should be pursued for cooler urban environments and uptake of renewable and lowemission energy. • Aspirations to strengthen the planning system for Environmentally Sustainable Design are supported. New planning tools • Exploring a code assessed approach for multi-unit developments is supported, if coupled with council agreement and inclusive of local design elements that may be codified as well. • Consider trialling a code assessed approach for emerging National Employment Clusters. Banyule would welcome a discussion on a trial for the La Trobe National Employment Cluster in Heidelberg West. Implementation • In a rate-capping environment for the local government sector, careful consideration is needed to ensure adverse impacts on the sector are avoided. • Any implementation plan that involves action or input from councils, should only be approved by the Government after the council has considered impacts and implications. • Delivery of the strategy calls for support and funding to the local government sector. This might be geared to emerging National Employment Clusters and direct assistance for creation of developer contribution schemes. CONCLUSION The above outline, coupled with Council’s previous submission, can be used to prepare Council’s final submission to the discussion paper for the 18 December 2015 deadline. In 2016, Council will receive a further report, after the Government has released the Plan Melbourne Refresh.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 24
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.1
STATE GOVERNMENT REVIEW OF METROPOLITAN PLANNING STRATEGY PLAN MELBOURNE REFRESH cont’d
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 112
Page 25
4.2
MARTINS LANE, VIEWBANK - PROPOSED CHILDREN'S CROSSING
Author:
Walter Yew - Transport Engineer, City Development
Ward:
Hawdon
File:
F2015/57
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
Previous Items Council on 18 November 2013 (Item 4.2 - School Crossing Update) Council on 11 May 2015 (Item 4.3 - Warren Road, Viewbank – Proposed Children's Crossing) Council on 3 August 2015 (Item 4.3 - Martins Lane, Viewbank - Proposed Children's Crossing and Supervisor) FEXECUTIVE SUMMARY Following the resolution at the Council Meeting on 3 August 2015 to consider allocating funds within future Capital Works budgets for the installation of a raised children’s crossing on Martins Lane, Viewbank a meeting was arranged with Viewbank Primary School to discuss the project details. This report presents the results from the actions that arose at the meeting. As recommended at the meeting, a permanent 40km/h speed limit has been installed on Martins Lane, Viewbank between Philippa Court and Rosemar Circuit and the construction of a raised children’s crossing is proposed between Winston Road and Rosemar Circuit. Additionally, it is proposed that, following the installation of the crossing, Council review the number of children crossing Martins Lane, between Rodney Court and Grantham Road to determine whether an additional children’s crossing is required. It is also proposed that Council request in writing from Viewbank Primary School, whether the school would consider constructing a school gate access via Martins Lane, adjacent to the existing raised pavement west of Grantham Road to provide a safe, direct access into the school. That: 1.
Council considers to fund the installation of a raised children’s crossing and subsequent appointment of a crossing supervisor on Martins Lane, Viewbank, between Winston Road and Rosemar Circuit within a future Capital Works budget.
2.
A review of Martins Lane, between Rodney Court and Grantham Road, is undertaken six (6) months after the installation of the raised children’s crossing between Winston Road and Rosemar Circuit.
3.
If the additional crossing is warranted following the review in item 2, Viewbank Primary School is requested to consider constructing a school gate access via Martins Lane, adjacent to the existing raised pavement west of Grantham Road.
4.
Viewbank Primary School and the primary petitioner of previous petitions be advised of this resolution.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 26
MARTINS LANE, VIEWBANK - PROPOSED CHILDREN'S CROSSING 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 In July 2015, residents of Viewbank and the surrounding area presented a petition requesting Council consider funding the construction of a raised children’s crossing on Martins Lane, Viewbank, to the north of Viewbank Primary School. Figure 1 shows the location of the requested crossing between Rodney Court and Rosemar Circuit.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 27
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
MARTINS LANE, VIEWBANK - PROPOSED CHILDREN'S CROSSING cont’d
Figure 1: Location of proposed raised children’s crossing on Martins Lane, Viewbank. At its meeting on 3 August 2015, Council considered a report on this matter, and resolved in part: “That Council: 1.
Consider allocating funds within future Capital Works budgets for the design and construction of a raised children’s crossing on Martins Lane, Viewbank.
4.
Request in writing from Viewbank Primary School, whether they are prepared to contribute towards the construction of a formal school crossing in Martins Lane Viewbank.
5.
Receive a future report following a meeting between the Viewbank Primary School Council, the Mayor and Ward Councillor.”
Consistent with point 1 of the resolution, the project has been put forward for Council’s consideration for funding in the four-year Capital Works Program. In accordance with point 4, a letter was sent to Viewbank Primary School on 17 August 2015 requesting the school consider a financial contribution towards the project. Viewbank Primary School responded indicating that it does not have funding to assist Council with the design and construction works on Martins Lane, Viewbank. A meeting was arranged with the school, the Mayor, Ward Councillor and Manager of Transport, Sustainability and Municipal Laws to discuss the project details. At the meeting, it was considered that Council should:
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 28
MARTINS LANE, VIEWBANK - PROPOSED CHILDREN'S CROSSING cont’d •
Conduct a speed and volume survey on Martins Lane, Viewbank, between Rodney Court and Winston Road, in order to assess the speed at which vehicles are travelling when children are crossing the road.
•
Request VicRoads approval for the installation of a permanent 40km/h speed limit along Martins Lane, Viewbank, between Philippa Court and Rosemar Circuit, to improve the safety of pedestrians.
•
Conduct an additional pedestrian survey on Martins Lane, Viewbank, between Winston Road and Castleton Road to identify the location where most pedestrians cross Martins Lane.
•
Establish a preferred location to install a raised children’s crossing.
This report responds to Item 5 of the Resolution of 3 August 2015. DISCUSSION Results from the Speed and Volume Survey A traffic speed and volume survey was undertaken during weekdays in September 2015 on Martins Lane, Viewbank, between Rodney Court and Winston Road. Table 1 summarises the results of the data collected. The survey showed that 85% of vehicles travel well below the speed limit (50km/h) at all times of the day indicating that vehicle speed is not an issue. Table 1: Speed and Volume Survey – Martins Lane, Viewbank, between Rodney Court and Winston Road
Survey Conducted 14-20 July 2015 Average Weekday Peak Hour Traffic
Time 8am-9am 3pm-4pm
Ave. Vehicles Per Day 3321 Peak Vehicle Volume 330 315
85th percentile speed 42.1 km/h th
85 percentile speed 40.8 km/h 40.2 km/h
Permanent Reduction of the Speed Limit to 40km/h In order to provide consistency in the speed limit around Viewbank Primary School, due to the high number of pedestrians crossing Martins Lane, and given the proposed construction of a raised children’s crossing within the vicinity of the school, an application was submitted to VicRoads for a permanent 40km/h limit on Martins Lane, between Philippa Court and Rosemar Circuit. VicRoads approved the request. Consequently, signs have been installed indicating a 40km/h speed limit on Martins Lane, Viewbank, between Philippa Court and Rosemar Circuit. Pedestrian Counts Between July and October 2015, pedestrian and traffic counts were conducted at three different sections of Martins Lane between Rodney Court and Rosemar Circuit. Figure 2 shows the results of these counts. The section where most children cross Martins Lane is between Winston Road and Rosemar Circuit. In accordance with VicRoads’ guidelines, the installation of a
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 29
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
MARTINS LANE, VIEWBANK - PROPOSED CHILDREN'S CROSSING cont’d children’s crossing and subsequent employment of a crossing supervisor is warranted.
Figure 2: Pedestrian Surveys Results – Martins Lane, Viewbank Establishment of the best location to install a raised children’s crossing While children cross Martins Lane at various locations, the design and installation of a raised children’s crossing presents some challenges: •
The vertical alignment of the road between Philippa Court and Rodney Court restricts forward visibility for motorists due to a crest on the road.
•
The angled parking spaces in front of the shops between Grantham Road and Winston Road restricts the provision a safe crossing point at this location.
•
Vegetation and infrastructure services west of Grantham Road, close to the existing traffic treatment, would need to be relocated should a raised children’s crossing be installed at this location.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 30
MARTINS LANE, VIEWBANK - PROPOSED CHILDREN'S CROSSING cont’d In light of the above, Martins Lane between Rodney Court and Winston Road is not the preferred location for the installation of a raised children’s crossing. The section of road between Winston Road and Rosemar Circuit presents less design and construction constraints. Moreover, it was observed to have the highest amount of school children crossing. It is proposed that a children’s crossing be installed on Martins Lane between Winston Road and Rosemar Circuit (shown in Figure 3).
Figure 3: Proposed Location for Children’s Crossing on Martins Lane, between Winston Road and Rosemar Circuit Future consideration for an additional raised children’s crossing The pedestrian survey indicated a reasonable level of pedestrians walking to school between Rodney Court and Grantham Road. The provision of an additional raised children’s crossing would help improve the pedestrian amenity. Inspections of the area determined an additional children’s crossing could be located west of Grantham Road (Figure 4), at the existing raised pavement. To supplement the additional children’s crossing, a direct access could be constructed from the proposed crossing into the school grounds to provide a safe, direct access into the school from Martins Lane.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 31
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
MARTINS LANE, VIEWBANK - PROPOSED CHILDREN'S CROSSING cont’d
Figure 4: Proposed Location for Future Children’s Crossing on Martins Lane, between Rodney Court and Grantham Road
It is proposed that Council undertake a review of pedestrian movements in Martins Lane, between Rodney Court and Grantham Road six (6) months after the installation of the raised children’s crossing between Winston Road and Rosemar Circuit to determine the need for the additional children’s crossing. Should the additional children’s crossing be warranted, it is proposed that Council request in writing that Viewbank Primary School considers constructing a school access gate via Martins Lane, adjacent to the existing raised pavement west of Grantham Road. FUNDING IMPLICATION The design and construction cost of the raised school crossing for Martins Lane is estimated at $40,000. The provision of a permanent school crossing supervisor is estimated to cost approximately $10,000 per year. The latter figure is based on VicRoads’ 2014/15 subsidy scheme. Since Viewbank Primary School responded indicating that it does not have funding to assist Council with the design and construction works on Martins Lane, Viewbank, Council will need to consider fully funding the installation of the raised children’s crossing at a cost of $40,000. CONCLUSION Following Council’s Resolution to consider funding the design and installation of a raised children’s crossing on Martins Lane, Viewbank, a meeting was held with Viewbank Primary School, and agreement was reached to further investigate traffic concerns and establish the best location for the installation of the crossing. Consistent with the agreement, a permanent 40km/h speed limit has been installed on Martins Lane, Viewbank between Philippa Court and Rosemar Circuit and the
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 32
MARTINS LANE, VIEWBANK - PROPOSED CHILDREN'S CROSSING cont’d construction of a raised children’s crossing is proposed between Winston Road and Rosemar Circuit. Also, the pedestrian survey indicates that there is sufficient pedestrian movement across Martins Lane between Rodney Court and Grantham Road to warrant an additional children’s crossing. It is proposed that, six months after the installation of the raised children’s crossing between Winston Road and Rosemar Circuit, Council undertakes a review of pedestrian movements in Martins Lane, between Rodney Court and Grantham Road to determine whether an additional children’s crossing is warranted. Should the additional crossing be warranted, it is proposed that Council requests in writing that Viewbank Primary School considers constructing a school gate access via Martins Lane, adjacent to the existing raised pavement west of Grantham Road.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 33
4.2
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.3
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 – GREENSBOROUGH ACTIVITY CENTRE REVIEW
Author:
Anne North - Senior Strategic Planner, City Development
Ward:
Grimshaw
File:
F2014/3972
4.3
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Greensborough Activity Centre Structure Plan was adopted by Council in May 2003. The Structure Plan provided a Vision for the centre to support local economic development and investment. In February 2014, Council resolved to review the Greensborough Structure Plan, reexamining the Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines for Precincts 2, 5 and 6 and translating any new controls into planning scheme changes. This review was sought to help strengthen delivery of the Vision for the centre. Specifically, greater opportunities for development is sought within these precincts. A review of Precincts 2, 5 and 6 of the Greensborough Structure Plan area has been completed and revised Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines have been prepared. The guidelines have been translated into proposed planning scheme provisions. This report recommends that Council adopts the Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines and requests Authorisation from the Minister for Planning to exhibit the amendment documents as part of Banyule Planning Scheme Amendment C110. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Approves the Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines for Precincts 2, 5 and 6 of the Greensborough Activity Centre October 2015 as shown in Attachment 1. 2. Supports the preparation and exhibition of Amendment C110 to the Banyule Planning Scheme, to implement the planning controls outlined in the Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines, for Precincts 2, 5 and 6 of the Greensborough Activity Centre. 3. Requests the Minister for Planning Authorise the preparation and exhibition of Amendment C110. 4. Undertakes pre-amendment consultation with landowners in Precincts 2, 5 and 6. 5. Write to Local State Members of Parliament advising of this decision and providing a copy of the Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 34
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.3
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 – GREENSBOROUGH ACTIVITY CENTRE REVIEW cont’d
Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “strengthen local activity and employment areas”. BACKGROUND The Greensborough Activity Centre Structure Plan was adopted by Council in May 2003. The Structure Plan provided a Vision for the Centre that anticipated diversity of higher density mixed use development, catering for the varied needs of the Greensborough population. The Vision for Greensborough is as follows: “The Greensborough Principal Activity Centre will be famous for its extraordinary natural attributes, an urban area connected to the natural beauty of the Lower Plenty River Valley. New development will provide visual linkages as well as an extension of the green landscape between the Valley and the activity centre. A “Green Edge” will define the centre’s entrances and reflect the landscape setting, while greenery and landscaping treatments throughout will provide both cohesiveness and define the role of parts of the centre. The activity centre will be recognised for its sense of community, sustainability and connectivity to and within the centre. A coherent public realm will be created with new public spaces including the centrally located town square, where people of all ages can meet, relax or enjoy public events. Health and wellbeing will be the focus of the transformed centre with the Aquatic Centre, spa facilities and a host of health and wellbeing services being accommodated in the centre. The diversity of higher density mixed use development will cater for the varied needs of the Greensborough population, including providing new opportunities for people to live in the centre. The centre will provide expanded retail, commercial, entertainment, leisure and civic uses to serve the needs of the local and regional area. Visitors and residents will be encouraged to walk the centre or use public transport rather than use their cars.” Planning Scheme Amendment C51 translated the Structure Plan into the Banyule Planning Scheme with various zones and a new Design and Development Overlay Schedule 4 (DDO4). This Amendment was adopted in August 2007. The Panel Report for Amendment C51 suggested that further investigation of built form may be required in some areas of the Activity Centre as it develops. In 2013 the Activity Centre Zone (ACZ) was applied to the Greensborough Activity Centre by the Victorian Government through Amendment VC100, to better implement the strategic objectives for Greensborough. The introduction of the ACZ translated the Design and Development Overlay Schedule 4 into this preferred zone. At the time the ACZ was the preferred zoning for Activity Centres in Victoria. Since the 2003 Greensborough Structure Plan was adopted by Council it has become evident that local economic development would be better supported with
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 35
4.3
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 – GREENSBOROUGH ACTIVITY CENTRE REVIEW cont’d reviewed development guidelines. In February 2014 Council resolved to do a review of the Greensborough Structure Plan, re-examining the Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines for Precincts 2, 5 and 6 and translating any new controls into planning scheme changes. Economic Base Report To help inform the review of building heights and setbacks in Precincts 2, 5 and 6, economic analysis has been done to consider the degree of change in the centre and the potential market for increased housing and commercial land uses. An economic report, Greensborough Structure Plan Review - Economic Base Report January 2015 was prepared by Charter Keck Cramer, and is in Attachment 3. Greensborough’s existing health precinct offers a significant opportunity to enable economic growth in this sector, combined with growing demand from a locally ageing population. This can generate demand for both specialist facilities as well as generic office space. There may be potential for a day hospital within the precinct, given the availability of larger sites and the continued growth in this sector. Economic analysis also shows that medium density housing opportunities are important for the Greensborough activity centre, with a focus on townhouses rather than apartments. This reflects a range of factors, including underlying property market conditions combined with more central Melbourne locations being more attractive. Nevertheless, there is still an opportunity for niche apartment developments to leverage off Greensborough’s key attributes. These include access to regional shopping facilities, public transport, open space and potentially new lifestyle opportunities within the centre. It is not expected that the demand for opportunities is likely to increase in the future. Locality Plan The Locality Plan shows the location of the Precincts in the Activity Centre boundary. The Precincts being reviewed are 2, 5 and 6 and are highlighted on the following plan.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 36
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.3
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 – GREENSBOROUGH ACTIVITY CENTRE REVIEW cont’d
Figure 1: Location of Precincts 2, 5 and 6 within the Greensborough Activity Centre
HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions. 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. PROPOSAL A review of Precincts 2, 5 and 6 of the Greensborough Activity Centre has been done to consider more appropriate building heights and setbacks are aligned with the Vision of the Greensborough Structure Plan. The review has created Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines for Precincts 2, 5 and 6, as shown in Attachment 1. The Guidelines change the existing requirements for building heights and setbacks in in these precincts. These changes have been reflected in an amended schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 of the Banyule Planning Scheme, shown in Attachment 2. The proposed planning scheme provisions include changes to the Precinct Objectives, Precinct Requirements and Precinct Guidelines for Precincts 2, 5 and 6.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 37
4.3
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 – GREENSBOROUGH ACTIVITY CENTRE REVIEW cont’d DISCUSSION The following discussion gives an overview of the three precincts being reviewed, and a comparison with existing height and setback requirements. Precinct 2 – Henry Street East Precinct 2 is currently occupied by a Council surface car park and a (Council owned) dwelling at 29 Howard Street. A rear service lane runs along the back of the commercial properties which front onto Grimshaw Street. To the west the precinct is bounded by Henry Street where there is a ‘Woolworths’ supermarket and its multi‐level car park. To the east the precinct is bounded by Howard Street. Both 25 and 27 Howard Street contain detached single storey dwellings. Number 25 Howard Street is owned by Council and is to be included within the Henry Street carpark as part of a proposed increase in the carpark to be undertaken next year. To the south the precinct abuts residential properties in Henry Street and Broad Street.
Photo 1: Aerial view of Precinct 2
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 38
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.3
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 – GREENSBOROUGH ACTIVITY CENTRE REVIEW cont’d Existing and proposed precinct requirements The following Table 1 is a summary of the Existing Requirements and the Proposed Requirements for Precinct 2. Table 1: Comparison between existing and proposed requirements for Precinct 2
Existing Requirements Preferred max. building height 11.5 metres from ground level for a distance of 10 metres from Henry Street, and 15 metres from the southern and eastern boundaries of the precinct.
Proposed Requirements
Preferred setback
Sub Precinct
Preferred max. building height
Preferred street wall building height
Preferred Setback
0 metres from Henry Street.
Precinct 2A
20 metres
11 metre street wall height.
0 metre setback to Henry Street and mid-block link
Precinct 2B
17 metres
13 metre street wall height.
0 metre setback to mid-block link
Precinct 2C
11 metres
NA.
Precinct 2D
11 metres
NA.
Clause 55.031 (Standard B6) setback to Howard Street. 0 metre setback to mid-block link. 0 metre setback to Henry Street.0 metre setback to mid-block link.
Minimum of 5 metres on the southern and eastern boundaries of the precinct for a landscape buffer (as shown on the Precinct Map).
Maximum overall height of 18.5 metres elsewhere.
It is also noted that the Precinct boundary has been shifted to include 2 additional Howard Street properties within Precinct 2. Precinct 5 – Southern Residential Precinct Precinct 5 is a bigger precinct compared to the other two precincts being reviewed. It is currently sub‐divided into Sub‐Precinct 5A and 5B. Precinct 5A has properties fronting Grimshaw Street that are mainly for medical land uses. Precinct 5B is a residential area with 1 and 2 storey dwellings. The precinct has a mix of original detached dwellings and more recent median density homes. A three storey development is under construction at 16 Eldale Avenue. The public realm in this precinct has street trees and canopy trees in the front gardens. The precinct is bounded by Grimshaw Street, Alexandra Street, Howard Street and Warwick Road to the south. Only the northern side of Warwick Road is included in the Precinct.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 39
4.3
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 – GREENSBOROUGH ACTIVITY CENTRE REVIEW cont’d
Photo 2: Aerial view of Precinct 5
Existing and proposed precinct requirements The following Table 2 gives is a summary of the Existing Requirements and the Proposed Requirements for Precinct 5. Table 2: Comparison between existing and proposed requirements for Precinct 5
Existing Requirements
Proposed Requirements
Sub Precinct
Preferred max. building height
Preferred setback
Preferred max. building height
Precinct 5A
11.5m
Min. of 3m from Grimshaw Street frontages.
20 metres
Precinct 5B
Max. building height should not exceed 9m, unless the slope of the natural ground level at any cross section wider than 8m of the site of the building 2.5 degrees or more, in which case the max building height should not exceed 10m. N/A. No existing Precinct 5C.
Setbacks should meet the objectives of Standard A3 and A10 of Clause 54 or Standard B6 and B17 of Clause 55 of the Banyule Planning Scheme.
13 metres
NA
N/A. No existing Precinct 5C.
9 metres*
N/A.
Precinct 5C
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Preferred street wall building height 13 metre street wall height.
Preferred Setback
Min. setback of 3 metres to Grimshaw Street except for corners which should have a 0 metre setback. This can be increased where significant vegetation is to be retained. Min. setback of 6 metres. This can be increased where significant vegetation is to be retained.
Clause 55.03-1 (Street Setback) setbacks apply.
Page 40
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 – GREENSBOROUGH ACTIVITY CENTRE REVIEW cont’d The Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines also identify Significant trees within Precinct 5 that should be considered for retention as part of any redevelopment proposals. Precinct 6 – Flintoff Street Precinct 6 is wedged between the Main Street Precinct and the Southern Residential Precinct. It is experiencing significant change, from detached homes to medium density apartments and multi‐storey office buildings. The Precinct also has a significant fall of about 15m from near the Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street intersection to the east, to Para Road. Notable existing buildings are the Centrelink office at 16 Grimshaw Street and the Gateway Apartments at 265 Para Road. To the north‐west the precinct is bounded by Flintoff Street. Across Flintoff Street is Council owned land which accommodates the recently completed WaterMarc, both surface and multi‐level car parks and a 2 storey commercial building. To the north‐east the precinct is bounded by Para Road, beyond which the land steeply falls away to the Greensborough Train Station, which is in a broad cutting. To the south the precinct is bounded by Grimshaw Street. On the opposite side of Grimshaw Street is Precinct 5A, which is predominantly a 2 storey medical precinct.
Photo 3: Aerial view of Precinct 6
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 41
4.3
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.3
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 – GREENSBOROUGH ACTIVITY CENTRE REVIEW cont’d Existing and proposed precinct requirements The following Table 3 is a summary of the Existing Requirements and the Proposed Requirements for Precinct 6. Table 3: Comparison between existing and proposed requirements for Precinct 6
Existing Requirements
Proposed Requirements
Sub Precinct
Preferred max. building height
Preferred setback
Preferred max. building height
Precinct 6A
15m.
Minimum of 4.5m from Grimshaw Street, Flintoff Street and Para Road frontages
22m on Key Development Sites
Preferred Setback
20 metre maximum.
Preferred street wall building height 13 m street wall height.
26 metre maximum
13 metre street wall height.
3 metre front setback.
Min. of 3m from rear boundaries of lots fronting Para Road 0m side setbacks. N/A. No existing Precinct 6B.
Precinct 6B
N/A. No existing Precinct 6B.
Precinct 6C
N/A. No existing Precinct 6C.
N/A. No existing Precinct 6C.
29 metre maximum.
13 metre street wall height.
0 metre front setback on Flintoff, 3 metre front setback on Grimshaw. 0 metre front setback.
Precinct 6D
N/A. No existing Precinct 6C.
N/A. No existing Precinct 6C.
32 metre maximum.
13 metre street wall height.
0 metre front setback.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 42
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.3
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 – GREENSBOROUGH ACTIVITY CENTRE REVIEW cont’d CONSULTATION Information Sessions Information sessions were held with land owners and occupiers in Precincts 2, 5 and 6 at the start of the review, during March 2015. At these sessions information about the review was shared. The sessions gave local people an opportunity to discuss the Greensborough Activity Centre. Feedback included: • • • • • •
Need for safe pedestrian crossing points at Grimshaw Street, Para Road and Flintoff Street. Potential overshadowing and overlooking by future developments. Increased parking in residential streets, generated from development. Querying how higher built form will revitalise Greensborough. Appearance of the Greensborough Activity Centre. Concern about closure of some retail tenancies in Greensborough.
Pre-amendment consultation It is considered that some pre-amendment consultation on the main changes proposed to the building height and setback guidelines would be beneficial. A condensed version of the guidelines should be produced that clearly shows what changes are proposed, through both text and images. This leaflet would assist in raising people’s awareness of the changes to the guidelines and invite discussion with the community. Letters to landowners in the three precincts would explain how to access the information on Council’s website or how to request further information or a meeting with a staff member. This approach may reduce the number of submissions received during the formal public exhibition period. The pre-amendment consultation would also include letters to local members of parliament advising of Council’s review of the buildings heights and setbacks and inviting discussions prior to a formal exhibition period. Exhibition of Planning Scheme Amendment Exhibition of Planning Scheme Amendment C110 will involve the following measures: • • • • • • • •
Letters to all landowners and occupiers included in Precincts 2, 5 and 6. Letters to people in our ‘interested persons’ database Letters to prescribed Ministers, as per the Planning and Environment Act. Advertising in local Leader Newspapers and the Government Gazette. Information on Council website. Opportunities for meetings with interested parties. Updates in the Banyule Banner. Notices/posters at Council Service Centres and Watermarc.
These steps go beyond Council’s statutory obligations but should ensure that the target audience is consulted.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 43
4.3
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C110 – GREENSBOROUGH ACTIVITY CENTRE REVIEW cont’d NEXT STEPS A letter will be sent to the Minister for Planning requesting Authorisation to prepare and exhibit the Planning Scheme Amendment C110. When Authorisation has been received a six week period of public exhibition will start. It is anticipated that this will start in February 2015. After considering submissions, any unresolved matters may be referred to an Independent Planning Panel that is appointed by the Minister for Planning. CONCLUSION A review of Precincts 2, 5 and 6 of the Greensborough Structure Plan area has been done and revised Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines have been prepared. The guidelines have been translated into a revised schedule to Clause 37.08 – Activity Centre Zone. A consultation exercise, done through public exhibition of the proposed amendment would give landowners and interested persons an opportunity to have their opinions heard. Any unresolved submissions arising from consultation can be referred to an Independent Planning Panel.
ATTACHMENTS
No.
Title
1 2
Greensborough Activity Centre - Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines for Precincts 2, 5 and 6. (Under Separate Cover) Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone
3
Economic Base Report - January 2015 (Under Separate Cover)
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page
Page 44
147
4.4
ALPHINGTON PAPER MILLS PROPOSAL REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Author:
Anne North - Senior Strategic Planner, City Development
File:
F2015/794
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Amcor site in Alphington (within the City of Yarra) is a 16.5 hectare parcel of land located on the corner of Heidelberg Road and the Chandler Highway and extending down to the Yarra River. Amcor ceased its paper recycling operations at the site in late 2012, and in June 2013, arranged for the land to be sold. A development plan was produced that outlines the future use and development of the site. The development plan provided for an anticipated 4,800 residents as well as non-residential land uses including commercial, community, hospitality and retail. A period of public consultation ran from 2 March to 30 March 2015 with the City of Yarra Seeking feedback and written submissions. Council lodged a submission with the City of Yarra expressing its support for residential infill on the site but raising concerns primarily about the economic impacts of the development on the nearby Ivanhoe Activity Centre, traffic congestion in the area and the importance of sustainable transport. In response to the submissions received the developer has revised the Development Plan and made changes to some aspects of the plan. The City of Yarra has organised various information sessions and is calling for submissions to the revised plan. Although the developer has made some changes to the Development Plan it is not considered that the changes go far enough. This report outlines the issues that are still a cause for concern for Council, including economic impacts, traffic congestion and sustainable transport. It is considered that Banyule should pursue a unified approach with the Cities of Yarra and Darebin in lobbying the State government for upgrades to the Hurstbridge rail line. It is also considered that Banyule should work with the City of Yarra to achieve other improved outcomes such as grade separation at Grange Road and safer cycling provision on Heidelberg Road. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.
Lodges a submission with the City of Yarra generally in accordance with the Draft Submission at Attachment 1 which outlines the following concerns: • • • • • •
The amount of retail floor space proposed and its economic impacts The impact of the development on the existing road network Access to public transport services Walking and cycling provision and access The provision and location of open space and sporting facilities Meeting diverse housing needs
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 45
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
ALPHINGTON PAPER MILLS PROPOSAL - REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN cont’d 2.
3.
Writes to the Cities of Yarra and Darebin to pursue a shared approach with the Minister for Transport to advocate for greater Government priority for upgrading the Hurstbridge Rail-line. Writes to the City of Yarra to indicate that: a)
b) c)
Should the AMCOR development enable funding for off-site multipurpose courts, that Yarra’s future construction of these courts be at a location that is no further away from Banyule than the AMCOR site, because there appears to be an undersupply of these types of courts for surrounding communities. Banyule seeks Yarra’s ongoing support for better cycling along Heidelberg Road Banyule supports Yarra’s ongoing advocacy to the Government and VicRoads for transport modelling to include Grange Road gradeseparation, Chandler Hwy upgrade to help identify other transport infrastructure upgrades that may be needed to support urban redevelopment and a shift towards more sustainable modes of movement.
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 “advocate on behalf of our community”. BACKGROUND Yarra Council first sought community feedback on an earlier version of the Development Plan in March 2015. Approximately 290 submissions were received. Banyule Council lodged a submission outlining concerns relating to: • • • • • •
The amount of retail floor space proposed The impact of the development on the existing road network Access to public transport services Walking and cycling provision and access The design and location of open space The impact on local sporting clubs and facilities
The development partners, Alphington Developments and Alpha Partners, have lodged a Revised Development Plan with the City of Yarra. The Revised Development Plan has been available for public inspection since the 5 October. The Revised Development Plan addresses some of the concerns that were raised in response to the first Development Plan.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 46
ALPHINGTON PAPER MILLS PROPOSAL - REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN cont’d Locality Plan
Map 1: Location of Alphington Paper Mill – Regional Context
Map 2: Location of Amcor site
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 47
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
ALPHINGTON PAPER MILLS PROPOSAL - REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN cont’d DISCUSSION Although the developers have listened to the community and made changes to the Development Plan there are still some unresolved concerns about the proposal that will impact on Banyule. Economic Impacts The revised Development Plan has reduced the retail component of the development from 19,000sqm to 15,000sqm which equates to a reduction of 21%. However the preferred retail mix remains unclear. It is noted that the Development Plan also provides a commitment that the proposed Neighbourhood Activity Centre cannot be upgraded to a Sub-regional Activity Centre. While a reduction in retail floor space is supported there are some remaining concerns about the impact that any ‘specialty shop’ component may have on the independent specialty retailers in Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe. More clarity and a clearer focus on “local convenience” priorities could help to address this concern. The recently released Plan Melbourne Refresh – Discussion Paper reveals that a revised Metropolitan Strategy for Melbourne will focus on meeting the convenience needs of a neighbourhood, first and foremost. There are still concerns that the retail component at AMCOR is too large, and has the potential to detrimentally affect the economic success of Ivanhoe, including the emerging retail/commercial component in the Darebin Station Precinct as identified in the adopted Ivanhoe Structure Plan. It is suggested that a further reduction in the retail/commercial floor space at AMCOR may be appropriate to help address this risk. Doing this might also reinforce a ‘local convenience’ role for retailing at the AMCOR site. Traffic and Transport Widening of Chandler Highway The widening of the Chandler Highway Bridge should be considered as part of the Alphington Paper Mill Development Plan project. Similarly the Government’s grade separation at Grange Road needs to be considered as it is a government commitment. Further discussions about the Chandler Highway widening should give better consideration to other potential development sites in the locale. There may be future residential development opportunities at the existing Royal Talbot Rehabilitation Centre and Guide Dogs Victoria, which would see a further increase in traffic movements on the Chandler Highway. It is understood that VicRoads has examined a four-lane option for the Chandler Highway, but decided that the road would be near its capacity upon completion in late 2018. It is considered that it would be more sensible to plan for paving six lanes instead, ensuring that adequate provision is made for walking and cycling too.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 48
ALPHINGTON PAPER MILLS PROPOSAL - REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN cont’d Sustainable Travel The revised Development Plan gives more priority to encouraging sustainable modes of movement throughout the development site. While this initiative is supported, further attention should be made for the provision of safe, designated pedestrian and cycling links to the Alphington and Fairfield railway stations. The developer has made a commitment to offsite upgrades including a shared path on Heidelberg Road and the provision of bicycle parking at Alphington Train Station. It is anticipated that any upgrades to this path and provision of bike parking will be undertaken in consultation with Bicycle Network to achieve a best outcome. The Hurstbridge rail line is running at capacity. Urban redevelopment at key sites such as AMCOR, the emerging LaTrobe National Employment Cluster (NEC), Heidelberg Activity Centre, Ivanhoe Activity Centre and Fairfield Activity Centre all collectively illustrate the need for the Government to put increased priority to upgrading the Hurstbridge rail line. This highlights the need for neighbouring Councils to work together lobbying the State Government for upgrades. Community Infrastructure & Open Space Council has some remaining concerns about how the provision of 2,500 additional dwellings at AMCOR will impact on nearby recreational facilities and sporting clubs, including those in Banyule. Further analysis and discussion on the likely impacts on clubs and facilities would be useful. The revised Development Plan now incorporates a financial commitment to fund the construction of two multipurpose outdoor courts, to be located offsite in an area to be determined by the City of Yarra. Given the AMCOR site’s proximity to Banyule, assurance should be sought from the City of Yarra that the courts will be built in Alphington, not further away from Banyule than the AMCOR site. Housing Diversity There does not appear to be any financial agreement in place with a housing association to deliver a strong mix of affordable housing on the AMCOR site. The fall back provision of five social housing dwellings is insufficient. Better provision for social housing would provide better housing diversity for smaller household sizes. There is an opportunity for the Government to work more directly with the AMCOR development to enable a better social housing outcome. 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 - 30 November 2015
Page 49
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.4
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
ALPHINGTON PAPER MILLS PROPOSAL - REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN cont’d TIMELINES The City of Yarra has a two-step process in relation to considering submissions and making a decision on the Revised Development Plan. Step 1 The City of Yarra will consider all feedback from the community and referral authorities at a Special Council Meeting at 7pm on Thursday 26 November. Members of the community are welcome to make verbal submissions at this meeting. Step 2 The City of Yarra will consider approval of the revised Development Plan at a Special Council Meeting on Monday 2 December. At this meeting, Council may decide to approve the revised Development Plan as it is, approve the plan with conditions, or decide not approve the plan. The City of Yarra will consider an Officer Report and assessment of the Development Plan under the requirements of the Development Plan Overlay (DPO). The DPO is a specific planning control over the site that provides a framework for future development including maximum and preferred building heights, protection of the Yarra River, and a range of other considerations relating to heritage, sustainability, traffic and transport. If the City of Yarra decides to approve the revised Development Plan, the developers would then have permission to proceed with the project, subject to necessary planning requirements. CONCLUSION Council has the opportunity to lodge a submission in relation to the Revised Development Plan for the Alphington Paper Mills site outlining issues about the offsite impacts of the proposal. A submission on behalf of Banyule Council will be prepared and submitted in line with issues raised in this report.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
DRAFT Submission to the City of Yarra on the Revised AMCOR Development Plan
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 171
Page 50
4.5
GRIMSHAW STREET AND FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH - PROPOSED TRAFFIC TREATMENT
Author:
David Bailey - Engineering Co-Ordinator, City Development
Ward:
Bakewell
File:
F2015/57
Previous Items Council on 15 December 2014 (Item 8.1 - Grimshaw Street / Flintoff Street Greensborough - Pedestrian Safety) Council on 7 September 2015 (Item 4.2 - Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough - Proposed Traffic Treatment) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At its meeting on 7 September 2015 Council resolved to provide ‘in-principle’ support for the safe pedestrian crossing across Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough and for further meetings to be arranged with interested Councillors, Council Staff, the State Member for Bundoora, and VicRoads. This report discusses the outcome of these meetings and the proposed functional design for infrastructure works to address road safety concerns. The design has been prepared to provide safer crossing opportunities for pedestrians and a road environment that encourages motorists to drive at 40km/h. Approval is sought to formally submit the functional design to VicRoads for approval and seek funding for the works to be completed next financial year. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Approves the attached functional design for Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough and formally submits the design to VicRoads for approval. The functional design includes: • Reconfiguration of the Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street intersection and inclusion of pedestrian operated signals. • Installation of a pedestrian crossing point on Grimshaw Street, between Stubley Court and Eldale Avenue. • Installation of a pedestrian crossing point on Flintoff Street, midblock between Grimshaw Street and Para Road. • Reduction of the effective road width of Grimshaw Street, between Church Street and Stubley Court. • Installation of bicycle lanes along Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street. • Redesign of the Flintoff Street and Para Road intersection to include a pedestrian crosswalk on the eastern approach and a double left turn lane on the northern approach. 2. Accepts the Transport Accident Commission (TAC) grant of $100,000 for pedestrian and cyclist safety improvements at the Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street intersection in Greensborough, and agrees to allocate $100,000 of match funding for the intersection improvements in the 2016/17 capital
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 51
4.5
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.5
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
GRIMSHAW STREET AND FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH PROPOSED TRAFFIC TREATMENT cont’d works budget. 3. Allocates a further $200,000 in the 2016/17 financial year for the implementation of works associated with the functional design for Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough in the 2016/2017 capital works budget on the basis that the State Government / VicRoads provides $400,000 on a 50/50 basis for the 2016/2017 financial year towards the project. 4. Writes to the Minister for Transport, VicRoads and the local State Member seeking support for the functional design for Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough and requesting State funding for $400,000 on a 50/50 basis for the 2016/2017 financial year. 1.
OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “strengthen local activity and employment areas”. 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 Greensborough Activity Centre is a high pedestrian and bicycle activity area. The precinct includes the Main Street Shopping Precinct, the Greensborough Plaza, Centrelink, a Community Health Centre and other medical suites, one of Council’s service centres, and WaterMarc. It is well served by public transport with eight bus routes and the Hurstbridge Railway Line connecting the Centre to the city. The Lower Plenty River Bicycle Trail runs along the east side of the Centre and some roads in the area are part of Principal Bicycle Network, and Council’s Local Bicycle Network. The high concentration of trip attractors generates a great number of pedestrian and cyclist movements in the area. This, coupled with the high volume and speed of vehicles on Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, increases the risk and severity of pedestrian and cyclist crashes.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 52
GRIMSHAW STREET AND FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH PROPOSED TRAFFIC TREATMENT cont’d The need for improvements to road safety in the area is supported by regular correspondence received by Council from residents and visitors. The intersection of Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street is a particular focus due to vehicle speeds and volumes, and pedestrian sightlines. At the start of 2013 the speed limit along Flintoff Street and on Grimshaw Street was reduced from 50km/h to 40km/h. The speed limit has since been extended to include a longer stretch of Grimshaw Street. Prior to the installation of the 40km/h speed limit on Flintoff Street and Grimshaw Street, the 85th percentile speed (the maximum travel speed of 85% of vehicles) was 59km/h (in a 50km/h zone). With the introduction of the 40km/h signs in February 2013, the 85th percentile speed was lowered to 54km/h. An extension of the 40km/h zone on Grimshaw Street to Main Street in November 2013 further reduced the 85th percentile speed to 51 km/h. Vehicle speeds remain significantly above the 40km/h limit and represent a high risk factor for road users. At its meeting on 15 December 2014 Council considered a Notice of Motion regarding safety at the intersection of Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough, and resolved: ‘That interested Councillors and appropriate officers meet with the State Member for Bundoora to discuss road safety concerns at the intersection of Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough.’ Council also considered this issue at its meeting on 7 September 2105 and resolved that: ‘1. Council Provides ‘in-principle’ support for the safe pedestrian crossing across Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough. 2.
The Ward Councillor, other interested Councillors, Council staff, the State Member for Bundoora and VicRoads meet to agree on a preferred design, including a signalised crossing on Grimshaw Street, Greensborough.’
Accordingly, meetings were held in January 2015, October 2015 and November 2015. The State Member for Bundoora has requested VicRoads prepare concept plans for the reconfiguration works at the Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street intersection including localised pedestrian safety improvements. While VicRoads has indicated it will shortly provide its design to Council, VicRoads has indicated that it supports Council’s concept design. CURRENT SITUATION Grimshaw Street has two eastbound lanes with a wide sweeping curve into Flintoff Street which allows traffic to negotiate the curve without reducing speed. Visibility around the curve is restricted due to the Watermarc building being located at the back of footpath. This restricts both driver visibility to the pedestrian crossing and pedestrians view of oncoming traffic. Pedestrian counts conducted in August 2015, identified that on a typical weekday, 280 pedestrians cross the road at or near the intersection of Flintoff Street and Grimshaw Street between 8am and 6pm. The level of pedestrian activity in the area
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 53
4.5
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.5
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
GRIMSHAW STREET AND FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH PROPOSED TRAFFIC TREATMENT cont’d is expected to increase as higher-density residential developments occur south of Grimshaw Street and the Activity Centre’s trip generation increases as a result of Council’s office relocation to Greensborough and other commercial development along Greensborough Walk. Figure 1 indicates the location of the proposed works in Greensborough.
Figure 1. Location of proposed works ADVOCACY Council has advocated on behalf of the community for a safer road environment along the Grimshaw Street-Flintoff Street road corridor for a number of years and some improvements have occurred. Enforcement of the speed limit in the area has been requested to the Victoria Police. Meetings have been held with the State Member for Bundoora and VicRoads to consider options for road safety improvements along Grimshaw Street and at its intersection with Flintoff Street as discussed in this report. THE PROPOSAL Research indicates that narrower carriageways, lower curve radii at intersections and pedestrian crossing points contribute to providing a safer and slower road environment, and provide greater pedestrian priority along key pedestrian links. A functional design (Attachment 1) has been developed which includes road improvements to reduce the injury risk for road users and pedestrians. The works are designed to reduce vehicle speeds to the signed 40km/h speed limit and provide improved pedestrian and cyclist facilities. The functional design includes reducing eastbound movements at the Grimshaw Street/Flintoff Street intersection to a single through lane and a single left turn lane. This will encourage through traffic to use The Circuit. The design has been
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 54
GRIMSHAW STREET AND FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH PROPOSED TRAFFIC TREATMENT cont’d developed with the support of road safety experts and in consultation with VicRoads’ officers. It is considered that the proposal will improve pedestrian and traffic safety along the Grimshaw Street-Flintoff Street corridor as: •
The reconfiguration of the intersection of Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street will improve sightlines for pedestrians crossing the road, while the tighter turning radius and single lane will reduce the speed at which vehicles turn left from Grimshaw Street into Flintoff Street
•
The installation of pedestrian crossings, including the realignment of the kerb will reduce the carriageway width and reduce the distance for pedestrians to cross.
•
The reduction of the attractiveness of the route for some arterial traffic will result in a reduction in the volume of vehicles in the area. This results in a lower crash probability.
FUNDING IMPLICATIONS The estimated cost of the design and construction of the infrastructure is $800,000. To partially fund the project, an application for $100,000 for the 2016 Local Government Grants from the Transport Accident Commission (TAC) was submitted at the end of August 2015. The TAC has confirmed that the application was successful and the funds are available for expenditure by 31 December 2017. Matched funding of $100,000 is required to accompany the grant and is proposed to be allocated in the 2016/17 financial year Capital Works Program. VicRoads is supportive of the functional design and has committed to making an application to seek funding for the project as part of the State budget on a 50/50 basis as Grimshaw Street is a Main Road under the control of VicRoads. In order to maximise State funding opportunities a commitment to allocate a further $200,000 is proposed in the 2016/17 financial year Capital Works Program would significantly improve the benefit cost ratio (BCR) of the project. The cost of the bicycle lane and pedestrian crossing works on Flintoff Street will be covered by secured funds from the grant to link the Plenty River Trail to the Greensborough Activity Centre. Other costs associated with the development of the project during this financial year will be covered using operating budget funding.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 55
4.5
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
4.5
Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment
GRIMSHAW STREET AND FLINTOFF STREET, GREENSBOROUGH PROPOSED TRAFFIC TREATMENT cont’d TIMELINES Subject to Council’s approval of the attached functional design layout, the project can be staged to be delivered as indicated in Table 1. Table 1. Project delivery staging Stage Installation of a safe pedestrian crossing point on Flintoff Street, midblock between Grimshaw Street and Para Road (Expected to be completed December 2015). Reconfiguration of the intersection of Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street. Installation of safe pedestrian crossing points on Grimshaw Street, between Stubley Court and Eldale Avenue. Reduce the effective road width of Grimshaw Street between Church Street and Stubley Court. Installation of bicycle lanes along Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street. Reconfigure the operation of the intersection of Flintoff Street and Para Road.
CONCLUSION The attached functional design for Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough, has been developed to address road safety concerns related to pedestrian sightlines at crossing points, high vehicle speeds and general road safety. Approval is sought to formally submit the functional design to VicRoads for approval and seek funding allocation from VicRoads and Council with the aim to finalise this project in the next two years.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Concept Plan for Works Along Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 176
Page 56
5.1
5.1
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
MACLEOD RECREATION AND FITNESS CENTRE MASTER PLAN
Author: Tom Zappulla - Leisure Facilities, Place & Partnership Co-Ordinator, Community Programs Ward:
Ibbott
File:
F2015/962
Previous Items Council on 1 December 2014 (Item 5.3 - Macleod Recreation and Fitness Master Plan) Council on 5 October 2015 (Item 5.1 - Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre Draft Master Plan) Council on 9 November 2015 (Item 5.1 - Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre Draft Master Plan: Submission Report) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre (MRFC) is located in Wungan Street Macleod. The land at Wungan Street Macleod is Crown land and is leased to Banyule City Council. The buildings located on the site are owned by Banyule City Council. In November 2015 Council granted YMCA Victoria a new short term lease concluding 30 June 2018 (2.5 years). The proposed expiry date for the lease will provide an opportunity for Council to consider the Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre Masterplan, review the current operational subsidy and consider a longer term capital improvement lease. In November 2013 Council engaged HM Leisure Planning to complete a master plan for the MRFC. A working group with officers, YMCA representatives and HM Leisure Planning was formed to assist with the preparation of the master plan. During the development of the draft master plan, two community consultation phases were conducted and over 550 people actively engaged during both consultation periods. The second round of consultations with users and the wider community gave strong endorsement to the earlier consultation findings in that they call for the upgrading, modernisation and expansion of MRFC. Seventy five (75) submissions were received during the final community consultation phase and all of the submissions supported the retention of the current indoor sports court (basketball court) as detailed in the draft master plan. The quantities surveyor (QS) report has confirmed the cost to build the preferred design is $10,878,000 at today’s building costs. To assist in the implementation and proposed upgrades of the master plan, officers intend to conduct an expression of interest process (EOI) seeking potential financial contributions via a capital improvement lease for the Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre. The final master plan meets the objectives of the master plan project, has acknowledged and responded to community feedback and once adopted, will help guide facility upgrades and programming improvements to ensure the facility meets contemporary standards, is sustainable and meets that changing needs of the
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 57
5.1
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
MACLEOD RECREATION AND FITNESS CENTRE MASTER PLAN cont’d community. RECOMMENDATION That Council adopt the (attached) Master Plan for Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre (MRFC). OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “promote and support health and wellbeing”. BACKGROUND Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre (MRFC) is located in Wungan Street Macleod. The land at Wungan Street Macleod is Crown land and is leased to Banyule City Council. The buildings located on the site are owned by Banyule City Council. In November 2015 Council granted YMCA Victoria a short term lease concluding 30 June 2018 (2.5 years). The expiry date for the lease will provide an opportunity for Council to consider the Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre master plan, review the current operational subsidy and test the market for a possible longer term capital improvement lease to assist with the delivery of the master plan. The site is currently at programming capacity and has a number of universal access and design issues limiting its functionality and ability to serve its community. In November 2013 Council engaged HM Leisure Planning to complete a master plan for the MRFC. A working group with officers, YMCA representatives and HM Leisure Planning was formed to assist with the preparation of the master plan. In December 2014, Council released the draft master plan to the public for consultation for a seven (7) week period. At the conclusion of the consultation period Council received nineteen (19) submissions regarding the plan. The key issues which emerged through the consultation phase focused on the quality and level of consultation during the preparation of the draft plan and the proposed relocation of the indoor sports court. Following this feedback Council requested officers conduct a second round of consultation to influence the preparation of the finalised masterplan. Following the second consultation process, the original concept design was reviewed and a second option has been prepared. Option 1 includes relocating the indoor
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 58
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
5.1
MACLEOD RECREATION AND FITNESS CENTRE MASTER PLAN cont’d sports court to another venue and Option 2 maintains the indoor sports court however one of the four multi-purpose program rooms would not be able to be delivered. Locality Plan
HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. CONSULTATION During the development of the draft master plan, two community consultation phases were conducted and over 550 people actively engaged during both consultation periods. The second round of consultations with users and the wider community gave strong endorsement to the earlier consultation findings in that they call for the upgrading, modernisation and expansion of MRFC. The revised draft masterplan adopted for the purpose of community consultation and submissions were invited between the 7 October and 2 November 2015. The draft masterplan was advertised via: • • • • •
Council website, Heidelberg Leader newspaper, Distributed to facility membership, Distributed to all attendees of community consultation sessions and Displayed within the Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre.
CURRENT SITUATION Seventy five (75) written submissions were received during the final community consultation phase and all submissions supported the retention of the current indoor sports court (basketball court) as detailed in option two of the draft master plan.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 59
5.1
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
MACLEOD RECREATION AND FITNESS CENTRE MASTER PLAN cont’d Other key outcomes from the community consultation phase include: • • • • • • •
The community want to maintain and enhance the community hub element of the Centre. There is a need to ensure that older adult programs are well represented at the Centre Keep the Centre accessible, both financially and availability to the wider community to access The neighbourhood character and environmental appeal of the facility and area it populates should be maintained Retain at least two tennis courts for community access Create flexible and accessible exercise and program space Improve wayfinding and signage for the Centre and the precinct
Given this feedback, officers have updated the final master plan and have identified option two as the preferred option. The other key outcomes from the consultation have been incorporated in the final master plan. The executive summary of the final draft master plan is available in Attachment One and the final concept plan is included in Attachment Two. Highlights of the final concept plan include: • • • • • • • • • • • •
Maintaining the indoor sports court Delete one of the four multi-purpose program rooms on the upper level, included in Option 1 Extension of the building footprint to the north by 7 metres New lift and stair access to all levels Upgrade of finishes, fittings and fixtures generally Upgrade of plant and equipment Upgrade of external facades Gymnasium in the existing crèche location Flexible group fitness/programming rooms above the new gym area The existing crèche and change rooms have been extended towards the north to provide increased floor area for new change rooms and a new gymnasium The crèche has been relocated to a new purpose-built space adjacent to the new entry The proposed warm water pool remains as a long term aspiration and is viewed as outside the scope of the current project.
The final concept plan is 830sqm larger than the existing facility. A comparison between the existing facility and the final concept plan is included in the table below. Description: Ground Level 1 Total:
Existing Facility: 2515 600 3115 sq.
Final Concept Plan: 2870 1075 3945 sq.
The quantities surveyor (QS) report has confirmed the cost estimate to build the final concept plan is $10,878,000 at today’s building costs. Efficiencies developed in the design included the removal of the mezzanine, rationalisation of the amenities space and use of the existing structure within the building footprint. The research report to
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 60
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
5.1
MACLEOD RECREATION AND FITNESS CENTRE MASTER PLAN cont’d support the key finding in the executive summary has also been updated and is available in Attachment Three. CONCLUSION The Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre is a key recreational facility for the Banyule Community. Whilst it has continuously served as a community facility since the early 1980s, the facility is currently at programming capacity and there are a number of universal access and design issues limiting its functionality and ability to serve its community. The final master plan meets the objectives of the planning project, has acknowledged and responded to community feedback and once adopted, will help guide facility upgrades and programming improvements to ensure the facility meets contemporary standards, is financially sustainable and meets that changing needs of the community. The Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre master plan provides a way forward to position the facility to serve the local community in a sustainable cost effective way for the decades to come.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
178
2 3
MRFC Master Plan: Concept Plans MRFC Master Plan: Research Report (Under Separate Cover)
202
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page
Page 61
5.2
GENERAL CODE OF CONDUCT - PUBLIC MEETINGS
Author: Services
Gina Burden - Manager Governance & Communication, Corporate
File:
F2015/2667
5.2
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council at its meeting on 20 July 2015 adopted a Notice of Motion (NOM) which requested the development of suitable public participation guidelines for planning or generic public consultation meetings. The request resulted from concerns raised about the poor behaviour of some attendees at a previous planning consultation meeting and at other public meetings in the past. In accordance with the general direction provided in the NOM, a set of guidelines/code of conduct has been developed and drafted in consultation with key staff involved in holding public meetings. This report seeks Council adoption of the General Conduct of Code – Public Meetings (attached). Adoption of the Code will then be promoted on Council’s website and distributed to participants at Council organised consultation and information meetings in future. The Code will be supplemented with training for both Officers and interested Councillors to support the effective running of public meetings. RECOMMENDATION That Council adopt the (attached) Banyule General Code of Conduct – Public Meetings. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key directions to “engage meaningfully with our community” and to “enable good governance and accountability with minimal risk”.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 62
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
5.2
GENERAL CODE OF CONDUCT - PUBLIC MEETINGS cont’d BACKGROUND Council at its meeting on 20 July 2015 adopted the following motion: “That Council receive a report regarding ways to implement suitable public participation guidelines for Planning or generic Public Consultation meetings similar to the provisions in the Banyule City Council Governance Local Law No. 2 (2015).” The explanation given for the motion was: “This motion is presented to Council in response to concerns arising from a recent planning consultation meeting that resulted in a number of concerns due to the behaviour of some attendees. A set of guidelines for managing future meetings of this type would be useful for both Officers and Councillor. The guidelines and report back to Council should address the following; • • • • • •
In appropriate and disrespectful reference to Council staff and Councillors. Interjecting and disruptive behaviour. The need to order withdrawal of inappropriate remarks. The need to close a meeting as a result of unruly behaviour. Access to information by the public regarding planning applications. Ongoing training and development for staff and Councillors relating to conflict resolution and the conduct of public meetings.”
HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (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. For councils this is particularly relevant when they develop policies or create Local Laws. 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. There are three human rights in the Charter which are impacted by the General Code of Conduct – Public Meetings. 1.
Right to Freedom of Expression: Section 15 of the Charter says that every person has a right to hold an opinion without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas. The General Code of Conduct – Public Meetings does limit the ability of persons to freely express their opinions under certain circumstances, however, the Charter in section15(3) specifies that special duties and responsibilities are attached to the right of freedom of expression and the right may be subject to lawful restrictions reasonably necessary – (a) To respect the rights and reputation of other persons; (b) For the protection of national security, public order, public health or public morality. The limits which the Code of Conduct places on the rights of freedom of expression are considered reasonable and meet the criteria of S15(3) of the Charter.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 63
5.2
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
GENERAL CODE OF CONDUCT - PUBLIC MEETINGS cont’d 2.
Right to Peaceful Assembly: Section 16 of the Charter says that every person has the right to peaceful assembly and the right to freedom of association with others. The Code of Conduct may be seen as limiting these rights especially where a decision is taken by the chairperson to terminate a meeting or to have a group of persons removed from the meeting. The limitation is considered reasonable as the Code of Conduct requires that a decision of this nature would only be made as a last resort and only when the meeting has been severely disrupted or becomes potentially unsafe. In these circumstances the meeting could no longer be deemed a peaceful assembly.
3.
Right to take part in Public Life: Section 18 of the Charter says that every person has the right, and is to have the opportunity, without discrimination, to participate in the conduct of public affairs. Examples of participating in public life may include: • taking part in popular assemblies to make decisions about local issues • being part of a community consultation with government • being able to attend and ask questions at a local council meeting • participating in public debate and dialogue with representatives (either as an individual or as part of an organisation) Rather than limiting the ability to take part in public life, the General Code of Conduct – Public Meetings reinforces the value of public meetings and consultation forums as an effective community engagement tool. The Code’s main objective is to strengthen the ability for all persons to be involved and heard without discrimination and detriment. Again, any limitations that have been placed on this right occur only to protect the rights of others to take part in public life without hindrance. Any such limitations are therefore considered to be reasonable.
LEGAL CONSIDERATION The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act is the main legislative responsibility and obligation that Council needs to consider and has been assessed in detail in the report section above. In developing the Code of Conduct – Public meetings, consideration was also given to the provisions contained in Council’s Governance Local Law 2015 (incorporating the Meeting Procedures Code) and whether there was any ability to apply the conduct rules in the local law to general public meetings convened by Banyule. The Meeting Procedures Code applies only to formal Council meetings and special Committees of Council and while it does include a few clauses relating to the behaviour of the meeting, this mostly deals with not interrupting or disrupting a councillor while speaking. The Meeting Code also allows for the Chairperson to call to order any person who disrupts the meeting and may order him or her to be removed from the chamber if they again breach the Code, and may call upon an authorised officer or the police to remove the offending party from the chamber. The approach above is consistent with the suggested steps outlined in the Code of Conduct - Public Meetings with regard to breaches of the conduct rules. Access to information regarding planning applications The Council resolution of 20 July 2015 calling for a set of guidelines and for a report back to Council asked that the report consider, amongst other matters, the access to information by the public regarding planning applications. It is understood that this
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 64
GENERAL CODE OF CONDUCT - PUBLIC MEETINGS cont’d relates to a concern that applicants and objectors contact details are made readily available as part of planning applications and is viewable during planning consultation meetings which sometimes results in individuals, particularly objectors, being contacted. It is considered that this matter is separate to the conduct of meetings and is governed by the requirements of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and practices established by the Development Planning Department in providing access to planning documentation and information. A planning register of applications must be made available for public viewing in accordance with the provision of the Act. Objections to applications must also be made available for viewing and may contain information about individual objectors. CONSULTATION Staff who are regularly involved in organising or conducting public meetings have been consulted in the preparation of the Draft Conduct Code and their feedback has been incorporated. Relevant officers are of the view that having a code of this type to reference and provide to meeting participants should greatly assist and support staff in dealing with difficult meetings in the future. Councillors were also provided with the opportunity to give feedback on the draft code of conduct and there has been general support for the document as drafted. DISCUSSION Code of Conduct In addressing the request for appropriate guidelines to assist in managing public meetings, relevant officers have developed a set of key conduct rules which could apply to all public meetings. The intention was to develop a set of easy to understand rules that could be applied to any public meeting but be particularly useful and relevant for consultation meetings and other public meetings where there is potential for debate and emotions to become heated. It was considered that keeping the conduct rules and guidelines to a one page document would be preferred as this would make it easy to send out with any invitations and be available on Council’s website. The Chairperson/convenor could then refer to the document at the start of the meeting, reminding attendees of the conduct rules before the meeting gets underway. Should there be an issue during the meeting, the chairperson could again remind attendees of the rules and also warn about the potential course of action regarding the breach of conduct rules which is also covered in the one page General Conduct Code document. The key section of the document is the list of code of conduct rules. These rules are considered the minimum expectation to apply to all attendees to ensure the effective and civil conduct of public meetings. The 10 suggested conduct rules are: 1.
Mobile phones and other personal devices must be turned off or switched to silent during the course of the meeting.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 65
5.2
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
5.2
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
GENERAL CODE OF CONDUCT - PUBLIC MEETINGS cont’d 2. 3. 4. 5.
Only speak when acknowledged and given the floor by the chairperson. Stay within the allotted time provided to speak. Be civil and courteous particularly when addressing the meeting. Direct remarks, comments or questions through the chairperson when you are speaking. 6. Do not interrupt or distract other speakers. 7. Comments must relate directly to the matter being discussed. 8. Do not use derogatory, defamatory, threatening, or offensive remarks about individuals or groups/bodies. 9. Do not use gestures or other means to intentionally disturb the order and decorum of the meeting. 10. Observe instructions from the chairperson at all times. Training
The Council resolution also called for ongoing training and development of Councillors and staff in conflict resolution and the conduct of meetings. It is agreed that training is an important component of ensuring the successful conduct of public meetings, as sometimes it is poor pre-planning or chairing of meetings which contributes to a meeting becoming disruptive. Appropriate training will be sourced and conducted as part of the rollout and introduction of the General Code of Conduct – Public Meetings. This will include both a combination of externally sourced training as well as more focused training or mentoring for identified individuals who may be new to running meetings. CONCLUSION Conducting well run public meetings is an important part of local government and the aim should be to ensure that all participants get the opportunity to express their views and listen to the views of others in a respectful way. Unfortunately, this aim is not always achieved, especially when the subject matter is contentious or there are strong competing interests at stake. The General Code of Conduct – Public Meetings has therefore been drafted to assist Banyule Council’s public meetings and forums operate fairly and transparently. It sets out the expected levels of behaviour and responsibilities of participants as well as the responsibilities of those chairing or organising a public meeting. Importantly, the code of conduct also articulates what steps will be taken should any person/s consistently fail to have regard for the expected rules of conduct.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Draft General Code of Conduct - Public Meetings
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 206
Page 66
5.3
BANYULE ARTS AND CULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE - APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS
Author:
Colin James - Art & Cultural Team Leader, Community Programs
File:
F2015/1637
Previous Items Council on 19 October 2015 (Item 5.1 - Banyule Arts and Culture Advisory Committee Terms of Reference and Selection process) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A review of the Arts and Cultural Advisory Committees has been undertaken and the revised Terms of Reference for the Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee (BACAC) were adopted on 19 October 2015. BACAC provides a formal mechanism for Council to consult with key stakeholders, seek specialist advice and enable community participation in the strategic development of arts, culture and heritage planning, policy and development. A call for nominations process was recently undertaken for the BACAC and nine (9) nominations were received. This report considers the appointment of members to BACAC. RECOMMENDATION That Council appoint the following persons (Names will be provided at the Council Meeting) to the Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee.
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 The Arts and Culture Team have operated a number of committees and reference groups over the years, many of which have fallen into disuse or lost their relevance. A review of the Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee has been undertaken. The revised Terms of Reference for the Banyule Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee were adopted on 19 October 2015. The selection process for community members was also presented at this meeting.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 67
5.3
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
5.3
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
BANYULE ARTS AND CULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE - APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS cont’d
The BACAC Terms of Reference supports the establishment of working groups which address specific areas of Arts, Culture and Heritage activity and report through the committee to Council where necessary. Members of the public, who are not committee members, can participate in the working groups if they have a particular interest in a project or program. A call for nominations to the BACAC was made in early November and closed midNovember. Nine (9) nominations were received and a further three (3) nominations were received to partake in the working groups. The terms of reference allow for fifteen (15) positions on the Committee. Councillors Melican and Mulholland are the delegates for the Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee. 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. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The committee will support the development of policy concerning arts, culture and heritage in Banyule. Its first involvement will be in the development of a public art policy during the current financial year. CONSULTATION The invitation to nominate for a position on the advisory committee was advertised in the Heidelberg Leader on the Tuesday 3 November 2015 and the Diamond Valley Leader on the Wednesday 4 November 2015. Information was also included on the Banyule website, the Arts and Culture Facebook page and the Pinpoint Website. Email notification was also sent to previous members of Banyule Arts advisory Committees. TIMELINES The nominations will be appointed for a period of two years. The first meeting of the committee will be in December 2015 on a date to be confirmed with the new committee members and Councillors Mulholland and Melican. CONCLUSION The revised Term of Reference will create one access point to Council for all Arts and Cultural business and streamlines the process for both Council and the community.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 68
BANYULE ARTS AND CULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE - APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS cont’d The wide call for Expression of Interest provided an opportunity for new interest in Arts and Cultural issues across the municipality and has attracted a number nominations from community members who have not previously been involved in Banyule’s Arts and Cultural Committees. The BACAC provides a formal mechanism for Council to consult with key stakeholders, seek specialist advice and enable community participation in the strategic development of arts, culture and heritage planning, policy and development.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 69
5.3
Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life
6.1
SECTION OF ROAD (RW028) ADJACENT TO THE REAR OF 4/98 LOWER HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE - PROPOSED DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE - HEARING OF SUBMISSIONS
Author:
Lorraine James - Property Officer, City Development
Ward:
Griffin
File:
F2015/451
Previous Items Council on 21 September 2015 (Item 6.4 - Proposed Discontinuance and Sale of Section of Road (RW028) Adjacent to the Rear of 4/98 Lower Heidelberg Road Ivanhoe) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Consistent with Council’s resolution of 21 September 2015 (Item CO2015/320), the statutory procedures were commenced to give public notice of Council’s intention to discontinue the section of ‘road’ (known as RW028 on Council’s Road Register) currently enclosed within the property fence line at the rear of Unit 4, 98 Lower Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe (unused ‘road’). Public notice was given in the “Heidelberg Leader’ on 6 October 2015, with submissions on the proposal invited in accordance with section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989. The submission period closed on 3 November 2015. Three (3) submissions were received; one (1) of which included a request to be heard before a meeting of Council. The purpose of this report is for Council to consider the written submissions received and to hear from the submitter who requested to be heard in support of their written submission. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.
Receives and notes three (3) submissions were received, one of which included a request to be heard, in response to the public notice given, pursuant to sections 207A(a) and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989, of Council’s intention to discontinue and sell, to the abutting owner that section of ‘road’ (known as RW028 on Council’s Road Register), being the unused ‘road’ currently enclosed within the fence line of Unit 4 98 Lower Heidelberg Road Ivanhoe (unused ‘road’).
2.
At a future meeting of Council, determine the proposal to discontinue the unused ‘road’ and to sell the resultant land to the owner of Unit 4, 98 Lower Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe, noting three (3) submissions on the proposal were received and considered and the submitter heard by Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 30 November 2015.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 71
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
SECTION OF ROAD (RW028) ADJACENT TO THE REAR OF 4/98 LOWER HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE - PROPOSED DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE HEARING OF SUBMISSIONS cont’d OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “develop and deliver best value services and facilities”. 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, in particular, Section 20 which provides that “A person must not be deprived of his or her property other than in accordance with law”. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues because the power to discontinue a ‘road’ is conferred on Council pursuant to Section 206 and Clause 3 of Schedule 10 of the Act. Any person who considers that they have been deprived of their rights may make a submission in accordance with Section 223 of the Act with respect of a proposal to discontinue a ‘road’. BACKGROUND The right of way (known as RW028 identified as such on the plan in Figure 1) currently provides vehicular and pedestrian access to the rear units of 98 Lower Heidelberg and 29 Locksley Roads, Ivanhoe. It also provides pedestrian access to several units at 27 Locksley Road Ivanhoe. A section of the ‘road’ has been enclosed within the fence line of Unit 4 98 Lower Heidelberg Road Ivanhoe for a number of years. (See photograph in Figure 2.) The owner of Unit 4, 98 Lower Heidelberg Road has requested to purchase that section of the ‘road’ (unused ‘road’) enclosed within the fence line of the property in order to legitimise the occupation. A title search at Land Registry confirms that the unused ‘road’ forms part of the land remaining untransferred in certificate of title volume 3896 folio 073, registered in the name of Unilaw Corporation Pty Ltd.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 72
SECTION OF ROAD (RW028) ADJACENT TO THE REAR OF 4/98 LOWER HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE - PROPOSED DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE HEARING OF SUBMISSIONS cont’d
Figure 1: Locality plan
Figure 2: Fence erected across the ‘road’ A plan showing the detail of the unused ‘road’ proposed to be discontinued and sold, which has an area of 39m2, is shown in Figure 3.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 73
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
SECTION OF ROAD (RW028) ADJACENT TO THE REAR OF 4/98 LOWER HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE - PROPOSED DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE HEARING OF SUBMISSIONS cont’d
Figure 3: Proposed area of discontinuance POLICY IMPLICATIONS The proposal has been considered, having regard to the aims and objectives of the Rights of Way Policy and Strategy adopted by Council on 2 June 2014. Service Authorities and Council officers have commented on the aspects that relate to this proposal and the relevant matters of Council’s policy regarding the discontinuance of ‘roads’. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION EASEMENT RIGHTS If the unused ‘road’ is discontinued easement rights in favour of Council and Yarra Valley Water will be preserved in order to protect existing assets. No structure of a permanent nature can be placed over the easement without consent. ASSET MANAGEMENT The unused ‘road’ is currently listed in Council’s Road Register as ‘occupied’. The unused ‘road’, which does not portray the physical characteristics of a ‘road’, is considered no longer required as ‘road’ for public use and should be removed from Council’s Road Register. LEGAL CONSIDERATION STATUTORY PROCEDURES The power to discontinue or remove ‘road’ status and sell the resultant land is conferred on Council pursuant to Section 206 and Clause 3 of Schedule 10 of the Act. Public notice of the proposal was given in the “Heidelberg Leader’ on 6 October 2015, with submissions on the proposal invited in accordance with section 223 of the Act. The submission period closed on 3 November 2015. Three submissions were received. Section 223 of the Act provides that any person who makes a submission incorporating a request to be heard is entitled to appear in
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 74
SECTION OF ROAD (RW028) ADJACENT TO THE REAR OF 4/98 LOWER HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE - PROPOSED DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE HEARING OF SUBMISSIONS cont’d person or to be represented by a person acting on their behalf, before a meeting of Council. SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED Copies of written submissions and further correspondence have been provided to Councillors under separate cover. Issues raised in each of the submissions have been paraphrased and responses are outlined in the summary below. Table 1: Summary of Written Submissions Submission Submitter 1 Queried Council’s power to sell privately owned land.
Submitter 2 Raised concerns regarding access via the right of way at the rear of 27 Locksley Road being denied because of the fencing off of the right of way adjacent to 37 Gilbert Road and at the rear of Unit 4, 98 Lower Heidelberg Road. The submitter requests that the section of ‘road’ is not discontinued and that the fence removed and the ‘road’ reinstated for use by adjoining properties and the public. In the alternative, if the ‘road’ is discontinued, the Owners Corporation be able to purchase all or a half portion of the land. Submitter 3 Raised issues relating to the occupation of the former right of way adjacent to 37 Gilbert Road, Ivanhoe and requested Council enforce any illegal occupancy of land. In the event that the road is discontinued, the land be offered for sale to all abutting owners (including the Owners Corporation) but not to 37 Gilbert Road. The submitter registered interest in purchasing the resultant land.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Response Council’s power to discontinue or remove the ‘road’ status is to be found in Section 206, Clause 3 of Schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1989 as supplemented by the definition of ‘road’ which appears in section 3(1) of that Act. This section of ‘road’ adjacent to 37 Gilbert Road was the subject of a claim by adverse possession in September 1997 and is not relevant to the current proposal. The 27 Locksley Road units currently have pedestrian access to the right of way. The section of ‘road’ currently occupied by Unit 4, 98 Lower Heidelberg Road has limited, but not denied vehicular access to the common property (car parking spaces) at the rear of 27 Locksley Road. Subject to complying with any existing planning permit conditions to the contrary, vehicle access via the right of way could be sought.
Issues raised in relation to the occupation of the former right of way adjacent to 37 Gilbert Road Ivanhoe are not relevant to this proposal. This land was claimed by ‘adverse possession’ by the former owner of 37 Gilbert Road in September 1997. There is no evidence to suggest that the Owners Corporation or any individual has previously sought to gain vehicular access from the right of way. Under existing conditions, the common area of 27 Locksley Road has approximately 9 metres of road abuttal that is not currently utilised.
Page 75
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.1
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
SECTION OF ROAD (RW028) ADJACENT TO THE REAR OF 4/98 LOWER HEIDELBERG ROAD IVANHOE - PROPOSED DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE HEARING OF SUBMISSIONS cont’d DISCUSSION The giving of public notice does not compel Council to discontinue the unused ‘road’ or sell the resultant land. Council is merely complying with its statutory obligations under the Act which are to give public notice and to hear and consider written and oral submissions received. CONCLUSION Council must consider the written submissions received and hear from submitters who have requested to be heard in support of their submission before making a decision. It is therefore appropriate for Council to consider the discontinuance and sale of the unused ‘road’ at a future Council meeting.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 76
6.2
THE REAR OF 43 HAIG STREET HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS - PROPOSED ROAD DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE OF LAND
Author:
Lorraine James - Property Officer, City Development
Ward:
Olympia
File:
F2015/1289
Previous Items Council on 21 September 2015 (Item 6.3 - Proposed road Discontinuance and Sale of Land - Section of Pimelea Lane at the rear of 43 Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Consistent with Council’s resolution of 21 September 2015, the statutory procedures were commenced to give public notice of Council’s intention to discontinue and sell the section of ‘road’ immediately adjacent to the rear of 43 Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights currently enclosed within the fence line of that property (unused ‘road’). Public notice was given in the “Heidelberg Leader” on 6 October 2015, with submissions on the proposal invited in accordance with section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989. The submission period closed at 5:00pm on 3 November 2015. No submissions were received. The proposal has been considered having regard to current and potential future uses of the unused ‘road’. The unused ‘road’ shows no evidence of being used by the public. Accordingly, there appears to be no impediment to Council forming the view that the unused ‘road’ is no longer reasonably required as a ‘road’ for public use. This report seeks Council’s decision to discontinue the unused ‘road’, and to then consider a further report in relation to sale of the resultant land to the abutting owner of 43 Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights. RECOMMENDATION That: 1.
Having complied with sections 207A(a) and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989: a. by giving public notice in the “Heidelberg Leader” on 6 October 2015; b. by providing an opportunity to those who have requested to be heard at Council’s Ordinary Meeting of 30 November 2015 to be heard at that meeting; and c. by recording that no submissions have been received; Council forms the view that the section of ‘road’ immediately adjacent to the rear of 43 Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights (unused road) is no longer reasonably required as a ‘road’ for public use for the following reasons: • the unused ‘road’ has been enclosed behind gates installed by the owner of 43 Haig Street for a number of years; • the movement of pedestrians or vehicles within adjacent ‘road’ will be unchanged; and • the Service Authority assets will be protected.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 77
6.2
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.2
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
THE REAR OF 43 HAIG STREET HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS - PROPOSED ROAD DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE OF LAND cont’d 2.
The unused ‘road’ be discontinued and the resultant land sold to the property owner of 43 Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights.
3.
The discontinuance of the unused ‘road’ and sale of the resultant land will not affect any right, power or interest held by Council in the ‘road’ in connection with drains or pipes under the control of Council in or near the unused ‘road’.
4.
Council’s resolution be published in the Victoria Government Gazette.
5.
Council consider a further report in relation to the sale of the resultant land to the abutting owner of 43 Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights.
OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “develop and deliver best value services and facilities”. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions. In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities. In particular, Section 20 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 206 and Clause 3 of Schedule 10 of the Act the power to discontinue a ‘road’ is conferred on Council pursuant to. Any person who considers they have been deprived of their rights may make a submission in accordance with Section 223 of the Act with respect to a proposal to discontinue a ‘road’. BACKGROUND The constructed right of way, formerly known as RW186, is bounded by Altona, Elliott, Haig and Monash Streets, Heidelberg Heights (as shown on the Locality Plan in Figure 1 below). Council recently named the right of way Pimelea Lane.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 78
THE REAR OF 43 HAIG STREET HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS - PROPOSED ROAD DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE OF LAND cont’d A title search at the Land Registry confirms that the unused ‘road’ forms part of the land remaining untransferred in certificate of title volume 5025 folio 949, registered in the name of the original subdivider. For many years the section of ‘road’ (shown cross hatched on the plan in Figure 1) immediately adjacent to the rear of 43 Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights, has been enclosed within the fence line of that property (unused ‘road’).
Figure 1: Locality Plan
Figure 2: Gates across Pimelea Lane
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 79
6.2
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.2
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
THE REAR OF 43 HAIG STREET HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS - PROPOSED ROAD DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE OF LAND cont’d Gates have been erected across Pimelea Lane from the western boundary of 45-47 Haig Street, as shown in Figure 2. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The proposal has been considered, having regard to the aims and objectives of the Rights of Way Policy and Strategy, adopted by Council on 2 June 2014. Service Authorities and Council officers have commented on aspects that relate to this proposal and the relevant matters of Council’s policy regarding the discontinuance of ‘roads’. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS Council’s engineers advise that there is a 300mm diameter UPVC pipe that runs diagonally across the south west corner of the unused ‘road’. SERVICE AUTHORITY CONSIDERATIONS Consultation with the relevant service authorities reveals that there are no assets contained within or in the vicinity of the unused ‘road’. EASEMENT RIGHTS Banyule City Council Easement rights must be saved in favour of Council for the purpose of drainage over the full width of the ‘road’, offset 1.0 metre east from the western boundary of the resultant land. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS The Banyule Planning Scheme governs the use and development within the municipality and Banyule City Council is the responsible authority administering the scheme. Under the Planning Scheme, the unused ‘road’, is included in the General Residential Zone – Schedule 1 (GRZ1) and is affected by the Vegetation Protection (VPO5) overlay control. Banyule’s Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy at Clause 22.02 of the Planning Scheme includes the area within its Garden Suburban (GS6) precinct. ASSET MANAGEMENT The unused ‘road’ is currently listed in Council’s Road Register as ‘occupied’. It has been enclosed within the existing gates for many years. It is considered no longer required as ‘road’ for public use and should be removed from Council’s Road Register.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 80
THE REAR OF 43 HAIG STREET HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS - PROPOSED ROAD DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE OF LAND cont’d LEGAL CONSIDERATION STATUTORY PROCEDURES The power to discontinue or remove ‘road’ status and sell the resultant land is conferred on Council pursuant to Section 206 and Schedule 10 Clause 3 of the Act. Public notice of Council’s intention to discontinue a ‘road’ an sell the resultant land was given in the “Heidelberg Leader” on 6 October 2015, with submissions on the proposal invited in accordance with section 223 of the Act. The submission period closed on 3 November 2015. No submissions were received. On publication of Council’s resolution to discontinue a ‘road’ in the Victoria Government Gazette, the ‘road’ status is removed and the title to resultant land then vests in Council. CURRENT SITUATION The purpose of this report is for Council to decide whether or not to discontinue the unused ‘road’ and sell the resultant land. A further report will be presented to Council in relation to the sale of the resultant land to the abutting owner. DISCUSSION The abutting owner has been made aware that no formal offer to sell the resultant land can be made until the necessary statutory procedures have been successfully completed and Council formally resolves to proceed with the proposal. The giving of public notice does not compel Council to discontinue or sell the resultant land. Council is merely complying with its statutory obligations under the Act, which are to give public notice and to hear and consider written submissions on such a proposal, before making a decision at a future meeting of the Council. The proposal has been considered having regard to current and potential future uses. It is considered that the unused ‘road’ is no longer required as a ‘road’ for public use because: • • •
the unused ‘road’ has been enclosed behind gates installed by the owner of 43 Haig Street for a number of years; the movement of pedestrians or vehicles within the adjacent ‘road’ will be unchanged; and the Service Authority assets will be protected.
Having given public notice, and to proceed with the proposal, Council must now be able to form the view that the unused ‘road’ is no longer reasonably required for public use.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 81
6.2
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.2
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
THE REAR OF 43 HAIG STREET HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS - PROPOSED ROAD DISCONTINUANCE AND SALE OF LAND cont’d CONCLUSION From responses received, and the absence of formal submissions, there appears to be no impediment to Council forming the view that the unused ‘road’ is no longer reasonably required as a ‘road’ for public use. Accordingly, the proposal to discontinue the used ‘road’ and sell the resultant land to the abutting owner of 43 Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights, should be supported.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 82
6.3
CREATION OF PLANTATION LANE
Author:
Lorraine James - Property Officer, City Development
Ward:
Beale
File:
F2014/529
6.3
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
Previous Items Council on 21 September 2015 (Item 6.2 - Creation of Plantation Lane) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Consistent with Council’s resolution of 21 September 2015, statutory procedures were commenced to give public notice of Council’s intention to discontinue a section of Dawson Street, Briar Hill, located within E J Andrews Reserve (unused ‘road’) and retain the resultant land for municipal purposes. The proposal has been considered having regard to current and potential future uses of the unused ‘road’. The unused ‘road’ does not portray the physical characteristics of a ‘road’. Accordingly, there appears to be no impediment to Council forming the view that the unused ‘road’ is no longer reasonably required as a ‘road’ for public use. This report seeks Council’s decision to discontinue the unused ‘road’ and retain the resultant land for municipal purposes. Following the discontinuance of the unused ‘road’ it is proposed to extend and create Plantation Lane as ‘road’ on title, and consolidate the resultant land from the discontinued ‘road’ with the remaining titles to E J Andrews Reserve. RECOMMENDATION That: 1.
Having complied with sections 207A(a) and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989: a. by giving public notice in the “Diamond Valley Leader” on 7 October 2015; b. by providing an opportunity to those who have requested to be heard at Council’s Ordinary Meeting of 30 November 2015 to be heard at that meeting; and c. by recording that no submissions have been received; Council forms the view that the section of ‘road’ located within E J Andrews Reserve, Briar Hill (unused road) is no longer reasonably required as a ‘road’ for public use for the following reasons: • the unused ‘road’ does not portray the physical characteristics of a road; • the proposal will not impact on the movement of pedestrians or vehicles within the vicinity of the ‘road’; • all Service Authorities’ assets will be protected; • the proposal does not involve the destruction or removal of native vegetation; • the ‘road’ forms part of a significant overland flow path for stormwater; and • the discontinuance of the unused ‘road will not affect physical access.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 83
6.3
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
CREATION OF PLANTATION LANE cont’d
2.
The unused ‘road’ be discontinued and the resultant land retained for municipal purposes.
3.
Council’s resolution be published in the Victoria Government Gazette.
4.
The proposed plan of subdivision PS718682S is lodged for certification and registration at Land Registry to create Plantation Lane as R1 ‘road’ on title and consolidate the resultant land from the discontinued ‘road’ with the remaining titles associated with E J Andrews Reserve.
5.
Council accept the contribution of $4,400.00 inclusive of GST from the property owner of 1 Sherbourne Road, Briar Hill, to facilitate an extension of Plantation Lane necessary to provide sufficient road abuttal to construct a crossover in accordance with the endorsed plans shown in Attachment 2.
OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “develop and deliver best value services and facilities”. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions. In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter. In particular, Section 20 which provides that “A person must not be deprived of his or her property other than in accordance with law”. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues because the power to discontinue a ‘road’ is conferred on Council pursuant to Section 206 and Clause 3 of Schedule 10 of the Act. Any person who considers they have been deprived of their rights may make a submission in accordance with Section 223 of the Act with respect to a proposal to discontinue a ‘road’. BACKGROUND In the early 1990’s, VicRoads undertook roadworks in Sherbourne Road, Briar Hill, resulting in vehicular access to certain Sherbourne Road properties being removed, namely those properties on the northern side, numbered 1-15.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 84
CREATION OF PLANTATION LANE cont’d Vehicular access was subsequently restored, by the former Eltham Council gazetting, as a public highway, part of E J Andrews Reserve, located at the rear of those properties. This unconstructed “public highway” is known as Plantation Lane. Despite this declaration being made on 5 August 1992, Plantation Lane has never been created as a ‘road’ on title. The declaration of Plantation Lane afforded only a narrow 2.3 metres road abuttal to 1 Sherbourne Road, as shown in Figure 1. This became apparent when the new owner of 1 Sherbourne Road recently sought to install a cross over at the rear of that property, off Plantation Lane. An extract of the endorsed plan associated with this property is shown in Figure 2 below. (A full copy of the endorsed plan can be viewed in Attachment 2). Having been issued the necessary planning permission, the owner of 1 Sherbourne Road, has written to Council requesting the provision of sufficient ‘road’ abuttal access to Plantation Lane to lawfully construct a crossover. The construction of the proposed crossover cannot proceed until such time as Plantation Lane is extended and created as a road on title. It is considered prudent that, as part of this process, the adjacent unused ‘road’ known as Dawson Street, be discontinued and consolidated with the titles to E J Andrews Reserve. E J Andrews Reserve, located at 13 Williams Road, Briar Hill, comprises 7 lots on two separate titles, and a ‘paper road’ known as Dawson Street on title. The discontinuance of the ‘paper road’ and consolidation of titles to E J Andrews Reserve had been identified for further investigation.
Figure 1: Locality Plan
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 85
6.3
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.3
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
CREATION OF PLANTATION LANE cont’d
Figure 2: Endorsed Plan A proposed plan of subdivision PS718682S has been prepared under section 35(8) of the Subdivision Act 1988 (see Attachment 1) to • extend Plantation Lane; • create Plantation Lane as ‘R1’ road on title; • remove an unwanted easement; • create easements in accordance with Council and service authorities’ requirements; and • consolidate all lots that make up E J Andrews Reserve, including the resultant land from the discontinued unused ‘road’. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The proposal has been considered, having regard to the aims and objectives of the Rights of Way Policy and Strategy, adopted by Council on 2 June 2014. Service Authorities and Council officers have commented on aspects that relate to this proposal and the relevant matters of Council’s policy regarding the discontinuance of ‘roads’. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS Council engineers advise that there are stormwater assets within the northern section of E J Andrews Reserve and that the land is affected by Banyule’s Special Building Overlay. This indicates significant overland flow during stormwater events. Consequently, the resultant land should be retained for municipal purposes as part of EJ Andrews Reserve to preserve the overland flow path for stormwater.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 86
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.3
CREATION OF PLANTATION LANE cont’d SERVICE AUTHORITY CONSIDERATIONS Consultation with the relevant service authorities reveals that there are assets contained within or in the vicinity of the unused ‘road’, namely: • Yarra Valley Water Ltd – several sewers • Ausnet Services – power lines EASEMENT RIGHTS Yarra Valley Water Limited Easement rights will be created in favour of Yarra Valley Water Ltd for sewerage purposes shown as E1, E2, and E5 on the proposed plan of subdivision (shown in Attachment 1). Banyule City Council Easement rights will be created in favour of Council for drainage purposes shown as E2 and E3 on the proposed plan of subdivision (shown in Attachment 1). Because the reserve status of the land remains unchanged, the overland storm water flow will not be affected by this proposal. Ausnet Services Easement rights will be created in favour of SPI Electricity Pty Ltd for electricity purposes shown as E6 on the proposed plan of subdivision (shown in Attachment 1). PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS The Banyule Planning Scheme governs the use and development within the municipality and the Banyule City Council is the responsible authority administering the scheme. Under the planning scheme, the unused ‘road’ is included in the Public Park and Recreation (PPRZ) Zone and is affected by Design and Development (DDO8) and Vegetation Protection (VPO1) overlay controls. Banyule’s Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy at Clause 22.02 of the Banyule Planning Scheme includes the area within its Bush Garden (BG(East)) precinct. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS Council’s Environmental Officer advises there is a mature Eucalytpus specimen on the property line of 1 Sherbourne Road and that any application to construct a cross over should take the protection of this Eucalyptus into account. Permit P317/2015 was granted to the owner of 1 Sherbourne Road to construct a crossover and driveway within the drip line of a protected tree which has addressed this issue. (See endorsed plan in Attachment 2.) ASSET MANAGEMENT The unused ‘road’ is not listed in Council’s Road Register because it is un-trafficable. The unused ‘road’, which does not portray the physical characteristics of a ‘road’, is considered no longer required as ‘road’ for public use and should be removed from Council’s Road Register.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 87
6.3
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
CREATION OF PLANTATION LANE cont’d LEGAL CONSIDERATION The power to discontinue or remove ‘road’ status and retain the resultant land for municipal purposes is conferred on Council pursuant to Section 206 and Schedule 10 Clause 3 of the Act. Public notice of Council’s intention to discontinue a ‘road’ an retain the resultant land for municipal purposes was given in the “Diamond Valley Leader” on 7 October 2015, with submissions on the proposal invited in accordance with section 223 of the Act. The submission period closed on 4 November 2015 with no submissions being received. FUNDING IMPLICATIONS Barker Monahan Pty Ltd, Land Surveyor, undertook fieldworks, computations, preparation of advertising, gazettal, plan of subdivision and removal of easement plans, to lodge plans to Council for a permit and certification and to then lodge certified plan to Land Registry. The cost to Council is $13,200.00 inclusive of GST. The owner of 1 Sherbourne Road, has indicated a willingness to contribute $4,400.00 inclusive of GST, which equates to one third of Council’s costs which will facilitate an extension of Plantation Lane necessary to provide sufficient road abuttal to that property to construct a crossover. DISCUSSION The owner of 1 Sherbourne Road has been made aware that until the necessary statutory procedures have been successfully completed and Council formally resolves to proceed with the proposal, the construction of the crossover and driveway cannot proceed. The giving of public notice does not compel Council to discontinue the unused ‘road’. Council is merely complying with its statutory obligations under the Act, which are to give public notice and to hear and consider written submissions on such a proposal, before making a decision. The proposal has been assessed, having regard to current and potential future uses. It is considered that the unused ‘road’ is no longer reasonably required as a ‘road’ for public use because: • • • • • • •
the unused ‘road’ is untrafficable; the unused ‘road’ does not portray the physical characteristics of a road; the proposal will not impact on the movement of pedestrians or vehicles within the vicinity of the ‘road’; all Service Authorities’ assets will be protected; the proposal does not involve the destruction or removal of native vegetation; the unused ‘road’ forms part of a significant overland flow path for stormwater; and the discontinuance of the unused ‘road will not affect physical access.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 88
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.3
CREATION OF PLANTATION LANE cont’d CONCLUSION Based on referral responses received, and in the absence of submissions, there appears to be no impediment to Council forming the view that the unused ‘road’ is no longer reasonably required as a ‘road’ for public use. Accordingly, the proposal to discontinue the used ‘road’ and retain the resultant land for municipal purposes, should be supported.
ATTACHMENTS No.
Title
1
Proposed Plan of Subdivision
209
2
Endorsed Plan
213
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page
Page 89
6.4
PROPOSED LEASE TO MONTMORENCY, IVANHOE AND ROSANNA BOWLING CLUBS PERMISSION - COMMENCE STATUTORY PROCEDURES
Author:
Andrea Turville - Property Officer, City Development
Ward:
Various
File:
F2013/1248 x F2013/149 x F2013/1251
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Montmorency Bowling Club Incorporated, Ivanhoe Bowling Club Incorporated and Rosanna Bowling Club Incorporated (“clubs”) are holding over under expired leases from the former Eltham and Heidelberg Councils. The proposal, which is to enter into a new lease with each of the three clubs, triggers the need to give public notice under section 190 and section 223 of the Local Government Act 1958 (Act). For the purposes of giving public notice for this proposal it is noted that the “Diamond Valley Leader” and the “Heidelberg Leader” are the newspapers generally circulated within the municipality. This report seeks to initiate the statutory processes associated with the giving of public notice of Council’s intention to grant each of the clubs a new lease. The giving of public notice of Council’s intention to enter into a lease does not compel Council to do so. Council is merely complying with its statutory obligations under the Act. These obligations include giving public notice, considering written submissions and hearing submissions from persons who have requested to be heard on such a proposal. Council will decide at a future meeting whether or not to grant the new Leases. RECOMMENDATION That: 1. Council acknowledge that the Montmorency Bowling Club Inc, Ivanhoe Bowling Club Inc and the Rosanna Bowling Club Inc (“clubs”) are seeking to enter into a new Lease for the land and improvements located at: Montmorency Bowling Club 16 Mountain View Road, Inc Montmorency Ivanhoe Bowling Club Inc 9 John Street, Ivanhoe Rosanna Bowling Club Inc 1-9 Strasbourg Road, Rosanna 2. In accordance with sections 190 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act), the statutory procedures be commenced to give public notice of Council’s intention to grant to each of the clubs a new lease of the land and improvements at the locations indicated in Item 1, and inviting written submissions from the public on the proposal, in the “Heidelberg Leader” and the “Diamond Valley Leader” on 5 January and 6 January, 2016, respectively. 3. Written submissions on the proposal be received and persons who have made a written request to be heard in person, or by a party representing them as
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 90
6.4
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
PROPOSED LEASE TO MONTMORENCY, IVANHOE AND ROSANNA BOWLING CLUBS PERMISSION - COMMENCE STATUTORY PROCEDURES cont’d specified in their submission and in accordance with the Act, be heard, at its Ordinary Meeting of Council on 22 February 2016 beginning at 7.45 pm to be held in the Council Chambers, 275 Upper Heidelberg Road Ivanhoe. 4.
Council decide on whether or not to grant the leases at a future meeting, after considering any submissions received and hearing from those persons who have requested to be heard in support of their submission.
5.
If no submissions are received, Council may, at its meeting on 22 February 2016, decide whether or not to grant the leases.
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 is the owner of the land and improvements at 16 Mountain View Road Montmorency, 9 John Street Ivanhoe and 1-9 Strasbourg Road Rosanna, on which bowling greens, clubrooms and associated outbuildings/shelters have been constructed and which are currently occupied by Montmorency Bowling Club, Ivanhoe Bowling Club and Rosanna Bowling Club (“clubs”). The clubs have operated from the respective sites over a period of many years and are holding over under expired leases from the former Eltham and Heidelberg Councils. The clubs are seeking to enter into new leases with Council to clarify, amongst other things, the maintenance responsibilities of the respective parties. 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. In particular, Section 20 which provides that “A person must not be deprived of his or her property other than in accordance with law”. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. Any person who considers they have been deprived of their rights may make a
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 91
6.4
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.4
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
PROPOSED LEASE TO MONTMORENCY, IVANHOE AND ROSANNA BOWLING CLUBS PERMISSION - COMMENCE STATUTORY PROCEDURES cont’d submission in accordance with Section 223 of the Act with respect to a proposal to grant a lease. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION The new leases provide for a term ending on 30 June 2020 with a nominal commencing annual rent of $104.00 with annual CPI increments. This is consistent with the commencing rental paid by Greensborough and East Ivanhoe Bowling Clubs. The new leases also provide that the clubs are responsible for all consumables, internal maintenance and maintenance of the bowling greens. Council undertakes and is responsible for external maintenance and structural repairs. The new Lease is consistent with the current Generic Community Lease exempt from the provisions of the Retail Leases Act 2004. The permitted use under the new leases is for the provision of recreation, lawn bowls and social gatherings, managed and administered by a Non-Profit community based organisation primarily for the benefit of the residents and ratepayers of the City of Banyule, including those who are socially and/or financially disadvantaged and people with special needs. LEGAL CONSIDERATION STATUTORY PROCEDURES Public notice of Council’s intention to grant rights must be given in accordance with Council’s Official Newspaper Policy and submissions on the proposal invited and considered in accordance with Section 223 of the Act. POLICY IMPLICATIONS PUBLIC NOTICE Council’s Official Newspaper Policy provides that: “The Heidelberg Leader and/or Diamond Valley Leader and/or the Heidelberg and Valley Weekly, where appropriate be appointed as Council’s official newspapers for the purpose of providing public notice except where circumstances may be deemed appropriate to use The Age and/or the Herald/Sun for particular public notices.” For the purposes of giving public notice for this proposal, it is noted that the “Diamond Valley Leader” and the “Heidelberg Leader” are the newspapers that are generally circulated within the whole of the municipality. DISCUSSION The proposed terms and conditions of the proposed leases are consistent with those contained in current leases to East Ivanhoe Bowling Club and Greensborough Bowling Club, both of which expire on 30 June 2020, and provide for a nominal commencing rental with annual CPI increments. The giving of public notice of Council’s intention to lease land does not compel Council to do so. Council is merely complying with its statutory obligations under the Act to give public notice and to hear and consider written submissions on such a
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 92
PROPOSED LEASE TO MONTMORENCY, IVANHOE AND ROSANNA BOWLING CLUBS PERMISSION - COMMENCE STATUTORY PROCEDURES cont’d proposal before deciding, at a future meeting of the Council, whether or not to grant a lease. CONCLUSION Council should now direct that, pursuant to section 190 and section 223 of the Act, public notice of its intention to grant new leases to the clubs be given in the “Diamond Valley Leader” and the “Heidelberg Leader” and a decision on whether or not to proceed be considered at a future meeting of Council. ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 93
6.4
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.5
AIR RIGHTS OVER FORGE LANE BETWEEN 37 BURGUNDY AND 4 VILLA STREET HEIDELBERG - LICENCE
Author:
Lorraine James - Property Officer, City Development
Ward:
Griffin
File:
F2015/905
Previous Items Council on 5 October 2015 (Item 6.1 - Air Rights Over Forge Lane Between 37 Burgundy & 4 Villa Streets Heidelberg) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Consistent with Council’s resolution of 5 October 2015, the statutory procedures were commenced to give public notice of Council’s intention to grant air rights over Forge Lane between 37 and 4 Villa Street Heidelberg. Public notice was given in the “Heidelberg Leader’ on 13 October 2015, with submissions on the proposal invited in accordance with section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989. The submission period closed on 10 November 2015. One late submission was received 13 November 2015 which did not include a request to be heard. The content of the submission related to traffic and planning concerns effectively already determined in the consideration of the planning permit for the development at 37 Burgundy and 4 Villa Streets, Heidelberg (development sites), and is considered to have no bearing on a decision to grant air rights over Forge Lane. This report seeks Council’s decision to grant, to the landowner of the development sites, a long-term licence of the air rights over Forge Lane Heidelberg, to facilitate the construction of a permanent physical link-way between the development sites (linkway). RECOMMENDATION That: 1.
Having complied with section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989: a) b)
c) d)
giving public notice in the “Heidelberg Leader” on 13 October 2015; and by providing an opportunity to those who have requested to be heard at Council’s Ordinary Meeting of 30 November 2015 to be heard at that meeting; and by recording that one late submission was received and considered; and by deciding that the content had no bearing on a decision to grant air rights;
Council forms the view that it is appropriate, for the following reasons: e) the late submission received is effectively a restatement of planning concerns that have already been considered and determined in the planning permit application for the development of 37 Burgundy and 4 Villa Streets, Heidelberg (development sites);
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 94
6.5
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
AIR RIGHTS OVER FORGE LANE BETWEEN 37 BURGUNDY AND 4 VILLA STREET HEIDELBERG - LICENCE cont’d f) g) h)
Council’s Rights of Way Policy defines Council’s role in managing the activation of rights of way within or close to activity centres; the granting of air rights to facilitate the construction of a link-way is supported by Council’s Rights of Way Policy; a planning permit is required to use and or develop the air space of the ‘road’.
to grant to the landowner of the development sites, a long-term licence of air rights over Forge Lane, Heidelberg. Such grant will be subject to the issue of a planning permit under the Banyule Planning Scheme which allows for the use and development of such air space, for the construction of a permanent physical linkway at a height of 5.8 metres above the natural ground surface of Forge Lane between the development sites, and which includes the following condition: “A legally binding agreement under Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 shall be entered into between the landowner and Council prior to the commencement of the development concerning liability, maintenance and possession of parts of the development that extend into air space of land vested in the care and management of Council”. 2.
The submitter be advised of Council’s decision and the reasons for such decision.
3.
Council consider a further report in relation to the terms and conditions of the long-term licence referred to in Item 1. 1.
OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “develop and deliver best value services and facilities”. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) outlines the basic human rights of all people in Victoria. The Charter requires that governments, local councils and other public authorities comply with Charter and to consider relevant Charter rights when they make decisions. In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter. In particular, Section 20 which provides that “A person must not be deprived of his or her property other than in accordance with law”. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. Any person who considers they have been deprived of their rights may make a
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 95
6.5
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.5
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
AIR RIGHTS OVER FORGE LANE BETWEEN 37 BURGUNDY AND 4 VILLA STREET HEIDELBERG - LICENCE cont’d submission in accordance with Section 223 of the Act with respect to a proposal to grant rights. BACKGROUND A Planning Permit P1256/2013 is in place for the development of 37 Burgundy and 4 Villa Streets, Heidelberg (development sites). The development comprises ground level retail, three levels of office and two levels of residential apartments on the Burgundy Street frontage and three levels of car parking with three levels of apartments on the Villa Street frontage. The landowner is desirous of linking the second and third levels of the development sites by the construction of a physical link (link-way) 5.8 metres above the natural ground level of Forge Lane, as shown in Figure 2. The floor area of the link-way is proposed to be 1.8 metres wide, by 4.0 metres long; with a floor area of 7.2m2 per level, totalling 14.4m2 over two levels or approximately 78m3. A plan indicating the location of the development sites and the approximate location of the link-way are shown (hatched) on the plan in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Locality Plan
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 96
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.5
AIR RIGHTS OVER FORGE LANE BETWEEN 37 BURGUNDY AND 4 VILLA STREET HEIDELBERG - LICENCE cont’d
Figure 2: Link-way over two levels
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 97
6.5
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
AIR RIGHTS OVER FORGE LANE BETWEEN 37 BURGUNDY AND 4 VILLA STREET HEIDELBERG - LICENCE cont’d POLICY IMPLICATIONS The proposal has been considered, having regard to the aims and objectives of the Rights of Way Policy and Strategy, adopted by Council on 2 June 2014, in particular, to define and facilitate Council’s role in managing the activation of rights of way within or close to activity centres. Service Authorities and Council officers have also commented on aspects that relate to this proposal. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS Council’s engineers advise that assets are contained within the ‘road’ and will not be affected by the granting of licence over the air space of the ‘road’. SERVICE AUTHORITY CONSIDERATIONS Consultation with the relevant service authorities reveals that assets contained within or in the vicinity of the ‘road’ are namely: •
Telstra Corporation Limited – an old aerial feed (which is not working and can be removed by the landowner at its cost). • Jemena – Underground cables within Forge Lane (that the landowner will need to consider during construction). PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
The Banyule Planning Scheme governs the use and development within the municipality and Banyule City Council is the responsible authority administering the scheme. Under the Planning Scheme, the ‘road’ is included in the Commercial 1 (C1Z) Zone and is affected by Design and Development Overlay – Schedule 5 (DDO5) and Special Building Overlay (SBO) controls. Banyule’s Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy at Clause 22.02 of the Banyule Planning Scheme includes the area within its Garden Suburban (GS3) precinct. Council’s Development Planning Coordinator advises that a planning permit is required to use or develop the air space above the ‘road’. In the circumstances it is appropriate that any permit issued would include a condition as follows: “A legally binding agreement under Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 shall be entered into between the landowner and Council prior to the commencement of the development concerning liability, maintenance and possession of parts of the development that extend into air space of land vested in the care and management of Council.”
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 98
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.5
AIR RIGHTS OVER FORGE LANE BETWEEN 37 BURGUNDY AND 4 VILLA STREET HEIDELBERG - LICENCE cont’d LEGAL CONSIDERATION Public notice of Council’s intention to grant air rights was given in the “Heidelberg Leader” on 13 October 2015, with submissions on the proposal invited in accordance with section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989. The submission period closed on 10 November 2015. One late submission was received. Legal advice obtained regarding the late submission indicated that “the submission is not a valid submission and need not be sent to Council for any special consideration.” However, the legal advice did suggest that, in order to diffuse any question of natural justice that may arise from the submitter in the future, that the late submission be acknowledged as being received late and that Council will, although not obliged to do so, consider and review the content of the submission before it determines whether to grant the air rights. SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED A copy of the late submission has been provided to Councillors for consideration. Issues raised in the submission have been paraphrased and responses outlined in the summary below. Table 1: Summary of Written Submission Submission The submitter raised concerns about: 1. the potential over development of the site and the loss of amenity; 2. additional trucks and cars will be directing onto Villa Street; 3. the development will impact on parking in the vicinity.
Response The submission is effectively a restatement of planning concerns that have already been considered and determined in the planning permit application for the development. Should the proposal be approved a planning permit will be required for the use and development the air space over Forge Lane.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS Given the potential “value-add” the link-way could deliver for the development sites, in terms of providing a secure passage from car park to residence/office, an independent valuation was sought. Council’s valuation and legal advice suggests that the ‘road’ status should not be removed from the air space above Forge Lane and sold to the landowner. Such provision would lock in ownership of air rights in perpetuity presenting problems into the future, when and if the building was to be demolished. Consequently, air rights should be conveyed by way of long term licence. In doing so, the options would be to: • Calculate the present day value for conveying rights for the term of the licence and seek payment up front with an annual nominal fee payable on demand for a fixed term; or • Strike an annual fee with annual increments of, for example, 4% with a fixed term.
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 99
6.5
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
AIR RIGHTS OVER FORGE LANE BETWEEN 37 BURGUNDY AND 4 VILLA STREET HEIDELBERG - LICENCE cont’d DISCUSSION The landowner has been made aware that no formal offer to grant air rights can be made until the necessary statutory procedures have been successfully completed and Council formally resolves to proceed with the process. The giving of public notice does not compel Council to grant such rights. Council is merely complying with its statutory obligations under the Act, which are to give public notice and to hear and consider written submissions on such a proposal, before making a decision at a future meeting of the Council. CONCLUSION The late submission is not a valid submission and need not be given any special consideration. The content of the submission relates to traffic and planning concerns effectively already determined and is considered to have no bearing on a decision to grant air rights over Forge Lane. Nevertheless, the proposal has been considered having regard to the content of the submission and to current and potential future uses of the air rights over Forge Lane. The granting of air rights to facilitate the construction of the link-way between the development sites actually demonstrates a suitable use of a ‘road’ within the Heidelberg Activity Centre, and is supported by Council’s Rights of Way Policy. Accordingly, the proposal to enter into a long-term licence with the landowner of the development sites should be supported. ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 100
6.6
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
6.6
ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS
Author:
Emily Outlaw - Council Governance Liaison Officer, Corporate Services
File:
F2015/337
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Under the Local Government Act 1989 an Assembly of Councillors is defined as: A meeting of an advisory committee of the Council, if at least one Councillor is present or; A planned or scheduled meeting of at least half of the Councillors and one member of Council staff which considers matters that are intended or likely to be: a) b)
the subject of a decision of the Council or; subject to the exercise of a function, duty or power of the Council that has been delegated to a person or committee.
In accordance with Section 80A of the Local Government Act 1989 Council is required to report as soon as possible to an Ordinary Meeting of Council a record of any assemblies of Councillors held. Below is the latest listing of notified assemblies of Councillors held at Banyule City Council. RECORD OF ASSEMBLIES 1
Date of Assembly:
9 November 2015
Type of Meeting:
Councillor Briefing
Matters Considered:
Items on the Council Agenda for the Ordinary Meeting of 9 November 2015 as listed below: 1.1 Petition in relation to operations at 35 Sherbourne Road, Briar Hill 1.2 85 Silverdale Road, Eaglemont in relation to an application to amend Planning Permit P589/2005 2.1 Traffic Investigation - Frye Street, Meakin Street and Trist Street, Watsonia North 2.2 7 Dudley Street Ivanhoe - Proposed Discontinuance of RW053 and Sale of Land 2.3 Naming of Pavilion at Seddon Reserve Ivanhoe 3.1 Membership to the Council Alliance for a Sustainable Built Environment (CASBE) 3.2 Fossil Fuel Divestment 4.1 Amendment C101 for a Special Building Overlay in the Banyule Planning Scheme for Council's 100 year stormwater mapping 4.2 Greensborough Activity Centre - Additional Parking Opportunities 4.3 Process to Undertake a Review and Proactive Enforcement of Replacement Tree Planting. 4.4 Additional external lighting for a Department of Human Services property at 94 Beatty Street,
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 101
6.6
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d Ivanhoe Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre Draft Master Plan: Submission Report 6.1 157 Wungan Street Macleod - Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre Lease 6.2 Quarterly Financial Management Report - 30 September 2015 6.3 Watsonia Pool: 20 Liat Way Greensborough, Notice of Intention to Lease 6.4 Assembly of Councillors 6.5 Items for Noting 6.6 7 Flintoff Street Greensborough - Proposed lease of car parking spaces 7.1 Sealing of Documents 8.1 Cultural and Recreational Lands Review 8.2 Screening and car parking at Council’s Operations centre in Waterdale Road, Bellfield 8.3 Somers Avenue Macleod - Staging of Paid Parking 8.4 Bolton Street Montmorency - State Road Improvement Project 9. General Business 9.1 Liveability Index report 10. Urgent Business Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Wayne Phillips Rick Garotti 5.1
Councillors Present:
Staff Present:
2
Others Present:
Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Allison Beckwith – Director Community Programs Scott Walker – Director City Development Peter Utri – Acting Director Corporate Services Geoff Glynn – Director Assets & City Services Vivien Ferlaino – Governance Coordinator Joel Elbourne- Manager, Urban Planning & Building Daniel Kollmorgen – Manager Transport, Sustainability & Municipal Laws Joseph Tabaco – Manager, Property & Economic Development Chris McInnes – Development Planner Nil
Conflict of Interest:
Nil
Date of Assembly:
11 November 2015
Type of Meeting:
Banyule Environmental Advisory Committee
Matters Considered:
Divestment Update Annual thank you tour Banyule Waterways Management – Melbourne Water
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 102
ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d
Councillors Present: Staff Present:
Conflict of Interest:
Chris Callahan – Coordinator, Bushland Management Fleur Anderson – Environment Officer Alan Leenaerts (Interim Chair) Matt Hall Peter Castaldo Kate Roberts Maree Keenan Jonathan Thom Denise Fernando Nil
Date of Assembly:
18 November 2015
Type of Meeting:
Confidential Councillor Briefing
Matters Considered:
Confidential Matters
Councillors Present:
Steven Briffa Craig Langdon Jenny Mulholland Wayne Phillips Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Scott Walker – Director City Development Joseph Tabaco – Manager, Property & Economic Development Jeanette Kringle – Coordinator, Property Rosemary Southgate- Russell Kennedy Lawyers Marika Hubble Marriott –Russell Kennedy Lawyers Daniel Aghion – Owen Dickson Chambers Nil
Others Present:
3
Waste Minimisation: - Kangaroo Cull in Gresswell Forest Steven Briffa
Staff Present:
Others Present:
Conflict of Interest:
RECOMMENDATION That the Assembly of Councillors report be received. ATTACHMENTS Nil
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 30 November 2015
Page 103
6.6
Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely
Notices of Motion
ANNUAL SOMALI COMMUNITY FESTIVAL
8.1
ANNUAL SOMALI COMMUNITY FESTIVAL
Author:
Cr Craig Langdon
Ward:
Olympia Ward
File:
F2014/5334
TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move:
“That a report be prepared and presented to Council on the 14 December 2015 regarding potential Council support for the Football (soccer component) of the Annual Somali Cultural Celebration.” Explanation The Annual Somali Cultural Celebration is an initiative of the Youth Activating Youth Inc. The primary objective of this organisation is to enhance the social inclusion of marginalised and disadvantaged youth in multicultural communities. The project is particularly important to the community as it aims to celebrate Somali culture in Australia. This community event is held annually with the initial objective of promoting unity within the Australian Somali community through their love of art, folk dancing, fashion, football and a host of other activities that contribute to the overall identity of the nation. This Annual Somali Cultural Celebration will be held between the 20 December 2015 and the 27 December 2015. To achieve the outcomes of the celebration, the group propose to use different platforms such as art, music, football (soccer), fashion and increase the skills of volunteers to enhance the community’s self-efficacy and future self-sustainability. The Cultural Celebrations will primarily be delivered within Banyule, Darebin and Hume City Council’s between the 20 and the 27 December 2015. Youth Activating Youth Inc. has requested the use of Olympic Park to host the Semi Finals and Finals of a Soccer tournament being staged as part of the overall Celebration. This component will take place on the 26 and 27 December 2015 and Youth Activating Youth Inc. has requested Council consider the following support: • • •
$5,000 cash grant to assist with the cost of the overall 2015 Somali Cultural Celebration $3,000 in-kind support for the possible ground renovations which may be required after the event $1,500 in-kind support for the additional rubbish bins and collection
CR CRAIG LANGDON Olympia Ward ATTACHMENTS Nil ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 105
ATTACHMENTS 2.1
Supervised Children's Crossings Attachment 1
4.1
State Government Review of Metropolitan Planning Strategy - Plan Melbourne Refresh Attachment 1
4.3
MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary ....................................... 178 MRFC Master Plan: Concept Plans ............................................... 202
General Code of Conduct - Public Meetings Attachment 1
6.3
Concept Plan for Works Along Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough .................................................................. 176
Macleod Recreation and Fitness Centre Master Plan Attachment 1 Attachment 2
5.2
DRAFT Submission to the City of Yarra on the Revised AMCOR Development Plan ........................................................... 171
Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough - Proposed Traffic Treatment Attachment 1
5.1
Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone .......... 147
Alphington Paper Mills Proposal - Revised Development Plan Attachment 1
4.5
Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne ................................ 112
Planning Scheme Amendment C110 – Greensborough Activity Centre Review Attachment 2
4.4
Submission to VicRoads for the 2016/17 Children's Crossings Subsidy ......................................................................... 107
Draft General Code of Conduct - Public Meetings ......................... 206
Creation of Plantation Lane Attachment 1 Attachment 2
Proposed Plan of Subdivision ........................................................ 209 Endorsed Plan ............................................................................... 213
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 106
2.1
Attachment 1: Submission to VicRoads for the 2016/17 Children's Crossings Subsidy
Attachment 1
Item: 2.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 107
Attachment 1: Submission to VicRoads for the 2016/17 Children's Crossings Subsidy
Attachment 1
2.1
Item: 2.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 108
2.1
Attachment 1: Submission to VicRoads for the 2016/17 Children's Crossings Subsidy
Attachment 1
Item: 2.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 109
Attachment 1: Submission to VicRoads for the 2016/17 Children's Crossings Subsidy
Attachment 1
2.1
Item: 2.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 110
2.1
Attachment 1: Submission to VicRoads for the 2016/17 Children's Crossings Subsidy
Attachment 1
Item: 2.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 111
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 112
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 113
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 114
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 115
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 116
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 117
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 118
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 119
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 120
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 121
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 122
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 123
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 124
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 125
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 126
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 127
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 128
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 129
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 130
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 131
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 132
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 133
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 134
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 135
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 136
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 137
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 138
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 139
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 140
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 141
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 142
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 143
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 144
4.1
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 145
Attachment 1: Banyule 2013 Submission to Plan Melbourne
Attachment 1
4.1
Item: 4.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 146
05/06/2014 GC6
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone
SCHEDULE 1 TO THE ACTIVITY CENTRE ZONE
4.3
Item: 4.3
Shown on the planning scheme map as ACZ1. GREENSBOROUGH PRINCIPAL ACTIVITY CENTRE 1.0
Greensborough Framework Plan
Attachment 2
14/02/2013 --/--/20-C82 C--
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 147
Item: 4.3 2.0
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone Land use and development objectives to be achieved
14/02/2013 C82
Land Use
To ensure the Greensborough Principal Activity Centre continues to thrive as a regional retail centre, with a range of commercial, office, entertainment, leisure, cultural, community, service and residential uses.
To promote the civic role and function of the Greensborough Principal Activity Centre.
To encourage a diverse range of accommodation uses including shop top housing and residential apartments that will take advantage of the broad range of services, public transport, amenities and features within and close to the Centre. Built Environment
To transform the Greensborough Principal Activity Centre through innovative urban design that is unique, site specific, diverse, understandable and adaptable.
To maximise opportunities for a broad range of well designed and integrated buildings that add to the vitality and visual interest of the centre.
To encourage high quality building design that provides an attractive and articulated form when viewed from surrounding areas.
To encourage high quality urban design that is responsive to and reinforces the locally distinctive topography, features, characteristics and landscape of the nearby Plenty River Valley.
To encourage the consolidation of land in order to create viable development sites.
To establish long term environmental sustainability outcomes to be achieved by development within the Greensborough Principal Activity Centre.
To incorporate sustainability principles in the design, demolition and construction of new development.
To ensure that buildings are designed to provide passive surveillance of public areas, by addressing and overlooking pedestrian routes, streets, footpaths, open spaces and transport facilities.
To ensure the scale of development reflects the preferred building height.
To ensure that building setbacks achieve the desired spatial proportion of the street, define the street edge and provide a high amenity for users of the street.
To promote high quality and distinctive built form outcomes on prominent corners, at gateways, key development sites and infill sites.
To encourage buildings to be designed to take advantage of views and vistas within the activity centre and to the nearby Plenty River Valley and parkland as shown on the Framework Plan.
To ensure signage is integrated into the design of the building façade, surrounding streetscape and landscape setting.
To ensure the design of car parking structures and areas has a minimal visual impact on the streetscape and adjoining public spaces. Public Realm To maintain and improve the provision and integration of quality public spaces, including streets, laneways, the town square and other public spaces. To create urban spaces that are attractive, interesting and safe at all times. To ensure that the design of public spaces is accessible and welcoming to all people. To minimise visual clutter and obscured views caused by signage. Landscaping To create a greener Greensborough by providing landscaped spaces, plazas and other open spaces within and around the Activity Centre.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 148
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone To ensure landscaping is integrated with the design of the development and complements the landscaping of any adjoining public realm. To ensure development is well landscaped, including canopy trees where possible.
4.3
Item: 4.3
Transport and access To promote a safe, convenient and sustainable traffic and transport network that assists walking, cycling and public transport use and maximises mobility for all. To ensure the design of parking and access areas is safe, practical, easily maintained and allows for use of car parking space for multiple purposes.
To improve directional signage and way finding measures for users of the activity centre. To ensure key community nodes and Key Pedestrian Areas have good access to sunlight, weather protection and clear pathways which link elements throughout the activity centre. To increase pedestrian permeability across large blocks, between major destinations and from the station to the rest of the activity centre particularly along Main Street and the Plenty River Valley parkland. To improve the appearance and design of the station building and surrounds, and its connectivity with the activity centre, particularly Main Street. To encourage development that maximises the operation of the station, while accessing views of the Plenty River Valley and surrounding hills, including opportunities for higher density residential development on land surplus to public transport requirements. To provide for the improved integration and operation of public transport services through the development of a multi-modal interchange for rail and bus services. 3.0 05/06/2014 GC6
Table of uses Section 1 - Permit not required Use
Condition
Bed and breakfast
Must be located in Precinct 2, 3 or 5 or Subprecinct 4B. In Precinct 2 or 5 or Sub-precinct 4B no more than 6 persons may be accommodated away from their normal place of residence. At least 1 car parking space must be provided for each 2 persons able to be accommodated away from their normal place of residence.
Betting agency
Must be located in Precinct 1 or 3 or Subprecinct 4A.
Caretaker’s house Car park
Must be located in Precinct 3.
Child care centre
Must be located in Precinct 1 or 3 or Subprecinct 4A. In Precinct 1 or Sub-precinct 4A any frontage at ground floor level must not exceed 2 metres and access must not be shared with a dwelling (other than a Caretaker’s house).
Cinema
Must be located in Precinct 1 or Sub-precinct 4A.
Cinema based entertainment facility
Must be located in Precinct 1 or 3 or Sub-
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 149
Attachment 2
To design any car parking within the centre to facilitate its use for multiple purposes throughout the week.
Item: 4.3
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone
Use
Condition precinct 4A.
Dependent person’s unit
Must be located in Precinct 2 or 5 or Subprecinct 4B. Must be the only dependent person’s unit on the lot.
Dwelling (other than Bed and breakfast and Caretaker’s house)
In Precinct 1, or in Height and Setback Area A of Precinct 2 or Sub-precinct 4A any frontage at ground floor level must not exceed 2 metres.
Education centre
Must be located in Precinct 1 or Sub-precinct 4A. Any frontage at ground floor level must not exceed 10 metres. Must not be a primary or secondary school.
Electoral office
Must be located in Precinct 1, 3 or 6 or Subprecinct 4A. In Precinct 1 or Sub-precinct 4A may be used for only 4 months before an election and 2 weeks after an election.
Food and drink premises (other than Hotel Must be located in Precinct 1, or 3 or Suband Tavern) precinct 4A. Home occupation Indoor recreation facility
Must be located in Precinct 3.
Informal outdoor recreation Market
Must be located in Precinct 3.
Minor utility installation Office (other than Electoral office)
Must be located in Precinct 1, 3 or 6 or Subprecinct 4A. In Precinct 1 or Sub-precinct 4A any frontage at ground level must not exceed 2 metres and access must not be shared with a dwelling (other than a Caretaker’s house), unless the office is a bank, real estate agency, travel agency, or any other office where the floor space adjoining the frontage is a customer service area accessible to the public.
Place of worship
Must be located in Precinct 2 or 5 or Subprecinct 4B. Must be no social or recreation activities. The gross floor area of all buildings must not exceed 180 square metres. The site must not exceed 1200 square metres. The site must adjoin, or have access to, a road in a Road Zone.
Plant nursery
Must be located in Precinct 3.
Postal agency
Must not be located in Precinct 2, 3 or 5 or Sub-precinct 4B.
Railway Residential aged care facility
Must be located in Precinct 2 or 5 or Subprecinct 4B.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 150
Use
Condition
Restricted recreation facility
Must be located in Precinct 3.
Shop (other than Adult sex bookshop)
Must be located in Precinct 1, 2 or 3 or Subprecinct 4A.
4.3
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone
Tramway Any use listed in Clause 62.01
Must meet the requirements of Clause 62.01.
Section 2 - Permit required Use
Condition
Accommodation (other than Corrective institution, Dependent person’s unit, Dwelling and Residential aged care facility) Adult sex bookshop
Must not be located in Precinct 2, 3, 4 or 5. In any other Precinct, must be at least 200 metres (measured by the shortest route reasonably accessible on foot) from Precinct 2, 3, 4 or 5, a residential zone, land used for a hospital, primary school or secondary school or land in a Public Acquisition Overlay to be acquired for a hospital, primary school or secondary school.
Amusement parlour
Must not be located in Precinct 5.
Animal boarding
Must not be located in Precinct 5.
Animal keeping (other than Animal boarding)
Must be no more than 5 animals.
Betting agency – if the Section 1 condition Must not be located in Precinct 5. is not met Car park – if the Section 1 condition is not In Precinct 5 must be used in conjunction with met another use in Section 1 or 2. Food and drink premises (other than Hotel In Precinct 5 the site must adjoin, or have and Tavern) – if the Section 1 condition is access to, a road in a Road Zone. not met Cinema – if the Section 1 condition is not Must not be located in Precinct 5. met Cinema based entertainment facility – if the Section 1 condition is not met
Must not be located in Precinct 5.
Gambling premises (other than Betting agency)
Must not be located in Precinct 5.
Hotel Industry (other than Material recycling, Refuse disposal, Rural industry and Transfer station)
Must not be located in Precinct 5 unless the industry is a car wash and the site adjoins, or has access to, a road in a Road Zone. Must not be a purpose listed in the table to Clause 52.10.
Leisure and recreation facility (other than Indoor recreation facility, Informal outdoor recreation, Motor racing track and Restricted recreation facility) Nightclub
Must not be located in Precinct 5.
Office – if the Section 1 condition is not met
Must not be located in Precinct 5 unless the office is a medical centre.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 151
Attachment 2
Item: 4.3
Item: 4.3
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone
Use
Condition
Place of assembly (other than Amusement parlour, Carnival, Cinema, Circus, Nightclub and Place of worship) Plant nursery – if the Section 1 condition is not met
In Precinct 5 the site must adjoin, or have access to, a road in a Road Zone.
Postal agency – if the Section 1 condition Must not be located in Precinct 5. is not met Retail premises (other than Food and drink Must not be located in Precinct 5. premises, Gambling premises, Market, Plant nursery, Postal agency and Shop) Service station
In Precinct 5 the site must adjoin, or have access to, a road in a Road Zone.
Shop (other than Adult sex bookshop) – if Must not be located in Precinct 5 unless the the Section 1 condition is not met shop is a convenience shop Store
In Precinct 5 must be in a building, not a dwelling, and used to store equipment, goods, or motor vehicles used in conjunction with the occupation of a resident of a dwelling on the lot. Must not be a purpose listed in the table to Clause 52.10.
Tavern Trade supplies
Must not be located in Precinct 5.
Transport terminal
Must not be located in Precinct 5.
Utility installation (other than Minor utility installation and Telecommunications facility) Warehouse (other than Store)
Must not be located in Precinct 5. Must not be a purpose listed in the table to Clause 52.10.
Any other use not in Section 1 or 3
Section 3 – Prohibited Use Agriculture (other than Animal keeping and Apiculture) Brothel Cemetery Corrective institution Crematorium Material recycling Motor racing track Refuse disposal Rural industry Saleyard Transfer station
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 152
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone
4.0
Centre-wide provisions
14/02/2013 C82
4.1
Use of land
14/02/2013 C82
A permit is not required to use land for the purpose of Local Government providing the use is carried out by, or on behalf of, the public land manager.
4.2
Subdivision
14/02/2013 C82
4.3
Item: 4.3
Applications for subdivision of existing sites that are not associated with a development proposal that supports the objectives of this Schedule are discouraged.
4.3 14/02/2013 C82
Buildings and works Permit Exemptions No permit is required to: Construct or carry out buildings and works in Precincts 1, 3, 4 or 6 for the following:
The installation of an automatic teller machine.
An alteration to an existing building façade provided: The alteration does not include the installation of an external roller shutter. At least 80 per cent of the building façade at ground level is maintained as an entry or window with clear glazing.
An awning that projects over a road if it is authorised by the relevant public land manager. Construct or extend the following within Precinct 5:
4.4 14/02/2013 C82
A single dwelling on a site greater than 300 square metres.
Works normal to a dwelling.
An open-sided pergola or verandah with a finished floor level not more than 800 mm above natural ground level and a maximum height not more than 3 metres above natural ground level.
An outbuilding with a gross floor area not more than 10 metres and a maximum building height not more than 3 metres above natural ground level, but not including the construction or extension of a garage or carport.
A deck with a finished floor level not more than 800 mm above natural ground level.
A domestic swimming pool or spa and associated mechanical equipment and safety fencing.
Design and development Active frontages adjacent to Key Pedestrian Areas Buildings with ground-level street frontages to Key Pedestrian Areas must present an active frontage with at least 80 per cent of the street frontage incorporating clear glazing. Development adjacent to the Town Square, and new and existing Mid-block Pedestrian Linkages as shown on the Framework Plan should provide active and interesting frontages including a minimum of 80 per cent clear glazing.Retail premises should provide an entry or display at the frontage that provides pedestrian interest and interaction. Offices and other uses should locate customer services and other activities that promote pedestrian interest and interaction at the frontage of the land.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 153
Attachment 2
Consolidation of land to facilitate the creation of viable development sites is encouraged.
Item: 4.3
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone Overshadowing and Pedestrian Amenity Development should be designed to avoid casting shadows on the defined Solar Access Area shown on the Framework Plan and Precinct Plans for Precincts 1 and 3. Generally, buildings should not overshadow the footpath on the south side of this part of the Main Street between 11am and 2pm on 22 June. Development should be designed to avoid casting shadows on the Town Square as shown on the Framework Plan and Precinct Plans for Precincts 1 and 3 between 11am and 2pm on 22 June. Development adjacent to Key Pedestrian Areas, as shown on the Framework Plan, should include continuous and generous weather protection for pedestrians. Development should avoid the use of reflective glazing and solid wall ground level facades throughout the centre. Vehicle access and parking The number and width of vehicle crossovers and access points should be minimised and where possible provided from laneways or secondary street frontages. All parking areas, including entry and exit points, should be well lit and clearly identified with signage. Vehicle access points should be separate from pedestrian access points. Shared vehicle and pedestrian access ways or car parks should be set back at least 1.5 metres from habitable room windows in adjacent dwellings. Parking between the front of the building and the street should be avoided, and car parking areas should generally be located to the rear of the property. New parking areas should be surrounded by buildings providing an active frontage to Key Pedestrian Areas. Where a building contains a mix of uses, car parking areas should be shared between day time and night time demand. Tandem spaces should not be provided unless associated with a single occupancy. Basement car parks should be naturally ventilated wherever possible. Views of cars parked on upper storeys should be screened from the public realm. Loading facilities should be screened from the public realm. Landscaping Landscaping in the private realm should be designed to complement the landscape treatments of adjoining public realm areas. Canopy trees should be provided within the site frontage of a new development. Landscaping should be used to provide physical and visual links with the Plenty River Valley. Landscape upgrade works, including new street planting, should be provided and favour native and indigenous species. Applicants should provide planting in public realm to Council standards. Loading and rubbish collection The negative visual impacts of loading docks and rubbish collection areas should be mitigated through the integration of facilities within the design of buildings as well as measures such as screening. Loading areas should be located to the rear of properties and screened from view from public areas.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 154
Built form Building height is the vertical distance between natural ground level (NGL) at the centre of the site frontage boundary and the highest point of the building. See diagram below.
Buildings on sloping sites should be articulated to reduce visual bulk and improve the appearance of new development. The ground floor of new buildings should be at the same level as the existing footpath. Development should respond to the sloping topography to minimise the need for cut and fill. Any higher built form within the Activity Centre should be designed to respect the built form of the traditional shopping strip. This should be done by recessing the upper level by 5 metres from the street wall.The heights of the street walls are specified in the precinct requirement Balconies can encroach into the recessed upper levels up to 2 metres but must be designed to reduce visual bulk. The siting and design of new development should be sensitive to and reinforce the locally distinctive topography, responding to important views from the surrounding area. New development should incorporate water sensitive urban design (WSUD) principles and ecologically sustainable design (ESD) measures. Continuous weather protection measures (verandahs, shade cloths or canopies) should be provided along Key Pedestrian Areas. Signage should be of a size and height that is proportional to the size and form of the building, and does not detract from public viewlines and views of the surrounding landscape. New development adjacent to residential areas should step down to respect the height of neighbouring buildings and dwellings. Development at gateway locations and Key Development Sites should be high quality, distinctive and emphasise the importance of their corner location and act as a local landmark. Building materials, colours and finishes should complement surrounding built form and reflect the preferred character of the area, including: Natural building materials and finishes including stone, masonry and timber. The use of complementary and contrasting material together. The use of low maintenance, naturally weathering materials and finishes. The integrated use of green landscaping in development. Adaptable building design should be utilised in new development that can be readily altered to accommodate alternate uses over time. Development should not increase the level of wind at ground level. Where appropriate, land should be consolidated to facilitate the creation of viable development sites. ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 155
4.3
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone
Attachment 2
Item: 4.3
Item: 4.3
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone
5.0
Precinct provisions
14/02/2013 C82 --/--/20-C--
5.1
Precinct 1 – Core Retail
5.1-1
Precinct Map
14/02/2013 C82 14/02/2013 C82
5.1-2
14/02/2013 C82
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 mixed use 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. Maintain reasonable street level solar access for pedestrians and landscaping. To ensure development south of Grimshaw Street does not unreasonably impact on the amenity of residential properties to the south.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 156
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone 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.
4.3
Item: 4.3
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. Precinct requirements Subprecinct
5.1-4
14/02/2013 C82
Preferred maximum building height
Preferred front setback
1A
11.5 metres within 8 metres of the Main Street frontage boundary, and 18.5 metres elsewhere (excluding Key Development Sites shown on the Precinct Map).
0 metre front and side setbacks.
1B
18.5 metres above natural ground level within 8 metres of The Circuit frontage/sideage.
Minimum of 2 metres from The Circuit property boundary on sites with a frontage/sideage to The Circuit for landscaping.
1C
11.5 metres within 10 metres of the Grimshaw Street frontage/sideage. 11.5 metres within 30 metres of the southern and western boundaries of the property at the corner of Grimshaw Street and Henry Street.
0 metres from Henry Street. Minimum of 3 metres from Grimshaw Street. Minimum of 5 metres from the southern and western boundaries of the property at the corner of Grimshaw Street and Henry Street.
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. Sub Precinct 1B – Main Street West Buildings fronting The Circuit should provide an interesting and attractive interface with the pedestrian environment, and when viewed from passing vehicles and residential properties to the north. Properties fronting The Circuit may include a retaining wall within the preferred setback area. Buildings fronting The Circuit should be designed for separation of building forms to allow for views from and between building structures to the Plenty River Valley and surrounding parkland (buildings above podium level should not result in continuous facades to The Circuit frontage). ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 157
Attachment 2
5.1-3 14/02/2013 C82
Item: 4.3
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone Development should be designed to incorporate plaza space open to the sky that links with pedestrian spaces adjacent to Main Street. Existing trees located along The Circuit frontage should be retained wherever possible, or replacement trees and other landscaping incorporated into the building design along this frontage. Main pedestrian thoroughfares within the Precinct should connect to key pedestrian routes linking between Main Street, the railway station and the Plenty River Valley. Landscape treatments of public thoroughfares should provide a cohesive appearance with treatments along Main Street. Sub Precinct 1C – Henry Street West Buildings should not unreasonably overshadow the War Memorial Park or residential properties to the south. Landscape upgrade works, including new street tree plantings, should be provided favouring native and indigenous species.
5.2 14/02/2013 C82
5.2-1
Precinct 2 – Henry Street East Precinct Map
14/02/2013 C82
5.2-2
Precinct Objectives
14/02/2013 C82
To facilitate the redevelopment of the precinct for a mixed use development of retail, commercial and medium density residential uses.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 158
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone To ensure new development is designed to sensitively respond to the residential areas to the south, protecting and maintaining existing amenity and character. To ensure the proposed setbacks achieve a balance between protecting residential amenity and allowing for residential, retail and commercial development of an appropriate scale.
4.3
Item: 4.3
To improve the streetscape character and pedestrian environment through landscaping. To ensure developments fronting Henry Street are adaptable, provide active frontages and maintain a pedestrian scale along the street. To ensure new development integrates with and enhances the existing streetscape character. To provide adequate car parking within the site to ensure no net loss. To improve access through the site via a mid-block link running east-west. To provide opportunities for new connections through the precinct to Grimshaw Street and Main Street. 14/02/2013 C82
5.2.4
Precinct guidelines
Built Form Buildings fronting Henry Street should include floor to ceiling heights of 4 metres on the ground floor to allow for future adaptatation. Development facing Henry Street should include active frontages with a minimum of 80% clear glazing applied to retail and commercial uses at ground level. Buildings fronting Henry Street should have a fine grain and vertical articulation reflective of the existing retail to the north along Grimshaw Street. Development within Height & Setback Guideline Areas D and C must be designed to reflect the scale and grain of adjoining residential areas to the south and east. Any multi-decked car parking should be sleeved with commercial floorspace. New development must step down in height at the interface between the Precinct and adjoining residential areas to avoid overshadowing and overlooking impacts. Setbacks Within Height & Setback Guideline Areas C and D, at the interface to the existing residential areas to the south: o
For residential development, apply a side setback in accordance with Clause 55.04-1 ‘Side and Rear Setbacks’.
o
For commercial or retail development, apply a minimum 5m side setback to provide an adequate landscape buffer.
To ensure suitable access can be achieved to the laneway on the northern boundary to Precinct 2, new development within Height & Setback Guideline Areas A, B and C should be setback 1 metre from the northern boundary. Landscape The public realm along Henry Street should be enhanced through street planting that favour native species. Significant trees should be retained within the site by incorporating them into the design of any new development. Landscape upgrade works, including new street tree plantings, should be provided, favouring native and indigenous species.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 159
Attachment 2
To ensure any multi-decked car parking is adequately activated at the ground floor.
Item: 4.3
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone Access Access through the Precinct should be improved via the provision of a new east-west link through the site. Active frontages are encouraged along the mid-block link. Development should incorporate and facilitate through-block linkages to Grimshaw Street. Active frontages should be provided to these linkages. Loading access to the rear of shops should be maintained in any redevelopment of the car park.
5.2-3 Precinct requirements 14/02/2013 C82
Height & Setback Guidelin e Area
Preferred maximum building height *
Preferred maximum street wall height
Preferred front setback
A
20 metres.
11 metre street wall height.
0 metre setback to Henry Street and mid-block link.
B
17 metres
13 metre street wall height.
0 metre setback mid-block link.
C
11 metres.
NA
Clause 55.03-1 (Standard B6) setback to Howard Street. 0 metre setback to midblock link.
D
11 metres
NA
0 metre setback to Henry Street. 0 metre setback to mid-block link.*
* The preferred maximum building height allows for a 4 metres floor to ceiling heights at the ground floor and first floor and 3 metres for every floor above it.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 160
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone
Precinct 3 – East Main Street Precinct 14/02/2013 C82
5.3-1
Precinct Map
4.3
Item: 4.3
Attachment 2
14/02/2013 C82
5.3-2
Precinct Objectives
14/02/2013 C82
To support a mixture of uses with active frontages such as food and drink, retail, civic and community facilities at pedestrian levels. To create a large public Town Square for public events, informal recreation and temporary events, displays and sale of goods. To create a Town Square comprising well-landscaped green spaces, equitable access, opportunities for meeting spaces and public art. To promote local arts and culture in public spaces. To ensure maximum sunlight access to the Town Square and other public spaces at all times of the year. To provide high quality civic facilities at the heart of the Greensborough Principal Activity Centre, which contribute to the activation of the Town Square beyond normal business hours. To provide for retail, car parking and associated office and residential uses over multiple levels. To ensure any new retail uses integrate with and complement the existing retail uses in Main Street and west of Main Street. To provide uses along the pedestrian access to the Town Square that will assist in the activation of the Town Square and promote pedestrian movements to and from Main Street, and through the Railway Precinct including the transport interchange. To facilitate higher density residential and office development at upper levels, where appropriate.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 161
Item: 4.3
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone To ensure development positively contributes to the civic character and quality on the southern side of the Town Square. To achieve a quality redevelopment of the Key Development Site on the corner of Main Street and Para Road, commensurate with the site’s prominence. To create convenient links to public transport services and safe pedestrian thoroughfares which encourage people to walk to the centre and use public transport rather than cars.
5.3-3 14/02/2013 C82
5.3-4 14/02/2013 C82
Precinct requirements Subprecinct
Preferred maximum building height
Preferred front setback
3A
None specified.
None specified.
3B
None specified.
None specified.
3C
73 metres AHD within 6 metres of the Para Road frontage. 10 metres above the floor level of the Town Square. 89 metres AHD overall.
0 metres from all road frontages.
Precinct guidelines Development should incorporate public art within public spaces and new developments. The Town Square should provide space for quiet, sheltered seating and temporary cafe seating. The Aquatic Centre should include a forecourt entry point at the Town Square and to Grimshaw Street. High levels of integration between built form and a green landscape should be achieved through the use of terraces, balconies and roof gardens. Development on the southern side of the Town Square should contribute to the civic character of the Precinct through the quality of the built form and through podium level activity that may extend into the public space. Landscape treatments of public thoroughfares should be cohesive with the appearance of landscape treatments along Main Street. Buildings should provide an articulated street edge, through small recesses, projections, building materials, windows and verandahs along the Para Road and Flintoff Street frontages. The design of the Aquatic Centre car park should incorporate features that will allow opportunities for adaptive re-use, such as commercial and residential uses, in the future. The design of the Aquatic Centre car park should use openings that provide good solar access and the penetration of natural light to all parking levels. The development on the corner of Main Street and Para Road should include a podium base which reinforces the Main Street built form frontage and key development site status of this location. Upper level space should be accommodated within a smaller envelope set back from the Main Street frontage. Development of the site on the corner of Main Street and Para Road should reflect the prominence and visibility of the site through the design of high quality architecture. A direct visual and physical connection should be made between new buildings and adjacent streetscapes to provide passive surveillance opportunities. Pedestrian linkages between car parking, retail areas, the Town Square and Greensborough Walk, Main Street, Greensborough Plaza and the Railway Station should be provided as shown on the Precinct map.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 162
5.4
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone
4.3
Item: 4.3
Precinct 4 – Diamond Creek Road
14/02/2013 C82
5.4-1
Precinct Map
Attachment 2
14/02/2013 C82
5.4-2
Precinct Objectives
14/02/2013 C82
To encourage a range of commercial and mixed uses, including small shops, service retail, entertainment, and residential at upper levels.
To ensure the quality of design and built form of development on Main Street (extension of Diamond Creek Road) reflects the ‘entry’ role of the precinct.
To ensure that the siting, colours and building mass of development is sympathetic to the surrounding landscape of the Plenty River Valley open space. To improve pedestrian movement along Main Street, shifting the focus away from the road as a traffic corridor. To ensure that pedestrian movement across the railway line and along Main Street, to the town centre and to passive and active recreation facilities is a safe and pleasant experience.
5.4-3
Precinct requirements
14/02/2013 C82
Preferred maximum building height 11.5 metres within 8 metres of the Main Street frontage.
5.4-4 14/02/2013 C82
Preferred front setback 0 metre front and side setbacks.
Precinct guidelines Development should address and complement the adjoining Plenty River Valley parkland through the:
Siting and designing of buildings to overlook the parkland.
Use of complementary colours and materials.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 163
Item: 4.3
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone
5.5 14/02/2013 C82
5.5-1
Screening of car parking, loading and service areas so they are not visible from the parkland.
Precinct 5 – Southern Residential Precinct Map
14/02/2013 C82
5.5-2
Precinct Objectives
14/02/2013 C82
To maximise the opportunity for urban consolidation in Sub-precinct 5A To encourage higher density residential and mixed use development with a medical centre focus in Sub-precinct 5A. To maintain a built form height and scale that is respectful of heritage and adjoining residential areas. To encourage medium density residential development in Sub-precinct 5B. To deliver heights that provide a transition in scale to surrounding residential areas, ensuring the development complements the surrounding character. Provide landscaping that responds to the existing landscape setting of the adjacent residential area. To protect and retain existing trees and promote planting of new trees.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 164
5.5-4
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone
4.3
Item: 4.3
Precinct guidelines Built Form Properties in Sub-precinct 5A should be consolidated and redeveloped for medium density residential and mixed use development. The establishment of medical and other related uses within the precinct with residential uses above is encouraged. Buildings fronting Grimshaw Street should include floor to ceiling heights of 4 metres on the ground floor to allow for future adaptation. Buildings in Sub-Preinct 5A should be designed with a street wall height of 4 storeys.
The built form should transition progressively, from lower scale development at the southern end of the precinct to taller built forms along Grimshaw Street in accordance with the precinct requirements at Clause 5.5-3. Sub-Precinct 5C should be designed to reflect the residential grain of the adjoining lowrise residential area. 05/06/2014 GC6
Residential development should be designed to provide natural surveillance by addressing the street and overlooking the public realm. Setbacks To manage the sensitive interface between sub-precinct 5B and 5C, apply Clause 55.041 (side and rear setbacks), Clause 54.04-2 (walls on boundaries), Clause 55.04-3 (daylight to existing windows), Clause 55.04-5 (overshadowing ope n space) and Clause 55.04-6 (overlooking). Landscape Screen planting should be provided between buildings in Precincts 5B and 5C. Existing substantial vegetation should be retained on the site where possible and possible. An increased front setback may be required to retain existing substantial vegetation. Canopy trees within a site frontage should be retained where possible .
5.5-3 Precinct requirements 14/02/2013 C82
Subprecinct
Preferred maximum building height*
Preferred maximum street wall height
Preferred front setback
Within heritage overlay* 5A
20 metres
13 metre wall height.
street
Minimum setback of 3 metres to Grimshaw Street except for corners which should have a 0 metre setback. This can be increased where significant vegetation is to be retained.
5B
13 metres
NA
Minimum setback of 6 metres. This can be increased where significant vegetation is to be retained.
5C
9 metres *
NA
Clause 55.03-1 Setback’ apply.
‘Street
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 165
Attachment 2
The rear of buildings in Sub-Precinct 5A should be recessed to avoid overshadowing development to the south in accordance with Clause 55.04-6 ‘Overshadowing’.
Item: 4.3
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone *For sites within or adjoining a Heritage Overlay setbacks and building heights must protect the heritage significance of the heritage place and be determined having regard to the heritage matters arising under the Heritage Overlay *Clause 55.03-2 ‘Building Height’ applies - A building used as a dwelling or residential building should not exceed the height specified, unless the slope of the natural ground level at any cross section wider than 8 metres of the site of the building is 2.5 degrees or more, in which case the maximum building height can increased by 1 metre. * The preferred maximum building height allows for a 4 metres floor to ceiling height at the ground floor and first floor and 3 metres for every floor above it.
5.6
Precinct 6 – Flintoff Street
5.6-1
Precinct Map
14/02/2013 C82 14/02/2013 C82
5.6-2
Precinct Objectives
14/02/2013 C82
To encourage development of high density commercial and residential buildings in the precinct. To promote the legibility of the precinct through high quality and distinctive built form outcomes on prominent corners. To provide setbacks and façade articulation that deliver visual interest. To ensure building heights and bulk consider topography and protect and enhance significant views.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 166
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone To enhance the pedestrian experience of Flintoff Street as a major movement link connecting the station with Main Street. To provide improved pedestrian connections to Main Street through the Key Pedestrian Areas, railway crossing and mid-block linkages.
4.3
Item: 4.3
To ensure buildings retain a pedestrian scale and do not visually dominate the street environs. To encourage rooftop gardens to blend the built form with the landscape. To retain significant vegetation where possible.
5.6.4 14/02/2013 C82
Precinct guidelines Built Form Development should be of a contemporary architectural style in keeping with the significant commercial role of the precinct. The design of prominent corners should include distinctive architectural elements. Development facing Flintoff Street and Grimshaw Street frontage should have active frontages at the ground level to provide a safe and lively environment. Buildings along key pedestrian routes should ensure a minimum of 80 percent of the street frontage at ground level is a display window or non-vehicular entry. Built form should be designed with a street wall that includes both a fine grain and strong vertical articulation to deliver visual interest. Upper levels of properties on Grimshaw should be recessed adequately to avoid impacts to solar access to the southern footpath at the Equinox. Ensure buildings make a positive contribution to both the street and distant views by minimising blank walls, articulating facades and using a combination of materials and colours. Street walls should be no greater than 4 storeys to reflect the open nature of the existing character of Greensborough and to avoid an overbearing relationship to the street. Floor to ceiling heights of 4 metres should be provided on the ground floor of built form interfacing with Flintoff Street and Para Road to allow for future adaptation. Development should make a positive contribution to the centres skyline from key views identified in the Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines (2015), by avoiding excessively tall or bulky buildings that dominate the view. Views to the Plenty River Valley and between buildings should be maintained through recessing upper floor elements and including slender and separated building forms above street wall height. Landscape Landscape treatments of setback areas should reflect appearance of landscape treatments in adjoining streets. To blend buildings into the landscape, rooftop planting should be provided where possible. Retain and incorporate significant remnant and canopy trees into the streetscape and site layout.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 167
Attachment 2
To ensure development improves physical and visual connectivity to the rest of the activity centre, railway station and Plenty River Valley parkland.
Item: 4.3
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone Access Development should provide internal and external pedestrian connections with key pedestrian routes linking Main Street, the railway station and the Plenty River Valley parkland.
5.6-3 Precinct requirements 14/02/2013 C82
Sub Precinct
Preferred maximum building height*
Preferred maximum street wall height*
Preferred front setback
6A
20 metre maximum.
13 metre street wall height
3 metre front setback.
6B
26 metre maximum
13 metre street wall height
0 metre front setback on Flintoff, 3 metre front setback on Grimshaw.
6C
29 metre maximum
13 metre street wall height
0 metre front setback
6D
32 metres maximum
13 metre street wall height
0 metre front setback on Para Road, 3 metre setback on Grimshaw Street.
* The preferred maximum building height allows for a 4 metres floor to ceiling height at the ground floor and first floor and 3 metres for every floor above it. 6.0
Application requirements
14/02/2013 C82
In addition to the application requirements set out at Clause 37.08-7 an application to construct a building or construct or carry out works must be accompanied by the following information, as appropriate, to the satisfaction of the responsible authority: Three dimensional diagrams or visualisation showing the proposed building in the context of the surrounding buildings. In Precinct 3:
The location and design layout of publicly accessible spaces, including proposed furniture locations, artwork, gates, lighting, signage, levels and steps, rubbish bins, and materials and finishes for all surfaces.
The location and details of commercial and domestic garbage and recycling bin enclosures, and cleaning and management arrangements.
The location and type of acoustic materials and treatments to floors, ceilings, walls and windows of all proposed dwellings, and any noise attenuation measures proposed for retail and commercial buildings or parts of buildings.
Details of environmentally sustainable design principles incorporated into the building design and materials.
Disabled access arrangements for internal and external spaces.
An Integrated Transport Plan that includes traffic management, pedestrian and bicycle movement routes, and integration with public transport and other private vehicular transport.
Proposed traffic management works and signage within the site, and outside the site.
Details of the design and layout of all internal roads, vehicle crossings and road connections to the adjoining street network.
Access arrangements, including opening hours, for vehicle and pedestrian accessways.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 168
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone
Loading and unloading facilities and management arrangements such as times, cleaning and access.
Details of any proposed measures to restrict access to publicly accessible areas.
Details of all above-ground items including furniture, lighting, signage, public art and other features.
The location and screening of existing and proposed services, including plant equipment, air conditioning and lighting.
An application for a permit by a person other than the relevant public land manager must be accompanied by the written consent of the public land manager, indicating that the public land manager consents generally or conditionally either:
4.3
Item: 4.3
To the application for permit being made and to the proposed use or development. A Construction Management Plan including details of:
7.0 14/02/2013 C82
Access, fencing, management and disposal arrangements during construction.
Methods to manage earthworks, stockpiles and stormwater runoff so as to prevent any entry of sediment and other contaminants to the Plenty River (See Construction Techniques for Sediment Pollution Control (EPA 1991) and Urban Stormwater Best Practice Environmental Management Guidelines.
Methods to ensure soil is removed from the tyres of vehicles prior to leaving the site.
Building materials recycling.
The management of waste and litter.
Construction parking.
The operations of any continuing uses on the land.
Notice and review Use In Precinct 1, 2, 4, 5 or 6 an application to use land is not exempt from the notice requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d), the decision requirements of Section 64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of Section 82(1) of the Act in accordance with Clause 37.08-8. Subdivision In Precinct 5 an application to subdivide land into lots that do not each contain an existing dwelling or car parking space is not exempt from the notice requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d), the decision requirements of Section 64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of Section 82(1) of the Act in accordance with Clause 37.08-8. Buildings and Works In Precinct 1, 4 or 6 an application to construct a building or construct or carry out works within 30 metres of land (not a road) which is in Precinct 5, in a residential zone, used for a hospital or an education centre or land in a Public Acquisition Overlay to be acquired for a hospital or an education centre is not exempt from the notice requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d), the decision requirements of Section 64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of Section 82(1) of the Act in accordance with Clause 37.08-8. In Precinct 2 or 5 an application to construct a building or construct or carry out works is not exempt from the notice requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d), the decision requirements of Section 64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of Section 82(1) of the Act in accordance with Clause 37.08-8.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 169
Attachment 2
To the application for permit being made.
Item: 4.3 8.0 14/02/2013 C82
9.0 14/02/2013 C82
10.0 14/02/2013 C82
Attachment 2: Revised Schedule 1 to Clause 37.08 - Activity Centre Zone Decision guidelines Before deciding on an application in addition to the decision guidelines in Clause 65 and 37.08, the responsible authority must consider as appropriate whether subdivision associated with a development proposal that supports the objectives for the Greensborough Principal Activity Centre will not result in fragmentation of sites. Advertising signs Advertising sign requirements are at Clause 52.05. All land within Precincts 2 and 5 are in Category 3 and all land within Precinct 6 is in Category 2. All other land is in Category 1. Other provisions of the scheme The notice requirements in Clause 67.02 do not apply to an application under any provision of this scheme in Precinct 3 by or on behalf of the public land manager.
11.0
Reference Documents
14/02/2013 C82
Urban and Landscape Design Guidelines – Precincts 2, 5 & 6, Banyule City Council, 2015 Greensborough Principal Activity Centre Plan (The Greenbook), Banyule City Council, 2007.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 170
4.4 Item: 4.4
Attachment 1: DRAFT Submission to the City of Yarra on the Revised AMCOR Development Plan
25 November 2015
Dear Mr Walmsley
ALPHINGTON PAPER MILL (AMCOR) – RESPONSE TO REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN On 17 April 2015 Banyule City Council made a submission to the City of Yarra for the Alphington Paper Mill Development Plan. Council advised that it considers that the Amcor site is generally suitable for residential infill development but raised some concerns about particular aspects of the proposal. The main concerns in Council’s submissions related to: •
Amount of retail floor space proposed
•
Impact of the development on the road network
•
Access to public transport services
•
Walking and cycling provision and access
•
Design and location of open space
•
Impact on local sporting clubs and facilities
Council has reviewed the revised Alphington Paper Mill Development Plan and appreciates the further information sessions that the City of Yarra has hosted. The following comments are given for the revised plan. Economic Impacts Council expressed concern that the original Amcor Development Plan proposed over 19,000sqm of retail floor space and referred to the commercial component as a ‘neighbourhood activity centre.’ Council also expressed concern about the impact of the scale of the proposed retail and commercial development on neighbouring activity centres, particularly the nearby Ivanhoe Activity Centre. ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 171
Attachment 1
Mr David Walmsley Manager City Strategy Yarra City Council PO Box 168, Richmond 3121
4.4
Item: 4.4
Attachment 1: DRAFT Submission to the City of Yarra on the Revised AMCOR Development Plan
Attachment 1
The revised Development Plan has reduced the retail component of the development from 19,000sqm to 15,000sqm which equates to a reduction of 21%. However the retail mix preferred remains unclear. It is noted that the Development Plan also provides a commitment that the proposed Neighbourhood Activity Centre cannot be upgraded to a Subregional Activity Centre. Council supports the reduction in retail floor space but has some remaining concerns about the impact that any ‘specialty shop’ component may have on the independent specialty retailers in Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe. More clarity and a clearer focus on “local convenience” priorities could help to address this concern. The recently released Plan Melbourne Refresh – Discussion Paper reveals that a revised Metropolitan Strategy for Melbourne will focus on meeting the convenience needs of a neighbourhood, first and foremost. It is not clear how the 11,500sqm of commercial floor space in the Development Plan will be filled in the short term. The ‘MacroPlanDimasi’ Economic Assessment Report suggests that the commercial floor space component will include a number of different facilities at the site including office, medical, gymnasium and showrooms. Council considers there is a future risk that an unsuccessful commercial outcome may be translated to retail floor space and cause off site implications for other centres. Council remains concerned that the retail component at AMCOR is still too large, and has potential to detrimentally affect the economic success of Ivanhoe. Banyule has very recently completed Structure Planning for Ivanhoe and has enabled a retail/commercial floor space growth opportunity along Heidelberg Road (near Darebin Station). The AMCOR development has potential to adversely affect the viability of retail/commercial floor space growth in this part of the Ivanhoe Activity Centre. Council has adopted the Ivanhoe Structure Plan. This plan includes properties near Darebin railway station on Heidelberg Road, where there is a valuable opportunity to improve the mix of retail/commercial in a location that enjoys excellent access to the Hurstbridge railway line. There is a risk that retailing and commercial floor space at the AMCOR site, which does not enjoy immediate access to the Hurstbridge rail line, may affect the financial viability of these properties in the Darebin Station precinct. Council suggests that further reduction in the retail/commercial floor space at AMCOR may be appropriate to help address this risk. Doing this might also reinforce a ‘local convenience’ role for retailing at the AMCOR site. Traffic and Transport Widening of Chandler Highway Council agrees that the widening of the Chandler Highway Bridge should be considered as part of the Alphington Paper Mill Development Plan project. Similarly the Government’s ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 172
4.4 Item: 4.4
Attachment 1: DRAFT Submission to the City of Yarra on the Revised AMCOR Development Plan
Further discussions about the Chandler Highway widening should give better consideration to the other potential development sites in the locale. There may be future residential development opportunities at the existing Royal Talbot Rehabilitation Centre and Guide Dogs Victoria, which would see a further increase in traffic movements on the Chandler Highway. Council understands that VicRoads has examined a four-lane option for the Chandler Highway, but decided the road would be near its capacity upon completion in late 2018. Council considers it would be more sensible to plan for paving six lanes instead, ensuring that adequate provision is made for walking and cycling too. Sustainable Travel The revised Development Plan has given more priority to encouraging sustainable modes of movement throughout the development site. While Council supports this initiative, further attention can be made for the provision of safe, designated pedestrian and cycling links to the Alphington and Fairfield railway stations. Council supports the developer’s commitment to offsite upgrades including a shared path on Heidelberg Road and the provision of bicycle parking at Alphington Train Station. It is anticipated that any upgrades to this path and provision of bike parking will be undertaken in consultation with Bicycle Network to achieve a best outcome. The Hurstbridge rail line is running at capacity. Urban redevelopment at key sites such as AMCOR, the emerging LaTrobe National Employment Cluster (NEC), Heidelberg Activity Centre, Ivanhoe Activity Centre and Fairfield Activity Centre all collectively illustrate the need for the Government to put increased priority to upgrading the Hurstbridge rail line. Banyule urges Yarra to advocate the Government for timely improvements to the Hurstbridge rail line as part of its final response to the AMCOR proposal. It is also noted that the Urban Development Industry Australia’s (UDIA) Environmentally Sustainable Design (ESD) approach doesn’t have a sustainable transport element. In the absence of this, Council questions how future opportunities for community buses, walking school buses, green travel plans for sites and other programs or projects might be achieved through the revised Development Plan.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 173
Attachment 1
grade separation at Grange Road needs to be considered as it is a government commitment. However the widening of the Chandler Highway and bridge is, in itself, a sensitive project that will draw much local community interest. Indeed, it is understood that there is already community concern about the plans for the future bridge’s impact on Alphington residential properties to the west.
4.4
Item: 4.4
Attachment 1: DRAFT Submission to the City of Yarra on the Revised AMCOR Development Plan
Community Infrastructure & Open Space
Attachment 1
Council has some remaining concerns about how the provision of 2,500 additional dwellings at AMCOR will impact on nearby recreational facilities and sporting clubs, including those in Banyule. Further analysis and discussion on the likely impacts on clubs and facilities would be useful. It is understood that the revised Development Plan now incorporates a financial commitment to fund the construction of two multipurpose outdoor courts, to be located offsite in an area to be determined by the City of Yarra. Given the AMCOR site’s proximity to Banyule, Council seeks some assurance from Yarra that the courts will be built in Alphington, not further away from Banyule than the AMCOR site. Council also raised concerns about the linear nature of the proposed open space and the lack of viable areas for people to enjoy recreational activities. Council notes that the masterplan now includes four parks and understands that the open space will not be stacked on other uses such as basement parking or land in flood prone areas. Council supports the concept that the open spaces are to be owned by the wider community and that the community will be involved in the design and end outcome of the open spaces. Housing Diversity Council is concerned that there appears to be no financial agreement in place with a housing association to deliver a strong mix of affordable housing on the AMCOR site. The fall back provision of five social housing dwellings is insufficient. Better provision for social housing would provide better housing diversity for smaller household sizes. There is an opportunity for the Government to work more directly with the AMCOR development to enable a better social housing outcome. In conclusion, Banyule City Council ‘in-principle’ supports development of the Amcor site. However as a neighbouring municipality, Council still has some reservations about various issues. These issues have been described in this submission. Council asks that further consideration of these concerns can be achieved by Yarra supporting these concerns and pursing further improvements to the Development Plan. If you have any queries about this submission please contact me on 9457 9887. Yours sincerely
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 174
4.4 Item: 4.4
Attachment 1: DRAFT Submission to the City of Yarra on the Revised AMCOR Development Plan
Attachment 1
Anne North Senior Strategic Planner
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 175
Attachment 1: Concept Plan for Works Along Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough
Attachment 1
4.5
Item: 4.5
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 176
4.5
Attachment 1: Concept Plan for Works Along Grimshaw Street and Flintoff Street, Greensborough
Attachment 1
Item: 4.5
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 177
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
5.1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 178
5.1
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 179
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
5.1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 180
5.1
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 181
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
5.1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 182
5.1
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 183
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
5.1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 184
5.1
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 185
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
5.1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 186
5.1
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 187
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
5.1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 188
5.1
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 189
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
5.1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 190
5.1
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 191
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
5.1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 192
5.1
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 193
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
5.1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 194
5.1
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 195
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
5.1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 196
5.1
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 197
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
5.1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 198
5.1
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 199
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
5.1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 200
5.1
Attachment 1: MRFC Master Plan: Executive Summary
Attachment 1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 201
Attachment 2: MRFC Master Plan: Concept Plans
Attachment 2
5.1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 202
5.1
Attachment 2: MRFC Master Plan: Concept Plans
Attachment 2
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 203
Attachment 2: MRFC Master Plan: Concept Plans
Attachment 2
5.1
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 204
5.1
Attachment 2: MRFC Master Plan: Concept Plans
Attachment 2
Item: 5.1
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 205
5.2
Item: 5.2
Attachment 1: Draft General Code of Conduct - Public Meetings
Preamble Conducting well run public meetings is an important part of effective local government.
Attachment 1
Banyule Council holds a range of public meetings throughout the year including formal Council meetings, planning consultation meetings, public workshops and various information evenings. These meetings are an important way for Council to engage with the community, share information, receive feedback, consult on new proposals, mediate disputes, and collectively solve problems. Effective public meetings need to be well conducted so that all participants get the opportunity to express their views and listen to the views of others in a respectful way. Meetings conducted like this are vital for transparent and democratic government and ultimately lead to better and more inclusive decision making. By their very nature, public meetings will include differing views and not everyone will agree with everything being discussed. If meetings are not managed well this can lead to raised emotions, heated debate and potential or actual conflict. If this happens the benefits of open participation can be lost because some people do not get a chance to have a say, or may feel intimidated or even threatened. To ensure Banyule Council’s public meetings/forums operate fairly and transparently, and are as effective as possible, the following rules of conduct and good governance principles apply. These rules of conduct and principles are consistent with and complement the rules contained within Banyule Council’s Governance Local Law No. 2 (2015) - Meeting Procedure Code. Expectations and Roles Organisers Banyule Council’s public meetings will usually be organised by Council staff. To maximise the meeting’s success, good planning is essential and this should include: • Ensuring all key stakeholders are invited. • Clearly outlining the meeting’s purpose including whether it is to inform, consult, or collaborate. • Arranging a suitable venue and meeting set-up. • Determining whether a trained or experienced facilitator is required, especially if a meeting is likely to be contentious. • Ensuring meeting notes or minutes are taken and ensuring participants are informed about will happen next. • Assisting and supporting the meeting chairperson. Chairperson The meeting chairperson may also be referred to as the meeting facilitator or convenor. The chairperson will usually be the Mayor, if in attendance, or another Councillor or Senior Officer nominated to the role. The chairperson’s role includes: • Being fair and ensuring everyone has the opportunity to participate and no-one dominates. • Keeping the meeting on track and on time.
• •
Maintaining order by ensuring the rules of conduct are followed. Determining what will happen if the meeting does not run smoothly or in keeping with this Code of Conduct.
Participants In addition to the Code of Conduct, people participating in a public meeting should: • Turn up on time. • Bring a positive attitude. • Understand that the goal is not necessarily to agree but to gain a deeper understanding of an issue through discussion. • Be fair and respectful at all times. CODE OF CONDUCT In attending meetings run by Banyule Council, participants agree to accept and abide by the following rules of conduct: Rules 1. Mobile phones and other personal devices must be turned off or switched to silent during the course of the meeting. 2. Only speak when acknowledged and given the floor by the chairperson. 3. Stay within the allotted time provided to speak. 4. Be civil and courteous particularly when addressing the meeting. 5. Direct remarks, comments or questions through the chairperson when you are speaking. 6. Do not interrupt or distract other speakers. 7. Comments must relate directly to the matter being discussed. 8. Do not use derogatory, defamatory, threatening, or offensive remarks about individuals or groups/bodies. 9. Do not use gestures or other means to intentionally disturb the order and decorum of the meeting. 10. Observe instructions from the chairperson at all times. *Council acknowledges that these rules of conduct anticipate more formal meeting structures. Council encourages public meetings and consultations that use a variety of methods to gain community input. While the structure and format of meetings will differ, the same principles of conduct apply.
Breach of Rules of Conduct Where a public meeting becomes uncooperative, the chairperson will take the following steps: • If a participant is acting in a uncooperative manner, the chairperson will state the problem and remind the person of the Rules of Conduct. • Provide sufficient warning about the need for certain behaviour to stop. • If a warning does not work, the chairperson may adjourn the meeting while the person is asked to leave. If a person refuses to leave the meeting appropriate authorities may be called. • Where a meeting is severely disrupted or is deemed to be potentially unsafe, the chairperson will close the meeting.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 206
6.3
Attachment 1: Proposed Plan of Subdivision
Attachment 1
Item: 6.3
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 209
Attachment 1
6.3
Item: 6.3
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 210
Attachment 1: Proposed Plan of Subdivision
6.3
Attachment 1: Proposed Plan of Subdivision
Attachment 1
Item: 6.3
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 211
6.3
Attachment 2: Endorsed Plan
Attachment 2
Item: 6.3
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 30 NOVEMBER 2015 Page 213