20140416 council agenda 16 april 2014

AGENDA

Ordinary Meeting of Council

6.00pm Wednesday 16 April 2014

*** Broadcast live on Phoenix FM 106.7 ***

VENUE:

Reception Room,

Bendigo Town Hall,

Hargreaves Street, Bendigo

NEXT MEETING:

Wednesday 7 May 2014

Bendigo Town Hall

Copies of the City of Greater Bendigo Council’s Agendas & Minutes

can be obtained online at www.bendigo.vic.gov.au

http://www.bendigo.vic.gov.au/

Council Vision

Our residents can live healthy and satisfying lives in our vibrant City and region, confident in its growth and future.

Council Purpose and Values Councillors have made a commitment in their Code of Conduct to working and leading together in:

Making informed, balanced and objective decisions

Acting honestly

Taking responsible financial decisions

Ensuring good governance

Being inclusive in their activities and sharing information with others

Learning from each other

Respecting each other's undertakings

Being respectful in their interactions with others

Communicating clearly about decisions that have been made

Fulfilling their undertakings and being clear when this is not possible

Working positively with the media to ensure community members are provided with accurate information

Themes Planning for Growth

Liveability

Productivity

Sustainability

Good Governance and Decision-Making

ORDINARY MEETING WEDNESDAY 16 APRIL 2014

ORDER OF BUSINESS:

ITEM PRECIS PAGE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY 6

PRAYER 6

CODE OF CONDUCT 6

PRESENT 6

APOLOGIES 6

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS 6

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 6

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS 7

CR WILLIAMS' REPORT 7

DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST 8

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 9

1. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS 10

2. PLANNING FOR GROWTH 11

2.1 Planning Scheme Amendment C160 - McIvor Forest Drive,

Junortoun - Consider Panel Report and Adoption of

Amendment

11

2.2 73 Howard Street, Ascot - Construction of 18 Dwellings 22

2.3 171-173 High Street, Kangaroo Flat - Construction of 22

Dwellings (Two 2 Storey Buildings & One 3 Storey

Building) Subdivision of Land, Creation/Alteration of a

Vehicular Access & Reduction in Car Parking

Requirement

45

2.4 146 Neale Street, Flora Hill - 2 Lot Subdivision and

Construction of a Two Storey Dwelling

68

2.5 11 Steane Street, Kennington - 2 Lot Subdivision and

Construction of a Dwelling

86

2.6 169 High Street, Heathcote - Display of Signage 100

2.7 52 Edward Street, Bendigo - Partial Demolition of Existing 108

Building, Construction of a 3 Storey Building, Use of Land

for 2 Dwellings, Provide Car Parking on Another Site,

Waive Remaining Car Parking & Loading & Unloading

Requirements

2.8 119 & 119 Prouses Road, North Bendigo - Development

and Use of Land for a Community Centre (Including Place

of Assembly, Cafeteria, Health Services and Child Care)

and RemovaloOf Native Vegetation

122

2.9 6 Graham Street, Quarry Hill 3550 - Demolition Of

Dwelling, Outbuilding And Fences And Construction Of

Dwelling And Fences

144

2.10 6 and 7 Gordon Court, Strathfieldsaye - Subdivision of the

Land into 4 Lots

159

2.11 22 Button Street, Strathdale - Two Lot Subdivision 170

3. LIVEABILITY 179

3.1 Hospital Precinct Structure Plan - Progress Update 179

3.2 2013-2014 Community Grants Program - Round 2 187

4. PRODUCTIVITY 199

5. SUSTAINABILITY 200

5.1 Submission to the Australian Government's Issues Paper

on the Development of an Agricultural Competitiveness

White Paper

200

5.2 Tender for Electricity 208

6. GOOD GOVERNANCE AND DECISION-MAKING 213

6.1 Record of Assemblies 213

6.2 Contracts Awarded Under Delegation 223

6.3 Progress Report Independent Review Implementation 224

7. URGENT BUSINESS 232

8. NOTICES OF MOTION 232

9. COUNCILLORS' REPORTS 232

10. MAYOR'S REPORT 232

11.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT 232

12. CONFIDENTIAL (SECTION 89) REPORTS 232

12.1 Any other matter which the Council or special committee

considers would prejudice the Council or any person

232

12.2 Personnel matter, industrial matters and any other matter

which the Council or special committee considers would

prejudice the Council or any person

232

12.3 Contractual mater (confidential attachment) 232

232

____________________________

CRAIG NIEMANN CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Ordinary Meeting - 16 April 2014

PAGE 6

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

PRAYER

CODE OF CONDUCT

PRESENT

APOLOGIES

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

That Standing Orders be suspended to allow the conduct of Public Question Time.

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Public Question Time Guidelines Public Question Time – Purpose Council has provided the opportunity for members of the public to ask questions of broad interest to Council and the community. Matters relating to routine Council works should be taken up with Council’s Customer Service Officers through its Customer Request System. By the time planning matters have reached the council agenda, they have been through an extensive process as required by the Planning and Environment Act. In addition, in most instances mediation has been held between the parties involved. Throughout the process there are many opportunities for the people to ask questions. Therefore, no questions relating to planning matters on the Agenda will be accepted. Public Question Time – Where, When And Who The public question time is held at every Ordinary Meeting of Greater Bendigo City Council. Meetings of Council commence at 6.00pm in the Reception Room, Bendigo Town Hall, Hargreaves Street, Bendigo. The public question time is held at the start of the meeting as close as practical to 6:00pm. A maximum of 30 minutes has been provided for registered and unregistered questions. Residents are encouraged to lodge questions in advance so that a more complete response can be provided. Questions will be put to the Council by the individual posing the question; the question will be answered by the Mayor or CEO, or where appropriate, Councillors or Council Officers.


PAGE 7

Acceptance of Questions Each person asking a question of Council is required to stand, state their name, and address the Mayor. Public Question Time is not an opportunity for making of statements or other comments. Council’s Meeting Procedure Local Law does not allow for other questions or comments during the remainder of the meeting. 1. An individual may only ask one question per meeting, a follow-up question may be

permitted at the discretion of the Mayor. 2. In the event that the same or similar question is raised by more than one person, an

answer may be given as a combined response. 3. In the event that time does not permit all questions registered to be answered,

questions will be answered in writing or referred to the next meeting if appropriate. 4. The Mayor and or CEO have the right to decline registration on basis of:

Prosecution, summonses or any other litigation;

Most appropriately addressed by other means;

Vague, irrelevant, insulting or improper, defamatory;

Answer likely to compromise his / her position;

Confidential, commercial-in-confidence. 5. Each individual whose registration form has been accepted or declined will be

advised by the Friday of the week prior to the scheduled meeting. 6. In the event of a registration form being declined the registration form will be

circulated to the Mayor or Councillors for information.

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

That Standing Orders be resumed.

CR WILLIAMS' REPORT


PAGE 8

DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Pursuant to Sections 77, 78 and 79 of the Local Government Act 1989 (as amended) direct and indirect conflict of interest must be declared prior to debate on specific items within the agenda; or in writing to the Chief Executive Officer before the meeting. Declaration of indirect interests must also include the classification of the interest (in circumstances where a Councillor has made a Declaration in writing, the classification of the interest must still be declared at the meeting), i.e. (a) direct financial interest (b) indirect interest by close association (c) indirect interest that is an indirect financial interest (d) indirect interest because of conflicting duties (e) indirect interest because of receipt of an applicable gift (f) indirect interest as a consequence of becoming an interested party (g) indirect interest as a result of impact on residential amenity (h) conflicting personal interest A Councillor who has declared a conflict of interest, must leave the meeting and remain outside the room while the matter is being considered, or any vote is taken. Councillors are also encouraged to declare circumstances where there may be a perceived conflict of interest.


PAGE 9

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Wednesday 26 March 2014. The following items were considered at the Ordinary Council meeting held on Wednesday 26 March 2014 at 6:00pm.

Petition: Parking in Leslie Street, Marong

Planning Scheme Amendment C190 - Rezoning of Land at 244 Edwards Road, Maiden Gully and Part CA43H Parish of Marong - Consider Panel Report and Adoption of Amendment

760-764 Strathfieldsaye Road, Strathfieldsaye - Stage Subdivision of the Land into 46 Lots and the Removal of Native Vegetation

224 View Street, Bendigo - Use of Land for a Café, Partial Demolition, Building and Works, Waiver of Car Parking (for Café)

9 Maynard Drive, Epsom - Construction of a Telecommunications Facility (35 Metre Monopole)

202 High Street, Kangaroo Flat - 2 Lot Subdivision of Land and Construction of Dwelling

12 Lyons Street, White Hills - Amend a Permit to Allow a 3-Lot Subdivision

Revised Greater Bendigo Residential Development Strategy

Parking for Hospital Precinct

Response to Petition: Traffic Management Issues around Strathfieldsaye Primary School

Response to Petition: Request for Disability Access Path between the Harcourt Street Car Park and Leo Hartney Pavilion at Ewing Park

Waste and Resource Management Strategy 2014-2019

Record of Assemblies

Local Government Performance Reporting Framework

Notice of Rescission Motion: 20 High Street, Marong - Use and Development of Land for a Service Station with an Above-Ground Diesel Tank and Creation of a New Access to a Road Zone 1

Confidential Section 89 Reports: Personnel matter and any other matter which the Council or special committee considers would prejudice the Council or any person

The unconfirmed minutes have also been posted on the City of Greater Bendigo website pending confirmation at this meeting. RECOMMENDATION That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Wednesday 26 March 2014, as circulated, be taken as read and confirmed.


PAGE 10

1. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS

Nil.

Planning for Growth - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 16 April 2014

PAGE 11

2. PLANNING FOR GROWTH

2.1 PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT C160 - MCIVOR FOREST DRIVE, JUNORTOUN - CONSIDER PANEL REPORT AND ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT

Document Information

Author Shannon Rosewarne, Senior Planner Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development Director

Summary/Purpose

Amendment details: Rezone land known as Lot S PS645134 and 8-11 Duncan Court, Junortoun and parts of Duncan Court and McIvor Forest Drive road reserves from Low Density Residential Zone to General Residential Zone. Rezone three Council owned reserves from General Residential Zone and Low Density Residential Zone to Public Park and Recreation Zone and remove Schedule 4 of the Development Plan Overlay from the above land.

The planning permit application affects Lot S PS645134 and 9-12 Duncan Court, Junortoun and proposes a 36 lot subdivision and the removal of a restrictive covenant from 12 Duncan Court.

Proponent: McIvor Forest Pty Ltd

No. of submissions: 13, with 5 referred to Panel

Key issues: Efficient use of land for conventional residential development within an existing urban area

Neighbourhood character and density

Traffic and car parking

Vegetation protection and impacts on fauna

Devaluation of property

Inclusion of other land within the amendment

Changes to the amendment recommended by the Panel

Introduction of new residential zones

Recommendation: That Council adopt Amendment 160 to the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme, with changes as recommended by the Panel, and request Approval from the Minister for Planning.


PAGE 12

Policy Context

City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013 – 2017 (2013)

Planning for Growth

Our quality of life is maintained as our City's population and economy grows.

Productivity

A diverse, strong and growing economy supports community resilience.

Background Information

At the time the Victoria Planning Provisions were introduced in 2000, the zoning was applied to the affected land to reflect the layout of a proposed cluster development. The Residential 1 Zone was applied over the area proposed for conventional sized allotments and Low Density Residential Zone over the larger residential lots. The unusual zone boundary that currently exists follows the alignment of the road originally proposed for that development. The Development Plan Overlay 4 was also introduced over the Low Density Residential Zone land. The proposed cluster development did not proceed and the land has since been developed along a more conventional subdivision layout. The proponent wishes to undertake more conventional subdivision, and the amendment will allow the land to be subdivided into smaller lots. Initially this Amendment sought to rezone land zoned Low Density Residential Zone to Residential 1 Zone, however new residential zones were introduced last year. It is necessary to change the proposed Residential 1 Zone to General Residential Zone in this amendment also. The amendment will also rezone three Council owned reserves to Public Park and Recreation Zone, a more appropriate zone which reflects the public use of the land and remove the DPO4, as a development plan is not required for this land. The key steps in the amendment process are summarised below:


PAGE 13

Previous Council Decisions 11 September 2013 – Council resolved to request the Minister for Planning to appoint an Independent Panel to consider the 5 opposing submissions. 27 March 2013 – Council resolved to request the Minister for Planning to authorise Council to prepare Amendment C160 and exhibit the amendment for one month.

Report

The attached Explanatory Report details the purpose and effect of the amendment and provides the strategic justification for the amendment. Key issues identified in the Explanatory Report are discussed below.

Send to Minister for Approval and Gazettal

We are at this point Council decides to Adopt or Abandon the Amendment

Council requests an Independent Panel to consider submissions

Submissions received

Public Exhibition of Amendment

Council decides whether to seek Ministerial Authorisation

Amendment prepared


PAGE 14

Land affected by the Amendment

Figure 1: Map identifying the land to be rezoned

Figure 2: Aerial of site showing area proposed for subdivision


PAGE 15

Figure 3: Aerial of area showing pattern of subdivision

The subject land is located south of Trotting Terrace and to the east of Cassinia Drive. Lot S is a ‘superlot’ created as part of the McIvor Forest Estate. The land is relatively flat with a number of scattered trees throughout. Only the northern portion of this property is affected by the amendment. Most of this property is already zoned General Residential Zone, except for the odd shaped area in the north zoned Low Density Residential. Lot 92 (8 Duncan Court) contains a dwelling and is predominantly zoned General Residential Zone with the north west corner of the property falling within the Low Density Residential Zone. Lot 93 (9-10 Duncan Court) and Lot 94 (11 Duncan Court) are vacant and are predominantly zoned Low Density Residential with small sections along their eastern boundaries zoned General Residential Zone. The property known as 1 McIvor Forest Drive comprises three freehold parcels owned by Council. This land contains high voltage overhead powerlines and it is encumbered by an Electricity Transmission Easement. This property also has dual zoning. A Planning Permit (DS/539/2012) was issued for subdivision of the two lots immediately south of Lot S last year. These lots are in separate ownership to the land subject to this amendment. To the east, conventional residential development exists, while to the north and west of the site there are low density residential allotments, most of which contain dwellings. Further to the west, opposite the adjacent low density residential area is the Greater Bendigo National Park.


PAGE 16

What the Amendment Does The Amendment proposes to:

Rezone the following land from Low Density Residential Zone (LDRZ) to General Residential Zone (GRZ).

o Lot S PS645134

o Lot 92 PS539711 (8 Duncan Court, Junortoun)

o Lot 93 PS539711 (9-10 Duncan Court, Junortoun)

o Lot 94 PS539711 (11 Duncan Court, Junortoun)

o Part of the road reserve in Duncan Court and McIvor Forest Drive

Rezone the following land from General Residential Zone (GRZ) and Low Density Residential Zone (LDRZ) to Public Park and Recreation Zone (PPRZ).

o RES 1 CS1241

o RES 2 CS1241

o RES 1 PS527974

Remove Schedule 4 of the Development Plan Overlay (DPO4) from the above land, except RES 2 CS1241.

The planning permit application affects Lot S PS645134, 9-10 Duncan Court, 11 Duncan Court and 12 Duncan Court, Junortoun. The planning permit application proposes a 36 lot subdivision of these parcels of land and the removal of a restrictive covenant from Lot 95 PS539711, 12 Duncan Court, which currently prevents further subdivision and restricts the number of dwellings on this lot. The proposed lots will range from 628 to 1,455 square metres.

Consultation/Communication

Exhibition Procedures The Amendment was exhibited for one month from 4 July to 5 August 2013Notice was provided in the following manner:

Individual notices to 93 owners and occupiers of land affected by the Amendment.

Notices to prescribed Ministers under Section 19(1)(c) of the Planning and Environment Act.

Notices to all authorities materially affected under Section 19(1)(a) of the Act. Public notice of the Amendment in the Bendigo Advertiser on 3 July 2013 and 6 July

2013.Publication of the notice of the Amendment in the Government Gazette on 5 August

2013. On the City of Greater Bendigo website. Submissions 13 submissions were received during the exhibition period. Six submissions from referral authorities had no objection to the amendment, while seven opposing submissions were from landowners. Consultation was undertaken with some of the opposing submitters and two submissions were able to be resolved.


PAGE 17

The key issues raised by the submitters included: Traffic impacts Change to the character of the area Amenity impacts Impacts on flora and fauna Financial impacts including devaluation of property Whether other nearby land zoned Low Density Residential Zone should be included

in the Amendment.

All submitters will be notified of Council’s decision resulting from this report. The Panel Hearing The Minister for Planning appointed an Independent Panel to consider the Amendment. The Hearing was held on 28 November 2013. The Panel has considered all written and oral submissions and material presented to it in connection with the Amendment. The Panel Report and Recommendations The Panel Report was received on 18 December 2013 and contained 5 recommendations, which are set out in Table 1 of this report. In summary, the Panel has supported Council’s position in majority. Under Section 26 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the Panel Report was automatically released to the public on 16 January 2014, 28 days following its receipt. In summary, the Panel has supported the Amendment subject to minor changes to the Amendment. Key Issues The Panel made comment about the following key issues: Appropriate development for the subject site In broad planning terms and in terms of the character of the area, the Panel concludes that the proposed rezoning is appropriate. Excessive traffic generated by the proposed development The Panel draws the following conclusions:

The proposed street network in the area has the capacity to cater for proposed traffic increases generated by development on both the subject site and in the broader McIvor Forest area.

That existing intersections have the capacity to cater for projected traffic increases generated by the development on both the subject site and in the broader McIvor Forest Estate area.

That a roundabout should be constructed at the Aberdeen Drive / ‘South Road’ / Stirling Avenue intersection and that this should be included as a condition of the permit.

That the road design standards proposed for the estate are satisfactory; and


PAGE 18

That vegetation management and parking restrictions recommended by Mr Citroën should be implemented and included as a condition on the permit.

Further land should have been included in the Amendment The Panel concludes that it is neither possible nor appropriate to consider the rezoning of the Gibson’s property as part of this process. Flora and fauna The Panel concludes there is no reason on biodiversity grounds to oppose the proposed Amendment. Devaluation of property The Panel concludes that the issue of impact on land values is not a reason not to proceed with the proposed rezoning. The following table lists the Panel's recommendations and provides a brief comment on how the recommendation be applied. Table 1: Panel Recommendations

No. Panel Recommendation Officer Recommendation

1. Amendment C160 to the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme should be adopted as exhibited.

Change the Amendment to replace proposed Residential 1 Zone with General Residential Zone, consistent with Amendment C205.

2. Reference to PS539711 in the land to which the Amendment in part applies, be amended to PS539711K.

Agree with recommendation.

3. Schedule 4 to the Development Plan Overlay be removed from the following land as exhibited: Lot S PS645134 Lot 92 PS539711 Lot 93 PS539711 Lot 94 PS539711 Res 1 CS1241 Res 1 PS527974 Part of the road reserve in Duncan Court and McIvor Forest Drive.


4. Permit number DS/594/2012 should issue subject to the conditions set out with the exception of the following: a) Condition 5 should be

amended to replace the words ‘Lots 6 & 7’ with ‘Lots 2 to 9 inclusive’



PAGE 19

No. Panel Recommendation Officer Recommendation

5. If agreement is reached between the proponent and the Council about the provision of a pedestrian/bicycle link adjacent to Lot 1 between Duncan Court and the Council reserve, that the requirement for this link be included as a further condition on Permit. If no agreement can be reached within a reasonable time, as judged by the Responsible Authority, the permit should issue subject to the amendment proposed in 4, above.

Consideration has been given to the co-location of the overland flow path and a shared path within 9-10 Duncan Court, however it would be difficult to achieve this without significant reconstruction works in Duncan Court to redirect flows. Despite this it is still desirable to provide a pedestrian/cycling link and it is therefore recommended that the existing overland flow path be retained in the current easement, and a new reserve be created along the western boundary of proposed Lot 1 for a shared path. The creation of a reserve for a shared path will be required to be shown on the amended plan under Condition 1 of the permit, with construction of the path required under condition 12.

Planning Permit Assessment The proposal complies with all the subdivision design objectives in clause 56 of the Planning Scheme. The lots in the subdivision will be fully serviced and they will enjoy a high standard of amenity owing to their solar orientation, pedestrian and vehicular linkages and access to recreational assets. All the lots will be capable of accommodating a suburban house with generous space for a garden and backyard. Since exhibition, some further changes to the draft planning permit are needed. Following recommendations from the proponent’s traffic engineer and advice from the City’s Engineering Unit, a roundabout at the intersection of Aberdeen Drive and a walkway off Duncan Court are required. To address concerns about traffic flow and car parking in Duncan Court, 7 indented concrete car parking bays can be provided within the road reserve. The City's Engineering Unit will notify residents of Duncan Court of changes to the naturestrip prior to the commencement of these works. A standard landscaping maintenance condition for subdivisions has also been added. The changes to the draft permit are set out in Table 2. Table 2: Changes to Planning Permit

Modified Permit Conditions

Condition 1 (Amended Plan) Before the plan of subdivision is certified amended plans to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible


PAGE 20

authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and then form part of the permit. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application but modified to show: a) a roundabout at the intersection of Aberdeen Drive and the new road to the south

of the subject site. b) creation of a 4 metre wide reserve along the western boundary of Lot 1 for the

purpose of a shared path c) provision of 7 indented car parking bays in Duncan Court.

Condition 8 (Landscaping Maintenance) The landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority for 12 months after the works are completed, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.

Condition 13 (Construction of Works) to include: h) The construction of a roundabout at the intersection of Aberdeen Drive and the

new road to the south of the subject site i) No stopping signage at the inner curve midway along Duncan Court j) Construction of a 2.5m wide shared concrete path within the new reserve k) Construction of indented concrete parking bays.

Conclusion

The Amendment will facilitate infill residential development in a well serviced area and provide for additional housing. It is recommended that Council adopt the Amendment with changes and forward the adopted Amendment to the Minister for Planning for approval. This will complete the Amendment process.

Options

Council has the option of:

Adopting the amendment in accordance with the above Officer Recommendations and sending to the Minister for Planning for Approval

Adopting the amendment in accordance with the Panel’s recommendations and sending to the Minister for Planning for Approval.

Adopting the amendment in part.

Abandoning the amendment under the Planning and Environment Act 1987 there is no right of review of a council's decision not to support the amendment.

It is recommended that Council adopt the amendment with changes in accordance with the above Panel and Officer Recommendations.

Resource Implications

Officer time will be required to prepare the Amendment documentation for adoption and liaise with the Minister for Planning.


PAGE 21

The proponent has agreed to pay for the statutory fees and extra costs incurred by the City for holding the panel as per the Policy for private Planning Scheme Amendments adopted by Council. The amendment is not expected to have any adverse effects on the resources and administrative costs of the City of Greater Bendigo.

Attachments

Draft planning permit

RECOMMENDATION

That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to: 1. Adopt Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme Amendment C160 with changes.

2. Forward the adopted Amendment to the Minister for Planning for Approval, together

with the prescribed information pursuant to Section 31(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.


PAGE 22

2.2 73 HOWARD STREET, ASCOT 3551 - CONSTRUCTION OF 18 DWELLINGS


Author Chris Duckett, Coordinator Land Use Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development Director

Summary/Purpose

Application details: Construction of 18 dwellings

Land: 73 Howard Street, ASCOT 3551

Application No: DR/433/2013

Applicant: Ethan Properties Pty Ltd

Zoning: General Residential Zone

Overlays: Environmental Significance Overlay 1 Land Subject to Inundation Overlay

No. of objections: 30

Consultation meeting held:

The applicant chose not to hold a consultation meeting as residents had not raised any new issues from the previous application on the site.

Key considerations: The principle of increased density of residential development in this location.

Whether the development is a good urban design outcome which will preserve neighbourhood character.

Whether the development would create an unacceptable flood risk which would be a risk to life and property.

Where the proposal would result in an acceptable amenity outcome for existing and future residents.

Conclusion: The site is suitable for medium density development and the proposed design addresses previous concerns with regard to the impact on neighbourhood character. The flood risk which is a key issue for local residents and had also been a concern for North Central Catchment Management Authority (NCCMA) is now considered to be at an acceptable level to allow the development to proceed.


PAGE 23

It is important to note that Council is not the decision maker on this proposal as the applicant has lodged an appeal to the Victorian and Civil, Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) against Council’s failure to make a decision on the planning application within statutory timeframes. This report therefore seeks Council’s position on the application in order to prepare its case for the forthcoming VCAT Hearing. It is recommended that Greater Bendigo City Council puts forward a position which supports the granting of a planning permit.

Policy Context


Planning for Growth


Productivity


Sustainability

Strengthen the links between Greater Bendigo's past and future by protection and contemporary re-use of our heritage assets.


A planning application for the construction of 20 dwellings was lodged with the City on 31 May 2013 and the timeline below sets out key milestones in the interim period.

4 June 2013 Application is referred to statutory and internal authorities.

26 June 2013 The City requests further information (flooding/drainage report).

2 July 2013 NCCMA responds and requests further information (flood report).

31 July 2013 Application is amended to construction of 18 dwellings and a flood report is provided.

2 August 2013 Application is amended and referred to NCCMA and advertised to local residents.

20 September 2013 Officers and Mayor conduct on-site meeting with residents.

19 November 2013 NCCMA provide a revised response recommending Council objects to the proposal.

22 November 2013 NCCMA advises they have met applicant and would consider a design solution to address their concerns.

27 December 2013 City receives notification that an appeal against the failure to determine the application has been lodged at VCAT.


PAGE 24

27 March 2013 Applicant formally amends application through VCAT and NCCMA subsequently advise that the amended information addresses their concerns and they do not object to the granting of permit subject to conditions.

Prior to, and post-lodgement of the appeal, officers have been made aware of continuing discussions between the applicant and NCCMA to try and address outstanding issues. With this knowledge officers deferred reporting the application to Council in order to provide the most up to date information so Council can be fully informed on a position to take to VCAT. Previous Planning Application The site was the subject of a planning application for 29 dwellings which was refused by Council on 17th October 2012 for the following reason: 1. The proposal would be harmful to existing neighbourhood character by reason of the

layout, design, appearance and number of dwellings contrary to the objectives of Clauses 21.06 Housing, 32.01 Residential 1 Zone and 55 Two or more dwellings on a lot of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.

The applicant appealed the decision to VCAT and Council’s decision was upheld. The VCAT decision is attached at Appendix 2 but in summary the Tribunal made the following key points:

Development of the site for units is not premature in relation to strategic planning

The design response is too intense to sufficiently respect the area’s character. (Particular concerns were the layout involving units built close to the side boundaries with minimal opportunity for landscaping).

In the absence of expert evidence to challenge the applicant’s and Council’s engineers’ and NCCMA’s position that the risk from drainage and flooding was acceptable it is difficult to question that the position of all authorities is flawed. That does not mean that there is no risk from water moving at some speed through the review site once developed but it would be an acceptable risk.

Although the flooding issue was not a fundamental concern, the Tribunal did find that there was insufficient information/detail in the application to demonstrate that mitigating against the flood risk would not result in other adverse amenity and liveability impacts for future occupants.

Report

Subject Site and Surrounds

The site comprises a vacant irregular shaped block of land which fronts Howard Street and has an area of 4,572 square metres. The site and surrounding land is relatively flat.


PAGE 25

The site is adjoined by 12 dwellings to the north western and south eastern side boundaries which are all on large blocks in the range of 1,619 square metres to 4,886 square metres. To the rear is a significantly larger parcel of land with an area of 2.126 hectares. This land is currently vacant. All surrounding land is zoned General Residential. The site is located approximately 800mm east of the Epsom Village shopping centre on Howard Street. The site is conveniently located for bus services with two bus stops on the number 10 route within 150m. In addition, the future Epsom railway station will be located approximately 600m from the site.

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors’ properties marked with a star, (some objectors' are outside the scope of the map).


PAGE 26

Figure 2: Aerial photograph. Proposal

The proposal is to construct 18 single storey dwellings on the lot. The site would be laid out with 1 dwelling fronting Howard Street with a further dwelling to the rear of this one. The remaining dwellings would be set in clusters of 4 spaced out on the block. A large area at the front of the block would be left open with vegetation retained and four visitor parking spaces provided in the middle of the site adjacent to the south-western boundary. It is proposed that 15 of the dwellings would be one bedroom with 3 having two bedrooms. Each dwelling would also have a living/kitchen area and a bathroom. 16 of the dwellings would have an integrated single carport and the remaining two dwellings would have a separate car space. Private open space would be provided in the form of rear and side gardens in the range of 25 square metres and 58 square metres.


PAGE 27

Figure 3: Refused site layout (15 March 2013)

Figure 4: Proposed site layout (28 March 2014)


PAGE 28

Figure 5: Typical floor plan/section/elevation

Figure 6: Typical elevation

Figure 7: Typical section


PAGE 29

Planning Controls - Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme

The following clauses are relevant in the consideration of this proposal: State Planning Policy Framework

11.05 Regional Planning

13.02 Floodplains

15.01 Urban environment

15.02 Sustainable environment

16.01 Medium density housing Municipal Strategic Statement

21.05 Settlement

21.06 Housing Other Provisions

32.08 General Residential Zone (GRZ)

44.04 Land Subject to Inundation Overlay (LSIO)

55 Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings

65 Decision Guidelines A planning permit is required to construct dwellings under the GRZ and LSIO.


Referrals The following authorities and internal departments have been consulted on the proposal:

Referral Comment

North Central Catchment Management Authority (NCCMA)

No objection subject to conditions. NCCMA’s response to this application is discussed in detail in the flooding section below.

Country Fire Authority (CFA) No objection the site is a low fire risk.

Department of Environment and Primary Industries (DEPI)

No objection.

Traffic & Design No objection subject to conditions.

Drainage No objection subject to conditions.

Public Notification The application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers.


PAGE 30

As a result of advertising 30 objections were received, with the grounds of objection being: Neighbourhood Character

Proposal would be harmful to neighbourhood character by reason of the layout, design, appearance and number of dwellings.

Density is a significant departure from the rural living character of the area with dwellings on large lots.

Site is not located in an area specifically targeted for community focused medium density.

No neighbourhood character policy for this area so should be assessed against general principles.

Streetscape will be unable to accommodate bins and parked cars in front of the block.

Proposal has no backyards and minimal landscaping.

Raised floor levels between 450-650mm required to meet flooding requirements will impact on character. The required fencing would add to the height and impact.

Flooding

There has been no independent flood study of this site to assess the suitability for development.

Applicant’s previous flood studies have been proven to be incorrect therefore the latest recommendation should not be accepted unchallenged.

Levels identified by flood modelling are inconsistent with recorded historical flood levels.

There will be a detrimental impact on Taylor Street properties and those downstream of Back Creek due to increased depth and velocity of water.

The land is extremely flood prone and with development proposed water will be forced into other people’s homes.

Traffic

The proposed development does not provide for safe and efficient vehicle movements which will increase vehicle movements into Howard Street by up to 180 vehicles.

Concerns over emergency access

Amenity

Pets would be numerous in a small area with added noise from dogs a concern General

Proposal is in breach of VCAT ruling.

Doesn’t comply with State policy on density.

Lack of footpaths is inappropriate for density proposed.

Concerns over general deterioration to the residential area similar to Melbourne.

It will adversely affect property values in Howard Street and surrounds.

Proposal would set a precedent for other areas of vacant land to be developed.


PAGE 31

Impact on tree protection zone on adjoining properties.

Carport dimensions do not meet minimum standard requirements. The issues raised by objectors are considered in the assessment below.

Planning Assessment

Principle of increased density of residential development in this location Clause 11.05-4 Regional planning strategies and principles have the objective of developing regions and settlements which have a strong identity, are prosperous and are environmentally sustainable. Of particular relevance to this application is the strategy to limit urban sprawl and direct growth into existing settlements, promoting and capitalising on opportunities for urban renewal and redevelopment. Clause 16.01 Residential development has objectives which promote a diverse range of housing that meets community needs in locations that offer good access to services and transport and that is both water and energy efficient. The importance of energy and resource efficiency is also referenced in Clause 15.02 Sustainable development. The City's Settlement and Housing policies within the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) are supported by a residential development strategy which advocates for urban consolidation in the form of high quality medium density in-fill housing. The site is zoned General Residential and is located within the Urban Growth Boundary and the proposal meets the overarching objectives of housing policies within the SPPF and the Residential Development Strategy as it would provide for urban consolidation in an area which has good access to local services and facilities. The Residential Development Strategy does not have any specific guidance on the Ascot/Epsom area but the strategy does identify a series of 'community focused development zones' which will provide for a wide variety of housing types at higher densities. One such development zone is centred on the Epsom Village shopping centre and is mapped as extending eastwards on Howard Street to within 400m of the site. Chapter 1.4 of the Strategy addresses the challenges facing future residential development in Bendigo and highlights the difficulties of achieving higher densities within existing urban areas whilst maintaining and enhancing Bendigo's special neighbourhood character. The Strategy highlights that Bendigo's changing demographic structure, in particular the ageing population and decreasing household size will result in increasing demand for higher density development and this is likely to be in the form of smaller dwellings in areas with high accessibility to public transport and retail and community facilities.


PAGE 32

Local residents have raised concerns regarding the change that this would have on an area with a rural living character. Whilst many of the blocks in the area are large and have only a single dwelling located on them, the fact remains that the land is zoned for residential development and has no density controls which dictate lot sizes. It is noted, however, that at the VCAT Hearing the Tribunal agreed that although not a low density area, it does have the feel of such an area. At the VCAT Hearing, a view was put forward by Council’s representative that development of the review site at the density proposed would be premature given that strategic planning for Ascot is incomplete. This was in reference to the MSS that identifies the need for tailored medium-density guidelines and drainage investigations for Back Creek. In response to this the Tribunal concluded that: “While it may be preferable to have a stronger strategic direction to guide applications such as that before me, I am not persuaded that development of the land for multi-units should be rejected because it is premature.” This was a view given in the knowledge that a Flood Study was underway, which is discussed in detail below. Whilst the location is appropriate for medium density, infill development, it is important to balance this against other objectives in the Planning Scheme as set out in the MSS. This includes the need to ensure developments are respectful of neighbourhood character and amenity in the area and flooding and drainage issues are addressed. This is discussed further below. Neighbourhood Character Unlike many of Bendigo's suburbs, Ascot does not have a residential character policy to guide the form of development in the area. However, neighbourhood character is referenced as an important consideration elsewhere in the Planning Scheme including Clauses 15.01 Urban Environment, 16.01 Residential Development, 21.06 Housing, 32.08 General Residential Zone and 55 Two dwellings on a lot. Applications for medium-density housing require a balanced consideration of State and Local policies which encourage consolidation of new housing within established urban areas against the need to be respectful of existing neighbourhood characteristics. An assessment therefore needs to be made as to whether the development would indeed respect neighbourhood character. Part of that assessment requires a comparison between this proposal and the previous proposal taking into account the VCAT determination. In respect to neighbourhood character the VCAT Order discussed the number of dwellings, site layout and extent of landscaping. These matters are considered below.


PAGE 33

Original Scheme What VCAT said Revised Scheme

Officer Comment

29 x 1 bedroom dwellings

There is potential to develop the site with multiple dwellings and a low density outcome is not dictated by policy.

15 x 1 bedroom dwellings and 3 x 2 bedroom dwellings

The significant reduction in the number of dwellings (38% less) provides scope to accommodate a less dense development.

Layout of two dwellings fronting Howard St with two rows of dwellings either side of concrete driveway.

….not persuaded that the extent and siting of buildings respects character. …less concern with the dwellings proposed at the front of the site. Most problematic elements of the development result from the layout involving two rows of units. The contrast from the existing pattern of development… would be stark...

Layout of one dwelling fronting Howard St and the remainder spaced throughout the site largely in clusters of 4.

The revised layout is a more spacious layout which enables a development less at odds with the existing character.

Landscaping and open space at the front of the block. Some landscaping proposed in front gardens and small amount in other areas

Existing area has a strong presence of vegetation…. Layout….would limit or prevent landscaping of any meaningful scale or contribution.

Increased amount of landscaping to the front and greater opportunities for further landscaping as a result of less intense development and increased spaciousness

The detailed landscaping plan includes the provision of a number of large canopy trees and other extensive planting more in keeping with the character of the area, then there was in the previous scheme.

In summary, the revised proposal is an improved design which provides a layout which has less site coverage and provides for greater landscaping opportunities which will allow the development to sit relatively comfortably in the neighbourhood.


PAGE 34

An objector has raised concerns that the increase in floor levels which are discussed below will adversely impact on the character of the area. The increase in floor levels is in the range of between 300mm and 700mm. This will result in building heights for the dwellings with a high point in the range of 4m to 4.9m. This maximum height does not significantly exceed typical single storey dwelling height and will not have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. It is concluded that the applicant has taken on board the Tribunal’s concerns and the redesign would not impact adversely on neighbourhood character. Flooding and Drainage State Planning Policy sets out the importance given to flooding in the Planning Scheme at clause 13.02-1 Floodplain management which has objectives that assist the protection of:

Life, property and community infrastructure from flood hazard.

The natural flood carrying capacity of rivers, streams and floodways.

The flood storage function of floodplains and waterways. This site is affected by a Land Subject to Inundation Overlay (LSIO), clause 44.01. This clause has a number of purposes, the most relevant to this application is:

"To ensure that development maintains the free passage and temporary storage of floodwaters, minimises flood damage, is compatible with the flood hazard and local drainage conditions and will not cause any significant rise in flood level or flow velocity." In addition to being affected by an LSIO, the site has a drainage overland flow path that flows through the site. The drainage flows from a westerly direction from the Golf Course via a culvert under Taylor Street through 114 Taylor Street onto the site. The water is conveyed off the site via the City's pipework to Back Creek. There are three main issues to consider in relation to the flood risk:

1. Will the proposed dwellings be under threat from flooding. 2. Will the existing dwellings in the area have an increase in flooding threat as a result of

the development. 3. Will there be safe access and egress from the site for residents in the event of

flooding. The applicant has undertaken extensive flood modelling on the site and surrounds over the period of the two applications. This has been updated to reflect ongoing modelling of the subject area undertaken by NCCMA as part of the Bendigo Urban Flood Study (referred to as flood study for the remainder of this report). At the time the current application was submitted, the modelling provided was based on the preliminary modelling of flood characteristics of the area as the flood study had not been completed at that time. Subsequently the flood study results were released and it became evident that the earlier design which included a sag point in the driveway with a grated pit to catch a portion of overland flows would not have ensured safe pedestrian and vehicular egress from the site due to increased water depth.


PAGE 35

The applicant has undertaken revised modelling based on the now completed flood study which has resulted in an amendment to the plans now before VCAT. The revised modelling purports to demonstrate that the proposed development poses no adverse impact on the surrounding properties and it is stated that the modelling provides the most conservative maximum flood levels that would occur. The revised design resulted in the removal of the sag point and pit and a raising of the driveway levels to as high as possible, a change in the grade along the driveway and relocation of the visitor parking areas further south along the driveway. As a result of these changes the following is stated in the report:

The development would produce a net benefit with regard to flood characteristics of the area immediately adjacent to the development.

There would be a drop in the flood levels for properties to the immediate north of up to 140mm due to the development effectively acting as a levee.

Negligible variations to flood levels in the rear of properties to the south of the site.

A maximum depth of flooding of 280mm (an increase of 160mm) at the centre section of the development. This is due to the development driveway being lowered to cater for additional flows stored on site.

A maximum depth of flooding of 370mm (a decrease of 60mm) at the point in the driveway where the overland flow path from the south enters the site.

A 30mm increase in the water level at the overland flow path in 112 Taylor Street due to increase water volume in the local area from overland flows from the rear of 104 Taylor Street and 108 Taylor Street flowing into the development and being directed to Howard Street via the driveway. It is stated that this increase in water level is in an existing Floodway and will not affect the water levels at the existing dwellings at 112 and 114 Taylor Street.

What does NCCMA say about the flood risk? NCCMA’s position on this proposal has changed a number of times over the course of the two applications as new and better information has become available. Their most up to date position is that they do not object to the granting of a permit on the application subject to conditions. The current position of not objecting is as a result of additional information provided by the applicant and by NCCMA’s consultant undertaking the flood study. In NCCMA’s original advice on the application they were satisfied that the applicant had demonstrated that there would be no adverse impact on surrounding properties and that the proposed dwellings would also be protected from flooding if floor levels are constructed 300mm above the flood level. However there were outstanding concerns regarding the safety of future residents accessing and exiting the site and the performance of the culverts under Taylor Street. These outstanding concerns have been addressed by the amended design referred to above and the further modelling from both the applicant and NCCMA’s consultant.


PAGE 36

Status of NCCMA as a referral authority on this application NCCMA are a statutory referral authority on this planning application due to the site’s location in the LSIO. However in changes to the Planning and Environment Act in October 2013, two types of referral authority were introduced: a determining referral authority and a recommending referral authority. The Act changed NCCMA’s status as a referral authority to a recommending authority. Both types of referral authority can object to the granting of a permit, decide not to object or specify conditions to be included on a permit. However, the effect of that advice on the final outcome of an application is different for each type of referral authority. If a determining referral authority objects, the responsible authority must refuse to grant a permit, and if a determining referral authority specifies conditions, those conditions must be included in any permit granted. In contrast, a responsible authority must consider the recommending referral authority’s advice but is not obliged to refuse the application or to include any recommended conditions. This is the case now. What does the City’s drainage engineer say about flood risk and drainage? The following advice has been provided:

There are 4 main issues for this site;

Dwellings to be above the flood levels

On-site detention for the development site

Not increasing the flood levels on properties up stream or downstream in the 1% AEP storm.

Provision of safe access and egress from the site during a 1% AEP flood event NCCMA have determined flood levels for the site from the Bendigo flood study and have set floor levels for the developments at 300mm above the calculated flood level. That is a significant margin of safety for the dwellings. There is sufficient space within the common property area to provide the required onsite detention. This will be detailed in the drainage plans if a permit is issued. The drainage study using the macro flow models derived from the flood study show that the proposal will not increase the flood levels on the neighbouring properties except for a minor impact within the overland flow path at the rear of 112 Taylor Street. This is due to the hydraulic efficiency of the proposed concrete driveways when compared to the natural ground currently on the site. The properties directly downstream of the site will have an improved outcome in the 1% AEP storm event as the overland flows are directed down the driveways to Howard Street.


PAGE 37

Safe access to the site is accessed using the Hazard index. This is the product of the depth of flow and the velocity of the flow. In a residential zone this is required to be less than 0.35 on the proposed access path. The micro drainage model used by the applicants, which uses a different flow rate to that in the flood levels, derives a maximum hazard index of 0.33. On the applicants proposed emergency egress route the maximum hazard index is 0.25. The NCCMA has accessed the flood model and accepts the result. I have no evidence to challenge this model and so have no objection to the proposal. What do local residents say about flood risk? Local residents are concerned that there has been no independent flood study of the site to assess the suitability of the site and that the applicant’s reports have shown information that is incorrect and should not be accepted unchallenged. Whilst there has been no specific independent flood study of the site, the NCCMA’s consultant has assessed the flood risk for the site in the context the Bendigo Flood Study and the applicant’s flood modelling. It is therefore incorrect to say that the latest information has not been challenged. It has been rigorously tested by NCCMA and their consultant. Local residents do not agree that the flooding/drainage solutions proposed by the applicant will negate the impact that the development will have on flood risk in the area. The residents have provided anecdotal evidence relating to the flood events in 2010-11 including the drafting of a level plan from a local surveyor showing some spot levels of flooding which according to previous advice from the NCCMA correlates reasonably well with the findings of the flood study, although the depth of flooding on Taylor Street was shown to be greater than in the flood study. There is no quantifiable explanation as why this might have been the case. The residents have also been provided with advice by an engineer but this has not been translated into any empirical data or a written assessment to demonstrate how the proposal would result in an unacceptable flood risk. Neither did the residents’ engineer provide any expert evidence at the Tribunal Hearing on the previous case. As was found at the Hearing, without evidence to the contrary it would be unreasonable to refuse this application based on an assumption that the development would create an unacceptable flooding risk. Process of notification of amended application to local residents As the application is now before VCAT, the applicant is required to serve direct notice of the amended application to all local residents who are a party to the appeal. Any further comments or concerns that this notification raises must be dealt with by VCAT not the City.


PAGE 38

It is of note that the formal amendment of this application included amended plans but did not include the updated flood report undertaken by the applicant. This report was sent to NCCMA and copied to Council for their consideration two weeks in advance of the amendment. The Planning Department raised concerns with the applicant that they had not included the report in the amendment. The applicant advised that they had not decided whether the report would be part of its submission. One of the objectors also asked the City why the flood report was not provided. The City has advised that as parties to the appeal they should take this matter up with VCAT to determine whether the information needs to be served on local residents. Notwithstanding this, the report is available to view at the City offices and a copy has been sent to the said objector. Impact of the required increase in floor levels above the flood levels in relation to Clause 55 (ResCode) As there will be a need to raise the floor levels of the proposed dwellings to mitigate the flood impact this has the potential to create some issues with ResCode which require assessment. This was an issue which was explored by the Tribunal at the previous Hearing. Senior Member Baird commented the that raised floor levels would require stairs, landings, ramped driveways in carports and potentially the need to build up open spaces to match internal floor levels. She also raised some uncertainty about the need for retaining walls and the driveway grade leading to the carports and parking spaces. In addition, there was a concern that raised floor levels would add to the height of the dwellings and potentially give rise to the need for screening treatments. In the amended plans for this application the applicant has provided detailed floor and ground levels including spot height and sections. Details such as stairs and landings have been shown on plan. There will be no requirement for any substantive retaining walls or screening to fences as the maximum increased ground level will be 280mm on the north-west boundary adjacent to units 1 and 2. In other cases the change in levels will be 200mm or less. The only standard in ResCode which will require variation as a result of the raised floor levels is B25 Accessibility. The objective of this clause is to encourage the consideration of the needs of people with limited mobility in the design of developments. The standard is that the entries of the ground floor of dwellings should be accessible or able to be easily made accessible to people with limited mobility. Due to the requirement of raised floor levels the submitted plans show steps at the front doors of the dwellings. This could preclude persons of limited mobility from entering the dwellings. However, there is nothing to suggest that for at least the majority of the dwellings they could not be adapted with access ramps.


PAGE 39

Residential amenity and other ResCode issues The main amenity impact of this proposal will be visual and increased activities as a result of the increased density and vehicle movements. However, in an established urban area these are not unreasonable impacts to expect and they would not be so harmful as to warrant a refusal of a planning permit. The proposal is compliant with the objectives of Clause 55. However, there are a number of standards which require some variation or further information as discussed below. B22 Overlooking The objective is to limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows. Whilst the development is single storey and adjoining dwellings benefits from good separation from the development, along much of the site boundaries the existing fencing is open and therefore there will be a need to provide new fencing which protects privacy to existing and future residents. This would be a condition of any permit granted. B26 Dwelling Entry The objective is to provide each dwelling or residential building with its own sense of identity. The standard is that entries to dwellings and residential buildings should:

Be visible and easily identifiable from streets and other public areas.

Provide shelter, a sense of personal address and a transitional space around the entry.

1 of the dwellings fronts Howard Street, 16 of the other 17 dwellings have entries which are orientated towards the accessway. Dwelling 17 requires a variation to the standard as the front door is deeply recessed and doesn’t have a satisfactory personal address. Given that all but one of the dwellings meet the standard it would not be reasonable to refuse the development on failure to comply with this standard. B28 Private Open Space The objective is to provide adequate private open space for the reasonable recreation and service needs of residents. The standard required is for each dwelling to have a minimum of 25 square metres. Private open space is provided for all dwellings in the range of 24.5 to 57.9 square metres located in side and rear gardens. Two of the dwellings do not technically comply with the standard, however the deficit of 0.5 square metres is negligible. Therefore this objective is met. B29 Solar access to open space objective The objective is to allow solar access into the secluded private open space of new dwellings and residential buildings.


PAGE 40

The standard of this clause is that the private open space should be located on the north side of the dwelling if appropriate. 14 of the 18 dwellings have private open space to the north. On a development of this size it is often difficult to ensure that all dwellings have north facing private open space. Therefore a variation is acceptable and the development is deemed to comply with the standard. Traffic Impact The City's traffic engineer has assessed the proposal and is satisfied that access for the dwellings is safe and manageable and will not impact on road safety. Local residents have expressed concern over the width of the access and problems for emergency services vehicles entering the site. The minimum width of accessways required under the Planning Scheme is 3m. The accessway of this development would be a minimum width of 5m which would mean that even if a car was parked on the access road there would still be enough room for a fire engine to pass. Although not discussed in the VCAT Order it was noted that residents had some concerns over increased traffic. The Tribunal did not cite traffic as a reason to refuse the application. With this revised application the number of dwellings has been reduced by 11 and consequently a refusal on traffic grounds cannot be substantiated. Other Issues Loss of property value

There is established case law which holds that a proposed decrease in property value is an irrelevant consideration. A long standing position held by VCAT is that other than in exceptional cases, and where clear evidence can be presented, loss in property value will not be entertained as a ground of objection.

Noise from pets

Barking dogs and the like are to be expected in an urban area. Should this become a nuisance factor in the future this would be dealt with under other legislation.

Deterioration of residential area similar to Melbourne

This is a somewhat subjective comment which is difficult to quantify.

Precedent for development of other vacant land

It is possible that this could set a precedent to develop other land in the area but there is no evidence that this would go beyond the ongoing infill developments that are already occurring in this and other areas of Bendigo.

Impact on tree protection zone on adjoining properties

There is no evidence to suggest that this would occur. The dwellings are adequately separated from trees on adjoining land.


PAGE 41

Lack of footpaths is inappropriate for density proposed

It is acknowledged that there is an absence of footpaths in the area, although it would be inappropriate to rule out future development in the area for this reason. As density increases in the area there may be a need for Council to review this as part of its future capital works programmes, particularly in light of the location of the future railway station.

In the interim, it would not be unreasonable to require the developer to provide an improvement to pedestrian facilities in the area given the proposed increase in density. It is therefore suggested that if a permit is granted a condition is imposed requiring the developer to provide for the construction of a footpath on Howard Street from the eastern boundary of the site to the eastern side of Strickland Road. This would connect with an existing footpath on Howard Street to the west of Strickland Road. Bins in front of block

As noted by the Tribunal in the previous case, a waste management plan could be required by a permit condition and the applicant is agreeable to using a private collection given the potential of multiple bins being placed on the Howard Street frontage. Carport dimensions undersize

A double carport is provided to serve two dwellings. The size exceeds the minimum Planning Scheme requirement.

Conclusion

The proposal would result in an efficient use of a vacant site in a residential area which is in an excellent location to provide new housing in terms of accessibility to employment opportunities, leisure and shopping facilities and public transport. However, the benefits of the location must be balanced against other planning considerations as discussed in this report. It is concluded that the applicant has adequately addressed Council’s and VCAT’s concerns with regard to neighbourhood character and has provided sufficient rigor in demonstrating that the development would not create an acceptable risk in relation to flooding on the site and in the surrounding area. On the basis that the application complies with the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme it is recommended that Council supports the development at the forthcoming VCAT Hearing.

Options

Council can only advise VCAT of its position on this application.

Attachments

Objections

VCAT Order for previous application


PAGE 42

RECOMMENDATION

That Greater Bendigo City Council put forward a position which supports the granting of a planning permit at the forthcoming Hearing at the Victorian and Civil Administrative Tribunal for the construction of 18 dwellings at 73 Howard Street, Ascot subject to the following conditions: 1. MODIFIED PLAN REQUIRED

Before the use and/or development start(s), amended plans to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application but modified to show: (a) Fencing to accord with condition 3. (b) The construction of a 1.5m footpath on Howard Street from the easternmost

boundary of the site to the eastern side of Strickland Road.

2. NO LAYOUT ALTERATION

The use and development permitted by this permit as shown on the endorsed plans and/or described in the endorsed documents must not be altered or modified (for any reason) except with the prior written consent of the responsible authority.

3. FENCING REQUIREMENTS Prior to the occupation of the dwellings new fences must be erected on south eastern, south-western and north-western boundaries to prevent overlooking of adjoining properties to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

4. WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN

Prior to commencement of development, a Waste Management Plan (WMP) to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved in writing by the responsible authority. The storage and collection of waste must be undertaken in accordance with the approved WMP to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

5. REFRIGERATION & AIR-CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT Any equipment required for refrigeration, air-conditioning, heating and the like must be suitably insulated for the purpose of reducing noise emissions and must be located so as to not be highly visible from the street to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

6. CONSTRUCTION PHASE

All activities associated with the construction of the development permitted by this permit must be carried out to the satisfaction of the responsible authority and all care must be taken to minimise the effect of such activities on the amenity of the locality.


PAGE 43

7. STORMWATER DRAINAGE

Drainage plans, including computations and longitudinal sections, must be provided to and approved by the responsible authority for the lot in the development to the responsible authority’s nominated point of discharge. Once approved, the plans will be endorsed as part of the planning permit and must not be further altered without the prior written consent of the responsible authority.

8. STORMWATER DETENTION

Prior to the connection of any dwelling to the responsible authority’s drainage system the owner or applicant must provide onsite surface and stormwater detention to pre-development levels in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Allowable Discharge: Q5 = 20 l/s

9. SECTION 173

Prior to the connection of any dwelling to the responsible authority’s drainage system the applicant/owner must enter into an Agreement under Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Such Agreement must covenant that;

The owner will maintain each on-site detention system and not modify without prior written approval from the responsible authority.

The owner shall allow duly authorised officers of the responsible authority to inspect the system at mutually agreed times.

The Owner will pay for all costs associated with the construction and maintenance of the onsite detention system.

10. VEHICLE CROSSINGS

Vehicular access to the subject land from any roadway or service lane (and vice versa) must be by way of a vehicle crossing(s) constructed at right angles to the road, to suit the proposed driveway(s) and vehicles that will use the crossing. A Works within Road Reserves permit must be obtained from the City of Greater Bendigo Asset Planning & Design Unit prior to any work commencing in the road reserve.

11. SEALED CAR PARK

Areas set aside for the parking of vehicles together with the aisles and drives must be properly formed to such levels that they can be utilised in accordance with the endorsed plan and must be drained and provided with an impervious all weather seal coat. The areas must be constructed, drained and maintained in a continuously useable condition to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

12. USE OF CAR PARKING AREAS

Areas set aside for the parking and movement of vehicles as shown on the endorsed plan must be made available for such use and must not be used for any other purpose.


PAGE 44

13. CONSENT FOR WORK ON ROAD RESERVES

The applicant must comply with;

The Road Management Act 2004,

Road Management (Works and Infrastructure) Regulations 2005 and

Road Management (General) Regulations 2005 with respect to any requirements to notify the Coordinating Authority and/or seek consent from the Coordinating Authority to undertake “works” (as defined in the Act) in, over or under the road reserve. The responsible authority in the inclusion of this condition on this planning permit is not deemed to have been notified of, or to have given consent to undertake any works within the road reserve as proposed in this permit.

14. NO MUD ON ROADS

In the event of mud, crushed rock or other debris being carried onto public roads or footpaths from the subject land, appropriate measures must be implemented to minimise the problem to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

15. COMPLETION OF LANDSCAPING

Before the occupation of the development starts or by such later date as is approved by the responsible authority in writing, the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

16. LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE

The landscaping shown on the endorsed plans must be maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.

17. NORTH CENTRAL CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY (NCCMA) (a) The finished floor levels of any new dwelling must be constructed to a

minimum of 300mm above the applicable flood levels. (b) The finished floor levels of any new garage must be constructed to a

minimum of 150mm above the applicable flood levels. (c) Open style fencing must be utilised along the property boundary with 112-116

Taylor Street.

NCCMA NOTES

Flood levels for the 1% AEP (100 year ARI) flood event have been determined for this area under the Water Act 1989. The applicable 1% AEP flood level for the location described above grades from 187.3 metres AHD at the south west corner of the property down to 186.9m AHD at Howard Street, which was obtained from the 2013 Bendigo Urban Flood Study.


PAGE 45

2.3 171-173 HIGH STREET, KANGAROO FLAT - CONSTRUCTION OF 22 DWELLINGS (TWO 2 STOREY BUILDINGS & ONE 3 STOREY BUILDING) SUBDIVISION OF LAND, CREATION/ALTERATION OF A VEHICULAR ACCESS & REDUCTION IN CAR PARKING REQUIREMENT



Summary/Purpose

Application details: Construction of 22 dwellings (comprising a two storey building of 14 one bedroom apartments, 4 two storey attached dwellings and 4 three storey attached dwellings), subdivision of land, creation/alteration of a vehicular access and a reduction in the car parking requirement.

Application No: DSD/12/2013

Applicant: M Cooper

Land: 171-173 High Street, KANGAROO FLAT 3555

Zoning: Road Zone 1 General Residential Zone

Overlays: None



Yes. Refer to background information below.

Key considerations: The principle of residential development in this location.

Whether the proposed subdivision and development is a good urban design outcome which will preserve neighbourhood character.

Whether the proposal will provide an acceptable amenity outcome for existing and future residents.

Whether there will be an adverse impact on traffic safety and car parking availability in the area.

Conclusion: The site is in an excellent location to provide new housing in terms of accessibility to employment opportunities, leisure and shopping facilities and public transport. The proposal will have the positive effect of providing a type of housing which is in short supply in Bendigo, whilst preserving neighbourhood character.


PAGE 46

This report considers the permit application and recommends that the Greater Bendigo City Council issues a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit.

Policy Context


Planning for Growth


Productivity



This application was submitted in January 2013 and advertised in May 2013. As a result of the advertising, one objection (from 169 High Street) was received and a consultation meeting was held on 4 July 2013 with the applicant and two ward councillors attending. The meeting concluded with the applicant agreeing to review the plans in line with some of the issues discussed. Subsequent to the meeting the applicant wrote to confirm that he would be agreeable to the following changes if the objection is withdrawn:

Installation of a 2.2m high timber acoustic fence along the property boundary of 169 and 171 High Street;

Relocation of bins further away from property boundary;

Removal of level 3 of the building closest to 169 High Street;

Installation of frosted glass to two units which back onto 169 High Street;

Designation of two visitor parking spaces. The offer of these changes was put to the objector in writing and he declined to withdraw his objection on the basis that he alleged that the applicant had failed to deliver copies of the planning application to the majority of adjoining properties. Subsequently an additional 5 letters of objection to the application were received in August 2013. Following this, the applicant put the application on hold and plans were finally amended in February 2014 largely in line with changes listed above. The amended application was re-advertised and 3 further letters of objection were received from people who had already objected. The applicant has requested that Council make a decision on the application now rather than arranging another consultation meeting. This is because no new issues have been raised and the amended plans were submitted in an attempt to address issues raised at the previous consultation meeting.


PAGE 47

Report


The subject site comprises two rectangular blocks of land with frontages to High Street Kangaroo Flat. On 171 High Street is a dwelling dating from circa 1965 and on 173 High Street a dwelling dating from circa 1920. There are also some sheds and some insignificant vegetation on the site. All structures and vegetation will be removed from the site. Neither the structures nor vegetation need a permit for removal. To the north of the subject site is a single storey dwelling which has a large amount of shedding to the rear. To the south of the site is the Soldiers’ Memorial and Kangaroo Flat Ambulance Station. To the east of the site is a church with associated outbuildings. To the west of the site on the opposite side of High Street are a number of commercial uses including a petrol station, a fast food premises and a supermarket.

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors’ properties marked with a star, (two objectors' outside the scope of the map).


PAGE 48

Figure 2: Aerial photograph

Proposal

The proposal is to subdivide the land and construct 22 dwellings. The development component would comprise a two storey building fronting High Street which would house 14 one bedroom apartments. To the rear of the site would be a two storey building comprising 4 two bedroom houses and a three storey building comprising 4 two bedroom houses. In terms of design, the building fronting High Street would be of a traditional appearance with pitched roofs whilst including some modern features such as glazed balconies. The buildings to the rear would be of a flat roofed modern design. The subdivision would provide strata title for the apartments and standard subdivision for the attached dwellings. The one bedroom apartments will have lot size/floor area in the range of 44-69 square metres and for the attached houses the lots will be in the range of 73-90 square metres. The car parking for the development would comprise 12 at grade spaces for the 14 apartments and 12 garaged spaces for the 8 houses. 2 visitor spaces are also provided. The Planning Scheme car parking requirement is for 1 space per dwelling and 5 spaces for visitor spaces. Therefore the shortfall is 2 spaces for the dwellings and 3 visitor spaces. Planning permission is required to reduce the requirement. Access to the site would utilise existing crossovers which are located on the northern and southern boundaries of the site. The crossovers would need to be altered slightly to align with the internal access way. A planning permit is also required for this alteration.


PAGE 49

Figure 3: Site layout plan

Figure 4: Street view - High Street

Figure 5: 3D image


PAGE 50

Figure 6: 3D aerial image

Planning Controls – Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme






21.05 Settlement

21.06 Housing Local Planning Policies

22.18 Kangaroo Flat Precinct 1

Other Provisions

32.08 General Residential Zone

52.05 Car Parking

52.29 Land adjacent to Category 1 Road Zone


56 Residential Subdivision

65 Decision Guidelines




PAGE 51

Referral Comment

Powercor No objection subject to conditions

Coliban Water No response

Telstra No objection subject to conditions

Tenix No objection subject to conditions

VicRoads No objection subject to conditions

Traffic & Design No objection subject to conditions

Drainage No objection subject to conditions

Public Notification Both the original application and the amended plans were advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers. As a result of advertising, 7 objections were received, with the grounds of objection being:

Applicant failed to follow procedure in respect to advertising of the application.

Design is out of character.

Development will be cheap, nasty modern day terrace cottages.

Impact on neighbourhood character.

Application should be restricted to single storey dwellings.

Concerns over parking availability in the area.

Traffic safety and access.

Refuse collection issues.

Footpath for safe pedestrian access should be provided.

Open space will be compromised.

Noise impact on bedrooms from parking.

High masonry wall will be required on northern boundary.

Significant overshadowing will occur to Baptist Church and other properties.

Impact on infrastructure (sewerage, drainage, power and water supply).

Accessibility issues for disabled.

Dwellings in worse condition than existing dwellings are heritage listed.

Comments about failure to comply with subdivision requirements.

Concerns over the developer’s integrity and viability.

Overlooking of property to the north.

Inconsistencies with site context and traffic reports.

Impact on Soldiers’ Memorial.

Potential of asbestos in existing dwelling.


PAGE 52

Monetary compensation will be required for loss of amenity and devaluation of property.

Decrease in available land for commercial and industrial development.

Low quality housing will attract low income families and add to cultural problems in the area.

The objections are considered in the assessment below.

Planning Assessment

Principle of Residential Development Clause 11.05-4 Regional planning strategies and principles have the objective of developing regions and settlements which have a strong identity, are prosperous and are environmentally sustainable. Of particular relevance to this application is the strategy to limit urban sprawl and direct growth into existing settlements, promoting and capitalising on opportunities for urban renewal and redevelopment. Clause 16.01 Residential development has objectives which promote a diverse range of housing that meets community needs in locations that offer good access to services and transport and that is both water and energy efficient. The importance of energy and resource efficiency is also referenced in Clause 15.02 Sustainable development. The City's Settlement and Housing policies within the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) are supported by a residential development strategy which advocates for urban consolidation in the form of high quality, medium density in-fill housing.

The MSS discusses how the Bendigo Residential Development Strategy incorporates 5 components for future residential development in the city. One of the components is 'Community focussed development’ which are to be based around community centres and allow for a variety of housing types and related mixed use developments at higher densities along the main transport routes and nodes. Kangaroo Flat is among the community centres listed. The amount of available land and the location of the site indicate that there is planning policy support for the principle of medium-density infill development in this location. Indeed with good access to services, public transport and employment opportunities one could reasonably comment that if this location is not deemed appropriate for an increase in residential density then the question must be asked; where in Bendigo is? Urban Design and Neighbourhood Character This is a proposal which requires consideration of the familiar challenge of balancing State and Local policies which encourage consolidation of new housing within established urban areas whilst at the same time requiring development to be respectful of existing neighbourhood characteristics.


PAGE 53

Neighbourhood character is referenced as an important consideration throughout the Planning Scheme including Clauses 15.01 Urban Environment, 16.01 Residential Development, 21.06 Housing, 22.18 Kangaroo Flat Residential Character Policy, 32.08 General Residential Zone, 55 Two dwellings on a lot and 56 Residential Subdivision. Clause 22.18 applies to the Kangaroo Flat Precinct 1 residential character policy and included in the objectives are the need to ensure that development is responsive to the desired future character of the area in which it is located and to retain and enhance the identified elements that contribute to its character. The policy sets out how the desired future character is to be achieved by the following relevant objectives and design responses.

Objectives Suggested Design Response

To maintain and strengthen the garden settings of the dwellings.

Prepare a landscape plan to accompany all applications for new dwellings. Retain large, established trees and provide for the planting of new trees wherever possible.

Comment: There are no significant trees on the site and a comprehensive landscaping plan was submitted with the original application. This will need to be updated to reflect the amended design.

To maintain the consistency, where present, of building front setbacks.

The front setback should be not less than the average setback of the adjoining two dwellings.

Comment: In this instance there is only an adjoining dwelling to the north and its setback varies between approximately 5.5-7.5m. The building proposed to front High Street would have a setback of between 3.5m and 5m with projecting first floor balconies that encroach into the setback. This is discussed further below.

To reflect the rhythm of dwelling spacing. Buildings should be setback from at least one side boundary.

Comment: The building fronting High Street would be setback 4.8m from each side boundary. The rear buildings are setback between 3 and 5.4m. This is an appropriate design response.

To ensure that new buildings and extensions do not dominate the landscape.

The height at the front of the dwelling should match the typical single storey wall height. Use low pitched roof forms.

Comment: The height of the three buildings will generally be higher than other buildings in the area. Height is discussed further below.

To use building materials and finishes that complement the dominant pattern within the streetscape.

In streetscapes where weatherboard predominates, use timber or other non-masonry cladding materials where possible, and render, bag or paint brick surfaces.

Comment: The materials proposed are a combination of render, cladding and glass.


PAGE 54

Objectives Suggested Design Response

To maintain and enhance the openness of the streetscape.

Provide open-style or low front fencing to a maximum of 1.2 metres. Fences should not exceed 1.2m other than in exceptional circumstances.

Comment: The development includes low, open slatted style front fencing.

The key issues from an urban design and neighbourhood character perspective are the height, siting and visual appearance of the buildings and how these relate to the surrounding environment. Each of the buildings is considered below. Building 1 This two storey building fronting High Street is the largest of three buildings and the most important in terms of the presentation of the development. The front setback at between 3.5 and 5m is less than the adjacent dwelling and others in this section of High Street. Overall this is not considered to be detrimental to the character of the area. This is because the design of the building should be read in the context of its location on a main road opposite a busy commercial area. This is not an area where street proportions and character are strongly defined and therefore setbacks should not be applied as restrictively as they may be in a typical residential environment. Moreover from an urban design point of view, constructing buildings closer to pedestrian environments in or close to activity centres should be seen as a positive element as this helps to create vibrancy and interest at street level. The height of the building at two storey is entirely appropriate. There are a number of other examples of two storey residential buildings located on High Street between Kangaroo Flat and Bendigo. The design of the building is traditional and not particularly innovative; however it is well-articulated with appropriate materials and finishes and will be acceptable in this location. Building 2 This building was proposed to be a three storey building in the original application but the applicant decided to reduce to two storeys to reduce the impact on the original objector at 169 High Street. This issue of potential amenity impacts such as overlooking is discussed below under residential amenity. This building would have minimal impact from High Street as it would be largely obscured from view by the other two buildings. There would be some oblique views through the northern access to the site. The building will be visible from Church Street although this would be largely through the open car park to the church at a distance of around 50m from the street.


PAGE 55

Building 3 Given the three storey (8.96m) height of this building, it will be particularly visible from the southern approach to the site from High Street due to the open nature of the adjoining Soldiers’ War Memorial. It will be less visible from the northern approach from High Street and barely visible at all from directly in front of the site. In principle the height of the building in itself is not a concern in this location. It is of note that in this area the residential strategy encourages higher density housing types (including apartments up to 4 levels).

However the design detail of both building 2 and building 3 is more of a concern than building 1 as they both appear box-like and are not very well articulated, particularly the flank elevations. That said, with appropriate changes to the design details, including the materials and finishes the proposed buildings to the rear would be an acceptable design. Overall this development is of a scale not currently found in the area. In determining whether to support a development of this scale an important consideration in terms of the design assessment is the sensitivity of the location. It could reasonably be argued that in this particular location fronting High Street where the character is very much mixed use rather than wholly residential, a more flexible approach should be applied to applying neighbourhood character principles and the residential character policy guidelines. The fact that there is strategic direction which strongly supports medium density development in this location adds weight to the argument that with conditional changes the design of the proposal should be supported. Residential Amenity and ResCode The purpose of Clause 55 Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings includes the need to achieve residential development that respects neighbourhood character and provides reasonable standards of amenity for existing and new residents. It is a requirement of Clause 55 that a development must meet all of the objectives of the clause and should also meet all of the standards. All objectives have been assessed and have been met. The objectives relevant to the issues raised by objectors and not covered elsewhere in this report and the standards which require a variation are considered below: B4 Infrastructure The objective is to ensure development is provided with appropriate utility services and infrastructure which does not unreasonably overload the capacity. The City’s drainage engineer has assessed the proposal as being acceptable subject to appropriate conditions. In addition all service providers such as Powercor have no concerns over the proposal.


PAGE 56

B5 Integration with the street The objective of this clause is to integrate the layout of development with the street. One of the standards is that developments should provide adequate vehicle and pedestrian links that maintain or enhance local accessibility. The apartments which front High Street on the ground floor have direct pedestrian links to High Street but the remainder of the dwellings are not linked to High Street. Objectors and the City’s traffic engineer have raised this as a concern and it is agreed that this matter should be addressed if a permit is granted. This could be resolved through a conditional requirement in one of two ways. The preference is for the provision of a 1.2m footpath, however this may require a redesign which may not be possible. If this is not possible an alternative would be to provide a hatched/coloured area on the access road which delineates pedestrians from traffic. Using shared surfaces in such a manner is an acceptable solution in a low traffic environment. B15 Parking location The objective of this clause is to provide convenient parking for resident and visitor vehicles and protect residents from vehicular noise within developments. The car parking is located in close proximity to the dwellings but not adjacent to any bedrooms or other habitable rooms as required by the standard. B21 Overshadowing The objective is to ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow existing buildings. The standard requires that at least 40% of private open space receives a minimum of 5 hours of sunshine measured between 9am and 3pm on September 22nd. Overshadowing plans have been provided which demonstrate that the proposal would comfortably comply with the standard. The private open space to the only adjoining dwelling would not be overshadowed at any time by the development. Objectors have expressed concern over significant overshadowing to Baptist Church and other properties. The Planning Scheme does not protect non-residential properties from overshadowing and in any case there will only minimal overshadowing to the church and Soldiers’ Memorial. B22 Overlooking The objective is to limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows. The development has been designed to meet the overlooking standard. At ground floor level all views to the adjoining dwelling would be obscured by a proposed 2m fence. At first floor level, overlooking is prevented from building 2 through windows being located 1.7m above floor level. In any case the outlook from these windows would only be to existing shedding. It would therefore be unreasonable to refuse the proposal on this basis.


PAGE 57

B25 Accessibility objective The objective is to encourage the consideration of the needs of people with limited mobility in the design of developments. The standard is that the dwelling entries of the ground floor of dwellings and residential buildings should be accessible or able to be easily made accessible to people with limited mobility. An objector has expressed concern that only building 1 is accessible at ground floor level. There is nothing to suggest that the ground floors on buildings 2 and 3 cannot be made accessible to persons with limited mobility, although it is noted that building 3 does not have any habitable accommodation on the ground floor. B28 Private Open Space The objective is to provide adequate private open space for the reasonable recreation and service needs of residents. The standard required is for each dwelling to have a minimum of 25 square metres to the side or rear or a balcony with 8 square metres. The private open space for the development is provided in the form of balconies and front and rear gardens as follows.

Building 1 - Ground floor front and rear gardens in the range of 6.65 square metres to 17.7 square metres. First floor balconies in the order of 7 square metres.

Building 2 - Rear gardens in the range of 14-17 square metres in addition to front Juliet balconies.

Building 3 - Rear gardens in the range of 21-26 square metres in addition to first floor balconies with an area of 7 square metres.

Although most of the dwellings do not have the required area of private open space, for the size of the dwellings proposed, it is an acceptable amount. It is of note that a large four bedroom dwelling could have slightly more open space than is being provided for the one bedroom dwellings here and comply with the standard, yet the recreation and service needs for a four bedroom dwelling are clearly greater than that required for smaller dwellings. B29 Solar access to open space objective The objective is to allow solar access into the secluded private open space of new dwellings and residential buildings. The standard of this clause has not been met for the rear gardens of the dwellings in building 3 due to the fact that the building is three storeys. However this would be compensated for by solar gain from the north facing front balconies. B 30 Storage The objective is to provide adequate storage facilities for each dwelling and the standard is to provide at least 6 cubic metres of externally accessible, secure storage space. Appropriate storage is provided in the garages for the 8 two bedroom dwellings but none has been identified for the one bedroom dwellings.


PAGE 58

This is another ResCode requirement which does not differentiate between the storage requirements for large and small dwellings, i.e the standard is the same for a one bedroom dwelling as it is for a four bedroom dwelling. For the one bedroom dwellings appropriate storage can be designed internally in the form of shelving or cupboards. B34 Site services This clause has objectives which includes ensuring that site facilities are accessible, adequate and attractive. Objectors have concerns about the bins impacting on access to the site. The applicant has satisfactorily addressed this issue with the submission of a waste management plan detailing a private bin collection. This would be endorsed and a condition of any permit granted. Subdivision ResCode is also a consideration for subdivision at Clause 56 Residential Subdivision. The application has been assessed as meeting the objectives of all clauses as it provides an appropriate mix of lots sizes, implements the residential strategy and provides for appropriate servicing and infrastructure to all lots. Traffic safety Objectors have expressed concerns regarding the traffic impact from the development. However both the City’s traffic engineer and VicRoads have assessed the proposal and do not share the concerns. In addition the application included traffic management advice from a qualified traffic engineer which concludes that there are no traffic management reasons to prevent the proposed development from proceeding. Car parking The purpose of Clause 52.06 Car Parking includes the need to ensure the provision of an appropriate number of car spaces having regard to the activities on the land and the nature of the locality. The table below sets out what is required by the Planning Scheme and what has been provided.

Car Parking Spaces Required

Spaces Provided Reduction Sought

One bedroom 14 12 2

Two bedroom 8 12 0

Visitors 5 2 3

Total 27 26 5


PAGE 59

Reduction of car parking assessment The applicant provided an assessment of car parking demand to justify the reduction. The assessment included the following salient points:

The type of dwelling is likely to have a much lower-rate of car ownership.

There is ample parking in surrounding streets.

Visitors are more likely to park in the streets than on site.

Visitors to some of the two bedroom dwellings could use the surplus spaces.

A bus stop is located in front of the site and it is envisaged some occupants will use public transport in lieu of car ownership.

Bicycle lanes are within the vicinity of the site and secure bicycle storage has been provided on-site.

All of the above points are sound reasons why car parking reduction should be considered favourably. The point raised about this type of dwelling having lower car-ownership has not been backed up with any evidence. However car ownership generally is a relevant consideration. In the census data of 2011, analysis of the car ownership of the households in Kangaroo Flat found that 8% of households did not own a car, 37.5% of households owned one car; 35.6% owned two cars; and 14.0% owned three cars or more. The figures showed lower car ownership than in the wider Greater Bendigo area. This data leads one to conclude that the proposed level of car parking should be adequate to meet car parking demand in the area. Objectors have concerns about the impact on the availability of parking for businesses and for visitors to the Soldiers Memorial but there is no evidence to suggest that this development would create such a problem. Two other reasons why approving the reduction in car parking on this site is sound planning are given below:

There is a likelihood of reduced car use in the area as a result of local employment opportunities and shopping and leisure facilities which are within walking distance.

Provision of additional spaces which are not required for the development would be likely to reduce the yield of housing on the site and potentially result in a less desirable outcome from an urban design perspective.

Other issues raised by objectors Failure to follow advertising procedure

There is no evidence that procedure was not followed on the original application. A statutory declaration was provided stating that the required advertising was undertaken. For the amended application the applicant asked the City to undertake the advertising to avoid a repeat of this suggestion.


PAGE 60

Property devaluation and monetary compensation

There is established case law which holds that a proposed decrease in property value is an irrelevant consideration. A long standing position held by VCAT is that other than in exceptional cases, and where clear evidence can be presented, loss in property value will not be entertained as a ground of objection. Potential of asbestos

This eventuality is a matter that is dealt with under building regulations not the planning legislation. Inconsistencies with site context and traffic reports

This objection relates to a suggestion of inaccuracies relating to the date of the existing dwellings on site, types of fencing in the area and the topography of the site and power poles. These are matters which are not critical in the assessment of the application. The dwellings are considered further below. In addition an objector is critical of the parking assessment in the traffic report. The parking issue is discussed above. High masonry wall will be required on northern boundary

There is no requirement for a masonry wall on the northern boundary. The applicant has, however, agreed to a 2 metre high acoustic timber fence. Decrease in available land for commercial and industrial development

As the land is zoned residential this comment is irrelevant as most commercial and industrial activities would be prohibited on the site. Residential use is clearly the most appropriate use of the land. Low quality housing will attract low income families and add to cultural problems in the area

The future occupants of the dwellings is not a planning consideration. However, providing smaller, affordable dwellings should be seen as a positive rather than a negative factor. Impact on Soldiers’ Memorial

It is accepted that the development will have a visual impact when viewed from in the vicinity of the Memorial. However there are no planning controls such as a heritage overlay which require special consideration of the impact on the Memorial other than general neighbourhood character considerations. The City’s Building and Property department were consulted as manager of the facility and have expressed no concerns over the impact of the development. Dwellings in worse condition than other dwellings which have been heritage listed

The existing dwellings are a 1965 cream brick house and a 1920 weatherboard. The City’s Heritage Architect / Advisor has undertaken an internal inspection of the weatherboard dwelling and concluded that whilst it has some heritage value as an early 20th century cottage it has no context within a heritage streetscape or precinct and therefore its demolition is supported.


PAGE 61

Concerns over the developer’s integrity and viability

The integrity of a developer or the viability of a development is not a planning consideration.

Conclusion

This proposal would provide for an increase in the diversity of housing in the municipality. The dwellings are likely to be at the lower end of the price bracket and would therefore provide more affordable options than might currently be available in the Bendigo region. Notwithstanding the need to provide affordable housing options, all development must still result in appropriate design outcomes which respect neighbourhood character, residential amenity, parking considerations and other relevant matters as discussed in this report. Although there are some areas of non-compliance with ResCode such as the full provision of private open space, the benefits of the proposal would outweigh such lesser negative internal amenity impacts. It is concluded that with appropriate conditions, approving this development would be an appropriate outcome that complies with the requirements of the Planning Scheme.

Options

Council, acting as the responsible authority for administering the planning scheme, may resolve to: grant a permit, grant a permit with conditions, or refuse to grant a permit.

Attachments

Objections

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for the construction of 22 dwellings (comprising a two storey building of 14 one bedroom apartments, 4 two storey attached dwellings and 4 three storey attached dwellings), subdivision of land, creation/alteration of a vehicular access and a reduction in the visitor car parking requirement at 171-173 High Street, KANGAROO FLAT 3555 subject to the following conditions:


PAGE 62

1. MODIFIED PLAN REQUIRED Before the use and/or development start(s), amended plans to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and two copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application but modified to show: (a) Alterations to the design of buildings 2 and 3 which provide for an

improved design in terms articulation, use of materials and finishes (b) The provision of a pedestrian link from the rear buildings to High Street

through either a 1.2m pedestrian footpath or a delineated pedestrian link (shared surface) on the proposed access road.

(c) Details of bicycle storage (i.e method of storing and capacity of storage) (d) Landscaping plan to accord with condition 3.

2. NO LAYOUT ALTERATION The use and development permitted by this permit as shown on the endorsed plans and/or described in the endorsed documents must not be altered or modified (for any reason) except with the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. LANDSCAPING PLAN Before the development starts, a landscape plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and two copies must be provided. The landscaping plan must be drawn by a person qualified in landscape design. The plan must show: (a) Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways including an

alternative surface treatment for the driveway which reduces the expanse of concrete/hard surfacing.

(b) Planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers, including botanical names, common names, pot sizes, sizes at maturity, and quantities of each plant

All species selected must be to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

4. ACOU FENCING OF SITE The site must be fenced to the satisfaction of the responsible authority and must include a wooden fence overlapped and capped to a height of 2 metres on the northern boundary prior to the occupation of the development.

5. SCHEDULE OF MATERIALS Prior to the commencement of development a sample board of the proposed materials and colours to be used for the building shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the responsible authority.


PAGE 63

6. LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE The landscaping shown on the endorsed plans must be maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.

7. COMPLETION OF LANDSCAPING Before the occupation of the development starts or by such later date as is approved by the responsible authority in writing, the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

8. REFRIGERATION & AIR-CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT Any equipment required for refrigeration, air-conditioning, heating and the like must be suitably insulated for the purpose of reducing noise emissions and must be located so as to not be highly visible from the street to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

9. CONSTRUCTION PHASE All activities associated with the construction of the development permitted by this permit must be carried out to the satisfaction of the responsible authority and all care must be taken to minimise the effect of such activities on the amenity of the locality.

10. DETAILED DRAINAGE PLANS Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision under the Subdivision Act 1988, plans to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and then will form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions. The plans must include: (a) Direction of stormwater run off (b) A point of discharge for each lot (c) Independent drainage for each lot

11. STORMWATER DETENTION Prior to the connection of any building to the responsible authority’s drainage system, the owner or applicant must provide onsite surface and stormwater detention to pre-development levels in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Allowable discharge Rate:

Q5 =15 l/s Q100 = 35 l/s

14 l/s

14 l/s

12. VICROADS (a) Access to the subject land must operate as a one way traffic flow with entry

only on the Northern crossover and left out only exit on the southern crossover.

(b) The entry and exit must be signed in accordance with Australian Standards and signs must be installed within the subject land.

(c) The exit must be designed in accordance with Australian standards for Off Street Parking.


PAGE 64

(d) The discharge of any concentrated drainage onto the Calder Highway reserve must not be permitted unless approved in writing by VicRoads.

13. DRAINAGE WORKS

Prior to the issue of the Statement of Compliance for the subdivision, drainage works must be constructed in accordance with plans approved by the responsible authority in condition 10 above.

14. SECTION 173 AGREEMENT – ON SITE DETENTION SYSTEM Should the applicant opt to install on-site stormwater detention or water quality treatment then, prior to the issue of statement of compliance, the applicant/owner must enter into an Agreement under Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Such Agreement must covenant that; (a) The owner will maintain each on-site treatment system and not modify

without prior written approval from the responsible authority. (b) The owner shall allow duly authorised officers of the responsible authority

to inspect the systems at mutually agreed times. (c) The Owner will pay for all costs associated with the construction and

maintenance of each on-site treatment and detention system.

15. CITY OF GREATER BENDIGO ASSETS Before the development starts, the owner or developer must submit to the responsible authority a written report and photos of any prior damage to public infrastructure. Listed in the report must be the condition of kerb & channel, footpath, seal, street lights, signs and other public infrastructure fronting the property and abutting at least two properties either side of the development. Unless identified with the written report, any damage to infrastructure post construction will be attributed to the development. The owner or developer of the subject land must pay for any damage caused to any public infrastructure caused as a result of the development or use permitted by this permit.

16. PRIVATE WASTE COLLECTION Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the responsible authority a private waste and recycling bins collection must be provided by the applicant in perpetuity for the development. The collection must be generally in accordance with the submitted waste management plan dated October 2013 and to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

17. PEDESTRIAN SIGHTLINES The minimum sight line for pedestrian safety must be provided at the exit lane frontage so as to accord with Clause 52.06-8 of the City of Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.

18. LINE MARKING OF PARKING BAYS ON HIGH STREET Prior to the occupation of the development, the parking bays on High Street affected by the alterations to the vehicular crossovers must line marked to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.


PAGE 65

19. VEHICLE CROSSINGS (a) Vehicular access to the subject land from any roadway or service lane (and

vice versa) must be by way of a vehicle crossing(s) constructed at right angles to the road, to suit the proposed driveway(s) and vehicles that will use the crossing.

(b) If the existing layback is not used, it must be removed and barrier kerb reinstated.

(c) The driveway must be 1m clear of the stormwater pit. (d) A Works within Road Reserves permit must be obtained from the City of

Greater Bendigo Asset Planning & Design Unit prior to any work commencing in the road reserve.

20. SEALED CAR PARK

Areas set aside for the parking of vehicles together with the aisles and drives must be properly formed to such levels that they can be utilised in accordance with the endorsed plan and must be drained and provided with an impervious all weather seal coat. The areas must be constructed, drained and maintained in a continuously useable condition to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

21. USE OF CAR PARKING AREAS Areas set aside for the parking and movement of vehicles as shown on the endorsed plan must be made available for such use and must not be used for any other purpose.

22. NO MUD ON ROADS In the event of mud, crushed rock or other debris being carried onto public roads or footpaths from the subject land, appropriate measures must be implemented to minimise the problem to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

23. PUBLIC OPEN SPACE CONTRIBUTION The applicant or owner must pay to the City of Greater Bendigo an amount equivalent to 5% of land in the subdivision. This payment must be made before a Statement of Compliance is issued and may be varied under section 19 of the Subdivision Act 1988.

24. TELECOMMUNICATIONS (a) The owner of the land must enter into an agreement with:

a telecommunications network or service provider for the provision of telecommunication services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time.

a suitably qualified person for the provision of fibre ready telecommunication facilities to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.


PAGE 66

(b) Before the issue of a Statement of Compliance for any stage of the subdivision under the Subdivision Act 1988, the owner of the land must provide written confirmation from:

a telecommunications network or service provider that all lots are connected to or are ready for connection to telecommunications services in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time.

a suitably qualified person that fibre ready telecommunication facilities have been provided in accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.

25. TENIX

The plan of subdivision submitted for certification must be referred to SP AusNet (Gas) in accordance with section 8 of the Subdivision Act 1988.

26. POWERCOR (a) The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision

Act 1988 shall be referred to Powercor Australia Ltd in accordance with section 8 of that Act.

(b) The applicant shall provide an electricity supply to all lots in the subdivision in accordance with Powercor’s requirements and standards, including the extension, augmentation or re-arrangement of any existing electricity supply system, as required by Powercor (a payment to cover the cost of such work will be required). In the event that a supply is not provided the applicant shall provide a written undertaking to Powercor Australia Ltd that prospective purchasers will be so informed.

(c) The applicant shall where buildings or other installations exist on the land to be subdivided and are connected to the electricity supply, they shall be brought into compliance with the Service and Installation Rules issued by the Victorian Electricity Supply Industry. The applicant shall arrange compliance through a registered electrical contractor.

(d) The applicant shall provide to Powercor Australia Ltd, a copy of the version of the plan of subdivision submitted for certification, which shows any amendments that have been required.

(e) Any buildings must comply with the clearances required by the Electricity Safety (Network Assets) Regulations.

(f) Any construction work must comply with the Officer of the Chief Electrical Inspector “No Go Zone” rules.

27. COLIBAN WATER

(a) The owner is required to provide reticulated water and sewerage services to each of the lots within the subdivision. Services are to be provided in accordance with our specifications.

(b) All Coliban Water assets within the subdivision, both existing and proposed, are to be protected by Registered Easement in favour of Coliban Region Water Corporation.


PAGE 67

City of Greater Bendigo Asset Planning & Design Note A Works within Road Reserves permit must be obtained from the City of Greater Bendigo Asset Planning & Design Unit prior to any work commencing in the road reserve. CONSENT FOR WORK ON ROAD RESERVES The applicant must comply with: (a) The Road Management Act 2004, (b) Road Management (Works and Infrastructure) Regulations 2005, and (c) Road Management (General) Regulations 2005

with respect to any requirements to notify the coordinating authority and/or seek consent from the coordinating authority to undertake “works” (as defined in the Act) in, over or under the road reserve. The responsible authority in the inclusion of this note on this planning permit is not deemed to have been notified of, or to have given consent, to undertake any works within the road reserve as proposed in this permit.


PAGE 68

2.4 146 NEALE STREET, FLORA HILL 3550 - 2 LOT SUBDIVISION AND CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO STOREY DWELLING



Summary/Purpose

Application details: 2 lot subdivision and construction of a two storey dwelling


Applicant: Impeckable Building Design

Land: 146 Neale Street, FLORA HILL 3550




3 December 2013



Whether the proposal will adversely affect residential amenity.

Whether there will be an adverse impact on traffic safety and car parking availability in the area.

Conclusion: The site is in a good location to provide new housing in terms of accessibility to employment opportunities, leisure and shopping facilities and public transport. The proposal will have the positive effect of providing additional, much needed housing in an urban area, whilst preserving neighbourhood character. This report considers the permit application and recommends that the Greater Bendigo City Council issues a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit.

Policy Context



PAGE 69

Planning for Growth


Productivity


Background Information There is no planning history on the site. However, it is relevant that an application for a similar proposal on a similar sized corner lot at 22 Ellis Street, on the corner of Neale Street, was approved with a subdivision with lots of 212m2 and 341m2 with a two storey dwelling on the new lot. This development can be seen at the top of Figure 2 below.

Report


The site comprises a corner block at Neale and Hammer Streets which is relatively flat, and is rectangular with an area of 510m2. Located on the block is dwelling circa 1950 which fronts Neale Street. The surrounding area is zoned for residential use, although on the opposite side of Hammer Street are a number of commercial properties. Aside from the commercial buildings the common building typology in the area is single storey dwellings mainly from the post-war era.

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors’ property marked with a star.


PAGE 70

Figure 2: Aerial photograph with site outlined in red and 22 Ellis Street identified with arrow.

Proposal

The proposal is to subdivide the land into 2 lots and construct 1 two storey dwelling. The development would be laid out with one lot fronting Hammer Street. The lot for the new dwelling would have an area of 184m2 and the existing dwelling would have a lot of 360m2. The new dwelling would be two storeys and have 2 bedrooms, a retreat area, 1 bathroom, a toilet, kitchen/living/meals area and a single garage. The design would be of a contemporary appearance with pitched roof and using a variety of materials including brick, cladding, render and colorbond sheeting. The private open space would be in the form of a first floor balcony and a side/rear garden.


PAGE 71

Figure 3: Site plan.

Figure 4: Floor plan.


PAGE 72

Figure 5: Streetscape - Hammer Street.

Figure 6: 3D images.






16.01 Medium density housing


PAGE 73

Municipal Strategic Statement

21.05 Settlement


22.14 Flora Hill Precinct 3 Residential Character Policy Other Provisions






Referrals The following internal departments have been consulted on the proposal:

Referral Comment



Public Notification The application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers. As a result of advertising, 4 objections were received from part-owners of the adjoining property (144 Neale Street), with the grounds of objection being:

Overlooking;

Overshadowing;

Two storeys would set a precedent detracting from neighbourhood character;

Impact on traffic flows and parking;

Property devaluation. A consultation meeting was held with the objectors and applicant. The objectors concerns were fully discussed and further to the meeting the applicant submitted amended plans which attempted to address the concerns raised. The changes made were as follows:

Amended layout resulting in a reduction from 3 to 2 bedrooms;

Addition of a retreat room;

Reduction in vehicle crossovers from 2 to 1;

Reduction in car spaces from 2 to 1;


PAGE 74

Slight changes to subdivision plan;

Increase front setback to first floor (+450mm);

Reduction in length of rear wall (-150mm);

Increase rear setback to rear wall (+150mm). The amended plans were re-advertised but all objectors' re-submitted letters with the additional points being raised:

Doesn’t meet Flora Hill Residential Character Policy;

A number of residents didn’t receive letters for the amended proposal.

Enclosing of habitable area of the dwelling to the west;

Dwelling on west has no allocated car park on the street;

Inadequate private open space;

Overshadowing and enclosure of existing dwelling;

Inconsistencies with plan;

Concerns over proximity of gutter to boundary;

Objection to loss of fence;

Potential for existing asbestos;

Loss of amenity from air conditioner (unsightly and noisy);

Lot 2 doesn’t meet policy and minimum requirement (300sqm).

The objections are discussed in the assessment below.

Planning Assessment

Principle of Residential Development Clause 11.05-4 Regional planning strategies and principles has the objective of developing regions and settlements which have a strong identity, are prosperous and are environmentally sustainable. Of particular relevance to this application is the strategy to limit urban sprawl and direct growth into existing settlements, promoting and capitalising on opportunities for urban renewal and redevelopment. Clause 16.01 Residential development has objectives which promote a diverse range of housing that meets community needs in locations that offer good access to services and transport and that is both water and energy efficient. The importance of energy and resource efficiency is also referenced in Clause 15.02 Sustainable development. The City's Settlement and Housing policies within the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) are supported by a residential development strategy which advocates for urban consolidation in the form of high quality medium density in-fill housing. The land is zoned General Residential and lies within the Urban Growth Boundary and the proposal meets the overarching objectives of housing policies within the SPPF and the Residential Development Strategy as it would provide for urban consolidation in an area which has good access to local services and facilities.


PAGE 75

Whilst the location is appropriate for medium density, infill development, it is important to balance this against other objectives in the Planning Scheme as set out in the MSS. This includes the need to ensure developments achieve high standards of urban design and meet the identified neighbourhood character of areas. This is discussed further below. Neighbourhood Character This is a proposal which requires consideration of the familiar challenge of balancing State and Local policies which encourage urban consolidation within established urban areas whilst at the same time requiring an assessment against existing neighbourhood characteristics. In the absence of a Neighbourhood Character Overlay the relevant policy consideration is Clause 22.14 Flora Hill 3 residential character policy which seeks to ensure that development is responsive to the desired future character of the area in which it is located and to retain and enhance the identified elements that contribute to its character. The policy sets out how the desired future character is to be achieved by the following objectives and design responses.

Objectives Response

To maintain and strengthen the garden settings of the dwellings.

Prepare a landscape plan to accompany all applications for new dwellings. Retain large, established trees and provide for the planting of new trees wherever possible.

Comment: A rudimentary landscaping plan has been submitted showing minimal landscaping which would not meet this objective. An improved landscaping plan would be a conditional requirement of any permit granted.


The front setback should be not less than the average setback of the adjoining two dwellings.

Comment: The average of the setbacks of the adjoining dwellings in Hammer Street is 4.4m. 4m has been provided. There is discretion to vary this and the fact that the first floor is recessed helps in reducing the overall impact on the streetscape.

To reflect the rhythm of dwelling spacing. Buildings should be off-set from at least one side boundary, and preferably both.

Comment: Both dwellings would be off-set from at least one side boundary.

To ensure that buildings and extensions do not dominate the streetscape.

Respect the predominant building height in the street and nearby properties. The height of the dwelling at the front of the dwelling should match the typical single storey wall height.


PAGE 76

Objectives Response

Comment: There is variety in the streetscape, however, single storey dwellings predominate. As discussed above the design of the dwelling has been designed with a recessive first floor. In addition the overall height at 7m is not excessively higher than the adjoining dwellings and it would therefore not dominate the streetscape.


In streetscapes where weatherboard predominates, use timber or other non-masonry cladding materials where possible, and render, bag or paint brick surfaces.

Comment: Weatherboard and brickwork are the most common materials found in the streetscape. The materials proposed would generally blend in well with the varied range of materials in the streetscape.

To maintain and enhance continuous flow of the garden settings and the openness of the streetscape.

Provide open style front fencing. Front fences should not exceed 1.2 metres other than in exceptional cases.

Comment: There is no proposed front fence.

This proposal will introduce a contemporary development into an established suburb. Although the design is a little different to many of the existing houses in the area, there is a mix of architectural styles in the area and much of the built form dates from the latter half of the twentieth century. Local residents have concerns over the introduction of a two storey dwelling in an area predominated by single storey dwellings. This is a concern that is often raised by local residents. However, two storey dwellings are rarely seen as inappropriate in principle, even in areas where single storey dwellings are the common building typology, moreover the test is whether or not the dwellings are respectful of neighbourhood character. Given the variety of building styles and materials in the locality, a two storey dwelling with a modern design with a recessive first floor can be readily accommodated into the street. Residential Amenity and ResCode The purpose of Clause 55 Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings includes the need to achieve residential development that respects neighbourhood character and provides reasonable standards of amenity for existing and new residents. It is a requirement of Clause 55 that a development must meet all of the objectives of the clause and should also meet all of the standards. All objectives have been assessed and have been met. The objectives relevant to the issues raised by objectors and not covered elsewhere in this report and the standards which require a variation are considered below:


PAGE 77

B13 Landscaping The objectives include encouraging development that respects the landscape character of the neighbourhood and to provide appropriate landscaping. As discussed in the residential character assessment there is a need to improve the landscaping. An appropriate condition will enable the landscaping objective to be met. B17 Side and rear setbacks The objective is to ensure that the height and setback of a building from a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the impact on the amenity of existing dwellings. The objectors expressed concern about the “enclosing of the dwelling” at 17 Hammer Street. The development would certainly change the outlook from the habitable room windows of this dwelling. However, the new dwelling would be at a distance of 4.7m away which is sufficient to reduce any detrimental impact to an acceptable level, thereby complying with both the standard and objective of the setback clause. B19 Daylight to existing windows The objective is to allow adequate daylight into existing habitable room windows. Objectors are also concerned about the overshadowing and enclosure of the existing dwelling. The proposal would include a new carport adjacent to existing habitable room windows. The ResCode requirement in such a scenario is for carports to be no higher than 3m. This would be a conditional requirement of any permit granted. In addition there is scope via condition to site the carport further towards the rear of the block to lessen the impact on these windows. B21 Overshadowing The objective is to ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow existing buildings. The standard requires that at least 40% of private open space receives a minimum of 5 hours of sunshine measured between 9am and 3pm on September 22nd. Overshadowing plans have been provided which demonstrate that the proposed dwelling would comfortably comply with the standard. However, the private open space to the existing dwelling would not comply with the standard as the majority of it would be overshadowed. Objectors have also identified the overshadowing of the private open space as a concern. The location of the private open space for the existing dwelling is arguably the only negative aspect of this development. Consideration does need to be given to the fact there are areas of amenity space on all sides of the dwelling, notably at the front. Although it is recognised that there will be minimal privacy at the front of the dwelling. It would seem unreasonable to refuse an application on the basis of inadequate siting of private open space given the overall benefits of the proposal.


PAGE 78

B22 Overlooking The objective is to limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows. The development has been designed to meet the overlooking standard. At ground floor level all views to adjoining properties would be obscured by existing and proposed fencing. At first floor level, overlooking is prevented by the provision of louvres in the rear bedroom. It would therefore be unreasonable to refuse the proposal on this basis. B24 Noise Impact The objective is to protect residents from external noise and contain noise in developments. Of relevance to local residents' concerns is potential noise from air conditioning units and there is a standard in this clause which requires air conditioning units to be located away from bedrooms in adjacent dwellings. This will be required by condition of any permit granted. B28 Private Open Space The objective is to provide adequate private open space for the reasonable recreation and service needs of residents. The standard required is for each dwelling to have a minimum of 25m2 accessible from a habitable room. The private open space provided for the new dwelling is 26.70m2 located in the side garden and 7.3m2 on the first floor balcony. The standard is therefore met for the new dwelling For the existing dwelling the area is 40.72m2 which is located in the side garden. Whilst the area is sufficient to comply with the standard as it would be accessed via the front door it would not be directly accessed from a habitable room and therefore a variation to the standard is required. The purpose of Clause 56 Residential Subdivision includes seeking to create liveable and sustainable neighbourhoods and urban places with character and identity and achieving residential subdivision outcomes that appropriately respond to the site and its context. Objectors have stated that Lot 2 doesn’t meet Council’s policy and minimum requirement (300sqm). It is unknown what policy is being referred to. Council has no policies of a minimum lot size in Flora Hill. The objection may relate to the standard of Clause 56.04-1 Lot diversity and distribution which states that subdivisions which provide lots of 300 square metres or less in area should be located within 400 metres street walking distance of an activity centre. However, this clause only applies to developments of three lots or more.


PAGE 79

The application has been assessed as complying with all of the relevant objectives of Clause 56. Traffic and parking Local residents have raised concerns regarding the impact on traffic flows and parking in the area. The proposal is compliant with parking and access requirements and the local road network can accommodate the vehicle movements that would be associated with the development. In addition the City’s traffic engineer has assessed the application and raised no concerns. A further concern was raised about the blacking out of existing on-street parking spaces which removes the ‘allocated’ car space for 17 Hammer Street. These spaces were blacked out recently as it was determined by the City’s engineers that the road is insufficient in width to accommodate parking on both sides of Hammer Street. This is not a planning issue and is unrelated to this application. Other issues

Property devaluation

There is established case law which holds that a proposed decrease in property value is an irrelevant consideration. A long standing position held by VCAT is that other than in exceptional cases, and where clear evidence can be presented, loss in property value will not be entertained as a ground of objection. Failure to notify all residents about amended plans

The amended plans were submitted as a response to concerns raised by objectors and the case officer. The amended plans did not result in an increase in material detriment and therefore only those who had commented on the original application were re-notified. Loss of fence

It is not proposed to remove any existing fences. In any case, changes to fencing is matter between the relevant property owners. Potential of asbestos

This eventuality is a matter that is dealt with under building regulations not the planning legislation. Plan inconsistencies

There were some minor inconsistencies on some plans such as a second crossover being shown on an overlooking plan. This has now been corrected with amended plans. Gutter location

The siting of the gutter within the 150mm setback on the boundary is standard practice.


PAGE 80

Conclusion

This development seeks to introduce an additional dwelling in Flora Hill whilst aiming to be respectful of neighbourhood character. Balancing increased densities and innovative design with neighbourhood character is not an uncommon challenge and one which will inevitably become more commonplace and arguably unavoidable as the City seeks to achieve a sustainable increase in densities in urban areas to meet population growth. Local residents do have some valid concerns over the potential impact of the proposal on existing neighbourhood character. In addition there is an area of ResCode non-compliance in respect of the private open space for the existing dwelling. However, any minor impacts on neighbourhood character and future amenity, needs to be weighed against the need to maximise the use of existing urban land. In this instance it is concluded that there is insufficient reason to resist the development and Council should support the proposal.

Options

Council, acting as the responsible authority for administering the Planning Scheme, may resolve to: grant a permit, grant a permit with conditions, or refuse to grant a permit.

Attachments

Objections

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for 2 lot subdivision and construction of a two storey dwelling at 146 Neale Street, FLORA HILL 3550 subject to the following conditions: 1. MODIFIED PLAN REQUIRED

Before the use and/or development start(s), amended plans to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and two copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application but modified to show: (a) Detailed plans of the carport for the existing dwelling (146 Neale Street).

The height of the carport must not exceed 3m in height. (b) Re-siting of the carport to the rear of 146 Neale Street


PAGE 81

2. LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIRED Before the development starts, a landscape plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and two copies must be provided. The plan must show: (a) Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways (b) Planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers,

including botanical names, common names, pot sizes, sizes at maturity, and quantities of each plant

(c) Replacement of crushed rock (as shown on submitted landscaping plan) in the front garden with appropriate medium sized shrubs and other planting.

3. NO LAYOUT ALTERATION

The use and development permitted by this permit as shown on the endorsed plans and/or described in the endorsed documents must not be altered or modified (for any reason) except with the prior written consent of the responsible authority.



6. GENERAL EXTERIOR TREATMENT The exterior treatment of the buildings permitted by this permit including all exterior decoration, materials, finishes and colours must be to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. The exterior treatment of the building(s) must be maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

7. REFRIGERATION & AIR-CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT Any equipment required for refrigeration, air-conditioning, heating and the like must be suitably insulated for the purpose of reducing noise emissions and must be located so as to not be highly visible from the street to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Furthermore the equipment must not be located in the vicinity of bedrooms to existing dwellings.



PAGE 82

9. DETAILED DRAINAGE PLANS Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision under the Subdivision Act 1988, plans to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and then will form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions. The plans must include: (a) direction of stormwater run off (b) a point of discharge for each lot (c) independent drainage for each lot

10. STORMWATER DETENTION Prior to the connection of any building to the responsible authority’s drainage system, the owner or applicant must provide onsite surface and stormwater detention to pre-development levels in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

11. STORMWATER QUALITY Before the use or development commences, the owner or applicant must provide a stormwater treatment system to achieve the “Best Practice Environmental Guidelines” storm water quality (Victorian Stormwater Committee, 1999) in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

12. DRAINAGE WORKS Prior to the issue of the Statement of Compliance for the subdivision, drainage works must be constructed in accordance with plans approved by the responsible authority in condition 9 above.

13. SECTION 173 AGREEMENT – ON SITE DETENTION SYSTEM Prior to the issue of statement of compliance, the applicant/owner must enter into an Agreement under Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Such Agreement must covenant that;



The Owner will pay for all costs associated with the construction and maintenance of each on-site detention system.

14. CITY OF GREATER BENDIGO ASSETS

Before the development starts, the owner or developer must submit to the responsible authority a written report and photos of any prior damage to public infrastructure. Listed in the report must be the condition of kerb & channel, footpath, seal, street lights, signs and other public infrastructure fronting the property and abutting at least two properties either side of the development. Unless identified with the written report, any damage to infrastructure post construction will be attributed to the development. The owner or developer of the subject land must pay for any damage caused to any public infrastructure caused as a result of the development or use permitted by this permit.


PAGE 83

15. VEHICLE CROSSINGS

Vehicular access to the subject land from any roadway or service lane (and vice versa) must be by way of a vehicle crossing(s) constructed at right angles to the road, to suit the proposed driveway(s) and vehicles that will use the crossing. A Works within Road Reserves permit must be obtained from the City of Greater Bendigo Asset Planning & Design Unit prior to any work commencing in the road reserve.

16. PEDESTRIAN SIGHTLINES The minimum sight line for pedestrian safety must be provided at the exit lane frontage so as to accord with Clause 52.06-8 of the City of Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.

17. FENCING OF SITE The fence(s) as shown on the endorsed plans(s) must be erected and maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.



a telecommunications network or service provider for the provision of telecommunication services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time.

a suitably qualified person for the provision of fibre ready telecommunication facilities to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.


a telecommunications network or service provider that all lots are connected to or are ready for connection to telecommunications services in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time.

a suitably qualified person that fibre ready telecommunication facilities have been provided in accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.


PAGE 84

20. SERVICE AUTHORITY CONDITIONS (TENIX, POWERCOR AND COLIBAN WATER) The owner of the land must enter into agreements with the relevant authorities for the provision of water supply, drainage, sewerage facilities, electricity and gas services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the authority’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time. All existing and proposed easements and sites for existing or required utility services and roads on the land must be set aside in the plan of subdivision submitted for certification in favour of the relevant authority for which the easement or site is to be created. The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act 1988 must be referred to the relevant authority in accordance with section 8 of that Act.

21. EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT - SUBDIVISION AND DWELLINGS This permit will expire if: (a) The plan of subdivision is not certified within two years from the date of this

permit; or (b) The subdivision is not completed within five years from the date of

certification of the plan of subdivision; or (c) Construction of the approved dwellings is not completed within ten years

from the date of this permit. The responsible authority may extend the time for certification of the plan, or for the completion of the dwellings, if a request is made in writing before the permit expires or thereafter, within the period allowed by section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

Telstra Note Approval does not cover alterations to existing Telstra plant or network. Locations of existing network can be obtained from Dial Before You Dig – Ph: 1100 For co-ordinated Telstra plant reticulation in this development, please refer to www.telstrasmartcommunity.com to register your development and apply for reticulation. City of Greater Bendigo Asset Planning & Design Note A Works within Road Reserves permit must be obtained from the City of Greater Bendigo Asset Planning & Design Unit prior to any work commencing in the road reserve. CONSENT FOR WORK ON ROAD RESERVES The applicant must comply with: (a) The Road Management Act 2004, (b) Road Management (Works and Infrastructure) Regulations 2005, and (c) Road Management (General) Regulations 2005


PAGE 85



PAGE 86

2.5 11 STEANE STREET, KENNINGTON 3550 - 2 LOT SUBDIVISION AND CONSTRUCTION OF A DWELLING



Summary/Purpose

Application details: 2 Lot subdivision and construction of a dwelling


Applicant: Building Design Solutions

Land: 11 Steane Street, KENNINGTON 3550




30 January 2014



Whether the proposal will adversely affect residential amenity.

Conclusion: The site is in a good location to provide new housing in terms of accessibility to employment opportunities, leisure and shopping facilities and public transport. The proposal will have the positive effect of providing additional, much needed housing in an urban area, whilst preserving neighbourhood character. This report considers the permit application and recommends that the Greater Bendigo City Council issues a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit.

Policy Context


Planning for Growth



PAGE 87

Productivity


Report


The site comprises a corner block at Steane Street and Thompson Crescent. The site has a south to north fall of around 2-3 metres and is rectangular with an area of 664m2. Located on the block is three bedroom dwelling circa 1955 which fronts Steane Street. The surrounding area is zoned residential. The common building typology in the area is single storey dwellings mainly from the post-war era. There is a modest level of infill development occurring in the area.

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors’ properties marked with a star.


PAGE 88

Figure 2: Aerial photograph of locality with property marked with arrow.

Proposal

The proposal is to subdivide the land into 2 lots and construct 1 two storey dwelling. The development would be laid out with one lot fronting Steane Street. The lot for the new dwelling would have an area of 264 square metres, and the lot for the existing dwelling would have an area of 400 square metres. The existing dwelling would maintain its vehicular access from Steane Street and secluded Private Open Space (SPOS) would be in the side and rear garden. The new dwelling would be two storeys, have 3 bedrooms, a lounge, 2 bathrooms, kitchen/living/meals area and a single garage. A second car space would be provided in front of the garage. SPOS would be in the form of a first floor covered terrace and a side/rear garden. The design would be of a contemporary appearance with pitched roof and using a variety of materials including brick, colourbond cladding, and render.


PAGE 89

Figure 3: Proposed Site Layout.


PAGE 90

Figure 4: Proposed Thompson Crescent elevation.







21.05 Settlement


22.24 Strathdale/Kennington Residential Character Policy Other Provisions







Referral Comment




PAGE 91

Public Notification The application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers. As a result of advertising, 2 objections were received with the grounds of objection being:

Height of the dwelling is out of character and not in keeping with residential character study.

Neighbouring houses would be overshadowed.

The proposed dwelling would look out of place (materials).

Drainage concerns.

Property devaluation.

Concerns that front setback doesn’t meet character study objective.

Precedent for two storey and townhouse development. A consultation meeting was held, attended by the objectors, applicant and a Ward Councillor. The objectors’ concerns were fully discussed and further to the meeting the applicant submitted amended plans which attempted to address the concerns raised. The changes made were as follows:

Remove all (existing) trees from the North property boundary.

Show clothes line to the rear of the property.

Provide exterior colour schemes.

Additional landscaping to the front of the property.

Removal of dark hatching on plans that represent rendered walls. Copies of the amended plans were sent to both objectors. No objections were withdrawn and one objector submitted a further letter with the additional points being raised.

Proximity of secluded private open space to bedroom window.

Drainage issues were not addressed.

Impact on northerly light to existing dwelling.

The objections are discussed in the assessment below.

Planning Assessment

Is this an appropriate location for infill residential development? The land is zoned General Residential and lies within the Urban Growth Boundary and in principle is appropriate for an intensification of residential development. The proposal meets the overarching objectives of housing policies within the SPPF and the Residential Development Strategy as it would provide for urban consolidation in an area which has good access to local services and facilities.


PAGE 92

Whilst the location is appropriate for medium density infill development it is important to balance this against other important objectives in the Planning Scheme as set out in Housing Clause 21.06-3 which includes the need to ensure developments achieve high standards of urban design and meet the identified neighbourhood character of areas. This is discussed further below. Would the proposal present as a good urban design outcome which will preserve neighbourhood character? Neighbourhood character is referenced as an important consideration throughout the Planning Scheme, including Clauses16.01 Residential development, 21.06 Housing, 22.24 Strathdale/Kennington Residential Character Policy, 32.01 General Residential Zone,43.05 Neighbourhood Character Overlay,55 Two dwellings on a lot and 56 Residential Subdivision. Local residents have expressed concerns relating to neighbourhood character issues and it is agreed that this is important issue in the consideration of the proposal. The site is affected by Clause 22.24 Strathdale/Kennington Residential Character (Precinct 4) Policy which has the principal objectives of ensuring that development is responsive to the desired future character of the area in which it is located and to retain and enhance the identified elements that contribute to its character. The policy sets out how the desired future character is to be achieved by the following objectives and design responses.

Objectives Response

To maintain and strengthen the garden setting of the dwellings.

Prepare a landscape plan to accompany all applications for new dwellings.

Comment: A plan has been provided in which the layout is acceptable but there is minimal planting and a revised plan should be required by a condition on any permit granted to address this.


The front setback should be not less than the average setback of the adjoining dwellings

Comment: The average setback of the adjoining dwellings is 4.3m. The front setback of the proposed dwelling is 4.9m. Furthermore there is a good deal of variation in front setbacks in the area. This objective is complied with.

To maintain the existing rhythm of dwelling spacing.

Buildings should be setback between 1 and 3 metres from both side boundaries, based on the predominant pattern in the streetscape.

Use low pitched roof forms.

Articulate front and side facades to reflect building forms in the street.

Comment: The new dwelling would be offset on both boundaries as required.


PAGE 93

Objectives Response

Low pitched roofs have been used. The elevations of the dwelling are well articulated.

To minimise site disturbance and impact of the building on the landscape.

Buildings should be designed to follow the contours of the site or step down the site.

Comment: The site slopes across the site but the dwelling has not been stepped down to address this.

To ensure that buildings and extensions do not dominate the streetscape.

Respect the predominant building height in the street and nearby properties.

Use low pitched roof forms.

Comment: The most common building typology in the area is single storey dwellings. However, there is variety in the style and ages of dwellings and there are a small number of two storey dwellings in the area which will enable the development to meet this objective.


In streetscapes where weatherboard predominates, render, bag or paint brick surfaces.

Comment: The proposal would have a variety of materials and colours and is unashamedly modern. Given that the neighbourhood also has a variety of materials there is no reason why the detailed design finishes would not sit well in the streetscape.

To maintain the openness of the streetscape.

Provide low or open style front fences.

Comment: No front fence is proposed.

In terms of the impact of the subdivision on neighbourhood character the lots created will be smaller than is typical in the area, but this is an unavoidable consequence of implementing state and local planning strategies which encourage more efficient utilisation of existing urban land. In summary this is a large dwelling which will have some impact on the streetscape and neighbourhood character. A slightly smaller dwelling which stepped down the site would have been a better design response to the site. However, on balance the proposal as submitted would be respectful of neighbourhood character. Will the proposal will adversely affect residential amenity? The purpose of Clause 55 Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings includes the need to achieve residential development that respects neighbourhood character and provides reasonable standards of amenity for existing and new residents.


PAGE 94

It is a requirement of Clause 55 that a development must meet all of the objectives of the clause and should also meet all of the standards. All objectives have been assessed and have been met. The objectives relevant to the issues raised by objectors and not covered elsewhere in this report are considered below: B4 Infrastructure objectives The objective is to ensure development is provided with appropriate utility services and infrastructure which does not unreasonably overload the capacity. The City’s drainage engineer has assessed the proposal as being acceptable subject to appropriate conditions. B19 Daylight to existing windows The objectors expressed concern over the impact on the northerly light to the existing dwelling. The new dwelling would be setback from the boundary well in excess of the required distance under ResCode, thereby complying with both the standard and objective of this clause. B21 Overshadowing The objective is to ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow existing buildings. The standard requires that at least 40% of private open space receives a minimum of 5 hours of sunshine measured between 9am and 3pm on September 22. Overshadowing plans have been provided which demonstrate that the proposal would comfortably comply with the standard. B24 Noise impact The objective is to protect residents from external noise and contain noise in developments. Of relevance to local residents' concerns is potential noise from secluded private open space proximate to a bedroom window. Whilst ResCode has requirements for built form to be setback from habitable rooms there is no such requirement for private open space. It is to be expected and accepted that activities associated with rear gardens in urban areas will generate a certain amount of noise. Other issues

Property devaluation

There is established case law which holds that a proposed decrease in property value is an irrelevant consideration. A long standing position held by VCAT is that other than in exceptional cases, and where clear evidence can be presented, loss in property value will not be entertained as a ground of objection.


PAGE 95

Precedent of two storey development

Two storey dwellings are rarely seen as inappropriate in principle, even in areas where single storey dwellings are the common building typology. Moreover the test is whether or not the dwellings are respectful of neighbourhood character. As discussed above the proposal is on balance respectful of neighbourhood character.

Conclusion

This proposal would result in the construction of a new dwelling in a previously developed area with good access to services. The proposal is therefore in line with Council’s Residential Development Strategy objectives of making efficient use of existing urban land. The application has generated two objections which include a valid concern over the impact on neighbourhood character. However, for the reasons discussed in this report, the proposal is respectful of neighbourhood character and it is therefore recommended that the proposal is supported.

Options


Attachments

Objections

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for a 2 Lot subdivision and construction of a dwelling at 11 Stene Street, Kennington 3550 subject to the following conditions: 1. MODIFIED PLAN REQUIRED

Before the use and/or development start(s), amended plans to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and two copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application but modified to show: (a) Landscaping plan to accord with condition 2.

2. LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIRED

Before the development starts, a landscape plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and two copies must be provided. The plan must show:


PAGE 96

(a) Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways (b) Planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers,


(c) Additional planting in the front garden including a further canopy tree.

3. NO LAYOUT ALTERATION The use and development permitted by this permit as shown on the endorsed plans and/or described in the endorsed documents must not be altered or modified (for any reason) except with the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.



6. SCHEDULE OF MATERIALS Prior to the commencement of development a schedule of the proposed materials and colours to be used for the building, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the responsible authority.

7. REFRIGERATION & AIR-CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT Any equipment required for refrigeration, air-conditioning, heating and the like must be suitably insulated for the purpose of reducing noise emissions and must be located so as to not be highly visible from the street to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Furthermore the equipment must not be located in the vicinity of bedrooms to existing dwellings.


9. DETAILED DRAINAGE PLANS Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision under the Subdivision Act 1988, plans to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and then will form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions. The plans must include: (a) Direction of stormwater run off (b) A point of discharge for each lot (c) Independent drainage for each lot.


PAGE 97

10. STORMWATER DETENTION Prior to the connection of any building to the responsible authority’s drainage system, the owner or applicant must provide onsite surface and stormwater detention to pre-development levels in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Allowable discharge: Lot 2 Q10 = 1.4 l/s

11. STORMWATER QUALITY Before the use or development commences, the owner or applicant must provide a stormwater treatment system to achieve the “Best Practice Environmental Guidelines” storm water quality (Victorian Stormwater Committee, 1999) in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

12. DRAINAGE WORKS Prior to the issue of the Statement of Compliance for the subdivision, drainage works must be constructed in accordance with plans approved by the responsible authority in condition 9 above.

13. SECTION 173 AGREEMENT – ON SITE DETENTION SYSTEM Prior to the issue of statement of compliance, the applicant/owner must enter into an Agreement under Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Such Agreement must covenant that;



The Owner will pay for all costs associated with the construction and maintenance of each on-site detention system.

14. CITY OF GREATER BENDIGO ASSETS

Before the development starts, the owner or developer must submit to the responsible authority a written report and photos of any prior damage to public infrastructure. Listed in the report must be the condition of kerb & channel, footpath, seal, street lights, signs and other public infrastructure fronting the property and abutting at least two properties either side of the development. Unless identified with the written report, any damage to infrastructure post construction will be attributed to the development. The owner or developer of the subject land must pay for any damage caused to any public infrastructure caused as a result of the development or use permitted by this permit.

15. VEHICLE CROSSINGS Vehicular access to the subject land from any roadway or service lane (and vice versa) must be by way of a vehicle crossing(s) constructed at right angles to the road, to suit the proposed driveway(s) and vehicles that will use the crossing. A Works within Road Reserves permit must be obtained from the City of Greater Bendigo Asset Planning & Design Unit prior to any work commencing in the road reserve.


PAGE 98

16. PEDESTRIAN SIGHTLINES

The minimum sight line for pedestrian safety must be provided at the exit lane frontage so as to accord with Clause 52.06-8 of the City of Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.

17. FENCING OF SITE The fence(s) as shown on the endorsed plans(s) must be erected and maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.



A telecommunications network or service provider for the provision of telecommunication services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time.

A suitably qualified person for the provision of fibre ready telecommunication facilities to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.


A telecommunications network or service provider that all lots are connected to or are ready for connection to telecommunications services in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time.

A suitably qualified person that fibre ready telecommunication facilities have been provided in accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.

20. SERVICE AUTHORITY CONDITIONS (TENIX, POWERCOR AND COLIBAN

WATER) The owner of the land must enter into agreements with the relevant authorities for the provision of water supply, drainage, sewerage facilities, electricity and gas services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the authority’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time.


PAGE 99

All existing and proposed easements and sites for existing or required utility services and roads on the land must be set aside in the plan of subdivision submitted for certification in favour of the relevant authority for which the easement or site is to be created. The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act 1988 must be referred to the relevant authority in accordance with section 8 of that Act.

21. EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT - SUBDIVISION AND DWELLINGS This permit will expire if: (a) The plan of subdivision is not certified within two years from the date of this

permit; or (b) The subdivision is not completed within five years from the date of

certification of the plan of subdivision; or (c) Construction of the approved dwellings is not completed within ten years

from the date of this permit. The responsible authority may extend the time for certification of the plan, or for the completion of the dwellings, if a request is made in writing before the permit expires or thereafter, within the period allowed by section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

Telstra Note Approval does not cover alterations to existing Telstra plant or network. Locations of existing network can be obtained from Dial Before You Dig – Ph: 1100 For co-ordinated Telstra plant reticulation in this development, please refer to www.telstrasmartcommunity.com to register your development and apply for reticulation. City of Greater Bendigo Asset Planning & Design Note A Works within Road Reserves permit must be obtained from the City of Greater Bendigo Asset Planning & Design Unit prior to any work commencing in the road reserve. CONSENT FOR WORK ON ROAD RESERVES The applicant must comply with: (a) The Road Management Act 2004, (b) Road Management (Works and Infrastructure) Regulations 2005, and (c) Road Management (General) Regulations 2005



PAGE 100

2.6 169 HIGH STREET, HEATHCOTE 3523 - DISPLAY OF SIGNAGE


Author Carol Lok – Consultant Town Planner Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development Director

Summary/Purpose

Application details: Display of signage

Application No: DA/756/2013

Applicant: BK's Franchising Aust Pty Ltd

Land: 169 High Street, HEATHCOTE 3523

Zoning: Commercial 1 Zone Abuts Road Zone 1

Overlays: Heritage Overlay 723 Environmental Significance Overlay 3



No

Key considerations: Whether the proposal would adversely affect the significance, character or appearance of the heritage place?

Conclusion: The proposed signage would have an adverse impact on the heritage values of the area.

This report recommends that the Greater Bendigo City Council issue a Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit for the application.

Policy Context


Planning for Growth


Productivity


Sustainability



PAGE 101


The subject signage was erected without a planning permit and was brought to the attention of the City by local residents in September 2013. Further to discussion between the City and the applicant, a retrospective planning permit application for the display/replacement of signage was lodged with the City on 16 September 2013. On 14 November 2013, further to a detailed assessment of the proposal, a letter of concern was sent to the applicant advising that the proposal is considered inappropriate given the heritage context of the site. In the letter, suggestions were made to the applicant that changes should be made to the proposal to address some of the identified heritage issues. A meeting between the applicant, Planning Officer and Heritage Architect / Advisor was subsequently held on 12 December 2013 to further discuss the application. At the meeting, the applicant was once again given an opportunity to make changes to the proposal. On 23 December 2013, the applicant advised the City that he had contacted the Minister and requested a Ministerial Inquiry into this matter. The applicant further advised the City on 5 February 2014 that he is reluctant to act on this application until he receives feedback from the Minister. At the time of writing, the applicant still has not received any feedback from the Minister's Office and no request to make changes to the application has been received.

Report


The subject site is located on the west side of High Street, between Chauncey and Herriot Streets, in Heathcote. The site is rectangular in shape, with a frontage to High Street of 14.02m, a depth of 50.29m and an area of 705 square metres. The site is developed with a single storey building that is constructed to the front title boundary. It is noted in City of Greater Bendigo Heritage Study Stage 2: Former Shire of McIvor & Strathfieldsaye (2009) that this building appears on the 1909 photograph as a shop attached with the adjoining Union Hotel and is considered to form part of the evolution of the Union Hotel building (Union Hotel Place Citation Report Hermes No. 32802, page 5 of 7). The building on the subject land is currently used as a takeaway shop. The site is located within the central business area of Heathcote and identified as being located within the Heathcote Precinct (HO723) in the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme. The Heathcote Precinct comprises both sides of High Street (McIvor Highway), between Jennings and Mitchells Streets. Of particular relevance to the application is the High Street streetscape, which consists of a line of shops and a group of basically intact nineteenth century public buildings (Heathcote Hall, McIvor Shire Offices, Court House, Commercial Bank, Wesley Uniting Church and Post Office). These buildings are of varying degree of local historic, aesthetic, scientific and social significance to the City of Greater Bendigo.


PAGE 102

More specifically, the following buildings within the immediate surrounds of the site have been identified as having individual heritage significance in the Planning Scheme. The location of the buildings are shown in figure 1 below. a) Directly to the northwest of the subject site at 171 High Street is the Union Hotel

(HO774), which is a two storey sandstone building constructed in 1856 and is considered to be architecturally significant as an example of a mid-nineteenth century hotel. It is also historically significant as a reflection of the confidence shown in the development of Heathcote and socially significant for its use as a local public house, meeting place and dwelling.

b) To the south of the site at 165 High Street (HO466) is the Old Church of England and Budd Hall St John's Anglican Church which was constructed in 1869.

c) On the opposite side of High Street of the subject site at 166 High Street (HO773) is a former shop that is historically significant both for its relationship with the first Heathcote District Roads Board and because it operated as a shop from the early 1860s until 1925, beginning with William Dove's bakery, grocery and drapery business. It is also of aesthetic significance for its stone construction with quoining to the corners and window and door openings.

d) To the east, also on the opposite side of High Street to the subject site, at 158 High Street (HO772) is a vernacular timber gabled roof building which is architecturally significant. It is also historically important as illustrative of small industry which was once common in country towns, firstly serving as a soap factory, then as cordial works. Due to its association with the Crowles who were prominent members of the Heathcote community, the building is also considered as historically significant.

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site and nearby buildings with individual significance

Proposal

The proposal arises as a result of a new takeaway business occupying the premises and is for the display of the following signs:


PAGE 103

1 x fascia business identification sign extending the entire width of the site frontage of approximately 14m, with the name of the business (i.e. BK's) and two business logos.

1 x above the verandah / parapet sign extending the entire width of the site frontage, reading 'Fish & Chips Hamburger'.

1 x above the verandah / parapet sign, centrally located on the parapet of the building with the business phone number on it

1 x above the verandah sign extending beyond the parapet, reading 'BK's takeaway'

Figure 2: Proposed and current illegal signage on site since September 2013.

Figure 3: Signage for the previous business (prior to September 2013)


PAGE 104

The exact dimensions of the signs have not been provided by the applicant, however, it is estimated that the total area of the signage for the premises is in excess of 8 square metres. It should also be noted that the entire building facade, other than the shop windows, has been painted in a corporate fluro red colour (without the relevant planning permit). The signs for the previous business can be seen in figure 3 and have already been replaced by the proposed / new signs.



15.03 Heritage Municipal Strategic Statement

21.07 Economic Development Local Planning Policies

22.06 Heritage Policy Other Provisions

32.01 Commercial 1 Zone

43.01 Heritage Overlay

52.05 Advertising Signs



Referrals The following internal department has been consulted on the proposal:

Referral Comment

Heritage Architect / Advisor The proposal is not supported in its current form

Public Notification Whilst this application is not exempt from notice and review in accordance with Clause 52.05 of the Scheme, public notification of the application was not undertaken as adjoining and surrounding properties are of a commercial nature.


PAGE 105

Planning Assessment

The impact of the proposal on the heritage precinct The subject site is affected by H0723 which relates to the Heathcote Precinct. A permit is required for the proposed signage under this overlay and the decision guidelines of Clause 43.01-4 apply. In deciding on an application, Clause 43.01-4 requires the responsible authority to consider whether a sign will adversely affect the significance, character or appearance of the heritage place. To determine whether the proposal will have an adverse impact upon the heritage significance of the precinct, it is necessary to understand what the significance is. The heritage statement of significance describes the Heathcote precinct as follows:

'The Heathcote Precinct comprises both sides of High Street (McIvor Highway), between Jennings and Mitchells Streets and includes the former Barracks Reserve and the Government Camp...Within the precinct there are a number of key buildings that have individual citations... The Heathcote precinct is of local historic, aesthetic, scientific and social significance to the City of Greater Bendigo.... ...High Street includes places associated with agricultural industries and later commercial activity derived from agriculture. High Street also contains the key buildings for recreation, education and religious worship, as well as a number of private residences. It also contains a number of contributory residential and commercial buildings that provide a context for the key buildings... ...Heathcote contains examples of buildings that demonstrate the town's links with agriculture of the region. This is best demonstrated by the former Christie's flour mill built by James Crowle, and several large stone stores in High Street. High St contains a number of examples of commercial buildings with distinctive in their design with splayed corners, such as 72 and 105 High Street. High Street presents an intact commercial streetscape of the late nineteenth century. The streetscape consists of a line of shops and a group of basically intact nineteenth century public buildings (Heathcote Hall, McIvor Shire Offices, Court House, Commercial Bank, Wesley Uniting Church and Post Office). Very few streetscapes in Victoria possess such continuity of scale and setback with a number of nineteenth century shopfronts and posted verandahs. The Heathcote precinct also contains examples of a variety of housing styles including small timber and masonry cottages and larger houses from the later nineteenth and early twentieth century. There are representative examples of Victorian, Edwardian and Inter War housing."

As detailed above and throughout this report, it is evident the subject site is located within an area that has heritage significance as a whole, as well as including individually significant buildings. Whilst it is acknowledged that the host building is not listed as individually significant nor does it contain any individual heritage citation, it provides an important context for the various historic buildings in the area, particularly the adjoining Union Hotel.


PAGE 106

The proposed signage is considered to be an inappropriate response to the site and the Heathcote precinct in general, as it seeks to draw excessive attention to the building. Whilst the size of the proposed fascia business identification sign is approximately the same as the previous one, the size of the lettering (i.e. BK's) is excessive and should be reduced in size to avoid visual dominance. The proposed above verandah signs are significantly larger in size than the previous verandah signs. These signs not only take up most of the site frontage width but also extend beyond the parapet of the building. The number of signs above the verandah also appears to be excessive, as the uppermost above the verandah sign appears to be of a similar type as the large "BK's" fascia sign, with both of them identifying the name of the business. Together with the large lettering, these above the verandah signs would result in visual clutter and dominance when viewed from High Street. In addition, the use of bright/ fluorescent red colour on the various signs and particularly on the facade of the building is considered unacceptable given the heritage context of the site. This is because the bright / fluorescent red colour tends to over-emphasise the signs, so that its impact on the High Street streetscape would be disproportionate to the area of the facade that it occupies. The use of the same bright / fluorescent red colour on the facade would further draw attention to the building in a manner which is inappropriate for a relatively small building in the Heathcote precinct. Particularly, the proposed signage with the use of bright / fluorescent red colour would detract from the heritage significance of the adjoining Union Hotel. On the above basis, it is reasonable to consider that the proposal is inconsistent with the objective and decision guidelines of the Heritage Overlay in that it would adversely affect the significance, character and appearance of the Heathcote heritage precinct by:

Creating visual clutter and dominance;

Reducing the heritage significance of the adjoining and surrounding building(s);

Detracting from the understanding and appreciation of the character of the Heathcote Precinct;

Introducing colours that would be inconsistent to the heritage frontage. As discussed in the background section of this report, the applicant was given a number of opportunities to amend the proposal in order to address the heritage issues as identified above. It is acknowledged that the subject site is located within a commercial area and the replacement of the existing signs is deemed necessary in order to meet the business identification needs of the new tenant. It is considered that given the heritage context of the site, a more acceptable outcome would be to replace the bright/fluorescent red colour with a more neutral colour, remove the bright / fluorescent red colour from the building and to re-instate it to its original condition, to reduce the size of the lettering of all signs and to remove the unnecessary business identification sign above the verandah.

Conclusion

The proposed signage would negatively impact the significance, character and appearance of the heritage precinct and the application should therefore be refused in its current form.


PAGE 107

Options


Attachments

Heritage Architect / Advisor’s Report

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Refusal for the display of signage at 169 High Street, HEATHCOTE 3523 based on the follow grounds: 1. The proposal would result in an adverse impact on the significance, character and

appearance of the heritage place, contrary to Clauses 15.03, 22.06 and 43.01 of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.


PAGE 108

2.7 52 EDWARD STREET, BENDIGO - PARTIAL DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUILDING, CONSTRUCTION OF A 3 STOREY BUILDING,USE OF LAND FOR 2 DWELLINGS, PROVIDE CAR PARKING ON ANOTHER SITE, WAIVE REMAINING CAR PARKING & LOADING & UNLOADING REQUIREMENTS


Author Simon Francis, Statutory Planner Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development Director

Summary/Purpose

Application details: Partial demolition of the existing building, construction of a three storey building, use of land for two dwellings, provide car parking on another site and waive remaining car parking and loading and unloading requirements.

Application No: DU/183/2012

Applicant: P Lythgo

Land: 52 Edward Street, BENDIGO 3550

Zoning: Commercial 1 Zone

Overlays: Design and Development Overlay Schedule 5 Heritage Overlay Parking Overlay

No. of objections: Nil

Key considerations: Balancing the need for additional retail, office and dwellings within the Bendigo CBD whilst ensuring the design proposed respects adjoining heritage buildings;

Retain and respectfully incorporating heritage buildings existing on site;

The waiver of three car parking spaces and providing of car parking spaces on another site in lieu of a financial contribution

Conclusion: Although mixed use development is encouraged within the Bendigo CBD, the design proposed does not appropriately incorporate the existing red brick stables on site which are of heritage significance; or consider the heritage place at 72 Queen Street via an increased side setback.


PAGE 109

Policy Context


Planning for Growth


Productivity


Sustainability



Zone changed from Business 1 to Commercial 1 during the application assessment During the assessment of the application the zoning has changed from Business 1 Zone to Commercial 1 Zone. Business 1 zone required planning permit approval for:

Use of land for retail premises;

Office with ground floor frontage of more than 2 metres and shared access and;

To construct a building or carry out works. Commercial 1 Zone requires a planning permit for:

Use the land for a dwelling with an entrance at ground floor level greater than 2 metres and;

To construct a building or carry out works. Heritage Overlay introduced onto the subject site and the land at 72 Queen Street. During the process of the application an interim Heritage Overlay on the subject site was approved by the Minister of Planning primarily to protect the redbrick building to the rear of the subject site which was originally a stable associated with the adjoining land at 72 Queen Street. Permanent heritage overlay controls were approved by the Minister for Planning and Gazetted on 20 March 2014. Introduction of the Parking Overlay In April 2013 the Car Parking Overlay was introduced and reduced the amount of car parking required within the Bendigo CBD and allowed the City to collect contributions in lieu of car parking being provided on site. It also allows the option to waive car parking without a contribution as well as allow car parking to be provided on another site in close proximity to the subject site.


PAGE 110

Report


The subject site is located at 52 Edward Street, situated between Hargreaves and Mitchell Streets. The site is within the designated Bendigo CBD precinct and is located approximately 60 metres from the City’s Edward Street multi-level car park. The land itself has an overall area of approximately 400 square metres with a frontage to Edward Street of 20.5 metres. The land is square in shape and currently contains a building in two forms. Firstly, a two storey red brick structure to the rear of the site that has been identified as a stable originally associated with the building located at 72 Queen Street. Secondly, a single storey structure presenting to the front of the site is a subsequent addition to the stable and occupied by a bicycle shop. Vehicle car parking and a hard stand area also present to the front of the site. The stable and the building at 72 Queen Street are covered by a Heritage Overlay. The central location of the site means that it is within close proximity of a number of key services and destinations within the Bendigo CBD such as the railway station, Bendigo Marketplace, Hargreaves Mall, other shopping strips and the City’s Edward Street multi-level car park to the south.

Figure1: Location map showing subject site and multi-level car park.

Proposal

The proposal is to develop the site with a three storey building which will comprise a combination of the following uses:

Restricted retail (bicycle shop) and office on the ground floor,

Office on the first floor and;


PAGE 111

Two apartments on the second floor. The development comprises the following: Demolition:

Partial demolition of the existing buildings with the retention of the external boundary walls of the existing red brick stables to the rear of the site.

Ground floor:

Restricted retail (bicycle shop) with a total area of approximately 200 square metres,

Office space 1 approximately 130 square metres;

Entrance and service area with lift and stairs to the first and second floors. First Floor:



Access to offices, stairwell and lift access to second floor. Second Floor:

Two 2 bedroom apartments;

Both dwellings contain a bathroom, ensuite, open plan kitchen, dining and living area, laundry, balcony and terraced area;

Light wells in the rear corners of the building providing light to the levels below. The building will be constructed along all property boundaries with the first and second levels having some articulation incorporated into the design to increase the amenity of potential users of the spaces. The building height is around 11 metres above natural ground level (measured from the footpath) to the top of the proposed machinery pant. In terms of design detail, the building will feature a mix of materials which are detailed on the plans. The major features are:

Utilising the existing red brickwork on the external walls where the stables are located;

Aluminium framed, glazed frontage at ground floor;

Textured, precast concrete panels with painted finish;

Shiplap timber slats laid horizontally with an oiled finish;

Powder coated exposed metal verandah along the Edward Street frontage.


PAGE 112

Figure 2: Edward Streetscape elevation and view from rear of the property


Why a permit is required: The site is within a Commercial 1 Zone which triggers the need for a permit:

for the use of land for the dwellings;

as the frontage at the ground floor level exceeds 2 metres and

for the buildings and works. The Heritage Overlay triggers the need for planning approval for the demolition of the existing redbrick building and construction of a building.


PAGE 113

The site is also subject to a Design and Development Overlay which triggers the need for a permit to construct a building and carryout works. A permit is required to waive car parking requirements (three spaces) and to provide for car parking on another site (multi- level car park). A permit to waive the requirements of a loading bay is also required. The following clauses are relevant in the consideration of this proposal: State Planning Policy Framework

Settlement (clause 11)

Activity centres (clause 11.01)

Regional development (clause 11.05)

Noise abatement (clause 13.04-1)

Urban Environment urban design (clause 15.01)

Heritage (clause15.03)

Sustainable development (clause 15.02)

Residential development (clause 16.01)

Housing diversity (clause 16.01-4)

Business (clause 17.01-1)

Car parking (clause 18.02-5)

Development infrastructure (clause 19.03) Municipal Strategic Statement

Strategic directions (clause 21.04)

Settlement (clause 21.05)

Economic Development (clause 21.07)

Reference documents (clause 21.10) Local Planning Policies

Heritage (clause 22.06) Zoning

Commercial 1 Zone (clause 34.01) Overlays

Design and development overlay schedule 5 (clause 43.02)

Heritage overlay (clause 43.01)

Parking overlay (clause 45.09) Other Relevant Provisions:

Car parking (clause 52.06)

Loading and unloading (clause 52.07)

Decision Guidelines (clause 65)




PAGE 114

Referral Comment

Urban Design Advisor

Prior to the Heritage Overlay being introduced, support for the proposal was provided with suggested design changes to provide a more energy efficient building which the applicant implemented. The introduction of the Heritage Overlay resulted in the proposal not being acceptable due to the need to retain the existing red brick building. A meeting was held with the applicant, assessing officer and Urban Design Advisor who had prepared concept plans indicating how a similar floor space yield could be achieved while retaining the existing red brick stables and providing sufficient separation with the building at 72 Queen Street. The applicant chose not to further amend the design.

Place Manager Was generally supportive of the proposal and its implementation of the Bendigo CBD Plan 2005.

Heritage Architect / Advisor

Did not support the demolition of the two storey red brick building to the rear of the site. The recommendation was for a Heritage Overlay be applied to the subject site and adjoining site at 72 Queen Street through a Planning Scheme Amendment. Heritage Overlay controls have now been introduced and the heritage response reiterates that the proposal is not acceptable in its current form and requires the following:

Retention of the original external walls and roof form of the original stables;

Greater space between the proposed three storey building and the existing house at 72 Queen Street to allow for a continued visual connection between the house at 72 Queen Street and the stables.

Traffic Engineer No objection subject to a standard condition relating to the requirement for a works in road reserve permit.

Development Engineer

No objections subject to a condition requiring drainage plans to be submitted.


Public Notification The application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers prior to the Heritage Overlay being introduced. The notice provisions did make reference to the demolition of the existing buildings and detailed the proposed design as per the intended Heritage Overlay controls. As a result of advertising no objections were received.


PAGE 115

Planning Assessment

The key to this assessment is whether the existing red brick building (stables) to the rear of the site is adequately retained and incorporated into the proposed design. Does the proposal meet the City’s vision for development within the Central Bendigo District? A range of State Policies including clauses 11.02 (Settlement), 11.02-1 (Urban growth), 11.05 (Regional development), 15 (Urban design), 16 (Housing) and 17 (Economic development) emphasize the importance of Bendigo as a major regional centre in the context of the State and that in this important context there is a need to develop and use sites more intensively to achieve strategic directions. The Municipal Strategic Statement at Clause 21.02-4 states that Greater Bendigo has a well-established and clearly defined hierarchy of commercial centres. The City of Greater Bendigo completed the Bendigo Commercial Land Strategy (2004) and this document is a reference document in the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme. The Strategy identified that the existing retail and commercial hierarchy in Greater Bendigo is to be protected by encouraging growth that supports the respective roles of each centre. The Strategy seeks to maintain and strengthen this hierarchy and promote new development that is consistent with structure plans and development plans. At Clause 21.07 the commercial activity centre hierarchy emphasises the primacy of the Bendigo CBD for commercial activity. The proposal being a combination of office, retail and residential implements Clause 21.06-1 which states the Residential Development Strategy goal for housing is to shift towards reducing the amount of detached housing in Greater Bendigo from 90% to 70% with the balance to be made up of higher density development including ‘shop top’ housing such as that proposed. The subject site is located within the Commercial 1 Zone which includes the purposes of creating vibrant mixed use commercial centres for retail, office, business, entertainment and community uses and to provide for residential uses at densities complementary to the role and scale of the commercial centre. The decision guidelines of the zone build upon the policy considerations of accessing development, provision of parking, interface with adjoining zones and uses, design, orientation, maintenance of the building and matters contained within ResCode (both internal and external amenity). These considerations are all relevant to this application.

In summary, the proposal in providing for a mixed use (office, retail and dwellings) is consistent with the planning vision for the site as expressed in the policy framework and zone. As the City matures, developments of this intensity will become more common in order to achieve the policy objectives of creating more compact cities, accommodating increased demand for office space and assisting with limiting urban sprawl.


PAGE 116

Given there is likelihood of a mixed use development of some form occurring on this site, a key issue for Council to determine is whether the design proposed is an appropriate outcome from an urban and heritage design perspective. Given the heritage values of the subject site and adjoining land at 72 Queen Street, the design will need to respect and adequately consider these buildings. Urban Design State policy direction with respect to urban design at Clause 15.01-1 states that planning should seek to create urban environments that are safe, functional and provide good quality environments with a sense of place and cultural identity. Clause 15.01-2 states that planning should seek to achieve architectural and urban design outcomes that contribute positively to local urban character and enhance the public realm while minimising detrimental impact on neighbouring properties. The CBD Plan expands upon these notions of creating quality places and is a reference document to the Planning Scheme. In the context of this application the CBD Plan relates to the scale, design quality and uses of buildings within central Bendigo and whether the proposal delivers a net community benefit consistent with the objectives of the Planning and Environment Act (1987). The CBD Plan adopts four themes to provide an integrated, cross-disciplinary vision for the future of Bendigo’s city centre. These themes are listed and the key messages responded to in turn:

THEME 1: REINFORCING THE CBD AS THE CENTRE OF ACTIVITY

Expand the CBD’s primary role beyond shopping and business to include a diverse range of activities including residential, education, tourism and recreation, attracting more people and for longer periods.

Officer Comment: The submitted proposal being a combination of office, restricted retail and housing is in accordance with this theme. THEME 2: CELEBRATING CULTURAL AND HERITAGE IDENTITY

Ensure that buildings define, enrich, protect and enliven streets and other public spaces, and ensure building frontages are interesting and contribute to the life of the CBD.

Officer Comment: The proposal implements this theme in that it is a contemporary building with an interesting frontage which provides for weather protection for pedestrians (verandah), active frontage for the restricted retail premises proposed (bicycle shop) and a zero setback to the street frontage. THEME 3: CREATING AN ACCESSIBLE PLACE

Create a high-quality and safe environment and improve the way pedestrians and cyclists move around the CBD. Achieve an appropriate balance that maintains adequate vehicular and public transport access, while providing improved space for cyclists, encouraging increased street activity and enhancing pedestrian safety.


PAGE 117

Officer Comment: The proposal is within the priority pedestrian area and highly accessible to all transport modes and will encourage increased street activity. THEME 4: DESIGNING A HIGH QUALITY URBAN ENVIRONMENT

All developments should be designed to reasonably protect amenity on their own and neighbouring sites. This will entail consideration of issues such as future development on neighbouring sites; acoustic and visual privacy; measures to buffer noise sources; access to daylight and natural ventilation; and, waste storage and disposable measures, provision of post boxes etc. Officer Comment: The potential exists for the proposed three storey building to have a negative impact on the adjoining heritage building at 72 Queen Street. The impact will limit access to daylight to existing windows on the north west elevation and natural ventilation to the building at 72 Queen Street due to the building having a zero side setback and a 10 metre high wall on the boundary. Design and Development Overlay (DDO) objectives The DDO5 recognises the subject site as being within the City’s vision to achieve the following objectives:

To ensure the heights of new buildings are generally consistent with the ‘low rise’ character of the CBD while responding to substantial heritage buildings in some locations.

To ensure street spaces are safe, welcoming and provide weather protection for footpaths in the areas of highest pedestrian activity.

To promote active frontages to streets, walkways and public spaces. This is to be achieved by meeting the following requirements:

A higher scale building with a maximum height of 20 metres with the purpose to avoid overshadowing of properties beyond what would result from a 12 metre high building, the upper levels of the building must be setback (The height can be varied to protect the heritage places on the site or in proximity to the site);

A building built to the boundary at ground floor; and

A façade that is a sympathetic and considered response to the adjoining buildings in immediate visual connection to the site.

With reference to building frontages and setbacks, the DDO states that ‘active’ frontages at ground floor level must be provided and that buildings must be built with no ‘front or side setback’ unless a setback is required to protect the heritage place on the site or adjoining site. Officer comment: The development does provide for an active frontage with large glazed areas to the ground floor bicycle shop and office space. The design however, is to be built along all boundaries and does not provide sufficient separation between proposed building and the existing heritage building at 72 Queen Street The lack of separation will limit light to existing windows and ventilation to the existing building at 72 Queen Street. Does the design appropriately consider the heritage significance of the existing building (red brick stables) and the heritage building at 72 Queen Street?


PAGE 118

The following State and Local Policies including clauses including 15.03-1 (heritage Conservation), 21.08-1 (heritage), 22.06 Heritage Policy) along with Clause 43.01 (Heritage Overlay and Clause 43.02 (Design and Development Overlay Schedule 5) emphasize the importance of Bendigo’s Heritage and that any proposed design should respect and appropriately considered existing heritage buildings both on site and in close proximity.

Clause 15.03-1 Heritage conservation has the objective of ensuring the conservation of places of heritage significance. This clause includes the following strategies:

Encourage appropriate development that respects places with identified heritage values and creates a worthy legacy for future generations.

Retain those elements that contribute to the importance of the heritage place.

Ensure an appropriate setting and context for heritage places is maintained or enhanced.

Support adaptive reuse of heritage buildings whose use has become redundant.

Clause 21.08-1 Heritage states that the collection of the City’s heritage assets are the most significant in central Victoria and that heritage is an important part of the economy due to its role in attracting tourists, renovators and new residents who bring economic development initiatives and assets. A relevant objective is: To protect and enhance the municipality’s built heritage for future generations.

Clause 22.06 Heritage Policy contains the following objectives:

To ensure that Greater Bendigo’s heritage assets are maintained and protected.

To ensure that new land uses and developments are sympathetic with the appearance and character of heritage places.

To encourage sympathetic reuse of heritage places so that such places are maintained and enhanced.

Clause 43.01 Heritage Overlay contains the following objectives:

To conserve and enhance heritage places of natural or cultural significance.

To conserve and enhance those elements which contribute to the significance of heritage places.

To ensure that development does not adversely affect the significance of heritage places.

Clause 43.02 Design and Development Overlay Schedule 5 includes the following Design objectives (in relation to heritage consideration):

To allow for increased development densities while ensuring that the heights of new buildings fit reasonably with Bendigo’s character and protect the amenity of public spaces.

To ensure the heights of new buildings are generally consistent with the ‘low rise’ character of the CBD while responding to substantial heritage buildings in some locations.

Officer comment: The common theme to come from the policies and overlays is that any design should respect existing heritage buildings and where possible incorporate them into any design response.


PAGE 119

The City’s Urban Design Advisor presented a concept plan to the applicant for consideration. The concept demonstrated how retention of the existing red brick stables and the desired setback to the existing building at 72 Queen Street could be achieved whilst still achieving a similar amount of net floor area. The applicant chose not to amend the plans to appropriately incorporate the red brick stables or provide sufficient side setback to the heritage place at 72 Queen Street. The proposed design does not adequately retain and incorporate those elements that contribute to the importance of the heritage place and should be refused on this basis. Car Parking Requirements The following car parking spaces are required to be supplied on site in accordance with the requirements of the Parking Overlay.

Use Planning Scheme Parking Requirement

Spaces Required

Spaces Provided

Office 346m2 leasable floor area requires (2.5 spaces per 100 sqms)

+9 0

Restricted retail premises

346m2 leasable floor area requires (1.5 spaces per 100 sqms)

+5 0

Residential 1space per 2 bedroom dwelling (2) +2 0

Subtotal: 16

Credit being sought

7 spaces are being sought as credits for the existing use

-7

Total spaces required +9 0

Car parking credit for existing spaces provided The applicant claims historically the car parking provided on site was equivalent to 7 spaces based on the car parking rate of 3.5 spaces per 100 square metres of floor space. It is agreed that a seven car space credit exists, therefore the car parking requirement is for 9 spaces. In lieu of providing 9 spaces on site, car parking on another site and waiving car parking is proposed When the application was lodged the applicant entered into discussions with the City to lease 6 spaces in the Edward Street multi-level car park. The proposal is to lease:

2, 24/7 car parking spaces (one for each dwelling) and;

4 spaces Monday to Friday (for office and restricted retail uses). This would result in the remaining 3 spaces requiring to be waived. Officer Comment: Given the subject site is within 60 metres of a City managed multi-


PAGE 120

level car park, to provide car parking within that facility and waive the remaining car parking requirements is an acceptable outcome. Waiving three car parking space requirements allows for a more efficient use of a site that is constrained by size. If a planning permit was to be issued to allow car parking to occur on another site, a Section 173 agreement would be required to ensure that those car parking spaces are provided on another site. Due to the Parking Overlay, Council has the option to consider a financial contribution in lieu of car parking spaces. Considering the close proximity of the site to the existing multi-level car parking facility and the applicant's intent to secure several car spaces within the facility, it is not recommended that a financial contribution be sought. Waive requirements to load and unload vehicles on site No on-site loading and unloading of vehicles is proposed. Officer comment: Insufficient area exists on site for loading and unloading of vehicles to occur and requiring this to occur would preclude the development from proceeding. There is adequate capacity on the road to allow for light trucks and standard sized vehicles to meet the expected loading and unloading requirements of the tenants. Although it is not ideal to load and unload some vehicles within the road reserve, it is not likely any adverse amenity impact on the adjoining land owners or road users would occur from doing so.

Conclusion

The land is in an appropriate location, within the Bendigo CBD and is supported in part by adopted strategies including the Bendigo CBD Plan 2005 and Bendigo CBD Parking Strategy (2008). These strategies identify a need to provide for intensive development within the CBD core and recommend that lower rates of parking be applied to CBD development. The proposal implements the purpose of the Commercial 1 Zone and is generally consistent with policy objectives of the Planning Scheme relating to development within the Bendigo CBD. The proposed design, however, does not adequately incorporate the heritage values of the existing red brick stables on site, nor does it provide a sufficient side setback to 72 Queen Street and would therefore have a negative heritage impact. Although a development of this nature is encouraged within the Bendigo CBD, the current design will have a negative impact on the heritage values of the existing heritage buildings both on site and the adjoining lot and the impact cannot be reduced to a reasonable level via conditional requirements.

Options



PAGE 121

Attachments

Heritage Architect / Advisor's Response

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Refusal for the partial demolition of the existing building, construction of a three storey building, use of land for two dwellings (with frontage greater than two metres at ground floor level) waiver of car parking and loading and unloading requirements at 52 Edward Street, BENDIGO 3550 based on the following grounds: 1. The proposed design is contrary to state and local policies relating to heritage.

2. The proposal is contrary to Clause 43.01 Heritage Overlay and will have an

adverse impact on the heritage value of the existing red brick stables and heritage place at 72 Queen Street.


PAGE 122

2.8 119 & 119A PROUSES ROAD, NORTH BENDIGO 3550 - DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF LAND FOR A COMMUNITY CENTRE (INCLUDING PLACE OF ASSEMBLY, CAFETERIA, HEALTH SERVICES AND CHILD CARE) AND REMOVAL OF NATIVE VEGETATION


Author Bryce Kilian, Statutory Planner Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development Director

Summary/Purpose

Application details: Development and use of land for a community centre (including place of assembly, cafeteria, health services and child care) and removal of native vegetation.

Application No: DP/243/2012

Applicant: Bendigo & District Aboriginal Co-Operative Limited

Land: 119 & 119A Prouses Road, NORTH BENDIGO 3550

Zoning: Low Density Residential Zone

Overlays: Bushfire Management Overlay Vegetation Protection Overlay 2 Significant Landscape Overlay 1 Development Plan Overlay 4



Consultation was held by the applicant including nearby and adjoining land owners, Ward Councillor and City staff.

Key considerations: Whether the use is appropriate within the zone?

Whether the site is appropriately located for such mixed use?

Risk to the site from bushfire.

Amenity impacts on the locality

Traffic impacts on the locality

Conclusion: The proposal is an appropriate design in a locality that allows all the proponent's operations to be undertaken from the one site, central to their geographic area. This report recommends that the Greater Bendigo City Council issues a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for the proposal subject to conditions.


PAGE 123

Policy Context


Planning for Growth


Productivity


Sustainability



The planning application for this proposal was received on 20 March 2012. The proposal was then referred to all relevant authorities. As a result, the Department of Sustainability and Environment (now Department of Environment & Primary Industries) and CFA both objected to the application based on bushfire management issues. These issues were not resolved until February 2014.

Report


Site: The subject site is zoned Low Density Residential Zone and is affected by the Bushfire Management Overlay, Vegetation Protection Overlay 2, Significant Landscape Overlay 1 and the Development Plan Overlay 4. It has a total area of approximately 1.2 hectares with a frontage to Prouses Road of approximately 91 metres. Prouses Road links Jackass Flat and Eaglehawk with North Bendigo. The site slopes from south to north and east to west and contains some vegetation. Currently, a dwelling and a number of outbuildings are located on the site as well as an ornamental dam. Prior to the BDAC purchasing the block approximately 4 years ago, the site was used for residential purposes. Surrounds: Surrounding the site are a number of dwellings to the south and east with land to the west and north being part of a Crown Land bush reserve under the control of the DEPI. The site is the last developed block before reaching Jackass Flat. Greater context: The areas of Jackass Flat and Eaglehawk are located to the north and north west, with North Bendigo located to the south of the subject site.


PAGE 124

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors' properties marked with a star.


PAGE 125

Figure 2: Aerial photo of the site.

Proposal

The proposal is for the development and use of land for a community centre (including place of assembly, cafeteria, health services and child care) and removal of native vegetation. The proposed facility is made up of five individual buildings, configured with the largest of the five buildings being the central, focal point of the development. The applicant provides the following overview of what the BDAC is hoping to achieve should the application be approved;


PAGE 126

The aim of this development is to consolidate the existing services of the Bendigo and District Aboriginal Co-Operative into one location. The proposed development also includes expanded facilities to enable a greater interaction with people outside the Aboriginal community through an onsite childcare centre and Community and Cultural Centre. These facilities will be made available to the wider Bendigo community, not just the Aboriginal community. This proposal seeks to develop the land to accommodate the following: - Administration and Intake - Health and Wellbeing Services - Children and Family Services - Community & Cultural Centre - Childcare Centre

Administration and Intake Services This building will comprise a total floor area of 326 square metres over two levels. The centre will be located on the southern side of the allotment towards the entry off Prouses Road. The intake services building will be the “point of call” for clients obtaining the services of the co-operative. The building will have a reception area for clients and interview rooms for initial assessments and referral to other service providers within the facility. This building will also accommodate the main administration functions for the facility. Health and Wellbeing Services This building will be located on the southern side of the site and comprise mainly of a medical centre providing a range of health care services including mental health, general wellbeing and counselling services. The building will also accommodate the Health and Community Care referral staff. The floor area of the building will be approximately 449 square metres over two levels. Children and Family Services This building is approximately 300 square metres in total area, over two levels and located at the southwest corner of the site. The Children’s and Family Services unit will contain separate reception and waiting areas for clients and interview rooms. The unit is to be staffed by counsellors and educators to assist with family counselling and facilitate cultural education programs for indigenous pre-school children in the region. Childcare Centre Located at the northwest corner of the site, the Childcare Centre is a 527 square metre building on two levels. The centre is designed in accordance with the current standards, with three separate rooms to cater for approximately 60 children from birth to around 4/5 years of age.


PAGE 127

Community and Cultural Centre This is the largest and most prominent building within the development. The building has a total floor area of approximately 806 square metres and will house a 40 seat cafe, auditorium, exhibition space and an archive storage area. It is envisaged that this area will be the centre of the development as well as meeting place and cultural reflection area. The auditorium will provide an area for public performance whilst the exhibition centre will accommodate Aboriginal art and cultural exhibitions open the public. The cafe will operate during normal business hours, however, the kitchen may be utilised after hours for special events held at the community or exhibition centre. Buildings and Works: To ensure the five buildings blend into the surrounding environment they will be constructed of ‘rammed earth’ and colorbond roofing. Natural timbers for trimming will be used where appropriate. All colours will be muted, earthen tones. A one way ring road will travel around the boundary of the site. Three parking areas are located at the front, rear and northern side of the site. A fourth, secure car park is to be located underground. The secure car park will be utilised for the cooperative's pool vehicles and buses that will reside onsite. A total of 112 car parking spaces will be available. Proposed fencing along the boundary with the Crown Land will be open, post and wire construction to maintain the visual link to the bushland from the facility. It is anticipated pedestrian gateways will be provided to allow interaction with the land. Design: The applicant describes the philosophy behind the design as follows:

The development has been designed by Select Architects to reflect the existing organisational structure of the BDAC and its core business as a key healthcare provider to the Aboriginal people of Dja Dja Wrung. Further to this the design allows for the organisation to realise its vision of providing a cultural hub for the community. The concept for the layout of the facility was inspired by the paintings created by local indigenous artists Georgina Riseley and Trina Maloney. The paintings identify a group of meeting places surrounding a large central meeting place and linked by tracks. Inspired by these paintings, the design reflects this concept of meeting places by locating each of the operational units into individual ‘pods’ surrounding a central ‘gathering place’ and cultural hub. These pods and the central hub are all interconnected by covered walkways meandering through native gardens.


PAGE 128

In their design response the architects have stated their purpose for the facility as being:

“A cultural statement, a place for health and wellbeing, but also a place for gathering and creation, in a real way engendering pride in Aboriginality”

Staging: It is proposed to develop the site in two stages. Stage one will include the construction of the Administration and Intake, Health & Wellbeing and Community Centre buildings. The eastern and northern car parks will also be constructed as part of this stage along with the car park under the Administration building. This stage will enable the existing dwelling and some of the shedding to remain and be utilised for a site office and storage during construction. Stage two will include the demolition of the existing dwelling and shedding and the construction of the Children and Family Services building and the Childcare Centre. The western car park will also be constructed at this stage. Vegetation Removal: The extent of vegetation proposed for removal equates to an area of 0.09 habitat hectares along with 2 medium sized trees and 1 small tree. This vegetation removal is required to facilitate the construction of the buildings as well as for bushfire mitigation measures.


PAGE 129

Figure 3: Site layout plan.


PAGE 130

Figure 4: Staging plan.


PAGE 131

Figure 5: 3D image.



13.05 Bushfire

19.02-1 Health Facilities

19.02-3 Cultural Facilities

19.02-4 Distribution of Social and Cultural Infrastructure Local Planning Policies

22.01 Development at the Urban Forest Interface Policy Other Provisions

32.03 Low Density Residential Zone

42.02 Vegetation Protection Overlay 2

42.03 Significant Landscape Overlay 1

43.04 Development Plan Overlay 4

44.06 Bushfire Management Overlay

52.06 Car Parking

52.34 Bicycle Facilities


74 Land Use Terms


PAGE 132



Referral Comment

North Central Catchment Management Authority

No objection subject to conditions

Coliban Water No objection subject to conditions

Public Transport Victoria No objection subject to conditions

Department of Environment and Primary Industries

No objection subject to conditions

Country Fire Authority No objection subject to conditions

Environmental Health No objection subject to conditions



Public Notification The application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers. A community consultation meeting was held on 18 December 2012 with adjoining and nearby land owners, the applicant, architect, BDAC representatives, the Ward Councillor and the assessing officer. This meeting was held at the conclusion of the formal advertising period (which commenced on 6 December 2012). As a result of advertising, two objections were received, with the grounds of objection being:

Construction of fencing between adjoining properties and who will pay for any new fence.

Concern that the BDAC will wish to expand its operations onto the adjoining private property.

The objections are discussed below.

Planning Assessment

Is there policy support for the proposal? There are a number of policies relevant to the proposal such as Clause 13.05 Bushfire, 19.02-1 Health Facilities and 19.02-3 & 4 Cultural Facilities and Distribution of social and cultural infrastructure.


PAGE 133

Health Services Currently, the BDAC is located at a number of different sites throughout Bendigo’s urban and CBD area and serves a significant area from Woodend in the south, Donald in the west, Puckapunyal and Rushworth in the east and Kerang in the north. Relevant to this application is Clause 19.02-1 Health Facilities which aims to;

Locate health related facilities with respect to demographic trends, existing and future demands and for the integration of services into communities;

Locate hospitals and other large health service facilities in areas highly accessible to public and private transport;

Provide adequate car parking faculties for staff and visitors; Bendigo is located geographically in the centre of the area covered by the BDAC. In order to improve their operational efficiency they wish to consolidate all their services on one site. This proposal would facilitate the first and third points of this policy by integrating all services together in one location close to public transport with a large number of on-site car parking spaces and a pick up and drop off service provided by the BDAC for its clients and patrons. In responding to the second point of the policy, the nuances of the physical site locality are discussed later in this report. Cultural Significance The cultural facilities policy aims to:

Encourage a wide range of arts, cultural and entertainment facilities including cinemas, restaurants, nightclubs and live theatres at principal and major activity centres.

Reinforce the existing major precincts for arts, sports and major events of statewide appeal and establishing new facilities at locations well served by public transport.

Identify and address gaps and deficiencies in social and cultural infrastructure.

Encourage the location of social and cultural infrastructure in activity centres, especially those identified as principal activity centres.

The proposal does not comply with this policy because the facility is located away from any other health or entertainment precincts, in an area containing low density residential dwellings and bushland. Due of the size of the proposal and the land owners wish to have a connection to the natural environment, it would be extremely difficult to facilitate this type of development in an area with close proximity to other similar uses which are predominantly located within the CBD. Whilst this is not justification of why the proposal is acceptable with regard to the policy, it provides some reasoning as to why the site is suited to the nature of the use.


PAGE 134

Will these uses be appropriate within a Low Density Residential Zone? The Low Density Residential Zone has the purpose of providing for residential development on medium to large lots which, in the absence of reticulated sewerage can treat and retain all wastewater on site. This purpose does not give a clear indication about the appropriateness of the zone for non-residential uses, however, all components of the application are uses allowable in this zone. A condition imposed by Coliban Water is that the development be connected to the sewer system. The appropriateness of the use in this zone is discussed further below. Is the site physically suited and located appropriately for the proposal? As stated previously, the BDAC has a strong desire to locate in close proximity to the bush. The site fulfills this desire as it is bounded on two sides by State managed bushland. Physically, the site is big enough to accommodate the uses, buildings, car parking requirements and landscaping buffers owing to the site area of 1.2 hectares and convenient access from Prouses Road. With appropriate conditions relating to on site management, limitations on noise emissions from the buildings and increased landscaping to help screen the development from adjoining dwellings, the site is appropriate for a development of this nature. The counter argument is that in the immediate vicinity of the site the character of the area is single dwellings on lots with a quasi-rural feel. Nothing nearby approaches the size and scale of the buildings and hard surfaced car parking areas proposed. Will the proposal adversely affect the residential amenity of the locality? Noise, light pollution and visual impact The proposed use could, without appropriate management, potentially have an impact on the amenity of the area. The site is adjacent to a busy road linking Bendigo to the residential developments in Eaglehawk, Jackass Flat and beyond. It is questionable as to whether the operational noise generated by the proposed use would be audible over the vehicle noise from Prouses Road. Light emissions from vehicle headlights within the site at after-hours events onto adjoining properties, can be minimized with appropriate landscaping around the boundaries of the site. A Colorbond fence is also proposed for the boundary fencing between the site and the residential properties. This issue is also further mitigated by the design and siting of the access way with vehicles entering the site and following one direction around the boundary of the property. Because of this, no vehicles will be directly facing or travelling towards a residential property. Conditions will be placed on any permit issued relating to:

Noise emissions from within the buildings being compliant with the relevant EPA requirements.


PAGE 135

Appropriate landscaping to be placed along the boundaries of the site to minimise the visual bulk of the building and the presence of vehicles on the site.

Baffles on all external lighting to avoid any direct light emissions from the site to adjoining properties.

With these conditions the proposal will not have a negative or detrimental impact on the amenity of the surrounding dwellings. Urban design The proposal includes large, hard-surfaced areas of car parking along 3 boundaries of the site and it is acknowledged that this is not ideal. However, it has been assessed as appropriate in this circumstance due to:

The need to provide sufficient spaces for the projected number of patrons;

The parking requirements of the Planning Scheme; and

Achieving the buffers required by the Bushfire Management Overlay. To reduce this impact, the applicant has made efforts to beautify the car park areas through landscaping with appropriate plantings that won’t interfere with or increase the risk from fire. A condition will be placed on any permit issued, that requires the applicant to submit a detailed landscaping plan, including plant species. In order to minimise the visual impact of the development, the buildings have been located centrally on the site and will be constructed of rammed earth, steel, timber and other lightweight cladding materials to better blend in with the surrounding bushland. The building design itself is quite unique and responds well to the site. Whilst the development will change the general character of the locality, due to the proposed landscaping, building materials, design and siting, it will result in a positive urban design outcome for the area. Hours of operation The proposed hours of operation are in line with the existing hours the BDAC currently operate at their various sites and are similar to other like facilities in the municipality. Administration 8am - 6pm, Monday to Friday. Medical Centre 8am - 6pm, Monday to Friday. Childcare Centre 6.30am - 6.30pm, Monday to Friday. Community Centre 8am - 5pm, Monday to Friday

9am - 5pm, Saturday & Sunday. Café 8am - 5pm, Monday to Friday.

9am - 5pm, Saturday & Sunday. The Community Centre and Café may be used outside of these hours for special and/or cultural events on an irregular basis during the year, i.e. during Naidoc Week, and a condition will be placed on any permit issued to regulate this use. These hours of operation are considered appropriate and will not have a negative impact on the locality.


PAGE 136

Risk from bushfire and removal of native vegetation. As the site is located within a Bushfire Management Overlay and adjoins State managed bushland there is a potential fire risk to the proposed facility. As noted in the background section of this report, the application was referred (with appropriate vegetation reports and Bushfire Management Statement) to the CFA and DEPI. Initially both parties objected to the proposal. After more than 12 months of negotiations between the applicant, CFA and DEPI the matters were resolved and both authorities consented to the proposal, subject to conditions. In order to allow for the construction of the buildings and to comply with the requirements set by CFA and DEPI, 0.09 habitat hectares along with 2 medium sized trees and 1 small tree are to be removed. Appropriate offsets will be provided, in line with the DEPI condition, therefore the vegetation removal has been assessed as acceptable. Will the proposal will have a negative traffic impact on Prouses Road? The application was referred to the City's Traffic Engineers and Public Transport Victoria for their comments as the proposal will generate significantly increased vehicle movements entering and exiting Prouses Road. Neither the Traffic Engineers nor PTV raised concern about the number of vehicles entering and exiting the site as the road is well formed, wide and offers reasonable visibility in both directions as well as having a 60km/h speed limit. Fencing and resolution of objections. The fencing of the site is proposed as post and wire, rural style fencing along the eastern, northern and western boundaries with fencing along the southern boundary being Colorbond. BDAC agreed to pay the full cost for Colorbond fencing along the southern boundary in response to concerns raised by the 2 objectors whose properties abut that boundary. However, neither objection has been withdrawn. A question was also raised regarding whether or not the patrons of the facility would be able to access adjoining private property. This question resulted from an error on the plans that showed a pathway between the subject site and the adjoining private properties. The plans have been revised and this error corrected.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the application is recommended for approval on the basis that it represents an acceptable urban design and planning outcome with regard to policy, the appropriateness of the location, the amenity of the locality and traffic movements.

Options



PAGE 137

Attachments

Objections.

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for the development and use of land for a community centre (including place of assembly, cafeteria, health services and child car) and removal of native vegetation at 119 & 119A Prouses Road, NORTH BENDIGO 3550 subject to the following conditions:

1. NO LAYOUT ALTERATION The use and/or development permitted by this permit as shown on the endorsed plan(s) and/or described in the endorsed documents must not be altered or modified (for any reason) except with the prior written consent of the responsible authority.

2. BAFFLED LIGHTING Outdoor lighting, where provided, must be designed, baffled and located to the satisfaction of the responsible authority such that no direct light is emitted outside the boundaries of the subject land.

3. COMPLY WITH STATE NOISE POLICY N-2 Noise emissions must comply with State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Music Noise from Public Premises) No. N-2.


5. SCHEDULE OF MATERIALS Prior to the commencement of development a schedule of the proposed materials and colours to be used for the building, including samples, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the responsible authority.

6. NO FLASHING LIGHT IN SIGNS Flashing or intermittent light must not be used in the sign(s) permitted by this permit except with the prior written consent of the responsible authority.

7. CAR PARK CONSTRUCTION Before the use or occupation of the development starts, the area(s) set aside for the parking of vehicles and access lanes as shown on the endorsed plans must be: (a) Constructed (b) Properly formed to such levels that they can be used in accordance with

the plans (c) Surfaced with an all-weather-seal coat (d) Drained


PAGE 138

(e) Line marked to indicate each car space and all access lanes (f) Clearly marked to show the direction of traffic along access lanes and

driveways to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. (g) Designed to be compliant with Australian Standard AS/NZ 2890.1:2004. (h) Comply with disabled parking bays - Australian Standard AS/NZ

2890.6:2009. (i) Provided with public lighting in accordance with AS/NZ 1158.0-2005/Amdt

2-2010 minimum light category P11/P12 and the fitting are to minimize spill lighting on to neighbouring property (including road reserves) in accordance with AS/NZ 4282-1997.

Car spaces, access lanes and driveways must be kept available for these purposes at all times.

8. STORMWATER DRAINGE Drainage plans, including computations and longitudinal sections, must be provided to and approved by the responsible authority for the lot in the development to the responsible authorities nominated point of discharge. Once approved, the plans will be endorsed as part of the planning permit and must not be further altered without the prior written consent of the responsible authority.

9. STORMWATER DETENTION Prior to the development connecting to the responsible authorities drainage system, the owner or applicant must provide onsite surface and stormwater detention to pre-development levels in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Allowable Discharge Rate: Lot 3 Q100 = 36 l/s Q5 = 16 l/s

10. CONSTRUCTION OF WORKS Road works, drainage and other civil works must be constructed in accordance with plans and specifications approved by the responsible authority and must include for the frontage (and/or other boundary) of the site: (a) Service road access is to be constructed and sealed (b) Underground drainage

11. DEPI OFFSET CONDITIONS a. In order to offset the removal of 0.09 habitat hectares of medium

conservation significance Box Ironbark Forest Ecological Vegetation Class (EVC) and 2 medium trees and 1 small tree of low conservation significance Box Ironbark Forest Ecological Vegetation Class (EVC) approved for removal as part of this permit, the applicant must provide for:

the protection and management for conservation purposes of 0.09 habitat hectares of medium conservation significance Box Ironbark Forest Ecological Vegetation Class (EVC), and

the planting and protection of 40 plants of low conservation significance Box

Ironbark Forest Ecological Vegetation Class (EVC). or an alternative to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.


PAGE 139

b. To provide the required offset, within 12 months of the vegetation removal, the applicant or the owner must either:

Provide to the responsible authority, an Allocated Credit Extract issued by the Department of Sustainability and Environment Native Vegetation Credit Register which satisfies the required offset; or

Have prepared an offset plan endorsed by the responsible authority. The offset plan must be prepared to the satisfaction of the responsible authority and submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. The offset plan must include a: i) description of the site where the offset will be provided, including a

site plan and ii) schedule of the works required to achieve the offset over a ten year

period, detailing the:

o management actions to be performed (e.g. fencing, weed

control, pest control, revegetation)

o person(s) responsible for implementing the specified

management actions

o timeline for the implementation of the management actions

o method by which the management actions will be undertaken

o standard to which the management actions will be undertaken

When approved, the offset plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. c. Within twelve months of the vegetation removal:

i) the endorsed offset site must be permanently protected to the satisfaction of the responsible authority ( e.g. encumbrance on title) ; and

ii) a copy of the endorsed offset plan and protection mechanism (e.g. title showing encumbrance) must be lodged with the Department of Sustainability and Environment

12. CFA CONDITIONS 1. Amended Bushfire Management Plan Required 1.1 Before works occurs, an amended Bushfire Management Plan to the

satisfaction of the CFA and the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and then form part of the permit and must not be modified without the consent of CFA and the responsible authority. The plans must be substantially in accordance with the plans submitted with application but modified to; 1.1.1 Show the central area of the property being managed for inner-

zone defendable space purposes. 1.1.2 Include the management prescriptions for the inner-zone and outer-

zone defendable space areas under the heading of DEFENDABLE SPACE REQUIREMENTS.

2. Bushfire Emergency Plan Required 2.1 Within 6 months of works commencing, a Bushfire Emergency Plan (BEP)

to the satisfaction of the CFA and the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the BEP must be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The BEP must generally address CFA’s publication ‘Guide to developing a Bushfire


PAGE 140

Emergency Plan in Victoria – Interim: July 2012’ and must specifically include details on: 2.1.1 The Fire Danger Rating triggers for the closure of the facilities. 2.1.2 Monitoring and notifying staff and visitors of forecast Fire Danger

Rating and any consequential actions. 2.1.3 Details of the location/s for emergency assembly, evacuation and

shelter in- place (in the event that evacuation from the site is not practicable).

2.1.4 Transport arrangements for staff and visitors. 2.1.5 The need for any additional arrangements for persons with special

needs. 2.1.6 Training of staff, visitors and overnight guests on emergency

procedures. 2.1.7 The nature and frequency of emergency procedure exercises. 2.1.8 Emergency procedures (bushfire action statements) including the

assignment of roles and responsibilities to staff. This must include assigning responsibility for the: 2.1.8.1 Management and oversight of emergency procedures. 2.1.8.2 Training of employees in emergency procedures. 2.1.8.3 Reviewing the effectiveness of emergency procedure

exercises and implementing procedure improvements. 2.1.8.4 Accounting for all persons during the emergency

procedures. 2.1.9 Monitoring and review of the BEP at least annually.

2.2 Once endorsed the operation and management of the site and must at all times be carried out in accordance with the Bushfire Emergency Plan endorsed under this permit to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. This condition continues to have force and effect after the development authorised by this permit has been completed.

3. Mandatory Condition (as per Clause 44.06-4) The bushfire mitigation measures forming part of this permit or shown on the endorsed plans, including those relating to construction standards, defendable space, water supply, and access, must be maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority and the relevant fire authority on a continuing basis. This condition continues to have force and effect after the development authorised by this permit has been completed.

4. Building Construction The construction of all buildings must be constructed to a minimum bushfire attack level of BAL-29 in accordance with the relevant sections of AS3959-2009.

5. Defendable space Vegetation within the property must be maintained to the distances and DEFENDNABLE SPACE REQUIREMENTS specified on the endorsed Bushfire Management Plan on an ongoing basis. 6. Vehicle Access 6.1 Vehicular access within the site must be provided and must generally be in

accordance with the endorsed Bushfire Management Plan.


PAGE 141

6.2 Any vehicular access within the property must provide a minimum trafficable width of 3.5 m and be clear of encroachments for 4 m vertically and 0.5 m either side of the trafficable width.

6.3 Vehicular access must be designed, constructed and maintained for a load limit of at least 15 tonnes.

7. Static water supplies for fire fighting 7.1 Prior to occupation, static water tanks, dedicated solely for fire fighting

purposes, must be provided in locations generally in accordance with the endorsed Bushfire Management Plan.

7.2 Each static water supply must: 7.2.1 Have a minimum capacity of 20,000 litres. 7.2.2 Be stored in an above ground water tank constructed of concrete,

steel or corrugated iron. 7.2.3 Be located so that fire brigade vehicles are able to get to within 4

metres of the tank which is directly connected to the tank. 7.2.4 Incorporate a 64 mm (minimum) gate or ball valve and 64 mm

(fixed size), 3 threads per inch, male fitting to suit a CFA coupling. 7.2.5 Be readily identifiable from the onsite vehicular access or

appropriate signage must be provided to the satisfaction of CFA must be provided.

7.2.6 Not have pipework that is no less than 64 mm nominal bore. 7.2.7 Not have pipework and fittings that are constructed of combustible

materials. 7.2.8 Incorporate additional outlets to enable staff to use the water for fire

fighting purposes as required.

13. LANDSCAPE PLAN Before the development starts, a landscape plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and two copies must be provided. The landscaping plan must be generally in accordance with the landscape concept plan dated 16th November 2012 prepared by Lotus Building Design Interior Design. The plan must show: (a) A survey (including botanical names) of all existing vegetation to be

retained and/or removed (b) Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways (c) Planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers,


All species selected must be to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

14. LANDSCAPING WORKS Before the use/occupation of the development starts or by such later date as is approved by the responsible authority in writing, the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.


PAGE 142


16. SECURITY ALARMS All security alarms or similar devices installed on the land must be of a silent type in accordance with any current standard published by Standards Australia International Limited and be connected to a security service.

17. LOUDSPEAKERS No external sound amplification equipment or loudspeakers are to be used for the purpose of announcement, broadcast, playing of music or similar purpose.

18. HOURS OF OPERATION Except with the prior written consent of the responsible authority, the use permitted by this permit must operate only between the following times:

Administration 8am - 6pm, Monday to Friday.

Medical Centre 8am - 6pm, Monday to Friday.

Childcare Centre 6.30am - 6.30pm, Monday to Friday.

Community Centre 8am - 5pm, Monday to Friday 9am - 5pm, Saturday & Sunday.

Café 8am - 5pm, Monday to Friday. 9am - 5pm, Saturday & Sunday.

Special Events With notice of these events, including but not limited to the nature of the event and hours of operation proposed for the event to be given to adjoining owners and occupiers as well as the City of Greater Bendigo as the responsible authority.

19. COLIBAN WATER CONDITIONS (a) The owner is required to provide reticulated water and sewerage services

to each of the lots within the subdivision. Services are to be provided in accordance with out specifications.

(b) All Coliban Water assets within the development, both existing and proposed, are to be protected by an easement in favour of Coliban Region Water Corporation.

Asset Planning & Design Note CONSENT FOR WORKS ON ROAD RESERVES The applicant must comply with:

The Road Management Act 2004,

Road Management (Works & Infrastructure) Regulations 2005; and

Road Management (General) Regulations 2005


PAGE 143

with respect to any requirements to notify the coordinating authority and/or seek consent from the coordinating authority to undertake “works” (as defined in the Act) in, over or under the road reserve. The responsible authority in the inclusion of this note on this planning permit is not deemed to have been notified of, or to have given consent to undertake any works within the road reserve as proposed in this permit. Environmental Health Notes FOOD

If preparing and selling food from any part of the facility then the premises must be constructed and maintained in accordance with the Food Act 1984 and the Food Standards Code.

A plan of the proposed food premises must be provided to and assessed by Environmental Health & Local Laws prior to the commencement of construction and/or fit-out. The Application form for plans assessment and information on the construction and fit-out of a food premises can be downloaded from City of Greater Bendigo webpage www.bendigo.vic.gov.au/Business/Food_businesses or by contacting Environmental Health & Local Laws on 5434 6333.

The premises must be registered with City of Greater Bendigo under the provisions of the Food Act 1984. The business shall not commence trade until an Environmental Health Officer has conducted the final inspection of the premises and registration under the Food Act 1984 has been granted.

Coliban Water must be contacted to determine whether the premise requires a grease trap. Environmental Health and Local Laws must be consulted in regards to the appropriate location of a Grease Trap to ensure compliance with the Food Standards Code.

TOBACCO If smoking is permitted in outdoor drinking and dining areas, the area must comply with the Tobacco Act 1987 (refer to the Smoke free guide: Licensed premises and outdoor dining and drinking areas booklet, available from Council or from the web at www.health.vic.gov.au/tobaccoreforms/outdoor.htm) DEPI Notes

Third party offsets may be available from Bushbroker Over the Counter program. Please email [email protected], or visit www.dse.vic.gov.au/nativevegetation for further information.

The adjoining Crown land is not to be used for access, storage of materials or rubbish. Any private use of Crown land requires consent and/or licensing from the Department of Sustainability and Environment.

http://www.bendigo.vic.gov.au/Business/Food_businesses

http://www.health.vic.gov.au/tobaccoreforms/outdoor.htm

http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/nativevegetation


PAGE 144

2.9 6 GRAHAM STREET, QUARRY HILL 3550 - DEMOLITION OF DWELLING, OUTBUILDING AND FENCES AND CONSTRUCTION OF DWELLING AND FENCES


Author Peter O'Brien, Senior Planner Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development Director

Summary/Purpose

Application details: Demolition of dwelling, outbuilding and fences and construction of dwelling and fences

Application No: DD/665/2013

Applicant: GAPA Pty Ltd

Land: 6 Graham Street, QUARRY HILL 3550


Overlays: Heritage Overlay 30 (Quarry Hill Street Precinct)



4 February 2014

Key considerations: Whether the demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a new dwelling in its place is appropriate with regard to State and Local Heritage Policy and the Heritage Overlay; and

Resident objections.

Conclusion: The proposed demolition and new dwelling have been assessed as being appropriate with regard heritage. This report recommends that the Greater Bendigo City Council resolves to issue a notice of decision to grant a permit subject to conditions.

Policy Context


Planning for Growth



PAGE 145

Productivity


Sustainability



The City’s Heritage Architect / Advisor and the assessing officer first inspected the application site in February 2013 in response to a formal Demolition Enquiry request. At the time of that inspection it was difficult to fully gauge the dwelling condition as the house was filled with rubbish. In the absence of being able to fully appreciate the internal condition of the dwelling, the initial officer position was that demolition should not be supported; however recommended that the house be reassessed once cleared. The applicant undertook a number of investigations as to whether the house could be retained and restored. The owner (who is a registered builder) came to the conclusion, having engaged expert advice and a quotation for the re-stumping of the dwelling, that it would not be economically feasible to retain and restore the dwelling. Officers re-inspected the site in September 2013, with the outcome being that it was agreed that the condition of the dwelling is beyond practical repair, as retention of the dwelling would necessitate the reconstruction of the dwelling resulting in the replacement of the majority of original (building) fabric. The advice was that demolition was supportable at officer level, subject to formal consideration of a planning application which resulted in the current application being made. The applicant initially applied for demolition approval only. This application was publically advertised and one objection was received. One of the grounds of objection related to concerns that no dwelling replacement was proposed. The applicant agreed to amend their application to include plans for a replacement dwelling. The application was advertised a second time with the initial objector lodging further grounds of objection and a second objection was also received.

Report


The subject site is a rectangular lot which is 16.76 metres wide and 25.15 metres deep, the total area being 421 square metres. The lot historically formed part of the grounds of 19 Hamlet Street, Quarry Hill which is a former residence of Sir John Quick. The application site and the adjoining property at 17 Hamlet Street were subdivided off 19 Hamlet Street in 1937 with dwellings on both constructed around the same time. A notable characteristic of the site and Graham Street is its hilly nature. The application site rises 2.74 metres across its frontage which is significant given that the frontage is only 16.76 metres.


PAGE 146

The existing Californian bungalow retains many original decorative features such as shingled gables, front veranda with arched entry and leadlight windows to the front rooms. The dwelling also contains an upstairs bedroom/attic. The bedroom/attic has been open to the weather for over a decade (with reference to aerial photography dating from 2001 showing the absence of a roof); however despite this the dwelling was being lived in as recently as late 2012. The context of Graham Street between Russell and Howard Streets is that it primarily serves as rear access for historic houses fronting either Hamlet or Harkness Streets. The subject site, 5 Graham Street and 2 Harkness Street (with a second dwelling fronting Graham Street) are the exceptions in that they do front Graham Street. The two adjoining lots both have garages constructed close to the boundary with the garage associated with 19 Hamlet Street setback 0.3 metres and 15 Hamlet Street setback 0.5 metres.

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objectors' properties marked with a star.

Graham Street is a local, City of Greater Bendigo managed road which narrows to a single, meandering paved lane towards its highest point. The street has a pleasant amenity as a result of the well-established native street trees along the street. Proposal

The proposal involves firstly the demolition of dwelling, fences and outbuilding and secondly the construction of a new dwelling which is proposed to contain three bedrooms and a double attached garage.


PAGE 147

Figure 2: Photograph of existing dwelling. The dwelling will be constructed as single storey with all bedroom, living, kitchen and bathroom areas on one level. Owing to the fall of the site; stairs will lead down to the garage and its lower floor level, which is located behind the front wall of the proposed dwelling. The front setback of the proposed dwelling is between 2.9 and 3.05 metres at the closest point and the front wall of the garage 6.4 metres (existing dwelling setback is between 4.45 and 6.75 metres).


PAGE 148

Figure 3: Floor and site plan.


PAGE 149

Figure 4: Front (Graham Street) Elevation

In terms of side setbacks, on the eastern (high) side of the lot the setback ranges between 1.7m and 1.1m (existing is between 2.45 and 3.2 metres) and on the western (low) side of the garage wall will be constructed on the boundary (existing is generally 3.4 metres).

Figure 5: Side (Eastern) Elevation

Figure 6: Rear Elevation


PAGE 150

Figure 7: Side (Western) Elevation

Materials proposed are to be predominantly face brick with weatherboard to be used selectively on the front (southern) and side (western) elevations. The balustrade panel on the front façade is proposed to be rendered. The roof is proposed to be colourbond and the dominant roof form is hipped in shape, however the conventional and Dutch gable roof shapes are also employed. Overlooking into neighbouring property is to be avoided by the use of a screen at the edge of the rear decked area (19 Hamlet) and a screening device in front of the existing rear boundary


PAGE 151

The highest point of the proposed dwelling will be marginally higher than the highest point of the existing dwelling, with the difference being 0.336 metres. Likewise, the finished floor level of the proposed dwelling will be marginally higher than the existing floor level with the difference being 0.42 metres.

Figures 8-11: 3 dimensional perspectives


The site is within a Heritage Overlay which triggers the need for a permit to demolish the dwelling, outbuilding and fences. Also under the overlay, separate consent is required to construct a dwelling and fences. Under the General Residential Zone, no permit is required for demolition or to develop and use a single dwelling on the lot. The following clauses are relevant in the consideration of this proposal: State Planning Policy Framework:

Heritage (clause 15.03).


PAGE 152

Municipal Strategic Statement:

Municipal profile (clause 21.01). Key issues and influences (clause 21.02). Vision - strategic framework (clause 21.03). Strategic directions (clause 21.04). Settlement (clause 21.05). Housing (clause 21.06). Infrastructure (clause 21.09). Reference documents (clause 21.10). Monitoring and review (clause 21.11). Local Planning Policies:

Heritage Policy (clause 22.06). Zone:

General Residential Zone (clause 32.01). Overlay:

Heritage Overlay (clause 43.03). Other relevant provisions:

Decision guidelines (clause 65).



Referral Comment

Heritage Architect / Advisor No objection; the views of the Heritage Architect / Advisor are expanded upon later in this report.

Public Notification The application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers. As a result of advertising, 2 objections were received, with the grounds of objection being:

Demolition of dwelling being contrary to the purposes of the heritage overlay; particularly in the absence of a plan for a replacement dwelling;

The replacement dwelling is inappropriate with regard site coverage and the lack space provided around the dwelling;

The dwelling being a timber house can be restored;


PAGE 153

Concerns regarding the absence of key dimensions from the application plans regarding the proposed dwelling;

Concerns about a ‘canyon effect’ if the outdoor area was markedly higher than the existing floor level of the dwelling; and

ResCode concerns regarding overshadowing and overlooking.

The objections are discussed below.

Planning Assessment

National Trust Principle A long held principle in planning law is called the ‘National Trust’ principle which holds that a decision maker's discretion is confined to a consideration of those matters related directly to the permit trigger itself, which in this case is the Heritage Overlay. The Heritage Overlay is the only reason why a permit is required for demolition of the existing dwelling (and fences and outbuildings) and then construction of the new dwelling and fences. For Council to support the proposal, it must be satisfied that the separate planning merits of both the demolition of the existing dwelling and the construction of the new dwelling are appropriate. ResCode Although not a planning consideration in a Heritage Overlay, development in established areas often raise legitimate ResCode concerns and a number of issues were identified by objectors. Planning officers routinely conduct an assessment against ResCode as this can often avoid future delays to a proposal caused by amendments to plans required at the Building Approval stage. In this case, the main issues of ResCode concern identified both by officers and objectors relate to potential for overlooking and overshadowing. The applicant amended their plans to include details of overshadowing as well as showing detail of the physical screening devices to be used in order to comply with the important overlooking standards. In going through this process, the applicant was able to demonstrate compliance. A relevant issue which links to the heritage consideration of the dwelling relates to the building setback. ResCode states that a building should have a minimum setback of ‘the average distance of the setbacks of the front walls of existing buildings on the abutting allotments facing the front street’. As was outlined earlier in this report, the two adjoining buildings (which are outbuildings) are setback 0.343 metres and 0.517 metres respectively. The average of the two buildings is 0.43 metres; which would be the minimum complying front setback for a proposed building on the application site.


PAGE 154

The front setback of the dwelling is proposed to be greater than the minimum complying setback being between 2.9 and 3.05 metres. The standard deals with a ‘minimum’ setback as opposed to a maximum and the setback proposed, whilst not as great as the existing dwelling, is greater than the complying minimum and is appropriate in both a ResCode and Heritage sense. Having a greater front setback assists in minimising the impact of the height and bulk of the building, in particular the down slope, western elevation. Heritage Consideration - Demolition The Eaglehawk and Bendigo Heritage Study identified the site as being a ‘C’ graded dwelling indicating individual significance; however the control which applies is the broader Heritage Overlay precinct control.

Figure 10: Extent of Heritage Overlay Schedule 30 (Quarry Hill Street Precinct) & location of subject site.

It is also relevant to note nearby properties (being dwellings at 8, 10 and 14 Harkness Street) have individual, site specific Heritage Overlays being 595, 596 and 597 respectively.


PAGE 155

The adjoining dwellings do not have site specific Heritage Overlays, although all were graded by the Butler and Associates – Eaglehawk and Bendigo Heritage Study 1993. 15 Hamlet Street is C graded and 19 Hamlet Street is B graded. Both B and C grade mean those buildings are individually important. 17 Hamlet Street (constructed around the same time as the dwelling on the application site) is ‘D’ graded meaning it is contributory/representative of a building era. The dwellings fronting Hamlet Street are within a Level 2 Streetscape and Harkness Street is a Level 1 Streetscape which means both streets have a high degree of intactness and integrity. Graham Street, as noted previously, contrasts with both these streets by being ungraded. Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement relating to Heritage at clause 21.08 notes that:

Greater Bendigo has a large number of significant built heritage assets of local, state and national significance. There are buildings, sites and precincts dating from all decades of post-contact settlement since the 1850’s, following the discovery of gold, throughout the municipality. The total complex of buildings, infrastructure, urban spaces and natural resources represent the most significant asset and resource in central Victoria. Heritage is an important part of the economy of the municipality due to its role in attracting tourists, renovators and new residents who bring economic development initiatives and assets.

Linking to the Municipal Strategic Statement is the City’s current Local adopted Heritage Policy at clause 22.06 which includes statements of policy to:

Ensure that new land uses and developments are sympathetic with the appearance and character of heritage places; and

Retain heritage assets for the enjoyment and experience of residents, visitors and future generations of the municipality

The Heritage Overlay at clause 43.01 includes, amongst other matters the requirement to consider whether “the demolition, removal or external alteration will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place”. The Heritage Architect / Advisor's assessment of the dwelling to be demolished is that:

The condition of the building following the removal of the rubbish was worse than first thought, and there was considerable subsidence in the south corner (bedroom 1 on the submitted plans);

Considerable damage has been caused by the ingress of water through the attic roof;

The rubbish has also left continuing OH&S issues, and the applicant has stated “that the internal air is toxic”. There was still a noticeable odour in the house several months after the rubbish removal;

The structural repairs required, plus the internal replacement of virtually all wall and floor linings would leave little of the original fabric. The leaded glass window to the front elevation could be recycled; and

The condition of the house is beyond practical repair, and would necessitate replacement of the majority of original fabric. Demolition is supported.


PAGE 156

Another purpose of the Overlay (which formed the basis of objections that are directly relevant to the application) is the objective to ‘conserve and enhance those elements which contribute to the significance of heritage places’. A similar statement is found in s. 4 (1) (d) of the Act which further underscores the importance of the consideration of post-colonial heritage in the planning system. This purpose of the overlay and objectives of the Act should not be read so as to prohibit what is proposed; rather ensure that the issue of significance and impact is considered before a decision is made. Another objective of the Act relevant in this case is to ‘provide for the fair, orderly, economic and sustainable use and development of land’ [author emphasis]. In this case, the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of officers, that retention of the dwelling would be uneconomic and would also result in a retained building that was a reconstructed facsimile of the existing dwelling. The extent of work required to the dwelling would amount to a reconstruction of the dwelling not restoration and renovation. Heritage Consideration – Replacement Dwelling. Assessment of the merit of the proposed dwelling is guided by the Heritage Overlay and Clause 15.02 of the Planning Scheme. The Heritage Overlay has a purpose of whether "the location, bulk, form or appearance of the proposed building will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place”. The State policy includes an objective to ‘encourage appropriate development that respects places with identified heritage values and creates a worthy legacy for future generations’. As has been outlined earlier the heritage place applies over a very wide area (Heritage Overlay 30). Even within the immediate surrounds of this site, the context of Graham Street is quite different to Hamlet and Harkness Streets in terms of the setting of dwellings within their lots. The proposed dwelling does occupy a larger footprint than the dwelling which exists on the site. The dwelling complies with regulations regarding building setbacks and the length and height of the wall on boundary. In the case of Graham Street, many lots contain garages built at a zero setback either on Graham Street or in the case of the two adjoining property, side boundaries also. The dwelling has been assessed as being appropriate in the context of the site and its surrounds. With regard to policy, the replacement dwelling is considered as being appropriate and a worthy legacy for future generations. The dwelling is a conservative design response which is influenced by the interwar architectural style; which is the era of the dwelling currently on the site. Notable features of the dwelling include drawing upon existing elements in the area including the use of a complex and higher pitched roof and the selective use of traditional materials such as weatherboard and some render. Whilst the proposed dwelling reuses two existing leadlight windows from the existing dwelling, the proposed dwelling does not seek to replicate a fine grain of design detail or be a faux inter-war heritage dwelling and would be readily distinguishable as being a contemporary new dwelling, albeit one which takes inspiration from the inter-war style of the dwelling on the site.


PAGE 157

The proposed dwelling will not be highly visible from nearby significant streets nor will it impact or obscure any of the graded or individually significant dwellings adjoining and adjacent the application site. The demolition of the dwelling will not impact the significance of the heritage place, given its location on an ungraded street which serves a rear lane/service function for dwellings fronting significant streets. Other Objector Issues Some concern was expressed by objectors regarding the absence of key dimensions on the application plans. Following the consultation meeting, the applicant prepared an amended set of drawings to address this issue which have been provided to the objectors. The plans are drawn to scale, but now also note a greater number of ‘figured’ dimensions. The plans also note the floor level and level of the existing dwelling at the highest point of its roof in relation to what is proposed in order to assist understanding the impacts of the proposed dwelling. A further issue, relating to the issue with the plans was a concern that a ‘canyon effect’ may result if the proposed outdoor area was markedly higher than the existing floor level of the dwelling. The floor level of the rear outdoor area is higher than the existing floor level. The difference is 0.42 metres. The difference in level means that a screening device to meet ResCode has been required. Screening for 19 Hamlet Street is to be affixed to the edge of the outdoor area and for 17 Hamlet Street inside the yard to screen to the required level above the existing fence.

Conclusion

The proposed demolition and new dwelling have been assessed as being appropriate with regard to the more general control, heritage precinct control on the site. This report recommends that the Greater Bendigo City Council resolves to issue a notice of decision to grant a permit subject to conditions.

Options


Attachments

Applicant written submission regarding demolition; and

Objections.

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for the Demolition of dwelling, outbuilding and fences and construction of dwelling and fences at 6 Graham Street, QUARRY HILL 3550 subject to the following conditions:


PAGE 158

1. NO LAYOUT ALTERATION The dwelling, outbuilding and fence demolition and construction of dwelling and fences permitted by this permit as shown on the endorsed plans (prepared by Plans for People sheets TP01-17 (inclusive) dated 25 February 2014) must not be altered or modified (for any reason) except with the prior written consent of the responsible authority.

2. SCHEDULE OF MATERIALS Prior to the commencement of development a schedule of the proposed materials and colours to be used for the building, including samples, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the responsible authority.

3. GENERAL DRAINAGE – DWELLING The development must be drained to the satisfaction of the City of Greater Bendigo as the responsible drainage authority.

4. VEHICLE CROSSING Vehicular access to the subject land from Graham Street must be by way of a vehicle crossing constructed at right angles to the road, to suit the proposed driveway(s) and vehicles that will use the crossing. A Works within Road Reserves permit must be obtained from the City of Greater Bendigo Asset Planning & Design Unit prior to any work commencing in the road reserve.

5. PAVING OF CROSSOVERS AND DRIVEWAYS Before the development starts, the materials and detailed design of all crossovers and driveways must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. The development of the crossovers and driveways must then accord with the approved materials and design.


Note: This development has been assessed and approved under the Planning Scheme provisions of the Heritage Overlay only. This approval does not indicate that all the requirements of Part 4 of the Building Regulations 2006 have been satisfied.


PAGE 159

2.10 6 AND 7 GORDON COURT, STRATHFIELDSAYE - SUBDIVISION OF THE LAND INTO 4 LOTS


Author Stephen Wainwright, Coordinator Subdivisions Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development Director

Summary/Purpose

Application details: It is proposed to subdivide two vacant land parcels situated at the end of an existing cul-de-sac into 4 residential lots

Application No: DS/226/2013

Applicant: Strath Loddon Park Pty Ltd

Land: 6 and 7 Gordon Court, STRATHFIELDSAYE


Overlays: Land Subject to Inundation Overlay



Nil

Key considerations: Neighbourhood character

Flooding

Traffic

Aboriginal cultural heritage

Conclusion: Gordon Court is a short cul-de-sac situated within the Basset Drive estate in Strathfieldsaye. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the character and appearance of Gordon Court and won’t cause any traffic problems. The flood prone nature of the site has been addressed by the proposed subdivision. Overall the plan meets the requirements of the Planning Scheme and it is recommended that a permit be granted.

Policy Context


Planning for Growth



PAGE 160

Productivity


Report


The subject site is located at the east end of an existing cul-de-sac named Gordon Court which was created as part of the Bassett Drive estate in the suburb of Strathfieldsaye. The site consists of two vacant land parcels which have a combined frontage to Gordon Court of 22m. Overall the site area is 3,733m2. There is a 2m wide drainage easement along the rear boundary of the site. The site is about 150m west of Emu Creek. There is a 4m wide walkway along the south side of the site that allows pedestrian access to the creek. The intervening land between the site and the creek is occupied by two large properties that address nearby Clydebank Court. There are 12 residential properties in Gordon Court. Over half of the properties have been built upon and all the developed lots contain single detached houses.

Figure 1: A locality plan. The objectors’ properties are marked with a star


PAGE 161

Figure 2: The view east towards the end of Gordon Court with the subject site in the background

Figure 3: Aerial photograph of the site and its surrounds

Proposal

The proposal is to subdivide the site into 4 residential lots. The lots will range in size between 593m2 and 1,526m2. The lots will be fully serviced. Gordon Court will be extended by 10m and the geometry of the existing court bowl will be altered in order to provide access to the lots. Since part of the site is flood prone it is expected that Lot 1 will be filled to raise the existing ground level about the flood level.


PAGE 162

Figure 4: The proposed subdivision


The site is in the General Residential Zone and is partly covered by the Land Subject to Inundation Overlay. A permit is required under the zone and overlay provisions to subdivide the site. The following clauses in the planning scheme are relevant to the permit application. State Planning Policy Framework Regional development (clause 11.05). Floodplains (clause 13.02). Urban environment (clause 15.01). Sustainable development (clause 15.02). Residential development (clause 16.01). Development infrastructure (clause 19.03). Municipal Strategic Statement Municipal profile (clause 21.01). Key issues and influences (clause 21.02). Vision - strategic framework (clause 21.03).


PAGE 163

Strategic directions (clause 21.04). Settlement (clause 21.05). Housing (clause 21.06). Reference documents (clause 21.10). Local Planning Policies Salinity and erosion risk policy (clause 22.04). Other Provisions General Residential Zone (clause 32.08). Land Subject to Inundation Overlay (clause 44.04) Residential subdivision (clause 56). Decision guidelines (clause 65). Referral and notice provisions (clause 66).



Referral Comment

Coliban Water No objection subject to conditions

Powercor No objection subject to conditions

Tenix No objection subject to conditions

North Central CMA No objection subject to conditions

Drainage engineer (internal) No objection subject to conditions

Traffic engineer (internal) No objection

Public Notification The application was advertised to the public by mail and an on-site notice. Two objections to the application were received. The objections focus on issues of neighbourhood character, traffic impacts and Aboriginal cultural heritage. These issues are discussed later in this report.

Planning Assessment

Is the subdivision in keeping with the neighbourhood character? The developer has made significant changes to the proposed subdivision over the course of the permit application. The permit application was originally for a 5 lot subdivision and the lots were to gain access using the existing court bowl geometry. This would have resulted in unsightly vehicle crossovers dominating the end of the street.


PAGE 164

The current proposal effectively creates two additional lots from the existing two parcels of land that comprise the subject site. So instead of potentially being two houses constructed at the end of the court with lot sizes at least 1,700m2 the proposed subdivision envisages four new dwellings on lots down to around 600m2. The average lot size in the Gordon Court is around 700m2 which is much smaller than the respective size of the two lots that comprise the subject site. The reason why the lots forming the subject site were created so large is unclear but it’s likely to be because of the flood prone nature of the land. These lots are closer to Emu Creek than any other part of Gordon Court. The Strathfieldsaye Township Plan places the site within Precinct 10 of the township where residential development at a mix of densities is encouraged. The preferred development density within Precinct 10 is defined in the Plan as being between 300m2 and 1,200m2 which is a very broad density range. The proposed subdivision falls somewhat in the middle of this density range, although as a point of fact, proposed Lot 4 will be 1,500m2, which is greater than the 1,200m2 upper range set by the Plan. One of the objectors opposes the subdivision plan on neighbourhood character grounds. Their concern appears to be centred not on the proposed development density as such but rather on the streetscape that will result from the creation of four vehicle crossovers to the site. The proposal is described as creating a “giant concrete facade at street level” and is criticised for not addressing “safe and inviting neighbourhood outcomes for the area” The objector draws attention to clause 56.06-8 in the Planning Scheme which is concerned with ensuring subdivisions provide safe vehicle access between roads and lots. The design standards in the clause require lots with a frontage of 7.5m or less to be “rear loaded” meaning that small, narrow lots should be designed to gain access from a rear lane so that lot frontages are not dominated by garages and accessways. The extent of vehicle crossovers required to service the lots is indeed an important streetscape consideration. However, it is the view of this planning officer that the creation of four new crossovers won’t be detrimental to the character and appearance of Gordon Court. Lots 1 and 4 will essentially have their crossover locations fixed by the narrowness of their respective frontages but there will be flexibility on where to locate the crossovers for Lots 2 and 3. This will ensure that there is some separation between crossovers and the intervening space can be maintained as a grass medium and footpath similar to the existing conditions. Lots 2 and 3 will also largely terminate the vista at the end of Gordon Court while Lots 1 and 4, being somewhat “off to each side” of the Gordon Court axis will be partially concealed from many vantage points in the street. In this context only two of the future houses facilitated by the subdivision will be obvious when looking down Gordon Court.


PAGE 165

In relation to the objector’s point about clause 56.06-8 this planning officer believes that a rear loaded subdivision layout is not warranted. For a start only one of the four lots has a frontage less than 7.5m. But more importantly, clause 56.06-8 is really only relevant where a “row” of small lots is proposed with the same orientation and of similar proportions. This typology lends itself to a built form outcome where there is little or no separation between dwellings, hence the desirability of rear vehicular access. In contrast the plan submitted for approval shows relatively large lots in a non-linear arrangement with scope for ample spacing between dwellings. Does the subdivision address the flood prone nature of the site? The proximity of the site to Emu Creek means that the site is prone to inundation in times of flood. A large part of the site is covered by the Land Subject to Inundation Overlay for this reason. The estimated flood level for the “1 in 100 year flood” is 202.8m AHD for each lot. The flood line is shown in red in the figure below. As can be seen the flood conditions will have the greatest practical consequence for Lot 1 since a large proportion of this lot will sit below the flood level. Only the very rear parts of Lots 2, 3 and 4 are below the flood line.

Figure 5: The estimated flood line at 202.8m AHD.


PAGE 166

The North Central Catchment Management Authority is the relevant flood authority in this instance. The CMA does not object to the proposed subdivision provided that the finished floor level of any dwelling constructed on a lot is 300mm above the flood level. It is expected that Lot 1 will be filled in part to raise the natural ground level above the flood level. This would necessitate fill to a depth of about 600mm. House pads for the remaining three lots will be situated in areas already above the flood level. It is clear then that the flood conditions of the site can be overcome by elevating the floor level of future dwellings and through a moderate degree filling on Lot 1. These construction techniques can be implemented without having a detrimental impact on the streetscape or the amenity of the area. The elevated design of the future houses will not be readily perceptible from a streetscape perspective and any level differences between Lot 1 and the neighbouring property to the west will be mitigated by the intervening walkway between these two properties. One objector argues that elevating the ground level of Lot 1 will compromise the adjoining walkway in terms of its passive surveillance. This planning officer doesn’t share this view. It is reasonable to believe that the walkway will still be visible from Lot 1 even after the lot has been filled. Indeed the walkway will probably be more visible than before. In addition a dwelling constructed on Lot 1 is likely to have windows facing towards the walkway. It should also be noted that there is a clear line of sight along the length of the walkway and the walkway can be seen from the existing residence that abuts it. Can the surrounding street network cater for the subdivision? Gordon Court is a local street featuring a 7m wide road pavement within a 16m wide road reserve. The street provides direct access for 12 lots and generates relatively modest traffic volumes. Gordon Street connects to Bassett Drive which in turn provides access to Wellington Street, the main street of Strathfieldsaye. Gordon Street and Bassett Drive have ample capacity to deal with the traffic generated by the proposed two additional lots. The low speed environment of Gordon Court will not change as a result of the subdivision and the level of amenity enjoyed by residents in the street will remain the same. The court bowl at the end of Gordon Court will be reconfigured to ensure there is a safe and convenient point of access for the new lots created by the subdivision. Is a Cultural Heritage Management Plan required? The site is within 200m of Emu Creek and thus is defined as an area of Aboriginal cultural heritage sensitivity. The developer believes that the subdivision does not trigger the need for a Cultural Heritage Management Plan because the site has been significantly disturbed over a long period of time. This conclusion accords with the City of Greater Bendigo Cultural Heritage Study which is a reference document in the Planning Scheme.


PAGE 167

Conclusion

The proposed subdivision complies with the requirements of the Planning Scheme for the reasons discussed above. On this basis a permit should be granted for the proposal.

Options

Council, acting as the responsible authority for administering the Planning Scheme may resolve to: grant a permit, grant a permit subject to conditions, or refuse to grant a permit.

Attachments

Objections.

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolves to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit which allows for the subdivision of the land at 6 and 7 Gordon Court Strathfieldsaye into 4 lots subject to the following conditions: 1. PLAN TO BE ENDORSED

The plan to be endorsed and which will then form part of the permit is the Revision F plan submitted with the application.

2. PLAN MUST NOT BE ALTERED The layout of the subdivision as shown on the endorsed plan must not be altered without the written consent of the responsible authority.

3. DETAILED DRAINAGE Before a plan of subdivision is certified for the approved subdivision detailed drainage plans to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and then will form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and must include (a) direction of stormwater runoff (b) a point of discharge for each lot (c) independent drainage for each lot

4. STORMWATER DETENTION Before a statement of compliance is issued for the subdivision the developer must provide onsite surface and stormwater detention to pre-development levels in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Allowable discharge: Q5 = 83 l/s per hectare.


PAGE 168

5. STORMWATER QUALITY Before the subdivision starts the developer must provide a stormwater treatment system to achieve the Best Practice Environmental Guidelines storm water quality (Victoria Stormwater Committee 1999) in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

6. CONSTRUCTION OF WORKS Road works, drainage and other civil works must be constructed in accordance with the Infrastructure Design Manual and plans and specifications approved by the responsible authority and must include (a) fully sealed pavement (b) drainage as required (c) underground conduits for water, gas, electricity and telephone (d) appropriate intersection and traffication measures (e) appropriate street lighting

7. PUBLIC ASSETS Before the development starts, the owner or developer must submit to the responsible authority a written report and photos of any prior damage to public infrastructure. Listed in the report must be the condition of kerb and channel, footpath, seal, street lights, signs and other public infrastructure fronting the property and abutting at least two properties either side of the development. Unless identified with the written report, any damage to infrastructure post construction will be attributed to the development. The owner or developer of the subject land must pay for any damage caused to any public infrastructure caused as a result of the development or use permitted by this permit.

8. COLIBAN WATER (a) The owner is required to provide reticulated water and sewerage services to

each of the lots within the subdivision. Services are to be provided in accordance with Coliban Water’s specifications.

(b) All Coliban Water assets within the subdivision, both existing and proposed, are to be protected by an easement in favour of Coliban Region Water Corporation.

9. POWERCOR

(a) The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act 1988 shall be referred to Powercor Australia Ltd in accordance with Section 8 of that Act.

(b) The applicant shall: Provide an electricity supply to all lots in the subdivision in accordance with Powercor’s requirements and standards, including the extension, augmentation or re-arrangement of any existing electricity supply system, as required by Powercor (A payment to cover the cost of such work will be required). In the event that a supply is not provided the applicant shall provide a written undertaking to Powercor Australia Ltd that prospective purchasers will be so informed.

(c) The applicant shall: Where buildings or other installations exist on the land to be subdivided and are connected to the electricity supply, they shall be brought into compliance with the Service and Installation Rules issued by the Victorian Electricity Supply Industry. The applicant shall arrange compliance through a Registered Electrical Contractor.


PAGE 169

(d) The applicant shall: Provide to Powercor Australia Ltd, a copy of the version of the plan of subdivision submitted for certification, which shows any amendments which have been required.

(e) Any buildings must comply with the clearances required by the Electricity Safety (Network Assets) Regulations.

(f) Any construction work must comply with the Officer of the Chief Electrical Inspector No Go Zone rules.

10. TENIX

The plan of subdivision submitted for certification must be referred to SP AusNet (Gas) in accordance with Section 8 of the Subdivision Act 1988.

11. TELECOMMUNICATIONS (a) The owner of the land must enter into an agreement with

• a telecommunications network or service provider for the provision of telecommunication services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time

• a suitably qualified person for the provision of fibre ready telecommunication facilities to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.

(b) Before the issue of a statement of compliance for any stage of the subdivision under the Subdivision Act 1988, the owner of the land must provide written confirmation from • a telecommunications network or service provider that all lots are connected to

or are ready for connection to telecommunications services in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time

• a suitably qualified person that fibre ready telecommunication facilities have been provided in accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.

12. NORTH CENTRAL CMA

The finished floor level of the proposed dwellings must be constructed a minimum of 300mm above the 1% AEP flood level.

13. EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT This permit will expire if (a) the plan of subdivision is not certified within 2 years from the date of this permit

or (b) the subdivision is not completed within 5 years from the date of certification of

the plan of subdivision. The responsible authority may extend the time for certification of the plan if a request is made in writing before the permit expires or within six months afterwards.


PAGE 170

2.11 22 BUTTON STREET, STRATHDALE 3550 - TWO LOT SUBDIVISION


Author Liz Commadeur, Subdivision Planner Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development Director

Summary/Purpose

Application details: The applicant seeks approval to subdivide land into two residential lots.

Application No: DS/725/2013

Applicant: CBA Building Designers

Land: 22 Button Street, STRATHDALE 3550


Overlays: There are no overlays



27 February 2014

Key considerations: Neighbourhood character issues

Amenity issues

Conclusion: This report assesses the merits of the proposed subdivision and discusses the issues raised by the objectors. The subdivision meets the requirements of the Planning Scheme and a permit should be granted.

Policy Context


Planning for Growth


Productivity



PAGE 171

Report


The subject site is located in Button Street, Strathdale. The site is generally rectangular in shape with an area of 1,699 square metres. A brick veneer dwelling is located towards the middle of the site, a large shed is located in the south western corner and a stone cottage is located in the north west corner. The stone cottage is used for storage purposes. A stone retaining wall crosses the southern part of the site in an east-west direction. The abutting properties are all developed with a dwelling and associated outbuildings, with the exception of a park, which abuts the south west corner. The land significantly slopes towards the west of the site. Services, including reticulated water and sewerage, power, gas and telecommunications are currently connected to the site. Button Street is part of an established residential area of Strathdale. The sizes of the lots in Button Street generally range between 600 and 1,600 square metres. The widths of the frontages along Button Street range between 18 and 45 metres. Gardens tend to be medium in size. Button Street is a sealed road with kerb and channel.

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site. Objector’s property is marked with a star.

Proposal

The applicant seeks approval to subdivide the site into two residential lots.

Lot 1 will have an area of 1,155 square metres and contain the existing dwelling.

Lot 2 will have an area of 544 square metres.

Access to both lots will be gained from Button Street.

A 1.83 metre wide drainage easement will run along the rear of the proposed lots.


PAGE 172

Figure 2: Proposed plan of subdivision.


The site is in the General Residential Zone (GRZ). A permit is required to subdivide land. The following provisions of the City of Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme are relevant to the application: State Planning Policy Framework:

Regional development (clause 11.05).

Urban environment (clause 15.01).

Sustainable development (clause 15.02).

Integrated transport (clause 18.01).

Movement networks (clause 18.02). Municipal Strategic Statement:

Municipal profile (clause 21.01).

Key issues and influences (clause 21.02).

Vision - strategic framework (clause 21.03).

Strategic directions (clause 21.04).

Settlement (clause 21.05).

Housing (clause 21.06).

Environment (clause 21.08).


PAGE 173

Infrastructure (clause 21.09).

Reference documents (clause 21.10). Local Planning Policies:

Salinity and erosion risk policy (clause 22.04).

Strathdale/Kennington residential character policy (clause 22.24) Other relevant provisions:

Residential subdivision (clause 56)

Decision guidelines (clause 65).

Referral and notice provisions (clause 66).



Referral Comment

Drainage No objection subject to conditions.

Public Notification The application was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers. As a result of advertising, one objection was received, with the grounds of objection being:

Proposed subdivision will compromise the existing neighbourhood character.

Future development on Lot 2 will cause amenity issues for abutting neighbours.

Devaluation of their property. The objections are discussed below.

Planning Assessment

Neighbourhood Character The site is located within Precinct 8 of the Strathdale/Kennington residential character policy (SK8) The precinct is described as: “This precinct, developed mostly from the 1960s to the 1980s, is one in which the horizontal emphasis of dwelling form is important, resulting from the long, low elevations of the buildings in relation to their height. Brick and tile is the predominant building material. Most have similar, modest front and side setbacks, creating a more intimate street feel, combined with an absence of front fencing in most instances”.


PAGE 174

The objectors are concerned that any future construction of a dwelling on Lot 2 will not respect the existing character of Button Street and therefore not be in keeping with the purpose of Precinct 8 of the Strathdale/Kennington residential character policy. Having regard to the site description and design response, it is considered that the proposed subdivision is in keeping with the character of the area for the following reasons:

The proposed lots sizes of 1,155 and 544 square metres are generally in accordance with the lots in the area. Most of the lots in the northern part of the street have an area of 600 – 800 square metres. There are units on smaller lots located closer to the McIvor Highway.

The width of Lot 2 is 21 metres which is comparable with most lots in the street. The shape and size of Lot 2 lends itself to further development due to the width of Lot 2 providing reasonable frontage to Button Street and the generous depth of the lot allowing flexibility in how a dwelling is setback from the street.

One shed already exists on the proposed Lot 2, so the streetscape already “accepts” a building of some form on this part of the land. There is potential for the owner of Lot 2 to construct a dwelling and establish a garden which will respect the existing streetscape in the future.

The objectors argue that dwelling plans, with particular reference to building materials should have been submitted with the application. In response, the applicant was not required to submit dwelling plans with this application as the area of the proposed lots is greater than 300 square metres, which is in accordance with the Planning Scheme. A planning permit is not required for a dwelling in a General Residential zone without overlays, if the land is greater than 300 square metres. Overall, the two lot subdivision proposed will respect the objectives of the Strathdale/Kennington residential character policy and won’t detract from the character of the existing streetscape. Amenity The objector is concerned that the future construction of a dwelling on Lot 2, in particular, a double storey dwelling will impact on the privacy and amenity of their property. In response, firstly there would be no overlooking into the bedroom or living areas due to the position of the garage at the eastern end of the objector’s dwelling. The land slopes towards the rear of the site, which ensures that overlooking towards this property from Lot 2 would be minimal. Secondly, any dwelling constructed on Lot 2 will likely be located towards the front of the site and any overlooking into the objector's front yard would be curtailed by the foliage of trees along the common boundary. With regard to the concern of the reduction in natural sunlight, there is potential for some minor overshadowing of the front yard of the objector’s property in the late morning to early afternoon. However, additional overshadowing would be minimal due to the existence of the trees along the common boundary.


PAGE 175

Clause 56 Report The application has been assessed as satisfactorily addressing the objectives and standards of ResCode as contained in Clause 56 of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme. In particular it is noted that:

The lots will be fully serviced.

Access is available to both lots.

Lot 2 is able to accommodate a building envelope of 10 metres by 15 metres.

The site is close to services and community facilities, including a supermarket. Devaluation of Property The objector is also concerned that the proposed subdivision will cause devaluation of their own property. There is established case law which holds that a proposed decrease in property is an irrelevant consideration. A long standing position held by VCAT is that other than in exceptional cases, and where evidence can be presented, loss in property values will not be entertained as a ground of objection.

Conclusion

For the reasons above, it is considered that the proposed subdivision does comply with the Planning Scheme and a permit should be granted.

Options


Attachments

Objection

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for a two lot subdivision at 22 Button Street, STRATHDALE 3550 subject to the following conditions: 1. PLANS TO BE ENDORSED

The plans to be endorsed and which will then form part of the permit are the plans submitted with the application.

2. LAYOUT PLANS The subdivision, as shown on the endorsed plans, must not be altered without the prior written consent of the responsible authority.


PAGE 176

3. PROVISION OF SERVICES The owner of the land must enter into agreements with the relevant authorities for the provision of water supply, drainage, sewerage facilities, electricity and gas services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the authorities’ requirements and relevant legislation at the time.

4. EASEMENTS All existing and proposed easements and sites for existing and required utility services and roads must be set aside in favour of the relevant authority for which the easement or site is to be created on the plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act 1988.

5. REFERRAL OF PLAN The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act 1988 must be referred to the relevant authority in accordance with section 8 of that Act.

6. DETAILED DRAINAGE Prior to the certification of the plan of subdivision under the Subdivision Act 1988, plans to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and then will form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions. The plans must include: (a) Direction of stormwater run-off. (b) A point of discharge for each lot. (c) Independent drainage for each lot. (d) Drainage easements over any private property for outfall drainage.

7. STORMWATER DETENTION Prior to the issue of a statement of compliance, the owner or applicant must provide onsite surface and stormwater detention to pre-development levels in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Allowable Discharge: Q10 = 16 l/s

8. STORMWATER QUALITY Before the use or development is commenced, the owner or applicant must provide a stormwater treatment system to achieve the Best Practice Environmental Guidelines storm water quality (Victoria Stormwater Committee 1999) in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

9. DRAINAGE WORKS Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance for the subdivision, drainage works must be constructed in accordance with plans approved by the responsible authority.


PAGE 177

10. SECTION 173 AGREEMENT Prior to the issue of statement of compliance, the applicant/owner must enter into an agreement under section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Such agreement must covenant that: (a) The system shall be designed by a qualified engineer and must be

approved by the responsible authority prior to construction. (b) Each system must be constructed either prior to, or currently with, the

construction of any building on the specified lots. (c) The system must be completed prior to connection to the responsible

authority’s drainage system. (d) The owner will maintain each system and not modify without prior written

approval from the responsible authority. (e) The owner shall allow duly authorised officers of the responsible

authority to inspect the system at mutually agreed times. (f) The owner will pay for all costs associated with the construction and

maintenance of the system.

11. PUBLIC ASSETS Before the development starts, the owner or developer must submit to the responsible authority a written report and photos of any prior damage to public infrastructure. Listed in the report must be the condition of kerb and channel, footpath, seal, street lights, signs and other public infrastructure fronting the property and abutting at least two properties either side of the development. Unless identified with the written report, any damage to infrastructure post construction will be attributed to the development. The owner or developer of the subject land must pay for any damage caused to any public infrastructure caused as a result of the development or use permitted by this permit.

12. REMOVAL OF OUTBUILDINGS Prior to the issue of a statement of compliance, the outbuildings on Lot 2 must be removed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.


A telecommunications network or service provider for the provision of telecommunication services to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time.

A suitably qualified person for the provision of fibre ready telecommunication facilities to each lot shown on the endorsed plan in accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.

(b) Before the issue of a Statement of Compliance for any stage of the

subdivision under the Subdivision Act 1988, the owner of the land must provide written confirmation from:


PAGE 178

A telecommunications network or service provider that all lots are connected to or are ready for connection to telecommunications services in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time.

A suitably qualified person that fibre ready telecommunication facilities have been provided in accordance with any industry specifications or any standards set by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the land is in an area where the National Broadband Network will not be provided by optical fibre.

14. EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT

The permit will expire if: (a) The plan of subdivision is not certified within two years from the date of

this permit; or (b) The subdivision is not completed within five years from the date of

certification of the plan of subdivision. The responsible authority may extend the time for certification of the plan if a request is made in writing before the permit expires or within six months afterwards.

NOTE: CONSENT FOR WORK ON ROAD RESERVES The applicant must comply with: (a) The Road Management Act 2004. (b) Road Management (Works and Infrastructure) Regulations 2005. (c) Road Management (General) Regulations 2005. with respect to any requirements to notify the coordinating authority and/or seek consent from the coordinating authority to undertake “works” (as defined in the Act) in, over or under the road reserve. The responsible authority in the inclusion of this condition on this planning permit is not deemed to have been notified of, or to have given consent to undertake any works within the road reserve as proposed in this permit.

Liveability - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 16 April 2014

PAGE 179

3. LIVEABILITY

3.1 HOSPITAL PRECINCT STRUCTURE PLAN - PROGRESS UPDATE


Author Mark Stubbs, Senior Strategic Planner Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning and Development Director

Summary/Purpose

To outline the Draft Hospital Precinct Structure Plan and seek Council endorsement for public display.

Policy Context

Council Plan Reference: Built and Natural Environment:

Strategy 1.6: Complete and progress local structure plans and development strategies to manage growth.

Action 1.6.3: Preparation of a Structure Plan for the Hospital Precinct. www.bendigo.vic.gov.au/hospitalprecinct


The current development of the new Bendigo Hospital is a once-in-a-generation public healthcare investment into our City and is anticipated to strongly influence on the city’s people, economy and physical fabric in the decades to come. To position the City well in response, the City of Greater Bendigo is taking various initiatives. The preparation of a long-term, high-level strategic plan for the Precinct surrounding the Hospital Campus – the Hospital Precinct Structure Plan (HPSP) – is one of these initiatives. The purpose of the Structure Plan is to provide a high-level strategy and vision for Hospital Precinct, focussing on various aspects of its physical environment – land use, building forms, public spaces, transportation and infrastructure. The time horizon considered by the Structure Plan is approximately one generation (25-30 years). The Structure Plan will be a guide for decision-making by Council and will provide improved certainty for businesses, investors and the community.


PAGE 180

At the time of the last report to Council in October 2013, a Draft Concept Structure Plan (Draft CSP) was presented and then endorsed to be placed on informal public display. Over the four-week display period, which concluded at the end of November, officers were approached by over thirty residents, landowners and other stakeholders to discuss the Draft CSP. Several written responses were also received, including from agencies such as Bendigo Health and VicRoads. Since December, the preparation of a Draft Hospital Precinct Structure Plan (Draft Structure Plan) has been carried out by officers, taking into account the public display feedback. The Draft Structure Plan is now presented to Council for information and endorsement to be taken through a formal public display process and continued stakeholder engagement. Previous Council Decision(s) Date(s): A first report to Council on the Hospital Precinct Structure Plan was provided in April 2013, at the time of preparation of the Stage 2 Technical Analysis. A further progress update was given in October 2013 following the completion of the Stage 3 Draft Concept Structure Plan. Priority/Importance: High – Preparation of a Structure Plan for the Hospital Precinct is a current project commitment of the City of Greater Bendigo for the 2013/14 financial year.

Report

Summary of the Draft Plan Encompassing about 165 hectares, the area to the Structure Plan is small, especially when contrasted with other recent strategic planning projects such as the Maiden Gully Precinct Structure Plan (around 700 hectares). The focus on a small-scale precinct has allowed considerably more detail to be explored than would otherwise be covered in a more conventional Structure Plan. Five main objectives have been set for the Hospital Precinct and are expressed also as concepts to underpin the Plan:

Establish a park-like setting for the Hospital;

Extend the City Centre;

Define a compact Health Precinct;

Create high-quality public boulevards;

Improve and diversify mobility and access. The Draft Structure Plan is organised into three themes which are consistent with the preceding Concept Structure Plan prepared in Stage 3 – Development, Access & Movement, and Public Spaces. Within each theme, a series of strategic directions are provided which collectively provide the planning strategy for the Hospital Precinct. There are 24 strategic directions in total.


PAGE 181

Chapter 3 of the Structure Plan addresses its implementation over a 25 year period. The actions in the Implementation Schedule will be progressively carried out by the City of Greater Bendigo, with the involvement of other agencies and landowners, as indicated. Some sense of prioritisation and sequencing is given by the allocation of a completion timeframe for each action. The details of the implementation schedule are preliminary and will be refined as part of stakeholder engagement during the public display. The Implementation chapter also includes a section on Planning Controls, identifying areas where the zoning is proposed to change and where new Overlays are proposed to be introduced, to achieve the objectives and strategic directions of the Draft Structure Plan. The extent of zone and overlay changes is relatively modest, however several more significant changes are noted as follows: Bridge Street area: Predominantly Commercial 2 Zone and Residential 1 Zone existing. Proposed to be replaced with a Commercial 1 Zone and Neighbourhood Growth Zone. Parking management: A Parking Overlay is proposed to be applied to areas where medical uses are encouraged and to proposed commercial areas such as part of Bridge Street (a Parking Overlay already applies to most of this area), the Barnard Street Commercial Hub and the Arnold Street Hospital Hub. Plan Elements to Highlight Whilst all aspects of the Draft Plan support its broader objectives, some elements are highlighted in the following section because of their significance, complexity and or implications for the City of Greater Bendigo and other parties. Bridge Street The vision for the transformation of Bridge Street into a contemporary main street destination and extension of Bendigo’s City Centre is the most significant objective of the Draft Structure Plan and will require major changes over time. A complex aspect of this change entails the proposed reconfiguration of the street to provide an optimal environment for pedestrians, cycling and businesses by providing two (instead of the current four) vehicle traffic lanes. The Draft Structure Plan also recommends that the public realm of Bridge Street is re-built and that consideration is given to the street reverting to Local Government control. This would create additional capital works and maintenance responsibilities, however would provide greater flexibility to shape the street according to the vision. A separate, detailed process will be required to progress this proposal, which includes further investigations and coordination as part of the Integrated Transport and Land Use Strategy. Private Property Impacts There will be various impacts on private landowners due to the Draft Structure Plan. There are two known instances where acquisition of private property is likely to be required (though will be subject to a separate future process). The first is a residential property (currently Commercial 2 Zone) located at the corner of Baxter and Joseph Street. This property is proposed to be incorporated into a new pocket park on the Bendigo Creek trail, just behind Bridge Street.


PAGE 182

The second is a residential property (currently General Residential Zone) located at the corner of Arnold and Stewart Streets. Part of this property may have to be acquired to create a proposed signalisation of the intersection. It is noted that this property is part of a small area proposed to be rezoned to a Commercial 1 Zone by the Draft Structure Plan. Timelines: The project was organised according to a five-stage program over a period of about twelve months, commencing in February 2013. Stages 1 to 4 have been completed and the endorsement by Council of the Draft HPSP will allow commencement of the final Stage 5, which entails a one-month public display period and subsequent review and Council reporting. Several cumulative delays during Stages 3 and 4 have required the timeline for completion to be extended by about four months to July 2014. The following table shows the original target milestones and actual achieved dates.

Stage Description Target Date Actual Date

1 Inception March 2013 March 2013

2 Technical Studies & Synthesis June 2013 June 2013

3 Vision & Conceptual Structure Plan September 2013 October 2013

4 Draft Structure Plan December 2013 March 2014

5 Public Display & Structure Plan Finalisation

April 2014 July 2014


The project Steering Group and Reference Group have reviewed the Draft Structure Plan and provided comment. Overall a broad level of support was received; however there are some issues that require further discussion and resolution prior to public display. In particular, concerns have been raised by Bendigo Health about information shown in the Draft Structure Plan which applies to, or otherwise affects, the Hospital Campus. More details of community consultation to date are provided in Appendix 1.


The resourcing of the Structure Plan process and documentation was provided through a joint CoGB-Consultant collaboration. A Consultant team, led by Hansen Partnership, provided substantial and specialist resources for Stages 2 and 3, including technical assessments and the preparation of the Concept Structure Plan. The City of Greater Bendigo has maintained a consistent dedicated team of two for the duration of the project, and which has fully resourced the work of Stages 4 and 5, including preparation of the Draft Structure Plan.


PAGE 183

A total of $250,000 was allocated for the completion of Structure Plan, inclusive of contributions of $100,000 from Bendigo Health and $50,000 from Regional Development Victoria. The $100,000 allocation from the City of Greater Bendigo over two financial years has employed a full-time specialist staff position to assist in the delivery of the project.

All funds have been expended, with the exception of internal resources to finalise the Structure Plan, undertake internal and external coordination and to run community engagement activities.

Conclusion

The Draft Hospital Precinct Structure Plan provides a generational strategic plan for Bendigo’s Hospital Precinct in response to the development of the new Bendigo Hospital. The Draft Structure Plan represents an evolution of the previous Concept Structure Plan and has been prepared following an ongoing process of engagement with agencies, landowners and other stakeholders. A public display period is now proposed to provide the opportunity for public review of the Draft Structure Plan and further refinement prior to adoption by Council.

Attachments

Draft Hospital Precinct Structure Plan - March 2014 - attached separately.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolves to endorse the Draft Hospital Precinct Structure Plan to be placed on public display for a period of at least four weeks to seek community comment.


PAGE 184

Appendix 1 Summary and sequence of major project activities

Activity Purpose Participation Date

Project planning and Project Brief preparation

CoGB staff Oct-Nov

Preliminary Steering Group Meeting

Project introduction and overview.

Agencies, Non-Government Organisations (NGOs) and CoGB staff

8 Nov

Recruitment of Strategic Design Planner to CoGB

Provide additional staff resources to deliver the project.

CoGB staff Oct-Nov

Technical Project Brief preparation

Develop scope of work for consultancy services.

CoGB staff 26 Nov-14 Dec

Public Tender and Interviews

For procurement of best-value specialist consultancy services.

Evaluation panel (internal +plus external) and tenderers

17 Dec-19 Feb

Stage 1 Inception

Inception Meeting Confirm understanding of the objectives and scope of the project.

Project Team 7 Mar

Steering Group Meeting 1

Project introduction. Agencies, NGOs and CoGB staff

7 Mar

Stage 2 Technical Analysis

Background research and engagement

Broad liaison and field investigations to inform the technical assessments.

Agencies, NGOs and CoGB staff

8 Mar

Community bulletin 1, webpage update and media release

Project introduction and promotion of workshops.

Various Early April

Council Forum Project introduction and update.

Council and CoGB Executive

3 Apr

Media Briefing Project introduction and update.

Media, CoGB, Bendigo Health

9 Apr

Technical and Community Workshops

Bring together local knowledge to unearth issues and opportunities that will inform planning of the Hospital Precinct.

Agencies, NGOs, residents, business operators, CoGB staff (150+ participants)

16-18 Apr

Technical Assessments

Analysis of existing conditions and considerations across a wide range of technical issues to be considered by the Plan.

Project Team, Steering & Reference Groups


PAGE 185


Issues & Opportunities Report

Consolidated summary of issues and opportunities to be explored by the Concept Structure Plan.



Discussion of issues and opportunities.


13 June

Reference Group Meeting 1

Discussion of issues and opportunities.

Agencies, NGOs, CoGB staff and residents

13 June

Stage 3 Vision and Concept Structure Plan


Update and promotion of workshop.

Various Early July

Vision Workshop Summarise the issues and opportunities. Create the basis of a vision and concept for the Hospital Precinct.

Agencies, NGOs, residents, CoGB staff (150+ participants)

17-18 July

Coordination Meeting – NBH and HPSP

Collaborate on integration opportunities for the Hospital campus with the Precinct.

Exemplar Consortium, Bendigo Health, DTPLI, CoGB staff, Project Team

23 Aug


Discussion of Concept Structure Plan.


12 Sept


Discussion of Concept Structure Plan.


12 Sept

Coordination Meeting – Rosalind Park Precinct Masterplan and HPSP

Alignment of cross-project directions.

Project Team, Masterplan Team

18 Sept

Draft Concept Structure Plan (Draft CSP)

Set a vision and conceptual directions for the Precinct.


Council Forum Review and comment on the Draft CSP. Endorsement to progress to Structure Plan stage.


9 Oct


Overview of the Draft CSP and public invitation to provide feedback.

Various Late Oct

Informal Public Display of Draft CSP

Receive community feedback on the Draft CSP.

Various Late-Oct to Late-Nov


PAGE 186


Meetings with informal submitters

Discussions with residents, landowners and agencies regarding CSP comment.

Various Late-Oct to Late-Nov

Stage 4 Draft Structure Plan

Internal and External Coordination Meetings

Explain and refine Draft Structure Plan.

Agencies, CoGB staff

Mid- Mar to Early-Apr


Discussion and comment on Draft Structure Plan.


28 Mar


Discussion and comment on Draft Structure Plan.


28 Mar

Draft Hospital Precinct Structure Plan

As described in the report. Project Team, Steering & Reference Groups

Council Forum Review and comment on the Draft Concept Structure Plan. Endorsement to progress to Structure Plan stage.


9 April


PAGE 187

3.2 2013-2014 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - ROUND 2


Author Suzie Mansell, Manager, Community Partnerships Deb Simpson, Coordinator, Connecting Communities Responsible Pauline Gordon, Director Community Wellbeing Director

Summary/Purpose

To present the recommended funding allocations for Round 2 of the 2013/14 Community Grants Program for Council to consider.

Policy Context

Council Plan Reference: This report is consistent with the following Council Plan 2013 – 2017 strategic objectives: 2.1 People feel connected to their community. 2.2 Our communities have active and vibrant places in which to meet. 2.5 Our community’s health and wellbeing improves over time. 2.6 Services and programs support all people to live in our community. 2.7 Greater Bendigo is known for its vibrant and diverse arts and culture scene. 4.3 Continue to build the capacity of our community to reduce the impact of changing weather on communities and individuals. Council Policy Reference (include weblink as applicable): Community Grants Policy (adopted 14 April 2010).


This report relates to Round 2 of the 2013/14 Community Grants Program (CGP). There are seven CGP funding categories:

Arts and Culture

Community Development

Community Events

Environmental Sustainability Healthy Communities

Print and Digital Publications

Recreation A new Print and Digital Publications category has evolved from the former Community Newsletter category. This is in response to a decline in applications for Community Newsletter support and an increase in inquiries about funding for online communication mediums (i.e. social media or website based platforms).


PAGE 188

Volunteer Community Assessment Panels (Panels) were convened to consider applications received for each of the seven categories. The Community Grants Policy (Policy) requires Council to consult with the relevant Panel prior to resolution of funding allocations if variations to the Panel's recommendations are proposed.

In accordance with the current Policy budgetary provision for each category is set aside as a ‘reserve’ to provide Quick Response Grants for community needs that may arise outside of CGP funding rounds. The Quick Response Grants reserves for 2013/14 are:

Arts and Culture $12,000

Community Development $19,000

Community Events $10,500

Environmental Sustainability $6,000

Healthy Communities $3,000

Print and Digital Publications $4,000

Recreation $15,000

Previous Council Decision(s) Date(s):

14 April 2010: Council adopted the Policy which includes Guidelines for CGP application assessment processes.

17 April 2013: Council resolved to discontinue the Small Township Funding Scheme and redirect the funds to the CGP.

23 October 2013: Council resolved upon the 2013/14 Program Round 1 funding allocations.

Report

The CGP has transitioned from a paper-based application system to an online one. The City of Greater Bendigo’s (CoGB) Community Partnerships Unit held workshops about the new system during February 2014 at the Bendigo, Kangaroo Flat, Long Gully, Eaglehawk and Heathcote Community Houses, plus the CoGB offices in Bendigo. These workshops were attended by 102 people and focused on how to submit online applications and where to access public computers and internet if required. One to one support with the online application system was also offered via phone or through scheduled appointments. Applications opened on 17 February 2014 and were originally scheduled to close at 5pm on 14 March 2014. The application deadline was extended to 5pm on Wednesday 19 March 2014 due to technical difficulties with the online application system on Wednesday 12 and Thursday 13 March 2014. CoGB received 94 applications for Round 2 which is 25 less than Round 1.


PAGE 189

Quick Response Grants

$10,000 in Quick Response Grant funds have been distributed to five applicants since Round 1. A total of $20,465 has been allocated so far this financial year which leaves a balance of $49,035 for 2013/14. Quick Response Grants

Bendigo Autism Resource Centre

International Day of People with a Disability 2013: engagement of a band called ‘Rudely Interrupted’, members of which include people with hearing and visual impairments, Autism and Downs Syndrome, to perform in the Hargreaves Mall on the day.

Community Events category

$2,000

Golden Square Swimming Pool

Replacement of the acid dosing pump to maintain water quality within regulated standards.

Recreation category $2,000

Total Round 2 funding available ($)

Total applications received

Total funding requested

Total applications recommended by Panels for funding

Total of Panel recommended funding allocations

Arts and Culture

$34,000 15 $46,595 12 $33,855

Community Development

$53,000 25 $85,929 18 $52,849

Community Events

$29,750 12 $41,604 8 $20,100

Environmental Sustainability

$28,000 5 $10,851 4 $9,751

Healthy Communities

$8,500 9 $19,181 6 $8,500

Print and Digital Publications

$21,000 6 $22,000 5 $17,000

Recreation $42,500 22 $67,133 12 $31,335

Total

$216,750 94 $293,293 65 $173,390


PAGE 190

Quick Response Grants

Golden Square Croquet and Bowling Club

Upgrade of the roof access infrastructure to enable the cooling system to be serviced.

Recreation category $2,000

Rotary Club of Bendigo Sandhurst

Volunteer support and equipment to assist in the clean-up of a fire damaged site.

Community Development category

$2,000

Mitch’s Autism Walk (auspiced by Bendigo Autism Resource Centre)

Support for an Autism awareness raising event / walk and for the purchase of sensory equipment for the Bendigo Autism Resource Centre.

Community Events category

$2,000

Total $10,000

The rigour of Quick Response Grant application assessment processes is not consistent with broader CGP processes. The Quick Response Grant process will be reviewed and clearer eligibility criteria and process will be developed to improve the transparency and equity of funds distributed through this program. Proposed changes to the Quick Response Grant process will be presented to Council for consideration before adoption. The tables below outline the funding allocations recommended by the Panels for each CGP funding category. The maximum funding available in any category or to any organisation is $5,000. Some applications were not recommended by the Panels for funding as:

They were incomplete.

They were assessed as not meeting the CGP Guidelines.

The funding category was oversubscribed.

The requested funding was for an ongoing resource.

In some cases the Panels have recommended partial funding due to applications not demonstrating sufficient merit to justify the maximum amount requested.


PAGE 191

Arts and Culture

Organisation Project Details Amount Sought Amount Recommended by Panel

Seniors Rights Victoria The Best Is Yet To Be: an inter-generational photography exhibition for World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. The exhibition will be developed through a partnership between secondary school students and older people and will promote positive aging messages.

$3,600 $1,800

Bendigo Steam and Oil Engine Preservation Group

Heavy Duty Heritage: a documentary about the collection of vintage agricultural and industrial machinery held by the group.

$3,000 $3,000

Bendigo Dance Eisteddfod

Bendigo Dance Eisteddfod 2014. $4,000 $4,000

The Heathcote Artists

Annual Art Show. $3,000 $3,000

Teacup Tumble (auspiced by Auspicious Arts)

Dimensional: a series of community activities that will engage participants in creative arts with a geometry and science focus.

$4,993 $4,993

Marist Brothers Band

New band hats.

$2,000 $2,000

Golden City Support Services

Trees, webs and hives: initiatives aimed at creating positive social connections through combining large scale collaborative drawing with video technology.

$5,000 $5,000

Heathcote Festival and Events Association

Promotion of the 4th Heathcote Film Festival across Central Victoria.

$1,942 $1,942

Bendigo Chamber Choir

A series of performances within the community.

$3,000 $2,000

City of Greater Bendigo Brass Band

A series of ‘Melody Makers’ performances within the community.

$1,000 $1,000

Eaglehawk Community House

Celebrating a Spirited People: promotion of Indigenous culture through a combination of food,

$2,620 $2,620


PAGE 192


dance, music and a film activities during NAIDOC Week.

Eaglehawk Secondary College

Story Blasting: a collaborative project between writers and secondary school students to create written/digital stories about themselves and their community.

$2,500 $2,500

TOTAL $36,655 $33,855

Community Development Organisation Project Details Amount Sought Amount

Recommended by Panel

Kangaroo Flat Primary School

Leadership and wellbeing camp/program.

$5,000 $4,300

Bendigo University of the Third Age (U3A)

Computer education sessions for older people.

$1,484 $1,484

Interchange Loddon Mallee Region

Meeting You, Accepting Me: establishment of adult and youth social groups to reduce social isolation.

$5,000 $5,000

California Gully Primary School

Shade sail for playground $5,000 $5,000

Rotary Club of Bendigo South

Central Victorian Science and Engineering Challenge 2015.

$1,000 $1,000

Eaglehawk Anglican Parish

Saltworks in our community: supports for volunteering/networking in the community.

$1,500 $1,500

Kennington Red Cross Unit

Red Cross centenary celebrations.

$1,800 $1,000

Anglican Parish of North Bendigo

Electrical appliances testing and tagging device for Opportunity Shop.

$1,400 $1,400

Raywood Progress Association

Community consultation and priority setting meetings.

$550 $550

Strathfieldsaye Kitchen equipment for volunteers, $2,743 $1,885


PAGE 193


Primary School

student learning programs and after school care.

Kangaroo Flat Bowls Club

Replacement of sunshades. $5,000 $5,000

Heathcote Playgroup Redevelopment/repair of playgroup playground.

$5,000 $5,000

Bendigo Regional Genealogical Society

Purchase of computer. $700 $700

Friends of the Bendigo-Kilmore Rail Trail

Station signage project - Stage 3. $2,500 $2,500

Salvation Army L2P - learner driver mentor program.

$5,000

$5,000

Oscar 1 Emergency Response Brigade

Training for members. $5,000 $4,449

Bendigo Childrens’ Community Cooperative

Establishment of Bendigo Childrens' Community Cooperative: support with the development of a Constitution, Business Plan, policies and procedures.

$5,000 $5,000

Kennington Primary School

Curiosity Club: a program designed to encourage curiosity in primary school aged children with mentor support from the business and community sectors.

$5,000 $2,081

TOTAL

$58,677 $52,849

Community Events Organisation Project Details Amount Sought Amount


Volunteer Special Olympics

Games of Faith – inaugural regional aquatics based Special Olympics.

$5,000 $3,000

Bendigo Safe Community Forum

White Ribbon Day 2014 - a community awareness raising event about prevention of violence

$5,000 $3,000


PAGE 194


against women.

Holstein Australia Herd development conference and fair to be held in Bendigo.

$5,000 $5,000

Golden Square Pool Committee

Australia Day community pool party.

$2,350 $2,350

Karen Organisation of Bendigo

Karen New Year community celebration.

$4,000 $2,000

Bendigo Orchid Club Annual Spring Show 2014.

$1,500 $1,500

Bendigo Reconciliation Group

Community breakfast. $4,100 $2,500


Community dance and barbecue. $750 $750

TOTAL $27,700 $20,100

Environmental Sustainability Organisation Project Details Amount Sought Amount


Upper Spring Creek Landcare Group

Saving our Bush Stone-curlews: a project aimed at raising awareness of threats to the species and practical activities to improve their habitat.

$1,415 $1,415

Northern Bendigo Landcare Group

Connecting Kids to Country - an Indigenous culture awareness raising initiative.

$2,126 $2,126

Bendigo Access Employment as PepperGreen Farm

Educational resources for organic waste management and reuse.

$2,840 $2,840

Quarry Hill Primary School

Water saving initiatives at Quarry Hill Primary School.

$3,370 $3,370

TOTAL $9,751 $9,751


PAGE 195

Healthy Communities


Strathfieldsaye Primary School

Fresh fruit Fridays: a program for Prep, Grade 1 and 2 classes aimed at promoting healthy food choices.

$2,000 $500

Uniting Care Bendigo

Promoting healthy food culture initiatives.

$800 $800

Weeroona College Bendigo

Fusion Youth Group healthy breakfast program.

$2,000 $1,000

Marong and District Preschool

Marong and District community garden.

$5,000 $3,369

Salvation Army

Gravel Hill community garden expansion project.

$2,000 $2,000

Bendigo Access Employment

An initiative to showcase healthy food production options in urban environments.

$831 $831

TOTAL $12,631 $8,500 Print and Digital Publications Organisation Project Details Amount

Sought Amount Recommended by Panel

Northern District School of Nursing Graduates Association

Printing of a book entitled First of its kind – A History of Nurse Education at the Northern District School of Nursing.

$5,000 $3,000

Strathdale Cricket Club

Club history publication. $3,000 $3,000

Campbell’s Forest and District Community Action Planning Group

Over the Fence: Campbell’s Forest and District Newsletter.

$1,345 $1,000

Greater Bendigo Community Radio

New operating console. $5,000 $5,000

Youth Foundations Victoria

3556 Magazine: support for production and distribution of the magazine within the

$5,000 $5,000


PAGE 196

Organisation Project Details Amount Sought

Amount Recommended by Panel

community.

TOTAL $19,345 $17,000

Recreation Organisation Project Details Amount Sought Amount


2nd Kangaroo Flat Scouts

Safety equipment for 2nd Kangaroo Flat Scout canoeing activities.

$859 $859

Bendigo Field Archers Club facilities improvement works.

$1,431 $1,431

Quarry Hill Croquet Club

Gimme Shelter: replacement of a sun shade beside the croquet green.

$755 $755

Huntly Football Netball Club

Technology update: new computer to meet regulation requirements for game days, including insurance mandated online ground checks.

$2,295 $1,796

Maiden Gully Lions Football Club

Purchase of training and match day equipment.

$2,320 $2,320

YCW Sporting and Social Club

Club facilities improvement works.

$5,000 $3,500

Lions Club of Bendigo Water safety awareness and learn to swim programs for culturally diverse community members.

$4,880 $4,880

Bendigo Dragons American Football Club

Compulsory safety equipment for players.

$4,525 $4,525

e.motion 21 Bendigo Dance Group

Moving bodies and moving boundaries: dance and fitness programs to increase participation and social connection for people with disabilities.

$4,500 $2,050

Eaglehawk Billiards and Snooker Club

Community engagement initiatives and equipment upgrades.

$2,600 $2,600


PAGE 197

Organisation Project Details Amount Sought Amount Recommended

by Panel


Purchase and installation of goal post padding.

$2,119 $2,119

Hockey Central Vic Replacement of steel goals to aluminium ones to preserve the recently upgraded synthetic turf.

$4,500 $4,500

TOTAL $35,784 $31,335

Commencement Date: Round 2 funded projects are required to:

commence on or after 1 June 2014;

be completed within one year; and,

submit Project Evaluation Forms / Acquittals within 60 days of project completion. Recipients who do not may be ineligible to receive further CoGB funding.

Successful and unsuccessful applicants are advised of the outcome of their application following Council’s resolution. Successful applicants are required to enter into a Funding and Service Agreement (FASA) with the CoGB. The FASA outlines the scope of the funded project as well as the CoGB’s and the recipient's responsibilities. Funds are released to recipients upon receipt of the signed FASA and an invoice. Risk Analysis: Round 2 applications were assessed in line with the Policy.

All Panel members sign a Declaration of Interest Form to identify any applications received where they may have a conflict of interest. Panel members are required to leave the room when these applications are assessed.

The Panels are required to recommend funding allocations that are within the set budget for the funding category.


External Consultation: Grant Writing Seminars CoGB's Community Partnerships Unit facilitated 11 free grant writing workshops throughout 2013/14. In previous years these workshops were presented by a consultant from Our Community for a fee.


PAGE 198


Budget Allocation in the Current Financial Year: The total Program budget is $465,000. This is broken down into the following sub-budgets:

Round 1 and 2 (combined) $395,500

Quick Response Grants $69,500

In Round 1 $178,370 was allocated which leaves a maximum budget of $217,130 for Round 2. The Panels have recommended that a total of 65 of the 94 applications received (or just under 70%) are allocated some funding. The total amount of Round 2 funding recommended by all Panels is $173,390.

Conclusion

The City of Greater Bendigo received 94 applications for Round 2 of the 2013/14 Community Grants Program. The Community Assessment Panels have recommended funding for 65 applications that were assessed as meeting the Program criteria. The total recommended funding allocations of $173,390 is within the available budget of $217,130.

All applicants will be notified in writing about the outcome of their application once Council has resolved upon the funding allocations.

Attachments

Nil.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1. endorse the Community Assessment Panels' recommendations to allocate

$173,390 in Round 2 Community Grants Program 2013/14 funds as detailed within the body of this report.

2. thank the members of the Community Assessment Panels for volunteering their time and energy to assess applications.

Productivity - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 16 April 2014

PAGE 199

4. PRODUCTIVITY

Nil.

Sustainability - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 16 April 2014

PAGE 200

5. SUSTAINABILITY

5.1 SUBMISSION TO THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT'S ISSUES PAPER ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN AGRICULTURAL COMPETITIVENESS WHITE PAPER


Author Jenny Pendlebury, Rural Development Coordinator Deb Simpson, Coordinator Connecting Communities Responsible Pauline Gordon, Director Community Wellbeing Director

Summary/Purpose

To seek Council approval to lodge a submission prepared by the Greater Bendigo Farming Advisory Committee in response to an Australian Government Issues Paper. The Issues Paper is a preliminary step in the development of a proposed Agricultural Competitiveness White Paper. Submissions close on 17 April 2014.

Policy Context

Council Plan Reference: This report is consistent with the following Council Plan 2013-2017 strategies and actions: Strategy 3.2: A diverse, strong and growing economy that supports community resilience. Action 3.2.2: Lobby State and Federal Government to improve biosecurity and water security and secure the continued viability of the agricultural sector, including protecting productive agricultural and intensive agricultural activities. Strategy 5.3: We engage effectively and often with our communities, through excellent customer service and by providing information to enable people to take part in decisions about the changes.


The Greater Bendigo Farming Advisory Committee (FAC) is an Advisory Committee of Council. The FAC was established in response to significant changes occurring in the rural sector, with Council endorsing new member appointments at its meeting of 11 September 2013.


PAGE 201

A key role of the FAC is to provide advice to Council when any farming and/or related issue is deemed appropriate for Council advocacy to other levels of government or other organisations. The Australian Government has proposed to develop a White Paper on the competitiveness of the agricultural sector. The White Paper aims to inform the long-term agricultural policies of the Australian Government and ensure Australia’s agricultural sector remains a significant contributor to the economy and local communities. A Taskforce was established within the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet to develop the White Paper. The Minister for Agriculture and the Department of Agriculture are working closely with the Taskforce to support the development process. Previous Council Decision(s) Date(s): Council endorsed FAC member appointments at its meeting of 11 September 2013.

Report

The objective of the Issues Paper is to describe and define the set of issues to be included within the scope of the White Paper. The White Paper is expected to be released towards the end of 2014. Issues Paper submissions should therefore focus on the range of issues that should be considered as part of the White Paper process. The full Issues Paper can be viewed at http://agriculturalcompetitiveness.dpmc.gov.au/papers An Issues Paper has been released for public comment as a preliminary step towards the development of the White Paper and submissions are due on 17 April 2014. The FAC resolved to develop a submission in response to the Issues Paper to highlight the important role major regional centres such as Bendigo play in growing and maintaining the competitiveness of Australian agriculture. The Issues Paper states that, “The White Paper will consider the contribution of agriculture to regional centres and communities, including ways to boost investment and jobs growth in the sector and associated regional areas.” The FAC has commented that this section of the Issues Paper seriously understates the importance of regional centres and focuses the discussion on how agriculture can assist population growth and the economy of regional centres. It does not acknowledge that investment in Australia’s agriculture and agricultural competitiveness is heavily reliant on Australia having a network of strong regional centres that will underpin future investment. The FAC raise the following key points in response to the Issues Paper:

1. Strong regional centres are integral to effective agricultural investment. 2. As a major regional centre, Bendigo is well placed to support growth and

investment in agricultural product. 3. Growing Australia’s agricultural product and supporting further investment requires

further government investment in essential infrastructure in regional centres. The FAC submission advocates that:

regional centres such as Bendigo have a vital interest in the future of Australian agriculture because agricultural production, agribusiness and agribusiness support are major economic contributors;

http://agriculturalcompetitiveness.dpmc.gov.au/papers


PAGE 202

the range of physical, economic and social infrastructure provided in regional cities is crucial to support a competitive agricultural sector and therefore investment in agriculture is also dependent on investment by governments in regional centres; and

the capacity of the City of Greater Bendigo to contribute to expanding Australia’s agricultural production requires further investment in the City’s infrastructure. Investment in key infrastructure in Bendigo is directly supporting Australian agriculture.

The FAC recommends that Council endorse the attached submission.


Internal Consultation: The submission has been informed by consultation with Cr James Williams (FAC Chairperson), Trevor Budge (CoGB’s Manager Strategy), Peter Davies (CoGB’s Manager Executive Services) and members of the FAC – an Advisory Committee of Council. External Consultation: Cr James Williams, Trevor Budge and Jenny Pendlebury met with two Taskforce officials on 5 March 2014. Following that meeting the FAC resolved to develop a submission.


The FAC will seek to provide further input into the White Paper development process beyond the Issues Paper stage. The White Paper stage is due to commence in mid-2014, once the Taskforce has reviewed and analysed all feedback received in relation to the Issues Paper. Further FAC input into White Paper development process could be supported within existing CoGB resources.

Conclusion

In its capacity as an Advisory Committee of Council, the Greater Bendigo Farming Advisory Committee has developed a submission that responds to an Australian Government Issues Paper. The purpose of the Issues Paper is to inform the scope of a proposed Agricultural Competitiveness White Paper that will in turn inform the long-term agricultural policies of the Australian Government. The submission advocates for greater emphasis to be placed on the importance of major regional centres (such as Bendigo) in growing and maintaining the Australian agriculture competitiveness. Submissions close on 17 April 2014.


PAGE 203

Attachments

Proposed submission by the City of Greater Bendigo on the Australian Government’s Agricultural Competitiveness Issues Paper.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1) Endorse the lodgement of the attached submission in response to the Australian

Government’s Issues Paper on Agricultural Competitiveness. 2) Thank members of the Greater Bendigo Farming Advisory Committee for their

efforts in preparing the submission.


PAGE 204


PAGE 205


PAGE 206


PAGE 207


PAGE 208

5.2 TENDER FOR ELECTRICITY


Author Richard Morrison, Manager Contract & Project Coordination Responsible Marg Allan, Director Organisation Support Director

Summary/Purpose

This report is seeking approval of preferred suppliers for the provision of electricity for CoGB street lights, buildings and facilities.

Policy Context

Council Plan Reference: City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013-2017:

Theme: 5 Good Governance and Decision Making

Strategic Objective: 5.2 The financial and physical resources of the organisation are managed efficiently and well.


The current electricity contracts CoGB has for the supply of the electricity it uses are reaching their end point and are required to be retendered. While the existing contracts have varying end dates, they have been tendered together to maximise efficiency and the volume being offered to the market. The contract end dates are as follows:

30 June 2014 Small buildings/sites 31 December 2014 Large buildings/facilities 30 June 2015 Green power 30 June 2015 Street lighting The tender process was conducted by MAV Procurement who aggregated the electricity demand of 28 Councils across the state. As volume has the biggest impact on pricing in electricity tenders, this approach was considered the most effective for obtaining the best electricity price for CoGB. Due to the complex nature of the electricity market, MAV Procurement utilises the expertise of energy consultant specialists, Trans Tasman Energy Group Pty Ltd (TTEG) to assist with undertaking the tender process and the ongoing contract management.


PAGE 209

Previous Council Decision(s) Date(s): Previous electricity contracts were approved at the Council meeting of 15 June 2011.

Report

The tender for large buildings/facilities, green power and street lighting closed on 13 March 2014. and the small buildings/sites tender closed on 20 March 2014. Tenders were received from the following suppliers for large buildings/facilities, green power and street lighting:

AGL ERM Energy Australia Origin Energy Momentum Energy Simply Energy Co-zero

Tenders were received from the following suppliers for small buildings/sites:

AGL ERM Energy Australia Origin Energy Lumo Energy

With the assistance of TTEG, the MAV undertook a detailed analysis of the tender submissions and provided reports to participating Councils for their evaluation. The summarised comparative report has been included as a confidential attachment to this report. The tender process and the analysis provided by the MAV have been reviewed by CoGB Manager, Contract and Project Coordination, to confirm the process undertaken to select electricity suppliers has been conducted in accordance with Section 186 of the Local Government Act and CoGB Procurement policy. A review of the MAV analysis indicates that the best offer for large buildings/facilities, small buildings/sites and street lighting was from ERM, while for green power it was Pacific Hydro. Priority/Importance:

Ensuring CoGB achieves “Best Value” for rate payers in the goods, services and works it procures is of high importance. Options/Alternatives:

The key option for consideration is whether to continue or discontinue the green power component of CoGB’s electricity contracts.


PAGE 210

The green power contract was introduced as part of the previous tender process in 2011. The report to Council on 15 June 2011, stated that a 5% green power contract amount was “a very sound environmental thing to do”. It also highlighted that “it is in effect buying a carbon reduction on a short term basis without making behavioural or structural changes within our own operations”. Since the 15 June 2011 Council report, there has been significant work undertaken to achieve behavioural and structural change in electricity use. Currently there are three major initiatives underway that are targeted at reducing CoGB electricity usage:

1. Lighting the Regions Streetlight Replacement Project. A partnership of 16 municipalities, with CoGB as the lead agency, was successful in obtaining $5.129M in funding from the Federal Government. Community Energy Efficiency Program (CEEP2). The project will replace 23,000 Mercury Vapour streetlights with more energy efficient lighting technology. The anticipated reduction in electricity usage is significant, with a projected cost saving to CoGB of approximately $20M over the next 20 years.

2. The Energy Efficiency Installations in Seven of City of Greater Bendigo's Highest Energy Using Facilities project. CoGB was successful in obtaining $380K from the Federal Government. CEEP1. The project will upgrade lighting, heating and air conditioning in seven major CoGB buildings to significantly reduce electricity usage.

3. CoGB is currently working with the Bendigo Sustainability Group on a project to

install solar power cells on the roof of the newly refurbished Bendigo Library, at no cost to CoGB. The energy generated will be used in the Library and will further reduce the carbon emission footprint of that facility.

Given that:

The cost of green power is considered to be an additional premium on top of the initial cost of the electricity used with an extra $52k paid to date, and

CoGB is currently investing in major projects that have a far greater impact on energy usage and carbon generation than the current 5% green power contract component;

it is appropriate that CoGB continue to concentrate on investment in local energy reduction initiatives in preference to green power in its electricity contracts. Timelines:

The migration of CoGB sites to the new contracts will begin from 30 June 2014, and migration of all contracts will be completed on 30 June 2015. The new contracts end date is 31 December 2017.


PAGE 211

Risk Analysis:

Given the volatile nature of the electricity market, it is important that a decision be reached at the Council Meeting on 16 April 2014, or the current offer is liable to lapse and a new tendering process will need to be undertaken. If that were to occur, CoGB will be tendering by itself, without the aggregated volumes of the other 27 participating Councils, and would therefore be extremely unlikely to achieve a similar competitive result. The electricity rate is a significant part of the electricity bill that CoGB receives, with Government carbon charges and the network provider PowerCor costs also being a large part. This means that while CoGB has a contract in place for the electricity rate, it is still subject to price changes in carbon and network costs.


Information on the electricity contracts has been sought from a number of internal Service Units including Engineering & Public Space, Sustainable Environment and Building & Property Services.


Electricity usage is a standard component of the CoGB annual budget with $2.872M budgeted for the 2013/14 financial year. As the progressive rollover from the current contracts will not be completed until 30 June 2015, this does not represent a significant immediate change to the current budget or even the 2014/15 budget. Instead, by locking in very competitive commercial rates until 2017, CoGB is future-proofing a significant part of its energy costs against possible electricity rate rises over the next three years. As mentioned above, CoGB has several important energy usage reduction projects currently underway and these will have a significant, long term positive impact on reducing CoGB energy operational costs.

Conclusion

The tender process undertaken to select electricity suppliers has been conducted in accordance with Section 186 of the Local Government Act and CoGB Procurement policy. The results provided by the tender are competitive and represent “Best Value” for CoGB.

Attachments

1. Confidential Attachment – MAV analysis of the tender submissions specifically for CoGB.


PAGE 212

RECOMMENDATION

That the Greater Bendigo City Council accepts the MAV analysis of the electricity tender evaluations and endorses the following contracts:

ERM – Large Buildings/Facilities and Street Lighting

ERM – Small Buildings/Sites

Good Governance and Decision-Making - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 16 April 2014

PAGE 213

6. GOOD GOVERNANCE AND DECISION-MAKING

6.1 RECORD OF ASSEMBLIES


Author Peter Davies, Manager Executive Services Responsible Craig Niemann, Chief Executive Officer Officer

Summary/Purpose

The purpose of this report is to provide the record of any assembly of Councillors, which has been held since the last Council Meeting, so that it can be recorded in the Minutes of the formal Council Meeting.

Policy Context

The purpose of this report is to provide the record of any assembly of Councillors, which has been held since the last Council Meeting, so that it can be recorded in the Minutes of the formal Council Meeting.


The Local Government Act provides a definition of an assembly of Councillors where conflicts of interest must be disclosed. A meeting will be an assembly of Councillors if it considers matters that are likely to be the subject of a Council decision, or, the exercise of a Council delegation and the meeting is: 1. A planned or scheduled meeting that includes at least half the Councillors (5) and a

member of Council staff; or 2. an advisory committee of the Council where one or more Councillors are present. The requirement for reporting provides increased transparency and the opportunity for Councillors to check the record, particularly the declarations of conflict of interest.


PAGE 214

Report

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type Planning consultation meeting

Meeting Date 4 February 2014

Matters discussed 1. Planning application DC/740/2013 - use of land for a Café, building and works, waiver of car parking at 224 View Street, Bendigo

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Elise Chapman Apologies: Cr Barry Lyons Cr Rod Fyffe

Staff/ Community Representatives

Mr Bryce Kilian/ Applicant Objectors

Conflict of Interest disclosures

Matter No. Councillor making disclosure Councillor left meeting Nil

Meeting Information



Matters discussed 1. Planning application DSD/718/2013 - two-lot Subdivision, construction of dwelling, demolition of Outbuilding and front fence and construct of new front Fence at 131 Olinda Street, Quarry Hill

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Elise Chapman Apologies: Cr Barry Lyons Cr Rod Fyffe


Mr Bryce Kilian/ Applicant Objectors




PAGE 215

Meeting Information



Matters discussed 1. Planning applicant DP/507/2013 - construction of a telecommunications facility (35 metre monopole) at 9 Maynard Drive, Epsom

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr James Williams Apologies: Cr Lisa Ruffell Cr Peter Cox


Mr Peter O'Brien/ Applicant Objectors



Meeting Information



Matters discussed 1. Planning application DS/725/2013 - two-lot subdivision at 22 Button Street, Strathdale

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Rod Campbell Cr Helen Leach Apology: Cr Mark Weragoda


Ms Liz Commadeur/ Applicant Objectors




PAGE 216

Meeting Information


Meeting Date 3 March 2014

Matters discussed 1. Planning application DS/833/2013 - 2-lot subdivision at 7 Holdsworth Road, Long Gully

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Peter Cox Cr James Williams Apology: Cr Lisa Ruffell


Ms Liz Commadeur/ Applicant Objectors



Meeting Information



Matters discussed 1. Planning applicant DSD/795/2013 - 26-lot subdivision (staged), construct 26 dwellings (8 detached building modules, 7 double-storey and 1 triple-storey), construction and use of food and drink premise (café), removal of native vegetation and parking reduction at 34-36 Havlin Street West, Bendigo

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Rod Campbell Cr Mark Weragoda Apology: Cr Helen Leach


Mr Peter O'Brien/ Applicant Objectors




PAGE 217

Meeting Information



Matters discussed 1. Planning application DI/698/2013 - use and Development of concrete batching plant at 2-6 Festini Way, Long Gully

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Peter Cox Apologies: Cr Lisa Ruffell Cr James Williams


Ms Stacey Poulter/ Applicant Objectors




PAGE 218

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type Positive Ageing Advisory Group Meeting


Matters discussed 1. PAAG membership 2. Residential Development Strategy 3. Bendigo Wellbeing Survey 4. "Are you considering relocating to a Retirement Village" Forum 5. Working Group feedback: Social Housing; ZOOM; Social Isolation; Transport 6. New process for electing new members

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Helen Leach Cr Lisa Ruffell


Suzie Mansell Natalie Jacobson Ann-Marie Roberts Andrew Cockerall Lindy Wilson/ Peter Eisen Robyn Warren Ruth Hosking Mary Fraser Dennis Robinson John Lennon Sue Spencer Kay Graves Apologies: Lyn Turner Jennifer Boak John Heizer




PAGE 219

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type Bendigo Easter Festival Advisory Board Meeting


Matters discussed 1. Improvements and recommendations for 2014 Bendigo Easter Festival - update report 2. Festival Marketing Plan

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Helen Leach


Mr Terry Karamaloudis Mr Raph Beh Mrs Lyn Brown/ Mr Barry McDowell Mr Gary Frank Mr Ken Deveraux Mr Paul Prendergast Apologies: Ms Fiona Chibber Mr Paul Rohan Mr David Wright Mrs Helen Yorston




PAGE 220

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type Councillors' Forum


Matters discussed 1. 'Walking - Good for Business' presentation 2. Budget workshop 3. Howard Street, Epsom 4. Soccer at Tom Flood Sports Centre 5. Rescission Motion 6. Aboriginal committee 7. VCAT hearing re Hopley 8. YMCA Olympian Avenue of Honour proposal 9. Governance meetings 10. Legal expenses 11. Quarry Hill Golf Club 12. Developer contributions 13. VCAT appeal on EPA notices 14. Bagshot residential area 15. Street tree policy 16. Insurance for rural halls 17. Conduct Panel 18. Signage Policy 19. Forest Park Amendment C190 20. Economic Development Strategy 21. Waste Strategy

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Barry Lyons Cr Rod Campbell Cr Peter Cox Cr Elise Chapman Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Helen Leach Cr Lisa Ruffell Cr Mark Weragoda Cr James Williams


Mr Craig Niemann Mr Stan Liacos Ms Prue Mansfield Ms Marg Allan Mr Darren Fuzzard Mr Pat Jess Mr Peter Davies Mrs Alison Campbell Apology: Ms Pauline Gordon


Matter No. Councillor making disclosure Councillor left meeting

18. Cr Lisa Ruffell Yes

18. Cr Mark Weragoda Yes


PAGE 221

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type Governance Meeting


Matters discussed 1. CEO advice on significant issues - computer network 2. Role of Forums and the Governance meetings 3. Further follow-up of Councillor Conduct Panel Report 4. CEO Performance Objectives 5. Review of Councillors' Support Policy 6. Independent Review Implementation Committee 7. Advertising Councillor contact details

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Barry Lyons Cr Rod Campbell Cr Peter Cox Cr Elise Chapman Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Helen Leach Cr Lisa Ruffell - part Cr Mark Weragoda Cr James Williams


Mr Craig Niemann Mr Peter Davies Mrs Alison Campbell



Nil


PAGE 222

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type Councillors' Forum


Matters discussed 1. Review of planning reports and draft Ordinary Meeting Agenda 2. Presentation on Bendigo Stadium 3. International Relations Policy 4. Capital Works Performance Management 5. Sale of Properties for Unpaid Rates 6. Draft Council Plan 7. Draft Residential Strategy 8. Bendigo Football League 9. Red Cross proposal 10. Visitor Centre changes 11. Strategies 12. Regent Park 13. Policy on drones 14. Utilising 'apps' 15. Long Gully Splash Park 16. Dump stations for caravans

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Barry Lyons Cr Rod Campbell Cr Peter Cox Cr Elise Chapman Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Helen Leach Cr Lisa Ruffell Cr Mark Weragoda Cr James Williams


Mr Craig Niemann Mr Stan Liacos Ms Prue Mansfield Ms Pauline Gordon Ms Marg Allan Mr Darren Fuzzard Mr Pat Jess Mr Peter Davies Mrs Alison Campbell



1. Cr James Williams Yes

RECOMMENDATION

That Council endorse the record of assemblies of Councillors as outlined in this report.


PAGE 223

6.2 CONTRACTS AWARDED UNDER DELEGATION


Author Leeanne Taig, Administration Assistant, Project Coordination Responsible Marg Allan, Director Organisation Support Director

Summary/Purpose

The purpose of this report is to provide information on contracts recently awarded under delegation.

Policy Context

Provide high quality professional services by undertaking responsible business planning to ensure long-term sustainability.

Report

The following contracts subject to public tender, have been issued under delegation by the officer as listed (Instrument of Delegation - August 5, 2009):

RECOMMENDATION

That the Contracts Award Under Delegation, as outlined in this report, be endorsed by Council.

Contract No

Project Successful Contractor

Value (GST Excl)

Delegated Officer

Date Signed

CT000099

Detailed Design Services for Grandstand & Associated Works at Canterbury Oval

K20 Architecture 81,150.00 Richard Morrison

21 February 2014

CT000081 Telecommunication upgrade

NSC Group Pty Ltd 387,547.00 Marg Allan 24 March 2014


PAGE 224

6.3 PROGRESS REPORT INDEPENDENT REVIEW IMPLEMENTATION


Author Peter Hargreaves Responsible Craig Niemann, Chief Executive Officer Director

Summary/Purpose

The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the Independent Review Implementation.

Policy Context

Council demonstrates good governance and leadership Council Plan Reference: 5.1.1 – Consider the recommendations of the Independent Review 2013 and implement the agreed actions. Independent Review: Recommendation 1 – Implementation and communication


Council has delivered on its commitment to independently review the City of Greater Bendigo to see what improvements can be made to its operations. In June 2013 Aurecon delivered its final report including 69 recommendations for Council to consider. Previous Council Decision(s) Date(s): On 21 August 2013 Council resolved to adopt in principle the 69 recommendations and that a Committee of all Councillors supported by the Chief Executive officer and Manager Executive Services be established as the Independent Review Implementation Committee. On 23 October 2013 Council adopted Terms of Reference for the Independent Review Implementation Committee, committed to responding to all 69 recommendations within the current Council term and acknowledged the completion of six – numbers 17, 22, 30, 39, 44 and 53. On 22 January 2014 Council acknowledged completion of a further seven recommendations – numbers 4, 12, 16, 25, 26, 28 and 34.


PAGE 225

On 5 March 2014 Council: a) Acknowledged the progress on Recommendations 1, 3, 14, 18, 31, 36, 45 and 47

completion of actions associated with Recommendations 35, 48, 52, 59, 60, 62, 63, 64, 65, and 66.

b) Approved the actions proposed to respond to the Governance Recommendations

numbers 32, 40, 41, 43, 56, 57 and 67 as outlined in the report. The number of completed recommendations stands at 23.

Report

Since the last progress report on 5 March 2014 further progress with implementation of the Review was considered at a Councillors Governance Meeting on 19 March 2014 and the Councillors Forum on 2 April 2014 and 9 April 2014. Matters considered were:-

The process for Councillors obtaining information on matters under consideration (Recommendation 58),

Aged and Disability Services Review (Recommendations 6, 15 and 20)

Governance (Recommendation 32),

Statutory Planning processes (Recommendation 42 – see below),

Councillor mentoring (Recommendation 67), and

Recommendations relating to performance and benchmarking Recommendations 2, 9, 10, 49, 55 and 57(see below).

Progress Progress is noted on the following recommendations:

Recommendation 1 - Review Communication

Create and continually update an implementation strategy and Communications Plan to address and action the recommendations of this review. Action:

A further Project Bulletin was issued following Council’s receipt of the progress report on 5 March 2014.

• Recommendations 2, 9, 10, 49, 55 & 57 - Performance Undertake an organisation-wide review of all classifications and work structures to formalise and document consistent roles, responsibilities and salary banding (IR2), Engage with Local Government Victoria regarding the program to streamline and benchmark KPIs across local governments (IR9), Implement a performance management framework, change management plan and an information technology system which is capable of facilitating performance management for all levels of the organisation (COGB, Directorate, Business Unit and individuals) (IR10),


PAGE 226

Create a succession management plan for all senior management and other critical COGB positions (IR49), Implement a formal organisation-wide continual improvement program (IR55), and Review CoGB’s policies and training relating to bullying, discrimination and harassment prevention, and how individual training needs are assessed and align to performance and development goals (IR57). Action: This cluster of recommendations was the subject of a briefing to Councillors on how they will be implemented on a staged basis through to 2016-17 as the building blocks to lasting culture change that focusses on performance and 'being the best we can' and will be the subject of further progress reports.

Recommendation 5 – Waste Strategy

Facilitate the development and finalisation of the Waste Strategy to determine the best way to manage waste going forward, and undertake analysis to determine the cost and requirements for the rehabilitation of historic sites and current sites once they reach capacity. Action: Council adopted the new Waste and Resource Management Strategy on 26 March 2014. The key recommendations include of the strategy include: • Introducing a solution for the food and garden organics to reduce waste going to

landfill; • Introducing an optional 360 litre recycling bins to residents wishing to increase

their recycling capacity; • Not pursuing the development of a new landfill once Eaglehawk Landfill reaches

its capacity; • Implementing a powerful and targeted education and awareness program to

support strategy initiatives; • Reducing littering and illegal dumping; • Creating the opportunity for innovative responses to the management of our waste

streams. On the specific issue of rehabilitation of historical waste management activities such as old landfills the strategy commits to undertaking further investigation of these sites to better understand whether they pose any unacceptable environmental or health risk. Following additional analysis a further briefing will be provided for Councillors.

Recommendations 6, 15 & 20 – Service Review

Following completion of the Aged and Disability Services Review, implement and complete the recommendations adopted by Council in a timely manner. Finalise the Aged and Disability Services and Early Childhood Services reviews by 31 July 2013.


PAGE 227

Develop a change management strategy to undertake any adopted structural changes to the Aged and Disability Services Unit Action: Progress on the review of Aged and Disability Service was the subject of a briefing for Councillors at the Council Forum on 2 April 2014.

Recommendation 9 – Benchmarking

Engage with Local Government Victoria regarding the program to streamline and benchmark KPIs across local governments. Action:

At a Glance – Actions well advanced

Council received a report on the Local Government Performance Reporting Framework (LGPRF) on 26 March 2014. The Framework will result in new KPIs for local government – some mandatory, some not. The City has been engaged in the consultation process and is satisfied the pilot set of mandatory KPIs address the themes mentioned in the Review report. Staff will be monitoring finalisation of the KPIs expected in late April 2014 when the new regulations establishing the KPIs are due to come into operation. Work is continuing to ensure the City is ready to report within the new framework next financial year.

At its meeting on 26 March 2014 Council received a report on the Local Government Performance Reporting Framework (LGPRF), developed by Local Government Victoria in consultation with Local Government and other stakeholders. The aim of the Framework is to strengthen accountability and transparency across local government by establishing a consistent set of indicators which need to be reported by all councils. The LGPRF is being developed and implemented in five stages. Stage 4 and 5 (data collection and reporting) are mandatory and commence from 1 July 2014. There are currently 110 indicators in the framework: 15 are optional and 95 are mandatory. The indicators need to be reported in the 2014/15 Annual Report and will help councils to monitor their own performance over time and benchmark their performance on an annual basis with other councils. The indicators and measures are grouped into three themes:

Service performance: 67 indicators (52 mandatory) across 11 services

Financial performance: 13 finance indicators (all mandatory)

Sustainability: 6 indicators relating to sustainable capacity; 24 indicators relating to governance and management (all mandatory)


PAGE 228

Many of the optional indicators are still being refined by Local Government Victoria through consultation with a range of stakeholders. Deferring reporting on the optional indicators for 12 months will provide Local Government Victoria with time to refine the scope and definition of the indicators and therefore reduce the amount of rework undertaken by council in collating and reporting on the indicators. Council resolved to:

Acknowledge the mandatory indicators for reporting in the 2014/15 Annual Report, and

Defer reporting on the optional indicators in the Local Government Performance Reporting Framework for a further 12 months.

The development of this new Framework was noted in the Final Recommendations Report of the Review when it addressed the issue of performance monitoring across the organisation. In making its recommendation for engagement with Local Government Victoria regarding the Framework the Review clearly saw an opportunity for enhanced “quantitative and qualitative comparisons around themes such as engagement techniques, process timeframes and managing referrals”. In response to the recommendation the City of Greater Bendigo has been engaged in the consultation process accompanying the development of the new framework and is satisfied the current set of mandatory KPIs, used in an initial pilot program, address the themes mentioned in the Review report. Staff will be monitoring progress with the roll out of the new Framework including finalisation of the mandatory and non-mandatory KPIs expected in late April 2014 when the new regulations establishing the KPIs are due to come into operation. Work is continuing to ensure the City is ready to report within the new framework next financial year.

Recommendation 32 - Governance Develop robust and detailed governance training for both Councillors and CoGB staff Action: In accordance with Council’s resolution of 5 March 2014 on this recommendation, Councillors met representatives of MAV and BRACE Training on 2 April 2014 to discuss opportunities for ongoing professional development of Councillors and staff. A detailed report is being prepared for Councillors’ consideration in early June.

Recommendation 38 - Advertising

Centralise the advertising budget and resources within the Communications and Media Team to improve buying power and negotiating influence. Action:


PAGE 229

The recommendation is currently being investigated to determine whether there is potential to extract the benefits suggested. Initial work is focussed on gaining a better understanding of the City’s total spend on advertising locally and elsewhere, how it is booked or purchased by various Business Units, the rates charged and the contractual arrangements which might attach to the campaign in question. For example, some advertising is undertaken in conjunction with Government Departments or forms part of a Government grant which have their own individual protocols. In other instances the spend is linked to sponsorships which might be tied to a particular media outlet where there is little or no discretion. There are also numerous occasions where Business Units such as Tourism take advantage of significant discounts offered by the media on a semi regular basis that are well below contracted rates. The aim is to ensure that any changes made to current arrangements can deliver benefits or savings while avoiding unintended adverse consequences.

Recommendation 42

Consider opportunities to improve the relationship between the planning team and public/applicants. This may include educating the community on the planning process and timelines so as to manage community expectations. Action: Councillors were briefed on the staged response to this recommendation being developed by the Statutory Planning Unit. The report of the Independent Review makes a number of observations about the planning permit assessment process and notes the improvements achieved since an independent audit was initiated in 2008. The report identifies several areas of interest to the Independent Review including the pre-application process, the quality of applications, what it termed the mediation process and community expectations around timelines for decisions. The plan being developed to respond to the Recommendation includes a number of elements as follows (mediation/consultation is addressed in a separate recommendation): • Restructure of the Statutory Planning Unit • Review and reforms to the pre-application process • Review of the application lodgement and receipt process (quality review) • Information for applicants. Councillors provided input on the response plan and a further report is expected in May 2014.

Recommendation 51 – Community Satisfaction

Set long term aspirational goals for the Community Satisfaction Survey outcomes, execute appropriate plans and track progress annually. These goals should relate to organisational best practice.


PAGE 230

Action Work has begun reviewing the goals, whilst closely following the development of two other sets of performance measures – the new Local Government Performance Reporting Framework and the Liveability indicators which relate to the Council plan. One objective will be to consider the extent to which the emerging new framework and the liveability indicators can be combined to set the City’s long term aspirational goals in accordance with the recommendation. This would increase efficiency and ensure a tighter focus on meaningful and relevant performance measures around organisational best practice.

Recommendation 58 – Access to Information Reiterate the process for Councillors obtaining information, providing guidance on what is considered reasonable in relation to the matter under consideration. Action: A Draft Policy on Councillor Access to Information has been discussed by Councillors. A further draft will be circulated to Councillors for comment with a further report to Councillors in late April.

Recommendation 61- Stakeholder Register

Identify and regularly maintain a comprehensive and representative cross-section stakeholder register. Action: Lists, registers, databases are maintained by a number of Directorates in order to ensure meaningful and timely engagement with stakeholders relevant to their areas of operation. The recommendation is currently being reviewed to determine whether the benefits of maintaining a single comprehensive stakeholder that will serve all needs across the organisation will outweigh the costs of such an exercise.


There are no resource issues arising directly from this report. However where recommendations have resource implications steps are in place to ensure that any proposed new capital or operating expenditure arising from the recommendations is considered in the budget process for 2014-15. Upcoming briefings The following progress or further briefings for Councillors are scheduled: 23 April – Recommendations 6, 15, 20 relating to Aged and Disability Services review. 30 April – Recommendation 8 – Investigate the option to separate the Economic Development Unit, Tourism, the Bendigo Art Gallery, The Capital and Major Events from City Futures into a separate entity.


PAGE 231

30 April – Recommendation 36 – Develop a detailed business case for the upgrade of Bendigo Airport to define the most effective costing mechanism. May – Recommendation 3 - Create a standardised Matter for Decision template for investment and business case proposals. June – Recommendation 32 - Governance training June – Recommendation 58 - Reiterate the process for Councillors obtaining information, providing guidance on what is considered reasonable in relation to the matter under consideration.

Conclusion

The number of completed recommendations stands at 23; progress has been reported on more than 60 of the 69 recommendations.

RECOMMENDATION

That Greater Bendigo City Council:

a) Acknowledge the progress on Recommendations 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 10, 15, 20, 32, 38, 42, 49, 51, 57, 58 and 61 as outlined in the report; and

b) inform the community of this progress.


PAGE 232

7. URGENT BUSINESS

Nil.

8. NOTICES OF MOTION

Nil. 9. COUNCILLORS' REPORTS

10. MAYOR'S REPORT

11. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT

12. CONFIDENTIAL (SECTION 89) REPORTS

12.1 Any other matter which the Council or special committee considers would prejudice the Council or any person

12.2 Personnel matter, industrial matters and any other matter which the Council or special committee considers would prejudice the Council or any person

12.3 Contractual mater (confidential attachment)

RECOMMENDATION

That the meeting be closed to the public to consider reports in accordance with Section 89(2)(a), (c), (d) and (h) of the Local Government Act 1989, as amended, relating to a personnel matter, industrial matter, contractual matter and any other matter which the Council or special committee considers would prejudice the Council or any person.

20140416 council agenda 16 april 2014

Documents