council meeting minutes 17 april 2013

MINUTES

Ordinary Meeting of

Council

6.00pm Wednesday 17 April, 2013

VENUE: Reception Room, Bendigo Town Hall, Hargreaves Street, Bendigo NEXT MEETING: Wednesday 8 May, 2013 Bendigo Town Hall

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

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

Council will realise its vision by setting strategic objectives, strategies and committing to annual actions within four Goal Areas:

• Built and Natural Environment

• Economic Development

• Community and Culture

• Our People, Our Processes

Vision GREATER BENDIGO will be the best place to live work and visit, where:

• growth and living standards are managed to sustain and enhance quality of life

• a regional culture of learning, creativity and innovation allows people to flourish

• its rich natural and cultural heritage is conserved for today and tomorrow

• resilience, local spirit and identity are proudly celebrated.

Values Council will achieve its vision by working with the community and business, displaying leadership in its decision-making, operating in an open manner and basing decisions on sound information.

Goal Areas

ORDINARY MEETING WEDNESDAY 17 APRIL 2013 ORDER OF BUSINESS: ITEM PRECIS PAGE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY 3

PRAYER 3

PRESENT 3

APOLOGIES 3

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS 3

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS 3

DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST 4

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 5

1. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS 7

2. BUILT AND NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 8

2.1 102 Railway Place, Elmore - 6 Lot Subdivision o f Land, Use and Development of Mixed Use Building (Commerci al & Residential), Advertising Signage, Reduction of C ar Parking and Waiver of Loading and Unloading of Commercial Vehicle Requirements

8

2.2 47 Spring Gully Road, Spring Gully - Subdivisi on of Land Into 10 Lots And Native Vegetation Removal

28

2.3 3 Pinnaroo Court, Strathdale - 2 Lot Subdivisio n of Land 50

2.4 Crocodile Gold P/L Fosterville Gold Project Nom ination For Community Representatives

61

2.5 Integrated Transport & Land Use Strategy (Itlus ) Update 64

2.6 Draft Natural Environment Advisory Committee Te rms Of Reference

76

3. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 86

4. COMMUNITY AND CULTURE 87

4.1 Draft Farming Advisory Committee Terms of Refer ence 87

4.2 2012/2013 Community Grants Program - Round 2 96

4.3 2012/2013 Small Townships Funding Program 10 6

4.4 Sister City Relationships 113

5. OUR PEOPLE, OUR PROCESSES 119

5.1 Potential Sale of Four Properties 119

5.2 Contracts Awarded Under Delegation 130

5.3 Record of Assemblies 132

6. Urgent Business 142

7. NOTICES OF MOTION 143

7.1 Notice of Motion: Extension of Porter Drive, E aglehawk 143

7.2 Notice of Motion: Properties at 26 to 30 Eagle hawk Road 146

7.3 Notice of Motion: 2 Club Court, Strathfieldsaye 151

8. COUNCILLORS' REPORTS 153

9. MAYOR'S REPORT 154

10. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT 155

11. CONFIDENTIAL (SECTION 89) REPORTS 156

11.1 Proposed Development 156

____________________________

CRAIG NIEMANN CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Ordinary Meeting - 17 April 2013

PAGE 3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

PRAYER

PRESENT

Cr Lisa Ruffell Cr Rod Campbell Cr Elise Chapman Cr Peter Cox Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Helen Leach Cr Barry Lyons Cr Mark Weragoda Cr James Williams Mr Craig Niemann (Chief Executive Officer) Ms Marg Allan (Director, Organisation Support) Mr Darren Fuzzard (Director, Presentation and Assets) Ms Prue Mansfield (Director, Planning and Development) Ms Pauline Gordon (Director, Community Wellbeing) Mr Peter Davies (Manager, Executive Services) Mrs Alison Campbell APOLOGIES

Mr Stan Liacos (Director City Futures)

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

That Standing Orders be suspended to allow the conduct of Public Question Time. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Fyffe, seconded Cr Campbell. That Standing Orders be suspended to allow the conduct of Public Question Time.

CARRIED

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

That Standing Orders be resumed.


PAGE 4

RESOLUTION Moved Cr Fyffe, seconded Cr Lyons. That Standing Orders be resumed.

CARRIED

DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Pursuant to Sections 77, 78 and 79 of the Local Gov ernment Act 1989 (as amended) direct and indirect conflict of interest m ust be declared prior to debate on specific items within the minutes; or in writing to the Chief Executive Officer before the meeting. Declaration of indirect intere sts must also include the classification of the interest (in circumstances wh ere a Councillor has made a Declaration in writing, the classification of the i nterest 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 app licable gift (f) indirect interest as a consequence of becoming an interested party (g) indirect interest as a result of impact on resi dential amenity (h) conflicting personal interest A Councillor who has declared a conflict of interes t, must leave the meeting and remain outside the room while the matter is being c onsidered, or any vote is taken. Councillors are also encouraged to declare circumst ances where there may be a perceived conflict of interest. Nil


PAGE 5

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Wednesday 27 March, 2013 and Minutes of the Special Meeting of Council held on Thursday 11 April, 2013. The following items were considered at the Ordinary Council meeting held on Wednesday 27 March, 2013 at 6:00pm. • Planning Scheme Amendment C160 - Rezoning of Land in Duncan Court, Junortoun

- Consider Authorisation Request • Planning Scheme Amendment C164 - Rezoning of 128 Victoria Street, Eaglehawk to

Industrial 3 Zone • Adopt Planning Scheme Amendment C186 to Update the Planning Controls for the

Former Crystal Ice and Gillies Pie Factory Sites • Proposed Construction of Five NBN Facilities • Two Lot Subdivision, Construction of a Two/Three Storey Dwellings, Partial

Demolition, Extension and Alteration to Existing Dwelling and Construction of Detached Garage for Existing Dwelling - 308 Barnard Street, Ironbark

• Subdivide Land into Ten Lots and Construction of Ten Dwellings - Lot 18 of PS 638645T - 15 Wesley Street/17 Grantham Terrace, Kangaroo Flat

• Construction of a Carport - 11 Shamrock Street, Golden Square • Greater Bendigo Residential Strategy Review Issues and Options Paper • Proposed Increases to VCAT Fees • Priorities for Greater Bendigo - Advocating to State and Federal Governments • Bendigo Airport Advisory Committee - Recommendations for Appointment • Council Plan 2013-2017- Draft for Exhibition • Domestic Animal Management Plan 2012-2106 • Kangaroo Flat Aquatic Leisure Centre - Project Update • Contracts Awarded Under Delegation • Record of Assemblies • Fire Services Property Levy • Provision of Loan Borrowings • Pricing Policy • Notice of Motion: Fortuna • Section 89 Report The following items were considered at the Special Council Meeting held on Thursday 11 April at 8:00pm. • Notice of Motion: Future of Fortuna Villa The unconfirmed minutes have also been posted on the City of Greater Bendigo website pending confirmation at this meeting.


PAGE 6

RECOMMENDATION That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Wednesday 27 March, 2013 and the Minutes of the Special Meeting of Council held on Thursday 11 April, 2013, as circulated, be taken as read and confirmed. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Leach, seconded Cr Fyffe. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED


PAGE 7

1. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS

Nil.

Built and Natural Environment Ordinary Meeting - 17 April 2013

PAGE 8

2. BUILT AND NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

2.1 102 RAILWAY PLACE, ELMORE 3558 - 6 LOT SUBDIVI SION OF LAND, USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF MIXED USE BUILDING (COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL), ADVERTISING SIGNAGE, REDUCTION OF CAR PARKING AND WAIVER OF LOADING AND UNLOADING OF COMMERCIAL V EHICLE REQUIREMENTS

Document Information

Author Simon Francis, Planning Officer Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Dev elopment Director

Summary/Purpose

Planning permission is sought for a six lot subdivision, the use and development of the land for a combination of retail, residential as well as business identification signage. A reduction of car parking for 12 vehicles and waiver of loading and unloading of commercial vehicle requirements is also sought. The key issues under consideration are:

• Amenity impacts on the dwelling to the south resulting from the length and height of the wall on boundary and;

• The impact of the design response on the locality. One objection was received against the proposal. A consultation meeting was held with the objector, the applicant and the owner of the subject site. Revised plans were submitted in relation to objector concerns. The objection remained. Council will need to consider the potential benefits additional retail space and the style of accommodation proposed will provide to Elmore against the amenity impacts imposed on the dwelling to the south from the height and length of the proposed wall on boundary. It is important to note that if the land at 100 Railway Place (objector’s property) was used for commercial purposes and not a dwelling, the officer recommendation would be for approval of a planning permit subject to conditions. This is an on balance decision and the report recommends that the Greater Bendigo City Council issue a Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit for the proposal due to the considerable amenity impacts on the adjoining dwelling to the south.

Policy Context

City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2009 – 2013 (updated 2012)


PAGE 9

1. Built and Natural Environment Strategic Objectives:

• Value, conserve and enhance the rich built and natural heritage.

• Achieve high quality outcomes in planning and policy activities.

• Encourage and foster high quality design to create environments that support public wellbeing and economic success.

Report

Application No: DSD/497/2012 Application Date: 11 July 2012 Applicant: Shane Muir Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd Land: 102 Railway Place, ELMORE 3558 Zoning: Road Zone 1

Township Zone Overlays: Nil Subject Site and Surrounds

The subject site is rectangular in shape and located on the corner of Railway Place (Northern Highway) and Clarke Street in Elmore. The frontage to Railway Place is 13.24 metres and Clarke Street 41.91 metres with a total area of the site being 554 square metres. The surface of the site slopes slightly from the northwest to the southwest and the site contains no native vegetation or natural features of any consequence to the application. Located near the eastern boundary is a shed measuring 9 metres by 7 metres. The subject site and adjoining land are zoned Township and adjacent to a VicRoads managed road. The site is located at one end of the Elmore shopping strip. The nature, layout and pattern of development in the Elmore shopping strip between Clarke Street and to the north and Cardwell Street to the south is a combination of single and two storey buildings built to more than one boundary generally for the first third of the site. The Elmore commercial strip is located on Railway Place between Clarke Street to the north and Cardwell Street to the south. Within this strip are the Bendigo Bank, Elmore Pharmacy, Victoria Hotel/Motel, Shamrock and Railway Hotels, Tea Rooms, hairdresser, food shop, collectables and old wares shop and the existing supermarket. On the west side of the main street are the post office, railway station and a takeaway food shop. The adjoining sites comprise the following uses:

• South – Mixed use of business and residential • North – Bakery • East – Senior citizens centre • West - Railway reserve and railway line.


PAGE 10

Figure 1 : Location map showing subject site. Objector's property marked with a star. Proposal

Subdivision:

• Three lots on the ground floor ranging from 96m2 to 111m2 & common property of 200m2

• Three lots on the first floor (dwellings) ranging from 124m2 to 129m2 & common property 241m2

Lots created by the subdivision will be fully serviced by water, sewerage, electricity and telecommunications systems. Use: Ground floor spaces are nominated for retail or shop which includes a food and drink premises on the corner lot. Three dwellings will occupy the first floor and associated communal area with entry from the ground floor where associated car parking, storage and bin receptacles will be located. Development: Development will take the form of a two storey building built to the boundary on all sides with a balcony built over the footpath on Clarke Street. The Railway Place (west) elevation takes cues from the adjoining building with a simple verandah design and window awnings.


PAGE 11

The Clarke Street (north) elevation has two distinctive sections with a rendered section defining the ground floor entry to the residential component of the building. The remainder includes a traditional style balcony/verandah similar to that of the Railway Hotel on Railway Place, a combination of face brick work, large glassed areas on the ground floor shop fronts and aluminium framed windows and doors. Each retail/shop will contain around 100 square metres of retail space and associated office, storage and wash room areas. The dwellings will each comprise two bedrooms, open plan kitchen/meals/lounge that open onto separate balcony areas presenting to Clarke Street. Each dwelling is accessed off a common passage area that connects to a staircase and foyer at the east end of the building. The ground floor foyer provides separate storage spaces for each dwelling, bicycle facilities, bin storage area, and car parking for 4 spaces which are accessed from a carriageway easement which benefits the subject site. The first floor foyer provides for an undercover garden and BBQ area to be used as a communal space for the three dwellings. Advertising signage: Detail around the location and area of the signage was not provided however a condition of the planning permit could address any concerns, by nominating locations and restricting maximum size. Reduction of car parking requirements and waiver of the loading and unloading of commercial vehicle requirements: Four car parking spaces are proposed on site (1 space per dwelling and 1 space for a retail premises). A reduction of 12 car spaces is sought. A waiver of the requirements for loading and unloading of commercial vehicles on site is also sought.

Planning Controls - Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme

Why a permit is required: The site is within a Township Zone which triggers the need for a permit for: • The subdivision of land; • Use and development of land for a section 2 use (retail premises/shop) and; • Construct two or more dwellings on a lot. In addition the following trigger the requirement for a planning permit: • Advertising signage as per clause 52.05; • Reduction in parking requirements as per 52.06 and; • Waiver of loading and unloading of commercial vehicles on site as per clause

52.07


PAGE 12

The following clauses are relevant in the consideration of this proposal: State Planning Policy Framework: • Settlement (clause 11) • Regional Development (clause 11.05) • Urban Design (clause 15.01-1) • Urban Design Principles (clause 15.01-2) • Sustainable Development (clause 15.02) • Business (clause 17.01-1) • Car Parking (clause 18.02-5) Municipal Strategic Statement and Local Planning Policy Framework: • Settlement (clause 21.05) • Housing (clause 21.06) • Economic Development (clause 21.07) Other Provisions: • Township Zone (clause 32.05) • Car Parking (clause 52.06) • Loading and Unloading of Vehicles (clause 52.07) • Bicycle facilities (clause 52.34) • Two or more dwellings on a lot (clause 55) • Subdivision of land (clause 56) • Decision Guidelines (clause 65)

Consultation/Communication

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

Referral Comment

Powercor No objection subject to conditions

Coliban Water No objection subject to conditions

Telstra No objection subject to conditions

Tenix No objection and no conditions

VicRoads No objection subject to conditions

Traffic & Design No objection subject to conditions. Of particular interest are: • All loading and unloading of goods must be done wholly

on site; • A 3m by 3m splay is required on the corner of Clarke

Street & Railway Place. These are discussed in the planning assessment.

Drainage No objection subject to conditions


PAGE 13

Referral Comment

Environmental Health No objection subject to notes

Heritage No objection providing the materials (especially bricks) and finishes are selected carefully; the proposal should not have adverse effect on the precinct. If a permit is granted a condition requiring the approval of sample bricks, and other materials, colours and finishes are to be included.

Public Notification The application was advertised to the public by mail and onsite notices. One objection on the following grounds was received: • Amenity impacts mainly resulting from the proposed length, height and location of a

wall on boundary with the adjoining dwelling to the south at 100 Railway Place.

A consultation meeting was held which was attended by the objector, the permit applicant and owner of the subject site. After the consultation meeting was held amended plans were submitted that reduced the height of the wall on the boundary in concern from approximately 7.5 metres to 6.4 metres along with changes to the material and finishes. The revised plans did not resolve any of the objector concerns. The objector revised their response and submitted additional areas of concern for consideration. The objections are discussed below.

Planning Assessment

The site is within the Township Zone which has the purpose to provide for residential development and a range of commercial, industrial and other uses in small towns. It is important for council to understand that if the building at 100 Railway Place (objectors land) to the south was used solely for commercial purposes then the amenity requirements of ResCode would not be applicable and the design response would be acceptable. This however is not the case. Through the course of the application, plans submitted were revised at the direction of the City to achieve a design that compliments the existing Railway Streetscape. A final revision of the plans occurred to try and address the concerns raised by the objector and the requirements of ResCode. The plans submitted that attempted to address the objector concerns after consultation are the plans considered in this assessment.


PAGE 14

Is the location appropriate for the mixed use and development proposed? The site is zoned Township and located on the corner of an existing commercial strip that encourages mixed use developments comprising retail on the ground floor and dwellings on the first floor. The style of development is appropriate to the zone however usually recognised with inner city living rather than a small town environment. Clause 21.05-2 recognises the need to ensure that existing service levels within Elmore do not decline and to build upon existing business opportunities. One objective of the clause is to encourage attractive lifestyle options and a sense of place in small towns and to support urban design initiatives that contribute to the town’s identity. The proposal will provide additional retail space and a different form of housing option for Elmore residents. In principle the use and development is therefore appropriate for the zone and meets the City’s strategic direction. Would the proposal result in an acceptable urban design outcome? The relevant objective of clause 15 Built Environment and heritage is that planning

should achieve high quality urban design and architecture that:

• Contributes positively to local urban character and sense of place; • Reflects the particular characteristics, aspirations and cultural identity of the

Community; • Enhances liveability, diversity, amenity and safety of the public realm. Promotes

attractiveness of towns and cities within broader strategic contexts and; • Minimises detrimental impact on neighbouring properties. With conditional requirements to address concerns relating to how the design contributes positively to the urban character and sense of place, the proposal is an acceptable urban design outcome. The following concern with the design response would need to be resolved prior to any plans being endorsed:

• Style, texture and colour of the brick work proposed

The City’s Traffic Engineer commented that a 3 metre by 3 metre splay is required for pedestrian safety. After discussing this concern with the City’s traffic engineer it was agreed that a condition requiring plans be revised to include a glass panel on the corner of shop 1 so pedestrian safety is maintained could form part of a planning permit. The main area of concern with the proposal is minimising any detrimental amenity impact on the adjoining property. These concerns are discussed below.


PAGE 15

Non Compliance with ResCode Standards and amenity impacts from the development on the adjoining dwelling. The key amenity issues from the proposal stem from the location, height and length of the boundary wall between the subject site and the existing dwelling at 100 Railway Place to the south. The height and location results in north facing habitable room windows on the objectors property being unreasonably overshadowed between the hours of 9am and 3pm. Building height At the highest point the building is 9.2 metres which slightly exceeds the preferred maximum by 200mm. This minor encroachment on the standard will not result in the building having a detrimental visual impact on the streetscape character. The decision guidelines to the clause also require consideration of the visual impact of the building when viewed from the adjoining land. It is from the adjoining land at 100 Railway Place that the combination of building height and visual impact of a 6.4 metre high wall on the boundary located approximately 2.5 metres from habitable room windows to the south will have a significant visual impact. This would create a harmful sense of enclosure and confinement to what is an area currently used as secluded private open space. Plans revised by the applicant did reduce the overall height of the wall on boundary and proposed different material and finishes to reduce the visual impact however this does not alleviate concerns. Site coverage and permeability ResCode standards require that development should not exceed 60% site coverage and provide at least 20% permeable surfaces. Due to the subject site being located on a corner with limited width, the site encourages a development that presents to both streets. It would be extremely difficult to develop the site without exceeding the standard. Therefore in this instance a variation of ResCode standards to allow 100% coverage of the site is an acceptable outcome. In addition the drainage network can accommodate the additional stormwater generated. 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 development does not meet the setback standards with particular concern being the side boundary with 100 Railway Place. After a consultation meeting was held amended plans were submitted that reduced the height of the wall on the boundary in concern from approximately 7.5 metres to 6.4 metres.


PAGE 16

The wall height of 6.4 metres will have a visual impact on the amenity of the existing dwelling in particular from the habitable room windows and the secluded private open space accessible from the habitable rooms. The narrow nature of the lot would require the applicant to submit a new design response to meet the standard which may reduce the viability of the development. The applicant was not prepared to consider a new design response. Walls on boundaries The objective is to ensure the location, length and height of a wall on a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the impact on the amenity of existing dwellings. The existence of walls on boundaries does form part of the existing character of the commercial area but not to the extent proposed. The total length and height of the wall on boundary could result in the residents feeling corralled by the wall and not an appropriate outcome for residents of the dwelling. The proposal does not comply with the objective of this clause. Daylight to existing windows The objective is to allow adequate daylight into existing habitable room windows. Within ResCode walls over 3 metres in height should be setback from an existing habitable room window on an adjoining property by 50% of the proposed wall height to ensure adequate daylight is received. The location of existing habitable room windows of the dwelling at 100 Railway Place are between 2.5-3.0 metres from the boundary. This would require the 6.4 metre high wall be setback a minimum of 3.2 metres from all windows. This distance is not achieved and the overshadowing imposed on these habitable room windows is considerable and unacceptable. North facing windows on adjoining property The objective is to allow adequate solar access to existing north-facing habitable room windows on adjoining land. The proposal does not meet the required setback standards which would result on the ground floor wall being setback 1 metre from the boundary and the second storey a further two metres. The proposed design will place the existing north facing windows of the dwelling to the south in shadow until 3pm. The existing windows are currently covered with a skillion roof to the boundary which limits the amount of direct sunlight to the north facing windows. This considered the structure is temporary and able to be removed.


PAGE 17

Overshadowing of secluded private open space The objective is to ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow existing secluded private open space. The proposal meets the standards of rescode. That said the space actually used as secluded private open space is the 3 metre wide area located between the dwelling and the proposed 6.4 metre high wall on boundary. The overshadowing diagrams submitted with the application suggest the area actively used as secluded private open space will not receive direct sunlight til after 3pm. In summary the proposal does not meet several ResCode standards. The main amenity impacts result from noncompliance with the height, length and location of the wall on boundary with 100 Railway Place to the south. The visual impact on the adjoining property, substantial sense of enclosure and confinement and limited sunlight to north facing habitable room windows is unacceptable. Reduction in car parking requirements and loading and unloading of commercial vehicles The main purpose of this clause is to ensure the provision of an appropriate number of car parking spaces having regard to the demand likely to be generated, the activities on the land and the nature of the locality. The planning scheme requires 16 spaces be provided on site however 4 spaces are proposed. Three of the spaces are designated for the dwellings with one of the spaces allocated to a shop. The reduction of car parking spaces required under this clause has been calculated at 12 on the basis of the following: • Retail 320sqm’s leasable floor area Required spaces 13 • Dwellings 3X 2 bedroom units Required spaces 3

Total spaces required 16

The reduction in car parking is considered appropriate as there is sufficient long term car parking available (approximately 60 on Railway Place) within 150 metres of the site to accommodate the shortfall of 12 spaces. In relation to the loading and unloading of commercial vehicles, no space is allocated on the site. Clarke Street however is a wide road and capable of handling the loading and unloading of goods and vehicles associated with small retail premises. The use of Clarke Street to achieve this would not cause a loss of amenity or an adverse effect on traffic flow and road safety. In summary a reduction in car parking and a waiver of the loading and unloading of commercial vehicle requirments is appropriate and able to be achieved without causing adverse amenity and traffic impacts.


PAGE 18

Conclusion

This application requires Council to weigh up the potential benefits of providing additional retail space and additional housing choice for Elmore against the amenity impacts on the adjoining dwelling to the south. It is important to understand that if the building at 100 Railway Place was not used as a dwelling but instead a business, the officer recommendation would be for approval. It is concluded that although there will be significant benefits from providing additional shops such as increased employment and business opportunities and additional housing choice for Elmore, the amenity impacts on the building currently used as a dwelling to the south are unacceptable when assessed against the relevant clauses of the Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme. The application is recommended for refusal on the basis that an unacceptable planning outcome would occur on the site.

Options

Council, acting as the responsible authority, may resolve to approve or refuse to grant a permit.

Attachments

Objection

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to section 61 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987), Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to issue a Notice of Refusal for a 6 lot subdivision of land, use and development of a mixed use building (commercial and residential), advertising signage, reduction of car parking and waiver of loading and unloading of commercial vehicle requirements at 102 Railway Place, Elmore based on the following grounds: 1. The development is contrary to the following standards of ResCode due to the

amenity impacts imposed on the existing dwelling at 100 Railway Place, Elmore. Clause 55.03-2.Building height standard Clause 55.04-1 Side and rear setback standard Clause 55.04-2 Walls on boundary standard Clause 55.04-3 Daylight to existing windows objective Clause 55.04-4 North facing windows objective


PAGE 19

MOTION

Moved Cr Williams, Seconded Cr Cox. That the Alternate Motion be adopted. 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 6 lot subdivision of land, use and development of a mixed use building (commercial and residential), advertising signage, reduction of car parking and waiver of loading and unloading of commercial vehicle requirements at 102 Railway Place, Elmore based on the following grounds: 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) Schedule and samples of proposed materials and finishes in particular the

brickwork proposed (b) A window to be located on the corner of shop 1 where Clarke Street and

Railway Place meet. This is to allow safe sightlines for pedestrians. (c) The location and dimensions of any proposed advertising signage

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. 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.

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. DETAILED DRAINAGE PLANS


PAGE 20

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

7. STORMWATER DETENTION Before the use or development is commenced, 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. Or The Responsible Authority may deem this condition satisfied by a development contribution towards the acceptance of surface and stormwater discharge from the approved subdivision, building and/or works, whether or not such new drainage infrastructure has been or will be situated within the boundaries of the subject land. Such amount is assessed as $ 3,000 or such amount applying at the time of payment.

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 (Victorian Stormwater Committee, 1999) in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Or The Responsible Authority may deem this condition satisfied by a development contribution towards the treatment of surface and stormwater discharge from the approved subdivision, building and/or works, whether or not such new stormwater treatment infrastructure has been or will be situated within the boundaries of the subject land or its immediate catchment. Such amount is assessed as $ 750.00 or such amount applying at the time of payment.

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 in conditions above.

10. SECTION 173 AGREEMENT – ON SITE DETENTION SYSTEM Prior to the issue of a Statement of Compliance, the applicant/owner must enter into an agreement under section 173 of the Planning & Environment Act 1987.

Such agreement must covenant that: • The on-site detention system and/or treatment system shall be designed by a

qualified engineer and must be approved by the responsible authority prior to construction.

• Each detention system and/or treatment system must be constructed either prior to, or currently with, the construction of any dwelling on the specified lots. Each system must be completed prior to connection to the responsible authority’s


PAGE 21

drainage system. • The owner will maintain each on-site detention system and/or treatment 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 systems at mutually agreed times. • The Owner will pay for all costs associated with the construction and

maintenance of each on-site detention system and/or treatment system.

11. 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.

12. 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. The angle parking in Clarke St is to be formalised and the parking areas must be sealed and the car parking spaces line marked to Council’s satisfaction.

13. 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.

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

15. VEHICLES CROSSINGS/ DRIVEWAY (a) Sealing is required of the right of way and the section of driveway between the

road and the kerb and the kerb and the footpath. (b) The proposed driveway must join to the existing footpath, not replace it. (c) If the existing layback is not used, it must be removed, and barrier kerb

reinstated. (d) All vehicles must enter and exit the right of way in a forwards direction.

16. 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.

17. NO MUD ON ROADS


PAGE 22

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.

18. 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.

19. ADVERTISING SIGNAGE (a) All signage must not be animated, flashing or reflective. (b) Any signage lighting (internal or Floodlit) is installed and maintained to ensure

there is no glare towards motorists or spillage of light onto the roadway. (c) All signs are installed totally within the site boundary line and to ensure they do

not obscure the sightlines of motorists or pedestrians.

20. 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.

21. 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.

(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


PAGE 23

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 and provide to Powercor Australia Ltd a completed Electrical Safety Certificate in accordance with Electricity Safe Victoria’s Electrical Safety System.

(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 Energy Safe Victoria’s “No Go Zone” rules.

22. 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.

23. VICROADS

(a) It must be ensured that the permitted use and occupation is not detrimental to the safety of road users and pedestrians and that the verandah is adequately maintained at all times to ensure such safety.

(b) The design of the verandah must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and must not extend less than 0.6 metres from the vertical extension of the back of kerb.

(c) Prior to the commencement of any use or occupation of the road reserve or works associated with this planning permit, the applicant must fully complete to VicRoads’ satisfaction a ‘VicRoads Works Agreement’.

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

(e) All works shall be undertaken at no cost to VicRoads.

24. EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT The permit will expire if: (a) The plan of subdivision is not certified within 2 years from the date of this

permit; or (b) The registration of the subdivision is not completed within 5 years from the date

of certification of the plan of subdivision. The responsible authority may extend these expiry periods if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within 3 months afterwards.

Telstra Note


PAGE 24

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 Not e 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. City of Greater Bendigo Environmental Health Note Food Premise (a) 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.

(b) 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.

(c) 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 (a) 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)

CARRIED


PAGE 25

Subdivision layout

Elevation of proposed wall on southern boundary


PAGE 26

Elevation plans (West: Railway Place, North: Clarke Street)

Aerial photograph


PAGE 27

Photo the adjoining dwelling to the south


PAGE 28

2.2 47 SPRING GULLY ROAD, SPRING GULLY 3550 - SUBD IVISION OF LAND INTO 10 LOTS AND NATIVE VEGETATION REMOVAL


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

Summary/Purpose

Planning permission is sought for the above proposal. The application is before Council as three objections to the application were received. The objections relate to impacts on neighbourhood character resulting from the density proposed, impacts on neighbours as the form of the future dwellings is not known, stress on services (sewerage), removal of trees, traffic, parking and noise concerns. This report considers the merits of the proposed subdivision and discusses the issues raised by the objectors. The report recommends that a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit be issued.

Policy Context


1. Built and Natural Environment Strategic Objectives: • Value, conserve and enhance the rich built and natural heritage. • Achieve high quality outcomes in planning and policy activities. • Encourage and foster high quality design to create environments that support

public wellbeing and economic success.

Background Information

In 2007 Council refused to grant a permit against an officer recommendation to approve an application which proposed the Development of ten dwellings, subdivision and vegetation removal generally in accordance with the endorsed plans. The permit applicant subsequently appealed the Council refusal and the refusal was ultimately set aside with a permit issued by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) in October 2008. The property ownership of the application site remains unchanged since the VCAT issued permit and the permit expired in October 2010 without building/works commencing.


PAGE 29

A request was made in May 2012 to extend the planning permit; however the request to extend was refused (under delegation) as the permit had expired and Council had no power to extend it. The permit applicant subsequently appealed the refusal to extend the expired permit to VCAT. When the permit application was considered in 2007 a cultural heritage management plan (CHMP) was not required. Under the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2007 consideration on whether a (CHMP) was required was uncertain. VCAT’s preferred approach was that a report addressing Aboriginal Cultural Heritage be prepared and a fresh permit application is made which led to the current application before Council being lodged. The only difference between the proposal considered previously by Council and VCAT is that the built form aspect of the earlier approval has been deleted.

Report

Application No: DS/833/2012 Application Date: 30 October 2012 Applicant: S J L Rechter Land: 47 Spring Gully Road, SPRING GULLY 3550 Zoning: Residential 1 Zone Overlays: Nil Subject Site and Surrounds

The subject land is located on the eastern side of Spring Gully Road, approximately 80 metres north of the intersection with Stanley Avenue. The site is generally rectangular in shape running east west. With a frontage to Spring Gully Road of approximately 39 metres and a depth of generally 95 metres, the site has an overall area of approximately 4,100 square metres. The site falls approximately 4 metres to the rear, where it adjoins the Spring Gully Creek reserve. A Victorian style weatherboard dwelling (believed to have been constructed in 1904) is centrally located from side boundaries with a setback of 4.15 metres from the street boundary. The dwelling is not subject to any form of heritage control and a current City of Greater Bendigo Building consent allowing demolition exists, however this consent will expire on 2 May 2013 if not acted upon. The front property boundary is fenced with an open, wire mesh fence and the two side boundaries and the rear boundaries are all delineated by post and wire fences. There are a number of scattered trees on the site, four of which are substantial, well established natives. A sewer line also runs north south approximately through the middle of the lot, effectively bisecting the site. Access is via an existing single vehicle crossover near the centre of the site. The road reserve in front of the site features two street trees. There is no formed footpath to the frontage of the site.


PAGE 30

The adjoining property to the north (45 Spring Gully Road) is a battle-axe shaped lot of approximately 3,200 square metres featuring an existing dwelling and native vegetation. There are two adjoining properties to the south. One lot of approximately 1,000 square metres fronting Spring Gully Road (49 Spring Gully Road) adjoins the site to the south, this lot contains a dwelling completed in 2009. The other is a battle-axe lot with access from Stanley Avenue (7 Stanley Avenue) of approximately 2,300 square metres area, developed with a single dwelling. The adjoining property to the rear is Public Park and Recreation zoned land set aside as a reserve for the Spring Gully/Bendigo Back Creek that runs from the Spring Gully Reservoir to the Bendigo Creek near Lake Weeroona. On the opposite side of Spring Gully Road in the vicinity of the site, lots are generally 600 to 1,000 square metres developed with single dwellings.

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

The application proposes a ten lot subdivision with the creation of common property for access and the removal of native vegetation. The proposed lot sizes range from 301 square metres to 362 square metres. Lots of over 300 square metres once separately titled do not require subsequent planning approval to be developed for a single dwelling.


PAGE 31


The site is located within the Residential 1 Zone. A permit is required to subdivide the site pursuant to the zone provisions. A permit is also required to remove native vegetation pursuant to clause 52.17 in the Planning Scheme. The following clauses in the Planning Scheme are relevant to the application. State Planning Policy Framework � Regional development (clause 11.05). � Biodiversity (clause 12.01). � Urban environment (clause 15.01). � Sustainable development (clause 15.02). � Residential development (clause 16.01). � Movement networks (clause 18.02). � 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). � Strategic directions (clause 21.04). � Settlement (clause 21.05). � Housing (clause 21.06). � Reference documents (clause 21.10). Local Planning Policies � Spring Gully residential character policy (clause 22.23). Other Provisions � Residential 1 Zone (clause 32.01). � Native vegetation (clause 52.17). � Residential subdivision (clause 56). � Decision guidelines (clause 65). � Referral and notice provisions (clause 66).


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

Referral Comment

Powercor No objection subject to conditions

Coliban Water No objection subject to conditions

Telstra No objection subject to conditions

Tenix No objection subject to conditions


PAGE 32

Referral Comment

Department of Sustainability and Environment

No objection subject to conditions

North Central Catchment Management Authority

No objection subject to conditions

Goulburn Murray Water No objection subject to conditions

Country Fire Authority No objection subject to conditions

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. As a result of advertising three objections were received, with the grounds of objection being:

• Impacts on neighbourhood character resulting from the density proposed;

• Impacts on neighbours as the form of the future dwellings is not known;

• Stress on services (sewerage);

• Removal of trees and

• Traffic, parking and noise concerns.

A consultation meeting was conducted on site on 21 February 2013 attended by all the objectors, Councillor Fyffe and the assessing officer. The permit applicant was unable to attend and one of the matters discussed was whether the applicant would be prepared to reduce to the number of lots to be between 6-8. This was discussed informally with the applicant who declined to amend the permit application. The planning merits and objections are discussed below.

Planning Assessment

The key issues to be determined in this application are:

• Whether the site is suitable for this medium density subdivision;

• Have the requirements of the Aboriginal Heritage Act been met?

• Will the proposal result in a suitable outcome with reference the City’s adopted character policy and clause 56 (Residential Subdivision) ?

• Whether the native vegetation removal is acceptable with regard clause 52.17 (Native vegetation) &

• The objections received from affected residents.


PAGE 33

Is the site suitable for medium density development?

There is no suggestion from any party (applicant, objectors and officers) that the site is not suitable for residential development. There is strong policy support in the planning scheme for further development of lots that are appropriately zoned, serviced (both infrastructure and social) and proximate to the Bendigo CBD. In this case, the zone is Residential 1 which is an appropriate zone for subdivision.

The objectors to the application have exhibited balance in their response to this application. As mentioned previously, the objectors do not dispute the suitability of the site for residential subdivision. Broadly speaking the divergence in the view of the applicant and objectors is the form and density (number of lots) proposed. This matter is very relevant to this proposal.

The Bendigo Residential Development Strategy 2004 notes that the site is located within the community centre that extends to Latrobe University. In the policy setting outlined in the planning scheme the direction is clear in that it actively seeks to promote higher density in community centres such as that proposed.


PAGE 34

Figure 2 : Map from the current Residential Development Strategy showing location of application site in a community centre.


PAGE 35

Implications of the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act and Regulations.

A key reason in the VCAT decision to refuse to extend the expired planning permit was that introduction of the Aboriginal Heritage Act & Regulations was a significant legislative change that required consideration, a consideration best given by being tested in concert with a new planning permit process.

In cases where an application is a ‘High Impact’ activity that involves ‘Significant Ground Disturbance’ in an area of ‘Cultural Heritage Sensitivity‘ (all terms as per their definitions in the Act and Regulations) it must be established whether a site has been previously subject to ‘Significant Ground Disturbance’. If a site has not been subject to Significant Ground Disturbance a Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) must be prepared and approved by the relevant Registered Aboriginal Party, in this case the Dja Dja Wurrung Aboriginal Clans Corporation, before any other approval, including planning, can be granted.

In this case, the permit applicant commissioned a report by an Archaeologist to investigate the implications of the Aboriginal Heritage Act and whether a CHMP was required. The report commissioned concluded that Spring Gully Creek was not a ‘natural’ waterway (having been altered by the Coliban Scheme) and that the site had been subject to alluvial mining meaning that it has been previously disturbed with the result being that no CHMP is required to be prepared.

Figure 2 : Map showing extent of potential area of cultural heritage sensitivity.

Will the proposed lot sizes respect the existing and preferred neighbourhood character and address the requirements of Clause 56?


PAGE 36

Character was a key issue common to all objections received and is a central consideration in the assessment of the merit of the proposal. The site is not subject to a specific overlay (Neighbourhood, Heritage or Significant Landscape) that may otherwise restrict lot yield and size of lots. The City’s Residential Character Policy seeks to guide development (including subdivision). The site is within the Spring Gully character precinct 1 which the policy describes as:

‘This area, mostly developed in the 1950s, is one in which consistency of siting of dwellings is important. Most share the same standard front set back, and most also have spacious side setbacks. This sense of spaciousness is emphasised by low or transparent front fences, or, in some cases, absence of a fence. The horizontal emphasis of the dwelling form is also important, resulting from the long, low elevations of the buildings in relation to their height. Mature native trees often form a backdrop.’

The statement of desired future character is that the ‘consistency of siting and horizontality of the dwellings, and the openness of the streetscape will be maintained’. The desired future character is to be achieved by the following objectives and design responses:

Objective Design Responses

To encourage consideration of the landscape setting of new dwellings.

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

Comment: A landscape plan was endorsed under the earlier permit and this aspect of the proposal is unchanged and is acceptable. Several substantial trees are proposed to be removed; however unlike the character policy for other parts of Spring Gully, this precinct does not include a policy statement encouraging retention of existing or replacement of trees to be removed.

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: This is not wholly applicable as buildings are not proposed as part of this proposal. As the lot does fall to the rear dwellings will clearly be set out in a way that responds to this context.

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.


PAGE 37

Objective Design Responses

Comment: A complying front setback for both lots fronting the street would be 9 metres. VCAT accepted that lesser setbacks for the front lots were warranted stating that ‘that the front setback is acceptable given the variation in front setbacks in the street’. This assessment was made in the context of the expired permit and it is noted that the two front dwellings in that proposal were single storey. The assessing officer agrees that variation in setbacks in the street presents a context where dwellings on the two front lots could have a reduced front setback, subject to obtaining permission for the variation to the standards from the Municipal Building Surveyor prior to obtaining a privately issued Building Permit. It is proposed to include a ‘building envelope’ restriction for both front lots based on the previous VCAT endorsed front setback.

To reflect the existing rhythm of dwelling spacing.

Buildings should be setback 2 metres from at least one side boundary and preferably both.

Comment: The indicative dwelling set-out plan submitted with this application (identical to that approved by VCAT) shows generous and complying spaces around the dwellings. As is proposed with the front setback it is proposed to include a ‘building envelope’ restriction for side boundaries based on the previous VCAT endorsed side setbacks.

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.

Comment: The proposal approved by VCAT allowed the front four dwellings to be single storey with the rear six dwellings double storey. As with the above, as no development is proposed by this permit the final built form in the development is unknown.

To maintain the openness of the streetscape.

Provide open-style or low front fencing to a maximum of 1.2 metres.

Comment: The applicant has not definitely shown whether front fences are proposed or not, however their submission noted that if fences were to be used they would be low and open style.

The character merits of the proposal have been assessed as being acceptable in terms of subdivision as that is all that can be considered by this permit.

The objectors indicated two or four fewer lots would lessen their concerns however ‘density’ alone is not the sole consideration in determining if the proposal is a suitable character response. Many VCAT decisions (including the earlier decision on this site) note that character does not necessarily mean ‘more of the same’ and on this issue the VCAT member remarked that:


PAGE 38

‘The pattern of lots will be no different to that created through the subdivision of medium density housing developments on infill sites like this one. The subdivision per se will not have an impact on the character of the area, rather, it simply responds to the development that is considered to be acceptable for the site’ &

‘While the density is higher than what is typically found in the area, this in itself does not mean that the proposal is not respectful of neighbourhood character The subdivision will follow the development’.

In terms of compliance with Clause 56, the proposal has been assessed as having a high degree of compliance with the clause and it is noted that all services consent to the grant of a permit, the lots sizes capable of containing a well sited and orientated dwelling and subject to compliance with CFA requirements, will be accessible to emergency vehicles and all lots have suitable fire hydrant coverage.

Whether the native vegetation removal is acceptable with regard clause 52.17 (Native vegetation)

The vegetation on the property has been identified as Box Ironbark Forest Ecological Vegetation Class (EVC). The conservation status of Box Ironbark Forest EVC within the Goldfields Bioregion of the North Central CMA is depleted. The vegetation on site is scattered trees. The applicant supplied an appropriate level of supporting information relating to the vegetation removal proposed and the application as referred to DSE who conditionally consent to the grant of a permit. The earlier permit also allowed vegetation removal and on this aspect of the merits the VCAT Member remarked:

‘The reality is that this is not an overly large site in terms of the Native Vegetation Framework. It is zoned for urban use and development, namely residential. The purpose of the zone and the policies at State and Local level contemplate and encourage medium density housing on appropriate sites within locations like this. There was nothing presented to show that the vegetation to be lost is significant in terms of number of trees, their quality and overall value given the context of the site. Accordingly, I accept that the provision of offset planting is appropriate in these circumstances’.

Resident Objections The issues of character and vegetation removal have been canvassed in this report, the balance of the report turns to the outstanding issues raised. It is agreed that the residents do have a legitimate concern about what impacts they will feel as a result of the unknown form of the future dwellings. With the exception of the proposed building envelope restrictions relating to front and side setbacks, this issue cannot be addressed by this planning application as it is beyond the scope of what the application can consider. Once the land is subdivided a right to single dwelling on each lot will exist. The Building Permit process will consider the same amenity standards that the Planning Scheme would however this process is without any third party (neighbour) involvement unless specific variation is required, in which case the consent of the Municipal Building Surveyor and neighbour input is part of that process.


PAGE 39

The concerns relating to impact on services, in particular the sewer are addressed by permit conditions and all relevant services were consulted with in the process of the application and all consented. On this issue with the previous application, the VCAT member remarked that:

‘Despite concerns raised by objectors about the ability for the development to be serviced, the council’s engineers and the various service authorities have all have agreed that a permit can be issued for the proposed development, although in some cases, this would be subject to conditions that would have to be met’.

Traffic and parking concerns are legitimate planning concerns and the assessing officer has been assisted by input from City’s Traffic Engineer. The common property is at the centre of the property, thus traffic will not generate the same level of ‘noise’ impact in the cases where they often adjoin a neighbour. The City’s Traffic Engineer conditionally consents to the proposal. It is also noted that the application plans show provision for two visitor car spaces, which is not a requirement for a subdivision that proposes dwellings, but nonetheless a positive addition that will mitigate to a degree the impacts from visitors to the site. Broader noise issues that may result from future dwellings are beyond the scope that this application can consider. If excessive non-residential noise was emanating from a future dwelling, the normal remedies available also exist here in terms of Police, EPA or City Environmental Health enforcement.

Conclusion

For the reasons discussed above it is concluded that the permit application meets the requirements of the Planning Scheme and on this basis a permit should be granted.

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 the Subdivision of land into 10 lots and native vegetation removal at 47 Spring Gully Road, Spring Gully subject to the following conditions: 1. MODIFIED PLANS TO BE ENDORSED

The plans to be endorsed and which will then form part of the permit must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted but modified to show:


PAGE 40

(a) Provision of a building envelope on the plan of subdivision which prevents development within 6.55 metres of the front boundary Spring Gully Road (Lots 1 and 2).

(b) Provision of a building envelope on the plan of subdivision which prevents development within 2 metres of any side boundary (all lots).

2. LAYOUT PLANS

The subdivision, as shown on the endorsed plans, must not be altered without the prior written consent of the responsible authority.

3. LANDSCAPE PLAN Before a statement of compliance is issued for the subdivision a landscape plan must be submitted to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and then form part of the permit. The Landscape Plan must be generally in accordance with the appended plan and must incorporate two visitor car parking spaces..

4. COMPLETION OF LANDSCAPING Before a statement of compliance is issued, or at another time agreed in writing with the responsible authority the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plan must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

5. 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.

6. PUBLIC OPEN SPACE CONTRIBUTION The applicant or owner must pay to 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. The applicant must pay on demand to the City of Greater Bendigo, the City of Greater Bendigo’s reasonable costs and expenses to provide valuation for payment in lieu of open space.

7. TRAFFIC CHANGES (a) The visitor parking spaces must be dimensioned on the plan in accordance

with AS/NZS2890.1:2004 (b) Provide a passing area at the entrance at least 5m wide and 7m long. (Plan

needs to show the length dimensions.) (c) Access ways should have an internal radius of at least 4m at changes of

direction or intersections or be at least 4.2m wide. (d) The minimum sight line for pedestrian safety must be provided at the exit

lane frontage so as to accord with Clause 52.06-8. (e) If the existing layback is not used, it must be removed, and barrier kerb

reinstated.


PAGE 41

(f) Vehicle access from the existing kerb and channel to the property boundary must be via a properly constructed driveway to the satisfaction of Council. A Works Within Road Reserve Permit must be obtained from Council’s Engineering and Public Space Unit prior to commencing this work.

(g) Have a passing opportunity (minimum driveway width of 5.5metres) every 30 metres.

(h) Driveway to be concrete or asphalt or similar all weather hard surface.

8. 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: (i) Direction of stormwater run off. (j) A point of discharge for each lot. (k) Independent drainage for each lot. (l) Approval from the relevant authority for the point of discharge.

9. 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: Q5 = 16 l/s

10. 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.

11. 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 conditions 6-8 above.

12. SECTION 173 AGREEMENT If a stormwater detention system or a water quality treatment system is installed on the site, the owner must enter into an agreement with the responsible authority under Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 before a statement of compliance is issued. The agreement must provide for the following: (a) All systems must be designed by a qualified engineer and must be approved

by the responsible authority before construction. (b) All systems must be installed before, or concurrently with, the development

of a building on the site. (c) All systems must be completed before they are connected to Council's

drainage system. (d) All systems must be maintained by the owner and must not be modified

without the written approval of the responsible authority.


PAGE 42

(e) The owner must allow authorised Council officers to inspect any system on the site from time to time.

(f) The owner must pay all costs associated with the construction and maintenance of any system on the site.

13. 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.

14. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN Prior to commencement of works the owner or applicant must submit a Construction Management Plan (CMP) for approval by the responsible authority. The plan must include: (a) A site specific plan showing proposed erosion and sedimentation control

works. (b) Techniques and intervention levels to prevent a dust nuisance. (c) Techniques to prevent mud and dirt being transported from the site to

adjacent streets. (d) The requirements of North Central Catchment Management Authority in

accordance with Condition 16. During construction of works associated with the subdivision, the must employ and provide the protection methods contained in the CMP to the satisfaction of the responsible authority and the Environment Protection Agency.

15. COUNTRY FIRE AUTHORITY Hydrants: (a) Operable hydrants, above or below ground must be provided to the

satisfaction of CFA. (b) The maximum distance between these hydrants and the rear of all building

envelopes (or in the absence of the building envelope, the rear of all lots) must be 120m and hydrants must be no more than 200m apart.

(c) Hydrants must be identified as specified in ‘Identification of Street Hydrants for Firefighting purposes’ available under publication on the Country Fire Authority web site (www.cfa.vic.gov.au).

Roads: (a) Roads must be constructed to a standard so that they are accessible in all

weather conditions and capable of accommodating a vehicle of 15 tonnes for the trafficable road width.

(b) Must provide a minimum trafficable width of 3.5 metres, be clear of encroachments 4 metres vertically and have no obstructions within 0.5 metres either side of the formed width of the road.


PAGE 43

(c) Constructed roads more than 60m in length from the nearest intersection must have a turning circle with a minimum radius of 8m (including roll-over curbs if they are provided.) T or Y heads of dimensions specified by the CFA may be used as alternatives.

16. DEPARTMENT OF SUSTAINABILITY AND ENVIRONMENT

(a) In order to offset the removal of 5 scattered trees of Box Ironbark Forest Ecological Vegetation Class of low conservation significance approved for removal as part of this permit, the applicant must provide for the revegetation and protection of 200 plants of Box Ironbark Forest Ecological Vegetation Class or an alternative to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

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

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

II. Commence management of an offsite in accordance with an offset plan endorsed by the responsible authority. The offset plan must be prepared to the satisfaction of and approved by the responsible authority. The offset plan must include: • a description of the site, including a plan, where the offset site will

be provided. • a schedule of works required to achieve the offset over a 10 year

period, detailing: • management actions to be performed (e.g. fencing, weed control,

pest control, revegetation) • the person(s) responsible for implementing the specified

management actions • the timeline for the implementation of the management actions • the method by which the management actions will be

undertaken • the standard to which the management actions will be

undertaken

When approved the offset plan will be endorsed and form part of this permit.

(c) Within 12 months of the native vegetation removal:

I. The offset site must be permanently protected to the satisfaction of the responsible authority such as through en 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.

17. NORTH CENTRAL CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

(a) Prior to the commencement of works, appropriate silt control measures must be installed to prevent sediment laden runoff from entering the waterway. The silt control measures must be maintained throughout the construction period.


PAGE 44

(b) Stormwater runoff arising from the site must be treated to best practice standards prior to discharging to the waterway. The number of new stormwater connections to the waterway must be limited and prior to the commencement of drainage works, a separate Works on Waterway Licence must be obtained directly from North Central Catchment Management Authority. Please contact North Central Catchment Management Authority on (03) 5440 1896 to obtain a full understanding of the Authorities Requirements.

(c) Prior to certification a suitable restriction is to be placed on the title which specifies the minimum floor level of any new dwelling(s) on lots 9 and 10. The minimum floor level must be no lower than 300mm above the declared flood level.

18. GOULBURN MURRAY WATER

(a) Each lot must be provided with connection to the reticulated sewerage system in accordance with the requirements of Coliban Water.

(b) All stormwater discharged from the site must meet the urban run-off objectives and Standard C25 as specified in Clause 56.07-4 of the Victorian Planning Provisions. All infrastructure and works to manage stormwater must be in accordance with the requirements of the Responsible Authority.

(c) All construction activities must follow sediment control principles outlined in ‘Construction Techniques for Sediment Pollution Control’ (EPA, 1991).

19. 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.

20. 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: Set aside on the plan of subdivision for the use of Powercor Australia Ltd reserves and/or easements, and/or leases, satisfactory to Powercor Australia Ltd where any electric substation (other than a pole mounted type) is required to service the subdivision.


PAGE 45

(e) The applicant shall: Provide easements satisfactory to Powercor Australia Ltd, where easements have not been otherwise provided, for all existing Powercor Australia Ltd electric lines on the land and for any new powerlines required to service the lots and adjoining land, save for lines located, or to be located, on public roads set out on the plan. These easements shall show on the plan an easement(s) in favour of "Powercor Australia Ltd" for “Powerline Purposes” pursuant to Section 88 of the Electricity Industry Act 2000.

(f) The applicant shall: Obtain for the use of Powercor Australia Ltd any other easement external to the subdivision required to service the lots.

(g) The applicant shall: Adjust the position of any existing easement(s) for powerlines to accord with the position of the line(s) as determined by survey.

(h) The applicant shall: Obtain Powercor Australia Ltd’s approval for lot boundaries within any area affected by an easement for a powerline and for the construction of any works in such an area.

(i) 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.

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

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

21. TELSTRA

The plan of subdivision submitted for certification must be referred to Telstra in accordance with Section 8 of the Subdivision Act 1988.

22. 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.

23. EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT 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 registration of the subdivision is not completed within five years from the

date of certification of the plan of subdivision. The responsible authority may extend these expiry periods if a request is made in writing before the permit expires or within three months afterwards.

Note: Department of Sustainability and Environment 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. Note: North Central Catchment Management Authority Flood levels for the 1% AEP probability (100 year ARI) have been declared for this area under the Water Act 1989. The declared 1% flood level for the location described above is 234.4 metres AHD.


PAGE 46

RESOLUTION Moved Cr Chapman, Seconded Cr Lyons. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED


PAGE 47


PAGE 48


PAGE 49

RESOLUTION Moved Cr Chapman, Seconded Cr Lyons. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED


PAGE 50

2.3 3 PINNAROO COURT, STRATHDALE 3550 - 2 LOT SUBD IVISION OF LAND


Author Liz Commadeur, Subdivision Planner Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Dev elopment Director

Summary/Purpose

This application seeks approval for a two lot subdivision of the land at 3 Pinnaroo Court, Strathdale. Four neighbours have objected to the subdivision principally because of concerns about the interpretation of a covenant and neighbourhood character and amenity issues. The site is within Bendigo’s urban growth boundary and is zoned for residential purposes. It is considered that the subdivision meets the requirements of the Planning Scheme and a permit should be granted.

Policy Context


1. Built and Natural Environment Strategic Objectives: • Value, conserve and enhance the rich built and natural heritage. • Achieve high quality outcomes in planning and policy activities. • Encourage and foster high quality design to create environments that support

public wellbeing and economic success.

Report

Application No: DS/582/2012 Application Date: 7 August 2012 Applicant: Geoff Shaw & Associates Pty Ltd Land: 3 Pinnaroo Court, STRATHDALE 3550 Zoning: Residential 1 Zone Overlays: No overlays Subject Site and Surrounds

The subject site is located in an established part of Strathdale. The site is located on the corner of Pinnaroo Court and Ellimatta Court. The vacant site is generally rectangular in shape with an area of 849 square metres. There is no vegetation on the site.


PAGE 51

The land slopes gently to the north western part of the site. Services, including reticulated water and sewerage, power, gas and telecommunications are able to be connected to the site. The surrounding area is comprised of lots of varying sizes. Most of the lots have medium to large dwellings and generous street frontages. The gardens are small to medium with no front fences. Pinnaroo Court and Ellimatta Court are sealed roads with roll-over kerb and channel. There is no footpath constructed along the frontage of the site.

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

The applicant seeks approval to subdivide the land into 2 lots, with Lot 1 being 420 square metres and Lot 2 being 429 square metres. The proposed lots are each capable of containing a dwelling. Lot 1 will have direct access to Pinnaroo Court, while Lot 2 will have access from Ellimatta Court. A 2 metre wide drainage easement is proposed to run along the northern boundary of Lot 1. The lots would be fully serviced. The application was initially lodged as a two lot subdivision and variation of a restrictive covenant on the title. The interpretation of Point (c) and Point (d) of the covenant are relevant to the assessment of this application. Point (c) states “that no main building shall be erected which has a floor area of less than 140 square metres including the outer walls thereof such area being calculated by excluding the area of carports, garages, terraces, pergolas and/or verandahs”. Point (d) states “that no flats or home units shall be erected on any Lot”.


PAGE 52

It should be noted that the covenant does not prohibit subdivision, rather it controls the type and size of dwellings.

Discussions were held between City planning staff and the applicant regarding the issue of whether a variation to the covenant was required. City officers considered that the proposed subdivision and subsequent development on the lots would not contravene the covenant. The covenant restricts the construction of “flats” or “home units” rather than detached dwellings.

The applicant provided legal advice which supported this view. The legal advice concluded that “the construction of a free standing detached dwelling on any lot in Plan of Subdivision 218444N is not prohibited by the covenant and is therefore permitted”.

Consequently, the application was amended to delete reference to a covenant variation.


The site is in the Residential 1 Zone. A permit is required to subdivide land pursuant to the zone controls. The following provisions of the 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) • Residential development (clause 16.01) • 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) • Infrastructure (clause 21.09) • Reference documents (clause 21.10) Local Planning Policies:

• Salinity and erosion risk policy (clause 22.04) • Strathdale residential character policy (clause 22.24) Other relevant provisions: • Residential subdivision (clause 56) • Decision guidelines (clause 65)


PAGE 53


Referrals As noted a two lot subdivision does not trigger a referral to any external service authorities. The following internal department has been consulted on the proposal:

Referral Comment

Drainage No objection subject to standard conditions

Public Notification The original application, including variation of the covenant, was advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers and a notice placed in the Bendigo Advertiser. As a result of the advertising four objections were received, with the grounds of objection being:

• Proposed subdivision will contravene the existing covenant.

• Proposed subdivision will alter the neighbourhood character.

• Future development on the site will cause amenity issues for an abutting neighbour.

After the application was amended to allow for a two lot subdivision only, it was re-advertised by way of notice on the site and letters to adjoining and nearby owners and occupiers. As a result of the subsequent advertising, one objection from an original submitter was received. The grounds of objection replicated the original concerns that the proposed subdivision will contravene the existing covenant and alter the neighbourhood character. The objections are discussed below. Planning Assessment Neighbourhood Character In relation to neighbourhood character, the site is located within Precinct 6 of the Strathdale/Kennington residential character policy. The precinct is described as being:

“The areas in this precinct are newly developed with small setbacks and numbers of larger dwellings. In general gardens are establishing with a mix of natives and exotics, however in parts substantial remnant indigenous and native trees (mostly iron bark) provide a backdrop that is distinctive. The streetscapes have an open feel created by a lack of fencing forward of the dwellings”.

The desired future character for the precinct is “to strengthen the garden settings of the dwellings”.


PAGE 54

Pinnaroo Court and Ellimata Court are comprised of lots that range in area from 380 square metres to 1,200 square metres. There is no uniform pattern to the shape of the lots in the courts. The types of housing in both courts are generally medium to large brick dwellings with reasonable front setbacks and a variety of side setbacks, constructed after 1990. Single storey dwellings abut the northern corner of the site and on the western boundary. Gardens tend to be small to medium in size. The objectors are concerned the proposed subdivision does not respect the surrounding character of the neighbourhood. In response to the objectors’ concerns, it is considered that the proposed subdivision will respect the character of the neighbourhood for the following reasons:

• The frontages of the proposed lots are generous and comparable to the lots located along both courts.

• The area of the vacant lots is sufficient to support a small dwelling with a small garden and private open space.

• Similar types of subdivisions have occurred within close proximity to the site, which have blended well with the existing streetscapes.

Covenant In accordance with legislation a permit must not be granted for any proposal that may contravene a covenant. There are two points of interest in the Covenant which affects this application. First, point (c) requires that a “main building” on a lot must be no less than 140 square metres in area. Second, point (d) restricts any future development of “flats” or “home units” on any lot in the subdivision. In relation to compliance with point (c) of the covenant, the proposed lots, including Lot 1 which has a two metre wide drainage easement that runs along the northern boundary, are large enough to fit a dwelling that meets the minimum size of 140 square metres. This is a small house by today’s standards. There is potential for the owners of the lots to construct a dwelling and establish a garden which will respect the existing streetscape in the future. In response to the issue of the restriction of “flats” or “home units”, it is important to understand the meaning of these types of dwellings. The interpretation of the meaning of “flats” or home units” is not entirely clear cut. There is no reference to these types of buildings in the Planning Scheme. Planning staff considers that a “flat” or “home unit” is a type of attached multi-dwelling such as an apartment building or townhouse development rather than a stand-alone house. It is likely that the intent of the covenant was to ensure that only single detached dwellings with a minimum floor area of 140 square metres be constructed on each of the lots. The applicant provided legal advice which supports this view. According to the advice, the term flat is described as being commonly known as a single dwelling which is comprised of a “suite of rooms” or an “apartment on a single floor of a building containing more than one such dwelling”.


PAGE 55

A home unit is described as being part of a “residential building in which ownership of a unit is gained by acquiring shares in an incorporated body”. The legal advice concluded that it would not be a breach of the Covenant to subdivide the land and create two separate dwellings on the newly created lots. In conclusion, Council agrees with the legal advice provided by the applicant. It is considered that the Covenant does not preclude the subdivision of land and subsequent future construction of a dwelling on each lot. Amenity Issues One objector is concerned about potential overlooking of their property at 2 Pinnaroo Court. If a single storey dwelling was constructed, overlooking issues are unlikely. It is true that if a double storey dwelling was constructed, issues of overlooking could arise. Overlooking towards this property from Lot 1 would be minimal due to the location of a brick shed along the northern part of the common boundary. The brick shed provides a degree of separation between the two properties. In any event overlooking can be managed in accordance with the relevant Rescode standard (at the Building permit stage), such as controlling the design and location of windows, balconies and patios. Future tree screening and use of fence extensions or other techniques could be used if necessary to minimise potential overlooking issues. Rescode 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.

Conclusion

For the reasons above, it is considered that the proposed subdivision complies with the Planning Scheme and a permit should be granted.

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 Two Lot Subdivision at 3 Pinnaroo Court, Strathdale subject to the following conditions:


PAGE 56

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.

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. TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES (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;


PAGE 57

• 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.

7. 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. (d) Easements as required.

8. 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: Lot 1: Q10= 3.0 l/s Lot 2: Q10= 3.0 l/s

9. 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. Or The responsible authority may deem this condition satisfied by a development contribution towards the treatment of surface and stormwater discharge from the approved subdivision, building and/or works, whether or not such new stormwater treatment infrastructure has been or will be situated within the boundaries of the subject land or its immediate catchment. Such amount is assessed as $750 or such amount applying at the time of payment.

10. 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.

11. 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:


PAGE 58

(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.

12. 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.

13. EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT The permit will expire if: (a) the plan of subdivision is not certified within 2 years from the date of this

permit; or (b) The registration of the subdivision is not completed within 5 years from

the date of certification of the plan of subdivision. The responsible authority may extend these expiry periods if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within 3 months afterwards.

RESOLUTION Moved Cr Leach, Seconded Cr Williams. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED


PAGE 59

Attachment 1 : Proposed Plan of Subdivision


PAGE 60

Attachment 2: Aerial view of the local area


PAGE 61

2.4 CROCODILE GOLD P/L FOSTERVILLE GOLD PROJECT NOM INATION FOR COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVES


Authors Peter Hargreaves, Planner Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning and D evelopment Director

Summary/Purpose

The purpose of the report is to appoint a community representative to fill a vacancy on the Environmental Review Committee for the Fosterville Gold Project for the balance of the current 2 year appointment period which expires in October 2014. There are three community representative positions on the ERC. Two appointments were made in October last year but there were insufficient expressions of interest to fill the third position. A new round of advertising has attracted two expressions of interest for the single vacancy.

Policy Context

Council Plan 2009-2013 (Updated 2012) Community and Culture: • Encourage, recognise and support active and informed engagement in civic life.


The Fosterville Gold Project commenced in 1988 with amendments to both the Huntly and Strathfieldsaye Planning Schemes to allow for open cut pits along the Fosterville fault line. A further approval by way of Environmental Effects Statement (EES) in 1997, provided for deepening of some pits and underground mining. Part of the original approvals written into the current Mining Lease (ML 1868) provide for the formation and ongoing project monitoring using an Environmental Review Committee (ERC) consisting of agencies (Environment Protection Authority, Goulburn Murray Water, Department of Primary Industries - Minerals and Petroleum, Department of Sustainability and Environment, City of Greater Bendigo) and 3 community representatives. The committee meets quarterly and is currently chaired by Councillor Campbell. The key role of the committee is to review the performance of the operator against the requirements of legislation, the licence and the environmental management plan. The committee may also act as a forum for discussion amongst government agencies, the community and the company. Subsidiary roles include:


PAGE 62

• Provision of feedback on any environmental problems associated with the mining operation;

• Enabling consultation on Work Plans and Work Plan Variations; • Reviewing new proposals and advising the company on the means to minimise

impacts and expedite approvals; and • Improving community understanding about mining and mechanisms of government. The Lease provides that the Greater Bendigo City Council will select the community representatives from a public call for nominations.

Report

In response to an invitation via public notices in both the Bendigo Advertiser and McIvor Times, two expressions of interest were received for the vacancy. Both candidates were interviewed and assessed against the advertised key selection criteria, as follows: • Demonstrated links with their local community; • Demonstrated ability to communicate with their local community and liaise between

the community and the ERC on matters of concern or importance; • Demonstrated commitment to working collaboratively in a community consultative

setting; • A commitment and the availability to serve for a period of two years, in the knowledge

that meetings are convened at least four times per year; • Technical expertise is not a pre-requisite, but the ability to objectively assess and

communicate technical information to the community is desirable. Both applicants possess a strong background in environmental management. One applicant was more able to demonstrate the skills, abilities and experience required, as identified by the key selection criteria. In addition, the candidate’s farming activity in the vicinity of the mine and ties to the local community were viewed as beneficial to fulfilling this role. Mr Jeff Cummins is a former regional manager for EPA Victoria based in Bendigo and currently a senior environmental adviser for the Australian Industry Group, Bendigo. He operates a mixed farm located near the mine and is a member of the Axedale Golf Club.

Resource Implications

Nil

Attachments

• Letters of nomination.


PAGE 63

RECOMMENDATION

That Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to appoint Mr Jeff Cummins to fill the vacancy of community member of the Fosterville Environmental Review Committee for the period to 30 October, 2014. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Campbell, Seconded Cr Williams. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED


PAGE 64

2.5 INTEGRATED TRANSPORT & LAND USE STRATEGY (ITLUS ) UPDATE


Author Katherine Wrzesinski, Senior Integrated Tran sport Planner Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning and D evelopment Director

Summary/Purpose

This report provides an update on the work undertaken since the appointment of a Senior Integrated Transport Planner and seeks Council’s endorsement of the Integrated Transport & Land Use Strategy:

• Project Brief; • Project Work Program; • proposed Project Governance Structure; and, • Draft Community Engagement Plan.

Policy Context

Council Plan Reference: City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2009–2013 (updated 2012) Built and Natural Environment

Strategy 1.12 Develop a sustainable integrated transport network.

Action 1.12.1 Undertake, in partnership with key agencies, the development and preparation of an Integrated Transport Strategy for Greater Bendigo.

Community and Culture

Strategy 3.9 Support and strengthen community resilience and build social capital.

Action 3.9.1 Identify and built organisational knowledge and capacity for developing community-wide approaches to achieving positive behaviour change on issues of concern to the wider population, specifically waste management, reduction in avoidable health risks and up taking of sustainable transport options.

Strategy Reference: Draft Bendigo Road Transport Strategy 2011. The current transportation strategy “Bendigo 2020 Transportation Strategy” was developed in 1993.


PAGE 65


A Community Led Legacy This report marks a significant milestone in the progression of a visionary strategy for Greater Bendigo. Following significant community mobilisation and response to a Draft Road Transport Strategy, the Greater Bendigo City Council had the foresight to reposition and appropriately resource the development of an Integrated Transport and Land Use Strategy (ITLUS). The development of the ITLUS has the potential to set a precedent in Victoria and goes to the heart of Greater Bendigo remaining a progressive, strategy led City. Investing in the development of the Strategy will be the first step towards establishing a legacy of community informed and effective decision making. Critical to the development of the ITLUS is the principle of ensuring best practice community and stakeholder engagement to elicit innovative strategy development and concrete commitments to its delivery. The work undertaken since the appointment of the Senior Integrated Transport Planner has focused on designing an effective process to deliver the ITLUS. This work follows a number of strategies, reports and research documents (Attachment 1) completed since 1970s. The current approach stands out in that it involves engaging the community and other key stakeholders in setting the parameters of the Strategy scope, methodology and Project governance structure. To that effect, the documents which are the subject of this Report namely, the Draft Project Brief, the Draft Community Engagement Plan and the Draft Project Work Program have been informed by the discussions held with the community and stakeholders to date; and had been reviewed and endorsed by the Project Reference and Technical Working Groups. The Legislative Mandate In 2010 the Transport Integration Act 2010 (the Act) took effect. The Act constitutes the most significant change in overarching policy, guiding transport and land use planning in Victoria. Aligning the ITLUS with the Act’s vision, objectives and decision making principals sets a precedent for other metropolitan and regional cities. As such, it offers an opportunity for Greater Bendigo to be the leader in integrating its transport and land use strategic decision making while basing it on the principles of social equity, economic prosperity and environmental sustainability. While the proposed approach aligns the development of ITLUS with the Act, it also ensures that the Strategy evolves into a guiding document which: • Reflects and strengthens Bendigo’s regional city context; • Ensures the Strategy’s application within both, the CoGB’s urban and rural areas;

and, • Enables responses that match the local community’s aspirations and needs.


PAGE 66

Report

Progress Update The Senior Integrated Transport Planner commenced work in mid-October 2012 and embarked on detailed scoping and setting up of the Project. To date, tasks have included:

• Review of relevant documentation. • Initial fieldtrips including: a truck tour of Bendigo’s freight routes; a bicycle tour of key

bike routes; a walking tour of the City Centre, a number of car visits to the City’s suburbs and townships.

• Initial engagement with key stakeholders, including CoGB staff, Department of Transport, Department of Planning and Community Development, VicRoads, Bendigo Take Action Group, Plan B – Latrobe University Planning Student’s Association, Christian’s Bus Co., Bendigo Tramways, Vline, the Positive Aging Group, local businesses and City of Greater Bendigo Councillors.

• Updating of Council website. • Media updates, including two interviews with the Bendigo Advertiser and publishing of

an ‘opinion peace’ in the same newspaper. • Determining project scope, methodology, resourcing, and the level and nature of

community engagement. • Drafting of the Steering Committee, Reference Group and Technical Working Group

Terms of Reference. • Development of the Community Engagement Plan and associated communication

plan. • Establishment of the Reference Group and Technical Working Group Memberships

and holding of their inaugural meetings. • Development of a detailed Project Work Program including cost estimates. • Drafting of the Project Brief. • Drafting of a Contractor Brief to undertake the Second Stage of the Project. Project Brief The Brief (Attachment 2) outlines the process of embarking on the Project and the principles which will guide the development of ITLUS. Furthermore, the Project Brief defines the scope of the task ahead and the associated research and analysis; it sets out the Project Governance Structure; provides an overview of the proposed community engagement; lists all the key task and outputs; and details the anticipated Project cost estimates. Effectively, the Project Brief constitutes a guiding document for the development of the ITLUS, with the following objectives:

• To outline a clear vision, objectives and decision making principles for an integrated and sustainable transport and land use system;

• To align with the vision, objectives and decision making principles of the Transport Integration Act 2010 (the Act) with CoGB ITLUS;

• To be responsive to Bendigo’s regional city context; • To enable application within the CoGB’s urban and rural areas; and • To respond to the local community’s aspirations and needs.


PAGE 67

Furthermore, the objective of developing the ITLUS is:

• To apply this vision, objectives and decision making principles in identifying preferred options for an integrated transport and land use system across the municipality; and

• To gain consensus on specific actions, timeframes and assignment of responsibilities, among both CoGB work areas, as well as other stakeholders, to ensure a successful delivery.

The proposed approach to developing the ITLUS will involve building on partnerships with key transport and land use agencies; best practice engagement and consultation with the community; a clear alignment with the Transport Integration Act 2010 (the Act).and, importantly, a reconsideration of submissions made to the draft Road Transport Strategy (2011). The proposed approach is innovative in terms of: • The breadth and type of community engagement. • The direct alignment with the Transport Integration Act (2010). • The potential to undertake state-of-the-art transport and land use modelling. Community Engagement Plan Community engagement will constitute an integral part of the Project. As such, a detailed Community Engagement Plan (Attachment 3) has been developed to:

• Identify the stakeholders; • Nominate the proposed engagement methods for reaching each stage of the Project; • Detail the proposed timing and purpose of the engagement; • Outline the required resources and costs associated with each engagement method. • Identify the positive and negative impacts of the proposed engagement and any

mitigating strategies. Greater Bendigo’s transport and land use system is complex. It involves a wide spectrum of competing needs, views and demands, as well as numerous sectors of the community, government levels and agencies. In order for the ITLUS to be inclusive a large number of stakeholders have been identified, namely:


PAGE 68

The Project depends on effective internal and external community engagement. As such, the engagement will span the entire process of the ITLUS development and will continue into the delivery stage (subject to drafting of the CoGB Delivery and Community Action Plans). The community engagement process will help identify what the City of Greater Bendigo, other government departments and agencies, as well as community members themselves can do to make travel for daily needs and transportation of goods and services more sustainable, equitable and efficient, and how to better integrate these activities. The ITLUS will need to identify emerging issues, opportunities and potential solutions; as well as address a myriad of competing views, needs and demands and will be developed within a context of economic constrains. The significant role that human behaviour plays in the way transport and land use evolves poses the challenge for the participants to become better informed about the implications of their behaviour, the choices they make, as well as their impacts on other people, the environment and the economy. As such, the engagement process has been designed to inform, educate and empower, as it aims to give the participants opportunities to contribute towards both Strategy development and its implementation. To that effect, a spectrum of engagement methods is proposed, ranging from community workshops and listening posts; to art based activities targeting children and the youth; through to a media campaign involving a series of ‘story telling’ articles on issues that are pertinent to transport and land use, but which will be told in the context of a personal experience of a local resident or business.


PAGE 69

Project Governance Structure The proposed project governance structure has been designed as most effective in delivering a highly complex Strategy, one which must take into account the competing transport and land use needs and demands of Greater Bendigo community. It therefore comprises of a Reference Group, a Technical Working Group and a Steering Committee, with the Project Manager (CoGB Strategy Unit) acting as the main conduit between them. It is noted however, that these three will not operate in isolation. In fact, the Project program has been designed such that the Members will gather to

work together on the key Project deliverables. Significantly, it is the composition and breadth of these Groups’ and Committee memberships that is unique.

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

TO BE UNDERTAKEN THROUGHT THE LIFE OF THE

PROJECT

INFORM Council website updates

Social media updates

Media releases

Media interview

Opinion peace in local newspaper

Issue specific stories & project update in Greater Bendigo news

Direct correspondence via email and post

Community newsletter updates

Fact sheets

Councillor Bulletins

CONSULT One-on-one interviews with key stakeholders

Project Manager field trips

Informal meetings & discussions

On-line poll/survey

Video recorded stakeholder field trips

Formal exhibition of Draft Integrated Transport & Land Use Strategy

INVOLVE

Community workshops

Art based activity: targeting children & youth

Oral history initiative: targeting older people

Listening Post

Targeted community visits

Council Meeting

Council Forum

One-on-one Councillor discussions

COLLABORATE Steering Committee meeting

Reference Group meeting

Technical Working Group meeting

Reference & Technical Working Group focus session


PAGE 70

Reference Group

The Reference Group comprises members of the community, business, transport and development sector, as well as specialist groups and organisations who have a keen interest in the development and delivery of the ITLUS. The Members largely constitute individuals and organisations which have either made submissions to the Draft Bendigo Road Transport Strategy (March 2011); or registered interest via the CoGB Transport Planning website. Many of them have attended the public Forums, held in 2012. Some have engaged with Council staff on issues pertinent to the Strategy over the years. Others have expressed a keen interest in being part of ITLUS since the appointment of the Senior Integrated Transport Planner.

To ensure that a wide spectrum of views and ideas are considered, the Reference Group Members represent a range of age groups, levels of technical expertise and responsibility, business sectors and particular areas of interests.

The Reference Group will contribute local knowledge of current transport and land use issues as well as an insight into the City’s future needs and desires. It will provide input into the Project; contribute possible solutions; assist with setting priorities; and make recommendations to the Technical Working Group and the Steering Committee.

Technical Working Group

The Technical Working Group will comprise staff from the City of Greater Bendigo, Department of Transport, Department of Planning and Community Development, VicRoads, VLine and VicTrack . The proposed Membership has been designed to include officers who possess a high level of technical expertise in areas affecting transport and land use; have responsibility over delivering transport and land use related projects; who have corporate knowledge of the work undertaken to date; as well as established relationships with the CoGB community, business sector and other stakeholders in the Project. The Technical Working Group will contribute technical expertise into the Project, provide advice and recommendations to the Steering Committee and the Reference Group.


PAGE 71

Steering Committee The Steering Committee will comprise representatives of various organisations who possess strategic insight and a high level of influence and responsibility over all matters associated with transport and land use, affecting the City of Greater Bendigo and the region. The Steering Committee will be responsible for overseeing the progress of the Project, providing guidance and direction to the Project team and approval of Project deliverables for consideration by Council. Further detail pertaining to Project management and Governance Structure, including membership, is outlined in the Draft Reference Group, Technical Working Group and Steering Committee Terms of Reference (Attachments 4, 5 and 6 respectively). All three documents had been drafted with the input of the Reference Group and the Technical Working Group Members. Project Work Plan Development of the ITLUS will occur over four stages. Each Stage of the ITLUS development will be undertaken in two Phases (refer to Attachment 2 Draft Project Brief for a detailed account of anticipated tasks and outputs for each Project Stage). Stage 1 – Project Inception November 2012-April 2013

This Stage, involving initial community engagement, scoping, establishment of Project Governance Structure and seeking Council’s approval of the 2013-2014 Project budget will be completed upon endorsement of recommendations of this Report. Stage 2 – Identifying the Vision April 2013-August 2013

This Stage will involve gathering of information for the purpose of drafting a State of Transport & Land Use Report – a written and visual account of key population, land use, travel and transport infrastructure characteristics and trends. This Report will then form the basis of community engagement, designed to identify the ITLUS vision, objectives and decision making principles; which will be captured in a CoGB Vision for Transport & Land Use Report, and will be subject to Council’s approval. Also during this Stage the design of an Internal Integration Model will take place, which will include a detailed audit of all relevant existing CoGB activities. The purpose of the internal integration model is to design a more effective and better-coordinated process of conducting CoGB’s transport and land use related strategic and resource planning, as well as day-today activities. Community engagement at this Stage will include (but will not be limited to): on line poll/survey; art based activities, targeting Primary School aged children, youth and older members of the community; community workshops; Reference, Technical Working Group and Steering Committee meetings and workshops, issue specific articles and other media and communication updates (for detail refer Attachment 3 Draft Community Engagement Plan).


PAGE 72

Stage 3 – Applying the Vision August 2013-March 2014

This Stage will involve modelling and analysis of transport and land use scenarios for Greater Bendigo and their anticipated costs, benefits, impacts, constrains and opportunities. The community will be engaged to work through the modelling scenarios detailed in the Transport & Land Use Options Paper. This work will be conducted within the context of Council adopted vision, objectives and decision making principles, as developed during Stage 2 of the Project. Council’s formal adoption of the preferred scenario for Greater Bendigo will be sought following the community engagement process. Furthermore, this Phase will involve a range of engagements, designed to build capacity in the community to contribute effectively to the development and implementation of the ITLUS, including: video recorded stakeholder fieldtrips (e.g. a bus tour, a tour of key cycle routes, a tour of key freight routes etc.); targeted consultation involving visits to established community associations, sports clubs etc.; community workshops; listening posts etc. (for detail refer Attachment 3 Draft Community Engagement Plan). Stage 4 – Defining the Strategy March 2014 – June 2014

This Stage in the ITLUS development is designed to bring all the previous work together with the aim of developing a way forward. As such, it will involve development of specific actions, timeframes and assignment of responsibilities among both CoGB work areas, as well as other stakeholders, which will be captured within CoGB Delivery Plan and a Community Action Plan. These will include other government departments and agencies, such as VicRoads, Department of Transport etc; and community stakeholders, particularly those represented on the Project Reference Group, such as Latrobe University, the Traders Association, Bendigo Take Action Group etc. The purpose of developing both a CoGB Delivery Plan and a Community Action Plan is to engage all stakeholders in both development as well as implementation of the ITLUS. The final Draft of the ITLUS will be publicly exhibited and Council’s formal adoption will be sought after review of community feedback. It is proposed that the Strategy be launched during a public event, celebrating its development and marking the commencement of the implementation process (for detail, refer Attachment 3 Draft Community Engagement Plan).


The costs associated with Stage 1 – Project Inception and Stage 2 – Identifying the Vision will be met under the currently approved 2012-2013 City of Greater Bendigo Budget. Further funds are required to undertake Stage 3- Applying the Vision and Stage 4 – Defining the Strategy, to complete the development of the ITLUS.


PAGE 73

Prior to the commencement of the project “in principle” agreement was received from the State Government about co-funding the project. Recent advice is that this funding is unlikely to be received due to various organisational and financial changes at the State Government. This means that there is an estimated budget shortfall of $132,500. This is a significant change in project costs that could not have been foreseen, and will place a significant burden onto Council. The shortfall has been included in the draft budget for Council to consider. A large proportion of this sum is to go towards undertaking state-of-the-art transport and land use modelling. This is proposed as a direct response to the community’s concerns about the methodology used in modelling Bendigo’s road capacity and the resulting recommendations of the Draft Bendigo Road Transport Strategy (March 2011).Funding of this component of the Project will enable the City of Greater Bendigo to determine the value, applicability or otherwise of the modelling undertaken in Drafting Bendigo Road Transport Strategy (March 2011). Furthermore, it offers an opportunity to apply ground-braking modelling techniques which take account of not only private vehicle traffic, but also the movements and volumes of public transport, pedestrians, cyclists and freight. In that respect, the City has the potential to become a leader in transport and land use interaction modelling; and developing a better informed, a more holistic and integrated transport and land use strategy.

Conclusion

This report informs Council on the recent work undertaken to develop the ITLUS. It is proposed that this work continue, by:

• Considering and building on knowledge gathered and work completed to date. • Seeking input and exploring a broad spectrum of views and opinions. • Exploring and applying visionary and creative ideas in transport and land use

planning and funding mechanism. • Defining roles, responsibilities and areas of influence of key stakeholders. • Building effective partnerships, reaching formal agreements and establishing

networks of cooperation. • Clarifying and building on areas of consensus and outlining areas where consensus

is difficult to achieve. • Employing best practice research, analysis, consultation and community engagement

techniques. • Creating awareness, building skills and working towards changing attitudes and

behaviours to create positive outcomes.

Additionally, the ITLUS development process will:

• Provide reasonable certainty to the residential and business community, Council, agencies and developers regarding the long-term transport and land use planning vision for the City.

• Identify emerging issues, opportunities and potential solutions within a context of economic constrains.

• Address a myriad of competing views, needs and demands.


PAGE 74

• Provide a range of opportunities for community involvement in the Strategy development and its implementation, including opportunities to share views, opinions and information; as well as decision-making; and active delivery of programs and initiatives.

• Establish a governance structure and process to support the delivery of the Project and which contributes a cross-section of representation including project sponsors, technical specialists and community; and,

• Coordinate the strategic and technical planning effort with the timely involvement and input of specialist government and private agencies and interest groups.

The above outlined process has been detailed in a number of Project documents, namely the:

• Draft Project Brief which details the tasks to be undertaken, the estimated Project costs, and outlines the proposed Project Governance Structure;

• Draft Project Work Program, which provides a summary of activities to be undertaken; and

• The Draft Community Engagement Plan which outlines the proposed methods for engaging, informing and empowering the Greater Bendigo community.

It is recommended that Council resolve to approve the proposed ITLUS development process by endorsing the associated Project planning documentation.

Attachments

• Attachment 1 – Overview of Transport Planning in Greater Bendigo (separate document)

• Attachment 2 – Draft Project Brief (separate document) • Attachment 3 – Draft Community Engagement Plan (separate document) • Attachment 4 – Reference Group Terms of Reference (separate document) • Attachment 5– Technical Working Group Terms of Reference (separate document) • Attachment 6 - Steering Committee Terms of Reference (separate document)

RECOMMENDATION

That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to approve the proposed ITLUS development process by endorsing the associated Project planning documentation, including the Draft Project Brief, Draft Project Work Program, Draft Community Engagement Plan and the proposed Project Governance Structure.

RESOLUTION Moved Cr Lyons, Seconded Cr Williams. That the recommendation be adopted.


PAGE 75

AMENDMENT Moved Cr Cox, seconded Cr Chapman. That Council advertise widely for expressions of interest for 3 community representatives for the Steering Committee, 3 residents for the Reference Group, 3 professional people with transport expertise for the Technical Working Group.

LOST

The original motion was put and CARRIED

Cr Cox called for a division on the voting for the motion. FOR VOTE - Cr Ruffell (Mayor), Cr Campbell, Cr Fyffe, Cr Lyons, Cr Weragoda, Cr Williams AGAINST VOTE - Cr Chapman, Cr Cox, Cr Leach


PAGE 76

2.6 DRAFT NATURAL ENVIRONMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE TE RMS OF REFERENCE


Author Anthony Sheean, Senior Environment Officer Responsible Darren Fuzzard, Director, Presentat ion and Assets Director

Summary/Purpose

This report outlines proposed amendments and additions to the Natural Environment Advisory Committee’s (Committee) Terms of Reference and has been prepared for Council's consideration and endorsement.

Policy Context

Council Plan Reference: City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2009-2013 (updated 2012) Built and Natural Environment Strategy 1.5 Work to promote, protect, maintain and restore Greater Bendigo's

natural heritage.

Community and Culture Strategy 3.3 Use meaningful and effective communication and engagement

with all sectors of the community as an input to decision-making.

Strategy 3.8 Encourage, recognise and support active informed engagement in civic life.


The Natural Environment Advisory Committee was established in 1995 to provide the best possible advice to Council on how to conserve, enhance and promote places of environmental significance in the municipality.

The makeup and intent of the Committee has remained largely unchanged for many years, with the Committee having substantially met its obligations under the Terms of Reference (ToR).


PAGE 77

Reviews of the ToR have occurred on several occasions over the life of the Committee, with the last review taking place in 2005. A review of the ToR for the Committee has therefore been undertaken in 2012/13 with the aim of ensuring that the Committee maintains its relevance and is well positioned to represent the community and provide advice to Council on strategic issues of relevance. The review has also provided an opportunity to ensure that the ToR format and structure is consistent with the ToR of other Council advisory committees.

Report

The objectives and purpose of the Committee are contained in the attached revised version of the ToR. A number of additions and amendments have been proposed and are outlined as follows: Purpose:

The principles and aims of the current ToR have been reviewed and updated and are now combined under "purpose". The essential aims and objectives of the Committee have not changed. Terminology:

The term "natural environment" and "natural environmental management" have been included to better reflect the Committee's specific areas of interest. Membership:

The current number of community representatives on the Committee is six. The revised ToR recommends "up to ten community representatives". This number is consistent with the number of community members on Council's other advisory committees and will provide an opportunity for increased community participation. This section also clarifies membership of the City of Greater Bendigo's Manager of Sustainable Environment as a full member of the committee. Term of Appointment:

Currently the ToR specifies initial two year appointments with an aim of changeover of half the community membership every two to three years. This approach has proven difficult to implement in practice and is not consistent with the other advisory committees terms of appointment. The revised ToR now states:

"Community representatives on the Committee are to be appointed for three years. At the conclusion of a term all community representative's positions become vacant". "Retiring Committee members may apply for further terms of office". Additions:

The following items have been included in the revised ToR to provide clarity and alignment with other Council advisory committee's ToR.


PAGE 78

Expression of Interest:

Provides further information and guidance around this process. Conduct of Meetings:

Provides further guidance around conduct of meetings specific to the Committee. Conflict of Interest:

Clarifies that Committee members should declare a conflict of interest if they are to discuss an item that, if supported by Council, could result in a direct or indirect benefit or loss to them. The provisions of the Local Government Act 1989 apply to Councillor members. Dismissal of Members:

Provides for a process to revoke membership of any person found to be acting outside the interests of the City of Greater Bendigo and the communities or sectors that the Committee is charged with representing. Insurance:

Provides information and clarity regarding Council's insurance arrangements. Dissolution:

Provides direction concerning the process for dissolution of the Committee. Implementation and Review:

Provides for a structured review process for the Committee's ToR. Resources provided by City of Greater Bendigo:

Clarifies the City of Greater Bendigo's allocation of resources to the Committee. The addition of this section does not alter the current resource allocation to the Committee but merely seeks to ensure clarity around this area of the Committee's operation. Communicating within Council:

Clarifies how communication between the Committee and Council should occur.


Internal Consultation:

The Committee's deliberations throughout the drafting of the ToR have been supported by advice and guidance from the City of Greater Bendigo's Manager of Sustainable Environment, Manager of Executive Services, Principal Risk Adviser and Senior Environment Officer.


PAGE 79

External Consultation:

All members of the Natural Environment Advisory Committee have had an opportunity to contribute to the development of the ToR. The Committee considered the draft ToR at its 5 February 2013 committee meeting. The Committee provided a number of appropriate suggestions and inclusions. These have, wherever possible, been included. The most relevant inclusions are: • The increase of community members from six to ten.

• The requirement for the attendance of at least three community members in order to form a quorum.

• Structuring a review process for the ToR, every three years just prior to the end of the Committee's term of appointment.

• Changes to terminology as specified above.

• Clarity around membership of the City of Greater Bendigo, Manager of Sustainable Environment.


The City of Greater Bendigo's Senior Environment Officer currently provides administrative support to the Committee, and this is reflected within the Officers position description. The level of resources the City of Greater Bendigo may be able to allocate to various issues or initiatives the Committee may identify into the future will need to be assessed on a case by case basis.

Conclusion

The purpose of the Committee is to provide the best possible advice and strategic representation to Council on how to conserve, enhance and promote places of environmental significance and to support Council in the development of strategy, policy and advocacy relative to the natural environment. The Committee recently undertook to review its ToR and make suggestions for Council consideration. The ToR have also been reviewed by relevant City of Greater Bendigo staff and a number of additions have been included to provide further information and clarity around the operation and function of the Committee. The additions and amendments to the draft ToR do not alter or change the original purpose or objectives of the Committee but rather clarify aspects of the Committee's operation. The most significant change is a recommended increase of community representation from six to ten.

Attachments

1. Revised Natural Environment Advisory Committee Terms of Reference


PAGE 80

RECOMMENDATION

That Council endorse the revised Natural Environment Advisory Committee Terms of Reference. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Fyffe, Seconded Cr Williams. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED


PAGE 81

Natural Environment Advisory Committee

TERMS OF REFERENCE and associated matters

April 2013 Revised April 2013


PAGE 82

1. Introduction The Natural Environment Advisory Committee was established in approximately 1995 to provide the best possible advice to Council on how to conserve, enhance and promote places of environmental significance in the municipality. The makeup and intent of the Committee has remained largely unchanged for many years, with the Committee having substantially met its obligations under the previous Terms of Reference (ToR). Reviews of the ToR have occurred on several occasions over the life of the Committee, with the last review taking place in 2005. A review of the ToR for the Committee has therefore been undertaken in 2012/13 with the aim of ensuring that the Committee maintains its relevance and is well positioned to represent the community and provide advice to Council on strategic issues of relevance. 2. Terminology The terms “natural environment” and ”natural environmental management” refer to those aspects of the natural environment related to land, water, vegetation and wildlife. The Committee does not advise on issues related to waste and energy management or air quality. 3. Purpose The purpose of the Natural Environment Advisory Committee (Committee) is to provide the best possible advice and strategic representation to Council on how to conserve, enhance and promote places of environmental significance in the municipality, and to support Council in the development of strategy, policy and advocacy relative to the natural environment, by: (a) Advocacy of ecological sustainable living principles within Council’s sphere of influence.

(b) Providing advice to Council on the development and implementation of relevant Council policies, strategies and plans.

(c) Providing advice to Council on current and emerging issues relevant to the natural environment and environmental management within the municipality.

(d) Providing recommendations to Council in respect to the allocation of the Environmental Sustainability Grants.

(e) Participating in relevant consultative forums offered by CoGB for the purpose of informing and seeking feedback from the sector.

(f) Assisting in developing partnerships and communication networks to ensure effective dissemination of information and coordinated sector advice and feedback to Council.

(g) Strengthening the relationships and partnerships between the community groups and organisations involved in the natural environment sector and City of Greater Bendigo staff and Councillors.

(h) Assisting in developing community support programs and activities in line with identified community needs and aspirations.

(i) Promoting community participation in environmental programs and activities.

(j) Recommending research and investigation into relevant strategic issues impacting on the City of Greater Bendigo municipality.

(k) Providing advice on, and assist with environmental education within the broader community.


PAGE 83

Council will take the advice of the Natural Environment Advisory Committee into consideration as part of its deliberations. 4. Membership 4.1 Membership to the Committee shall consist of:

(a) One Councillor (Chairperson).

(b) A representative from the Dept of Sustainability and Environment.

(c) A representative from the North Central Catchment Management Authority.

(d) Up to ten community representatives.

(e) The City of Greater Bendigo’s Manager Sustainable Environment.

4.2 To ensure a balanced and comprehensive advice base, Committee members will collectively have a diversity of relevant expertise and experience. Ideally there will be balanced gender representation within the Committee.

4.3 If a Committee member misses more than three meetings in succession without informing

the Committee Chair or Executive Officer, that person will be contacted and their membership of the Committee may be revoked.

4.4 Selection of Community Members:

Community members of the Committee will be selected by an expression of interest (EOI) and interview process. A diversity of knowledge and experience across the Committee membership is desirable. Interested persons will be selected considering the following criteria:

• Previous interest and involvement in the natural environment sector;

• Qualifications and/or area of expertise;

• Demonstrated connections with relevant community groups and organisations;

• Demonstrated understanding of the natural environment, relevant issues and local programs;

• Geographic distribution of persons within the City of Greater Bendigo; and

• Availability to be involved.

5. Term of Appointment 5.1 Committee members shall be appointed by Council. 5.2 Community representatives on the Committee are to be appointed for three years. At the

conclusion of a term all community representatives’ positions become vacant. 5.3 Retiring Committee members may apply for further terms of office. 5.4 The Committee may make recommendations to the Chief Executive Officer to fill any

vacancy on the Committee and the term of office of the newly appointed Committee member shall expire at the same time as the current Committee.


PAGE 84

6. Expressions of Interest 6.1 Community membership will be facilitated via an Expressions of Interest (EOI) and

interview process. Expressions of Interest will be publicly advertised. 6.2 All Expressions of Interest received for Community membership will be considered by an

appointed Panel. The Panel will comprise the relevant Councillor, Manager of Sustainable Environment Unit and the Senior Environment Officer. The role of the Panel shall be to assess all expressions of interest received, develop a shortlist for interview and, following interview, make recommendations to Council as to the preferred Committee make-up.

6.3 Committee members will be formally appointed by Council. 7. Chairperson A Councillor is to be appointed by Council to chair the meetings. If the Chair is absent, the Committee may nominate any Committee member present to chair by agreement. 8. Conduct of Meetings Committee meetings will be conducted as follows: (a) Minutes of each Committee meeting will be recorded and distributed to all Committee

members. (b) A quorum will consist of more than half the membership, including 3 community

members. (c) Committee meetings are to be held on a regular cycle every two months (six times a year)

or more frequently as may be required from time to time. (d) The Committee, by resolution may invite any individual, interest group, or agency

representative to attend a meeting as a delegation or to submit or present information that will assist the Committee in carrying out its functions.

(e) Any City of Greater Bendigo Officers, other than the Manager of the Sustainable

Environment Unit, who attends Committee meetings, shall do so in an ex-officio capacity. 9. Conflict of Interest Committee members should declare a conflict of interest if they are to discuss an item that, if supported by Council, could result in a direct or indirect benefit or loss to them. The provisions of the Local Government Act 1989 apply to Councillor members. 10. Dismissal of Members Council and the Chief Executive Officer retain the right to revoke the membership of any person found to be acting outside the interests of the City of Greater Bendigo and the communities / sectors that the Committee is charged with representing.


PAGE 85

11. Insurance 11.1 Public Liability Insurance: Members of any Committee established by the Council under

the Local Government Act or any other enabling legislation, whilst acting in that capacity within the scope of their duties for and on behalf of the Council, are provided with cover under the LMI Broadform Public and Products Liability and Professional Indemnity Insurance, subject to the LMI policy terms, conditions, endorsements, exclusions and deductible and the like.

11.2 Council appointed Committee members, whilst acting in that capacity within the scope of

their duties for and on behalf of Council, are covered within the terms and conditions of the Council’s LMI Public and Products Liability Insurance Policy for third party personal injury or damage to property (as defined) caused by an occurrence, and where applicable for breach of professional duty, in connection with the Business of the Council.

11.3 The City of Greater Bendigo's insurance policies provide indemnity for personal injury,

property loss, products liability and claims for breach of professional duty, subject at all times to the Policy "Conditions and Exclusions".

12. Dissolution 12.1 The Committee may, at any meeting, agree to disband. 12.2 The Council may - for any reason - resolve to disband the Committee and, upon written

notice to that effect being given to Committee members, the Committee shall be disbanded.

13. Implementation and Review The Committee shall review its Terms of Reference every three years, before the end of its term, and provide advice on any suggested amendments. 14. Resources provided by City of Greater Bendigo 14.1 Provide secretarial and technical support for the Committee's bi-monthly meetings. 14.2 Provide a suitable venue for the Committee's bi-monthly meetings. 14.3 Give due consideration to the Committee's advice / recommendations. 15. Communicating within Council 15.1 City of Greater Bendigo’s Senior Environment Officer shall generally be the primary

liaison between the Committee and Council. 15.2 The minutes shall also be made available to all Councillors and City of Greater Bendigo's

Executive Management Team. 15.3 The Chairperson will report to Council regularly.

Economic Development Ordinary Meeting - 17 April 2013

PAGE 86

3. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Nil.

Community and Culture Ordinary Meeting - 17 April 2013

PAGE 87

4. COMMUNITY AND CULTURE

4.1 DRAFT FARMING ADVISORY COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFER ENCE


Author Jenny Pendlebury, Rural Development Coordina tor Responsible Pauline Gordon, Director Community Well being Director

Summary/Purpose

For Council to consider and endorse the Draft Farming Advisory Committee (Committee) Terms of Reference.

Policy Context

Council Plan Reference: This report is consistent with the following Council Plan 2009 – 2013 strategies: Strategy 2.5: Continue to support the municipality’s diverse business and rural

sector. Strategy 3.1: Advocate effectively to government to further the interests and

needs of Greater Bendigo and its communities. Strategy 3.3: Use meaningful and effective communication and engagement with

all sectors of the community as an input to decision-making. Strategy 3.7: Work collaboratively to promote community safety and healthy living. Strategy 3.9: Support and strengthen community resilience and build social

capital.


The Committee - also formerly known as the Greater Bendigo Rural Area Farming Consultative Committee - was formed in June 1995. Its current membership is comprised of invited farmers from the rural areas to the east and north of the municipality. Since its inception, the Committee has been guided by a Customer Service Agreement which describes its functions as being: • To define the way services are provided to meet the needs of customers. • To define policies and philosophies in respect to: - an equitable rating structure; - support and advocacy to high levels of Government; and - ensuring that farmers have an effective voice in the way the municipality is governed.


PAGE 88

Report

In recent years rural communities and primary producers across the nation have experienced significant change. Factors such as the Global Financial Crisis, declining terms of trade against a strengthened Australian dollar, ageing farmer populations and trends in young people migrating away from rural areas, farm amalgamations, and changes in social and water policy – to name a few – have all left indelible marks. For Greater Bendigo’s rural communities and farmers, the aforementioned factors have been exacerbated by more than a decade of severe drought immediately followed by significant flooding events in late 2010 and early 2011. The impacts of these events have been far-reaching and significant, including spiralling debt levels and declining health and wellbeing. According to the Report of the Drought Impact Survey produced by the City of Greater Bendigo in August 2009: “… the rate of severe mental distress is up to 1.4 times higher in outer regional areas than it is in major cities. Similarly, suicide rates are much higher for this group than the city rates, with risk rising with increasing remoteness (1.3 – 2.6 times)” (Phillips, 2009). “Farmer’s mental distress can result from a number of factors, some outside their control, such as drought or the market price for their produce, or from factors such as their resistance to help-seeking, which are more amenable to assistance” (Staniford et al, 2009). Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics statistics reveal that average farm debt levels have risen substantially in recent years, with average broad acre farm debt in Australia rising from $200,000 in 1992-93 to $500,000 in 2010. The North Central Rural Financial Counselling Service has reported that the average debt of their rural clients was $800,000 in 2010. These changes – and the pace at which they have occurred – have increased the complexity of primary production enterprises and associated industries, and have left many farmers and rural communities particularly exposed and vulnerable. In consideration of the above, the Committee initiated a process of critical review of its functions in 2012. The objectives of this process were to ensure that the Committee is maintaining its relevance and is well positioned to provide representative and strategic advice to Council. Through this process the Committee identified that: • it has been a valuable reference point for CoGB staff in relation to some emerging

rural issues and proposed strategies, however its focus has largely been on CoGB service delivery and asset management;

• it could be more proactive in providing advice to Council, as opposed to only providing advice when asked to do so;

• its current membership is not as representative of the breadth of Greater Bendigo’s primary production enterprises, skills and knowledge base and geographical spread as it could be;

• CoGB has well established Customer Service systems in place, and that service delivery / asset management inquiries or complaints are best managed through these systems rather than through Committee meetings.


PAGE 89

Committee members have reflected on the above issues and believe that the attached draft Terms of Reference respond to these. The Committee considers the strengths of the draft Terms of Reference in comparison to the existing Customer Service Agreement to be: • a broader and therefore more representative Committee membership; • an emphasis on the Committee being more proactive in identifying emerging rural

issues and opportunities, plus being more proactive in feeding advice through to Council on potential responses and advocacy.

Risk Analysis: The Local Government Act requires Council to endorse the Committee’s Terms of Reference given its status as an Advisory Committee to Council. The proposed Terms of Reference represents a significant shift from the previous Customer Service Agreement, with a focus on the Committee being more proactive. The proposed Terms of Reference outline as follows with regard to member recruitment: All Expressions of Interest received for Committee membership will be considered by an appointed Panel. The Panel will comprise one Councillor Representative, the Responsible Director or his/her nominee and one Greater Bendigo Rural Support Network member. The role of the Panel shall be to assess all Expressions of Interest received, develop a shortlist for interview and, following interview, make recommendations to Council as to the preferred Committee make-up. In accordance with the above, all current Committee members would be required to submit an Expression of Interest if they were interested in further Committee membership. There is a risk that long-standing Committee members will not seek re-appointment, however the prospect of membership change can be viewed as a positive in that new members often bring ‘fresh eyes’ and help to rejuvenate Committee enthusiasm.


Internal Consultation: The Committee’s deliberations regarding the draft Terms of Reference have been supported by advice provided by CoGB’s Manager Customer Support, Manager Executive Services, Principal Risk Adviser, Rural Development Coordinator, and Committee Development Officer. External Consultation: Members present at the last Committee meeting held on 11 December 2012 endorsed the draft Terms of Reference being presented to Council for formal consideration. A copy of the draft Terms of Reference was also forwarded to Committee members who were unable to be present at the meeting however no further amendments were requested.


PAGE 90


CoGB’s Rural Development Coordinator currently provides administrative support to the Committee, and this function is reflected within the Officer’s Position Description. The level of resources CoGB may be able to allocate to the various issues and opportunities the Committee may identify into the future will need to be assessed on a case by case basis.

Conclusion

The Farming Advisory Committee is an Advisory Committee to Council. The Committee is cognisant of the many changes and significant events that Greater Bendigo’s rural communities and farmers have had to grapple with since its inception in 1995. As such, the Committee recently reflected on its functions to assess if it is maintaining its relevance and if it is well positioned to provide representative and strategic advice to Council. As a result of this critical reflection process, the Committee recommends that Council endorse changes to its membership and its purpose. The Committee considers that these changes are accurately reflected within the attached Draft Farming Advisory Committee Terms of Reference.

Attachments

1. Draft Farming Advisory Committee Terms of Reference.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. thank all members of the Farming Advisory Committee who have volunteered their time to provide advice about CoGB’s service delivery and asset management to its rural communities;

2. endorse the Draft Farming Advisory Committee Terms of Reference. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Williams, Seconded Cr Campbell. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED


PAGE 91

Farming Advisory Committee

TERMS OF REFERENCE and associated matters

1. Introduction The Rural Area Farming Consultative Committee was established in approximately 1995. A Customer Service Agreement between Council and the Committee was signed in June 1995. This Agreement set out the main aims of the Committee.

The makeup and intent of the Committee has remained largely unchanged for many years, with the Committee having substantially met its obligations under the original Agreement.

In recent years significant changes have occurred within the farming and rural sectors and these have had extensive impacts. A review of the Terms of Reference for the Committee has therefore been undertaken in 2012 with the aim of ensuring that the Committee maintains its relevance and is well positioned to represent the rural community and provide advice to Council on strategic issues of relevance.


PAGE 92

2. Purpose

The purpose of the Farming Advisory Committee (Committee) is to provide general advice and strategic representation to Council with respect to rural and farming issues, and to support Council in the development of strategy, policy and advocacy relative to the rural and farming sector, by:

(a) Effective representation of all farming sectors of the municipality.

(b) Provide advice to Council when any farming and / or rural related issues are deemed appropriate for Council advocacy to other levels of government or other organisations.

(c) Provide advice to Council on current and emerging issues for the rural and farming sectors, including issues related to, but not limited to economic, cultural, social and environmental aspects.

(d) Provide advice on relevant strategic and statutory land use and development matters as required by Council, including input on planning amendments and permit applications which may be considered to have an impact on the future direction of rural areas or farming practices.

(e) Participate in consultative forums offered by CoGB for the purpose of informing and seeking feedback from the rural sector.

(f) Assist to develop partnerships and communication networks to ensure effective dissemination of information and coordinated sector advice and feedback to Council.

(g) Strengthen relationships and partnerships between the farming and rural sectors and City of Greater Bendigo staff and Councillors.

(h) Assist to develop community support programs and activities in line with identified community needs and aspirations.

(i) Harness the opportunities that CoGB’s Community Engagement meetings afford to profile issues relevant to rural businesses and farm families.

(j) Initiate research and investigation into strategic rural issues impacting on the City of Greater Bendigo municipality as required.

Council will take the opinions of the Farming Advisory Committee into consideration as part of its deliberations.

3. Membership

3.1 Membership to the Committee shall consist of one City of Greater Bendigo Councillor from each of the three Wards plus nine community members drawn from across each of the three Wards. Each community member shall satisfy a set of key selection criteria and be ideally drawn from the following categories of commercial rural business:

(a) Broadacre farming; (b) Horticulture;


PAGE 93

(c) Viticulture; (d) Animal husbandry; (e) Farming related business; (f) Agribusiness.

3.2 To ensure a balanced and comprehensive advice base, Committee members will collectively have a diversity of relevant expertise and experience. Ideally there will be balanced gender representation within the Committee.

3.3 If a Committee member misses more than three meetings in succession without informing the Committee Chair or Vice Chair, that person will be contacted and their membership of the Committee may be revoked.

4. Term of Appointment

4.1 Committee members shall be appointed by Council.

4.2 Community representatives on the Committee are to be appointed for three years. Councillor appointments shall be for a twelve-month term.

4.3 Retiring Committee members may apply for further terms of office.

4.4 The Committee shall make recommendations to the Chief Executive Officer or their delegate to fill any vacancy on the Committee and the term of office of the newly appointed Committee member shall expire at the same time as the Committee member being replaced.

5. Expressions of Interest

5.1 Expressions of Interest for Committee membership will be sought from the categories outlined in 3.1. The Expressions of Interest will also be publicly advertised.

5.2 All Expressions of Interest received for Committee membership will be considered by an appointed Panel. The Panel will comprise one Councillor representative, the Responsible Director or his/her nominee and one Greater Bendigo Rural Support Network member. The role of the Panel shall be to assess all Expressions of Interest received, develop a shortlist for interview and, following interview, make recommendations to Council as to the preferred Committee make-up.

5.3 Expressions of Interest for Committee membership must include responses to any Key Selection Criteria.

5.4 Committee members will be formally appointed by Council.

5.5 Any City of Greater Bendigo Officers who attend Committee meetings shall do so in an ex-officio capacity.

6. Chairperson

A Councillor is to be appointed by Council to chair the meetings. If the Chair is absent, one of the other Councillors or Council delegate present is to chair by agreement.

7. Conduct of Meetings

Committee meetings will be conducted as follows:


PAGE 94

(a) Minutes of each Committee meeting will be recorded and distributed to all Committee members. The minutes shall also be made available to all Councillors, City of Greater Bendigo's Executive Management Team and placed on Council’s website.

(b) A quorum will consist of half of the Committee's community members plus one other Committee member.

(c) Committee meetings are to be held on a regular cycle every two months or more frequently as may be required from time to time

(d) The Committee, by resolution or through the Chair, may invite any individual, interest group, or agency representative to attend a meeting as a delegation or to submit or present information that will assist the Committee in carrying out its functions.

8. Conflict of Interest

Committee members should declare a conflict of interest if they are to discuss an item that, if supported by Council, could result in a direct or indirect benefit or loss to them as opposed to a large sector of the farming community. The provisions of the Local Government Act 1989 apply to Councillor members.

9. Dismissal of Members

Council and the Chief Executive Officer retain the right to revoke the membership of any person found to be acting outside the interests of the City of Greater Bendigo and the communities / sectors that the Committee is charged with representing.

10. Insurance

10.1 Public Liability Insurance: Members of any Committee established by the Council under the Local Government Act or any other enabling legislation all, whilst acting in that capacity within the scope of their duties for and on behalf of the Council, are provided with cover under the LMI Broadform Public and Products Liability and Professional Indemnity Insurance, subject to the LMI policy terms, conditions, endorsements, exclusions and deductible and the like.

10.2 Council appointed Committee members, whilst acting in that capacity within the scope of their duties for and on behalf of Council, are covered within the terms and conditions of the Council’s LMI Public and Products Liability Insurance Policy for third party personal injury or damage to property (as defined) caused by an occurrence, and where applicable for breach of professional duty, in connection with the Business of the Council.

10.3 The City of Greater Bendigo's insurance policies provide indemnity for personal injury, property loss, products liability and claims for breach of professional duty, subject at all times to the Policy "Conditions and Exclusions".

11. Dissolution

11.1 The Committee may, at any meeting, agree to disband.

11.2 The Council may - for any reason - resolve to disband the Committee and, upon written notice to that effect being given to Committee members, the Committee shall be disbanded.


PAGE 95

12. Implementation and Review

The Committee shall review its Terms of Reference annually and provide advice on any suggested amendments.

13. Resources provided by City of Greater Bendigo

13.1 Provide secretarial and technical support for the Committee's bi-monthly meetings.

13.2 Provide a suitable venue for the Committee's bi-monthly meetings.

13.3 Give due consideration to the Committee's advice / recommendations.

14. Communicating within Council

14.1 City of Greater Bendigo’s appointed officer shall generally be the primary liaison between the Committee and Council.


PAGE 96

4.2 2012/2013 COMMUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM - ROUND 2


Author Narelle Lyle, Community Grants Officer Deb Simpson, Coordinator Connecting Communities

Responsible Pauline Gordon, Director Community Well being Director

Summary/Purpose

For Council to consider the funding allocations that have been recommended by the Community Assessment Panels for Round 2 of the 2012/13 Community Grants Program.

Policy Context

Council Plan Reference: This report is consistent with the following Council Plan 2009 – 2013 strategies: Strategy 3.3 - Use meaningful and effective communication and engagement with all sectors of the community as an input to decision-making. Strategy 3.8 - Encourage, recognise and support active and informed engagement in civic life. Strategy 3.9 - Support and strengthen community resilience and build social capital. Council Policy Reference (include weblink as applicable): Community Grants Policy (adopted 14 April 2010).


The 2012/13 Community Grants Program (Program) has been offered in two funding rounds. This is a change in practice from recent years where only one funding round has been offered. This change in practice has been implemented in order to provide the community with greater scope to access Program funding throughout the financial year. This report relates to Round 2. Program funding was offered under six categories:

• Arts and Culture • Community Development • Community Events • Community Newsletter • Environmental Sustainability • Recreation


PAGE 97

In accordance with the Community Grants Policy (Policy), volunteer Community Assessment Panels (CAP) were convened to consider applications received under each of the six categories. Each CAP was tasked with the development of funding allocation recommendations for Council consideration. Under the Policy provisions, if Council wishes to vary any of the CAP’s funding allocation recommendations, a Councillor must consult with the respective CAP to outline the reason/s for the proposed variation/s prior to Council formally resolving upon the funding allocations.

Consistent with the Policy, some of the budgetary provision for each category has generally been withheld as a ‘reserve’. This reserve offers organisational capacity to provide Quick Response Grants for community needs that may arise outside of the established Program funding round timelines. The Quick Response Grants reserves for 2012/13 are:

• Arts and Culture - $7,500 • Community Development - $13,500 • Community Events - $6,000 • Community Newsletters – $0 (Nil) • Environmental Sustainability - $3,000 • Recreation - $9,000

Previous Council Decision(s) Date(s): The Community Grants Policy was adopted at the Council Meeting of 14 April 2010 and includes guidelines for the Program’s assessment processes.

At its meeting of 14 November 2012 Council resolved to allocate $110,083 of the $125,500 in available Round 1 funding.

Report

In Round 2, 83 applications were received across the Program's six categories. This brings the total number of applications received for the 2012/13 Program to 170, which is a significant increase on the 149 applications received for the 2011/12 Program. This data indicates that offering the Program in two funding rounds has been successful from a community perspective. Program Application Forms were made available electronically from City of Greater Bendigo’s (CoGB) website and in hard copy from the Bendigo and Heathcote Service Centres. A small number were also direct mailed (via email or post) following Officer contact with community members. The option to lodge applications online was not made available in Round 2 due to ongoing technical issues, however it is envisaged that the organisation’s investment in purpose specific grants management software will alleviate these technical issues. This software is on track to be implemented in time for Round 1 of the 2013/14 Program. The following table provides a category by category summary of:

• the total amount of Round 2 funding available; • the total number of applications received; • the total amount of funding requested;


PAGE 98

• and, the total of the CAP's funding allocation recommendations.

Quick Response Grants There have been 7 Quick Response Grants allocated since Council considered the Round 1 report in November 2012 due to community needs arising outside of the established Program funding round timelines. The respective applications were assessed by the Community Grants Officer, Coordinator Connecting Communities and Manager Community Partnerships as being consistent with the Quick Response Grants criteria.

Quick Response Grants

Bendigo Tennis

Association

Lighting of Tennis Courts Recreation Quick Response

Grant $2,000

Junortoun Community

Plan Committee

Launch Junortoun Community Plan

Community Development Quick Response Grant

$800

Mudbrick Motley

“Santa meets the Bushrangers” Performance

Arts & Culture Quick Response Grant

$450

Bendigo Traders

Association

Bendigo Volunteer Open Day


$2,000

Total Round2 funding available

Total applications received

Total funding requested

Total of CAP recommended funding allocations

Arts and Culture

$27,510

(which includes unexpended

Round 1 funds of $6,260) 9 $30,692 $27,500

Community Development

$38,250

23

$78,139 $38,246 Community Events

$17,000

8

$25,700 $14,700

Community Newsletters

$15,000

3

$11,750 $5,250

Environmental Sustainability

$8,500 6 $26,160 $7,500

Recreation $25,500

34

$138,289 $23,960

Total

$125,500

83

$310,730

$117,156


PAGE 99

Bendigo Relay for

Life

Bendigo Relay for Life Event 2013


$2,000

Vision Australia

Vision Impaired Children Learning to Ride a Bike

Recreation Quick Response Grant

$135

United Nations

Youth Victoria

Victorian Conference – Bendigo 2013


$1,000

$8,385

This brings the total number of Quick Response Grants allocated so far in 2012/13 to 11, totalling $16,385. The tables below outline the CAP's funding allocation recommendations for each category. There are a range of reasons as to why some applications were not recommended for a level of funding by the CAP's. These include:

• Incomplete applications.

• Applications being assessed as not meeting the Program Guidelines.

• The limited amount of available funding being oversubscribed.

• Program funding being applied for as an ongoing resource.

The Program Guidelines stipulate that the maximum level of funding that can be sought under any category is $5,000, with the total amount of funding that any one organisation can seek being $5,000. In many instances the CAP's tended to not recommend the maximum level of funding where this was requested with generalised CAP comments being “the application did not have sufficient merit to justify recommending the maximum level of funding". The CAP's felt that information provided by the respective Council Officers regarding any application queries assisted them in making more informed decisions. Arts and Culture Organisation Project Details Amount S ought Amount

Recommended

Golden Square Primary School

Muso Magic – workshops involving students writing, recording and performing own songs. $2,500 $2,500


PAGE 100

Undue Noise Inc.

Undue Noise Concert Series July 2013 - June 2014 $1,000 $1,000

Bendigo Blues & Roots Music Festival Inc.

Bendigo Blues Tram/Bendigo Blues & Roots Music Festival $4,500 $3,000

Bendigo Neighbourhood House Program

Journeys to Australia - Karen Stories $4,820 $4,800

New Horizons Welfare Services

Workshops for community members through Twelve Sheds Arts $5,000 $4,000

Bendigo Chorale Inc

Performances of music from Australian and British composers $1,663 $1,600

CWA (VIC) Inc. Creative arts state-wide exhibition $5,000 $5,000

Heathcote Festivals and Events Association

Growing the Third Heathcote Film Festival $3,609 $3,000

TOTAL $30,742 $27,500 Community Development Organisation Project Details Amount

Sought Amount Recommended

The Salvation Army Regular community meals $3,000 $1,000 Marong Community Action Group Support for a Community Centre

Feasibility Study $5,000 $5,000 Woodvale Public Hall COM Woodvale Historical Trail $2,930 $1,500 Bendigo Community Health Services

Happy Healthy Families Supported Playgroup $4,250 $2,156

Bendigo Access Employment Development of a path to enable all abilities access to food gardens at PepperGreen Farm $1,478 $1,478

Bendigo Community Farmers Market

Sunny Bin - a portable, solar powered public address system in a wheelie bin $3,125 $3,125

Victoria State Emergency Service Emergency "Go Bag" for residents – helping people be better prepared for emergency evacuation $4,875 $2,000

Friends of the Bendigo-Kilmore Rail Trail Inc.

O'Keefe Rail Trail Station Signage Stage 2 $3,657 $1,900

Redesdale Recreation Reserve Support for a pavilion extension (a designated Place of Last Resort) $5,000 $4,500

California Gully Connections Playgroup

Keeping Us Connected – upgrading water connection to playground facility. $4,834 $3,300

St Andrews Parish Bendigo/Axedale

Uniting Threads – making handmade patchwork quilts for distribution to vulnerable community members $1,000 $1,000

Vision Australia Making of a tactile community mural for hanging at Day Centre $364 $364

Seeds Bendigo Jamie Oliver, Eat Your Heart Out! – building on the Jamie Oliver healthy food choices and cooking sessions by enhancing community garden facilities $4,901 $3,756


PAGE 101

Organisation Project Details Amount Sought

Amount Recommended

Eaglehawk Citizens' Brass Band Laying it all on the tables – purchase of purpose built trolley and new tables for volunteer safety $3,767 $3,767

Girl Guides Purchase of some new tents and a barbecue for use in programs $2,762 $1,740

Heathcote Region Farmers' Market

Expand Promotion & Marketing Strategies for the Heathcote Region Farmers Market $3,324 $1,660

TOTAL $78,139 $38,246 Community Events Organisation Project Details Amount


Bendigo Garden Club Inc. Support for Spring Flower Show 2013 $1,700 $1,700

Axedale Primary School Support for a Axedale Community Drive-in $4,000 $3,000 Motor Neurone Disease Association (VIC).

Walk to D-Feet MND – community awareness raising event $500 $500

Bendigo Society of Model Engineers

Support for 10th Biennial National Bendigo Model Engineering Exhibition $5,000 $2,500

Bendigo Jailhouse Rockers Club Inc.

Annual Rock & Roll Festival - Music in the Hargreaves Mall $4,500 $3,000

Spring in the Bendigo Bush Association Inc.

Spring in the Bendigo Bush – community educational walks in the bush $5,000 $4,000

TOTAL $15,000 $14,700 Community Newsletters


Amount Recommended

Kangaroo Flat Community Enterprise Flat Matters $4,250 $4,250

McIvor Neighbourhood House, Heathcote Inc.

Heathcote & District Community Newsletter (yet to be named) $5,000 $1,000

TOTAL $9,250 $5,250 Environmental Sustainability Organisation Project Details Amount


Sebastian Progress Association Improvements to the Sebastian Hall site – indigenous plantings $4,660 $3,000

Kangaroo Flat Primary School Greening the Flat – indigenous plantings at the Primary School $1,500 $1,500

Bendigo Sustainability Group

Expanding our Impact – training 10 emerging leaders to build awareness of sustainability issues and opportunities within their local communities / networks $5,000 $3,000

TOTAL $11,160 $7,500


PAGE 102

Recreation


Amount Recommended

Elmore Lawn Tennis Club Inc.

Additional drainage works around hard court $4,000 $1,585

Strathfieldsaye Cricket Club Purchase of equipment for junior coaching clinics $4,000 $2,000

Dragons Afloat Bendigo Provision of new lightweight paddles for Dragons Afloat Bendigo $4,550 $2,275

Quarry Hill Junior Football Club Essential safety equipment for junior football $971 $450

Bendigo Canoe Club

iPaddle@Bendigo Canoe Club - purchase of essential equipment to support growing membership $4,160 $2,680

Cheer N Dance Parent's Committee Cheerleading safely flooring project $4,500 $2,000

Neangar Park Pony Club Development of sand arena $5,000 $2,000

Quarry Hill Golf Club

Bringing life to the hill – installation of some sprinkler systems to reduce burden of hand watering currently undertaken by volunteers $5,000 $5,000

Bendigo Yacht Club Bendigo Yacht Club - youth development and training program $5,000 $1,500

Eaglehawk Junior Football Club Purchase of safety equipment $3,702 $1,605

Eaglehawk Croquet Club Inc Purchase of equipment trolley $748 $374

Bendigo Pony Club Installation of a storage shed roller door to improve security $1,941 $1,441

Axedale Recreation Reserve Purchase of a defibrillator for multi-group use $1,050 $1,050

TOTAL $44,622 $23,960 Commencement Date: In accordance with the Program Guidelines, Projects that funding allocations are approved for under Round 2 should commence on or after 1 June 2013 and generally be completed with one calendar year. Project Evaluation Forms / Acquittals need to be provided to the Community Grants Officer within 60 days of the completion of the Project. Failure to do so could render funding recipients ineligible to seek further CoGB funding. Both successful and unsuccessful applicants will be advised as to the outcome of their application following Council’s resolution.


PAGE 103

Successful applicants will be required to enter into a Funding and Service Agreement (FASA) with the City of Greater Bendigo (CoGB). The FASAs outline the scope of the funded project as well as CoGB’s and the grantee’s various responsibilities in relation to it. Funds are only released to grantees upon receipt of the signed FASA and tax invoice. The FASA’s will include a clause stipulating that grantees must return the signed FASA and forward a tax invoice within 6 weeks. This clause has been inserted due to difficulties previously experienced with the disbursement of funds prior to the end of the Financial Year. The FASA will outline that if grantees do not adhere to this clause, the offer of funding will become void and CoGB will retain the funds. Risk Analysis: The manner in which all applications received for Round 2 of the Program were assessed is consistent with the Policy.

The CAP’s collective funding allocation recommendations are consistent with the sub-budgets outlined within ‘Resource Implications’.

CoGB is currently undertaking an internal review (review) of all grants and other forms of financial assistance it currently provides to the community through a range of mechanisms. CoGB has initiated this review in the spirit of continuous improvement, transparency and equity. A cross-organisational Project Control Group is overseeing the implementation of this review. The project brief provides for the review to be undertaken in two stages. The focus of Stage 1 was an audit of current activity, whilst the focus of Stage 2 is the development of recommendations that will ultimately be for Council consideration. Stage 1 has been completed and the findings have been presented to EMT. Stage 2 has now commenced.

The review outcomes are likely to have some impacts on the Program, with the aim of implementing any required changes in time for the 2013/14 Program. One of the recommendations arising from the review to date is for the current Small Township Funding Program to be discontinued and for the budget allocation to be redirected into the Community Grants Program. More information about this recommendation has been provided in the Council report titled ‘2012/13 Small Township Funding Program’.


Internal Consultation: • Internal consultation regarding the Program Guidelines included staff from the

Building and Property, Community Partnerships, Media and Communications, Recreation and Sustainable Environment Units.

External Consultation: Grant Writing Seminars Three Grant Writing Seminars (Seminars) have been held in 2012/13 Program. There were varying levels of attendance across the three Seminars, with 94 community members participating in total, representing a broad spectrum of community interests. For comparison purposes, the three Grant Writing Seminars held in 2011/12 had 146 attendees in total.


PAGE 104

The decrease in the number of participants is thought to be due to the success of these Seminars in previous years and former participants feeling confident enough to prepare a Program application without having to attend an additional Seminar. Evaluation data indicates that all three Seminars held in 2012/13 were positively received by community members. In accordance with the Policy, volunteer Community Assessment Panels (CAP) have been convened to consider applications received under each of the six categories.


Budget Allocation in the Current Financial Year: The total budgetary provision for the Program is $290,000. This was broken down into the following sub-budgets at the commencement of the financial year: Round 1 - $125,500 Round 2 - $125,500 Quick Response Grants reserve - $39,000 (of which there was $22,615 remaining at the time of preparing this report). At its meeting of 14 November 2012 Council resolved to allocate $110,083 of the $125,500 in available Round 1 funding. Of the 83 applications received for Round 2, the CAP’s have recommended that a total of 48 (or just under 60%) be allocated a level of funding. The total amount of Round 2 funding that the CAP’s have collectively recommended be allocated is $117,156.

Conclusion

83 applications were received for Round 2 of the 2012/13 Community Grants Program. The total amount of funding sought across all applications was $310,730. This far outweighed the available budgetary provision of $125,500. In accordance with the Community Grants Policy, Community Assessment Panels have been convened to consider applications received under the six respective categories. The Community Assessment Panels have developed funding allocation recommendations totalling $117,156 for the consideration of Council, with just under 60% of applications recommended to receive a level of funding. The Community Assessment Panels’ collective funding allocation recommendations fall within the available budgetary provision of $125,500.

Once Council has resolved upon funding allocations, all applicants will be notified in writing as to the outcome of their application.

Attachments

Nil.


PAGE 105

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. allocate 2012/13 Community Grants Program - Round 2 funds totalling $117,156 in accordance with the Community Assessment Panels' recommendations detailed within the body of this report, and

2. thank the members of the Community Assessment Panels for volunteering

their time and energy to assess all applications.

RESOLUTION Moved Cr Fyffe, Seconded Cr Lyons. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED


PAGE 106

4.3 2012/2013 SMALL TOWNSHIPS FUNDING PROGRAM


Author Glynn Jarrett, Community Development Officer Deb Simpson, Coordinator Connecting Communities Responsible Pauline Gordon, Director Community Well being Director

Summary/Purpose

For Council to consider applications received for the 2012/13 Small Township Funding Program and to resolve upon funding allocations. For Council to consider proposed changes to the Small Township Funding Program.

Policy Context

Council Plan Reference: This report is consistent with the following Council Plan 2009 – 2013 strategies: Strategy 3.3: Use meaningful and effective communication and engagement with

all sectors of the community as an input to decision-making. Strategy 3.8: Encourage, recognise and support active and informed engagement

in civic life. Strategy 3.9: Support and strengthen community resilience and build social

capital.


Eligibility for making application to the Small Township Funding Program (STFP) has historically been limited to those rural communities that have Council endorsed Community Plans in place and / or where District Engagement Meetings have been held i.e. the twelve communities of Axedale, Elmore, Goornong, Heathcote, Lockwood, Marong, Mia Mia, Neilborough, Raywood, Redesdale, Sebastian and Woodvale. In 2012 the communities of Knowsley and Sedgwick were added to the District Engagement Meeting schedule, hence those two communities were also invited to make application to the STFP for the first time in the 2012/13 funding round.

Report

2012/13 funding round In assessing STFP applications and formulating recommendations for Council's consideration, Officers consider whether broad community support for a project proposal has been demonstrated.


PAGE 107

Often such community support is demonstrated through strong links between the project proposal and objectives articulated in the respective Community Plan, or to community needs / aspirations that have been identified through other community engagement / consultation mechanisms e.g.: a Flood Community Recovery Plan. Each community is also encouraged to consider project proposals that could potentially attract additional funding from State and / or Federal government agencies by utilising the STFP funding as leverage. Nine communities have sought funding through the 2012/13 funding round. They are Axedale, Elmore, Goornong, Heathcote, Lockwood, Marong, Redesdale, Sebastian and Woodvale. Each respective community's project proposal, the total estimated project value and the amount of STFP funding sought has been summarised within Attachment 1. Successful applicants will be required to enter into a Funding and Service Agreement (FASA) with the City of Greater Bendigo (CoGB). The FASAs outline the scope of the funded project as well as CoGB’s and the grantee’s various responsibilities in relation to it. Funds are only released to grantees upon receipt of the signed FASA and tax invoice. The FASA’s will include a clause stipulating that grantees must return the signed FASA and forward a tax invoice within 28 days. This clause has been inserted due to difficulties experienced in previous funding rounds with the disbursement of funds prior to the end of the Financial Year. The FASA will outline that if grantees do not adhere to this clause, the offer of funding will become void and CoGB will retain the funds. Small Township Funding Program proposed changes A recent internal review of the STFP has given rise to some proposed changes. The review identified that many of the project proposals that have been received over the years for the STFP had a facility development / maintenance focus involving Council owned / managed facilities, and that this has been a source of tensions between CoGB's established strategic planning, asset management, procurement and risk management systems. Officers have formed the view that all future facility development / maintenance works should be identified, scheduled and managed through CoGB’s whole of municipality focused systems. In essence, this should engender a more strategic approach to the allocation of CoGB resources to such works. The review also highlighted the differences between the current STFP and Community Grants Program application assessment processes. Generally the maximum amount of funding available to any one community in a given STFP funding round is $15,000. It is proposed that this limit is reviewed together with the current limit of $5,000 in the Community Grants Program and be presented to Council for consideration in a future discussion paper once the overall findings are complete. Currently all applications received for the STFP are assessed by Officers, whereas all applications received for the Community Grants Program are assessed by Community Assessment Panels (CAP). Whilst not to suggest that undue influence has ever been exercised by Officers in making funding recommendations, the CAP model is considered by Officers to afford greater transparency.


PAGE 108

In summarising the review outcomes, Officers do not wish to see the pool of STFP funds ‘lost’ to the community, but rather that greater emphasis is placed on the funds supporting increased social connectivity, community capacity building and cultural expression versus facility development / maintenance works. Officers have also formed the view that the funds could more transparently administered through an alternative mechanism. The proposed way forward is for the STFP to be discontinued in name and for the budget allocation to be redirected into the Community Grants Program. Using this approach, rural communities would still be able to access the former STFP funds, although their applications would be assessed on the basis of merit against all other applications received for the respective Community Grants Program categories. This approach could potentially result in greater levels of funding flowing into rural communities. Timelines: In most instances grantees will have until the end of the 2013/14 financial year to complete and acquit their 2012/13 funded projects. If extenuating circumstances arise, grantees can request an extension to their FASA expiry date. Officers will assess any such requests on a case by case basis. The only scenario in which a FASA extension is unlikely to be approved is if no or very little project progress can be demonstrated. In such a scenario, the grantee would be required to return any unexpended funds to CoGB. Risk Analysis: As some of the project proposals received involve assets that are currently owned or managed by CoGB, comment on / approval for these project proposals has been sought from the relevant CoGB Service Units. This process has been adopted to ensure that project proposals are consistent with broader CoGB strategies and objectives and that any future budgetary or asset lifecycle planning implications are considered.


Internal Consultation: (Refer to Risk Analysis). External Consultation: As eligibility for making application to the STFP has historically been limited it is generally only promoted via District Engagement Meetings and through rural community newsletters.

Officers have mentored a number of communities in the development of their project proposals. Importantly, Officers have focused their support at the level of building community capacity versus specific project proposal detail e.g.: mentoring applicants in event management planning processes / considerations versus developing an event management plan for an applicant.

in event management planning processes / considerations versus developing an event management plan for an applicant.


PAGE 109


The available budget for the 2012/13 funding round is $85,000. The recommended funding allocations for the nine applicants referred to within this report totals $84,913. This falls within the available budget of $85,000. Budget Allocation in the Current Financial Year: $85,000. Any known or anticipated variance to budget: There are no anticipated variances to budget. The only exception to this could be if a grantee does not return their FASA and forward a tax invoice within 28 days, in which case their offer would become void unless a reasonable explanation was provided. CoGB would then retain the funds, which would in turn generate a positive budget variance (or saving).

Conclusion

All project proposals recommended for funding within this report are linked to objectives articulated in the respective Community Plan, or to community needs / aspirations that have been identified through other community engagement / consultation mechanisms. A range of CoGB Service Units have reviewed the project proposals as may have been applicable to ensure consistency with broader CoGB strategies and objectives and that any future budgetary or asset lifecycle planning implications are considered. In some instances, special conditions will need to be included in the Funding and Service Agreements at the request of other CoGB Service Units e.g.: CoGB approval must be obtained for design concepts prior to the commencement of any works. A recent internal review of the STFP has given rise to some recommendations regarding its future. Officers do not wish to see the pool of STFP funds ‘lost’ to the community, rather that greater emphasis be placed on the funds supporting increased social connectivity, community capacity building and cultural expression versus facility development / maintenance works. Officers also consider that this could be achieved by the funds being used to bolster the already well-established Community Grants Program.

Attachments

1. 2012/13 Small Township Funding Program Application Summary and Recommended Funding Allocations.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. allocate a total of $84,913 in 2012/13 Small Township Funding Program funds across nine applicants on the basis of the proposed allocations within Attachment 1.


PAGE 110

2. redirect the Small Township funds as part of a broader bucket of funding

available into the Community Grants Program. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Campbell, Seconded Cr Williams. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED

Applicant Project proposal Estimated

total project

cost

Requested

CoGB

contribution

Other CoGB Service

Units consulted

Recommended

CoGB

allocation

Axedale Our

Town Our

Future

Project

Platypus:

promoting the history and

significance of

Axedale River Reserve

(temporary public art

installations, plus installation

of interpretive signage and

bench seats and tables).

$45,000

$13,000 Engineering and

Public Space; Parks

and Natural

Reserves;

Recreation;

Statutory Planning,

Strategy;

Sustainable

Environment.

$13,000

Elmore

Progress

Association

Campaspe River walking

track improvements.

$7,500 $7,500 Engineering and

Public Space; Parks

and Natural

Reserves;

Recreation;

Statutory Planning,

Sustainable

Environment.

$7,500

Goornong and

District

Community

Group

Project 1 - Development of a

free to download mobile

phone application for

Goornong.

Project 2 – Goornong and

District community

consultation workshop.

Project 3 – Goornong and

District Tourism and

Heritage Project.

$2,530

$2,200

$10,000

Total

$2,530

$2,200

$10,000

Total

Engineering and

Public Space;

Information

Systems; Parks and

Natural Reserves;

Recreation;

Statutory Planning;

Strategy;

Sustainable

Environment;

Tourism.

$0

$2,200

$10,000

TOTAL


PAGE 111

$14,730

$14,730 $12,200

Heathcote

Community

Planning

Group

Installation of outdoor gym

equipment in Heathcote

Community Space.

$14,000 $10,000 Engineering and

Public Space; Parks

and Natural

Reserves;

Recreation;

Statutory Planning.

$10,000

Lockwood and

District

Community

Hall

Various energy efficiency

initiatives at Lockwood and

District Community Hall.

$9,000 $9,000 Building and

Property;

Sustainable

Environment.

$9,000

Marong

Community

Action Group

Purchase of laptop,

projector and screen for

Marong CFA to assist with

volunteer training.

Installation of new gas

continuous flow hot water

system at Marong

Community Hall.

Purchase of equipment to

assist with community

newsletter production.

$2,861

$2,467

$4,285

Total

$9,613

$2,861

$2,467

$4,285

Total

$9,613

Building and

Property.

$2,861

$2,467

$4,285

TOTAL

$9,613

Redesdale

Community

Committee

Redesdale Community

Engagement Project

(development of a

community website and

newsletter).

$3,600

$3,600 Information

Systems.

$3,600

Sebastian

Recreation

Reserve

Committee of

Management

Installation of bench seat

and table near existing

barbecue.

Various energy efficiency

initiatives in Recreation

Reserve buildings.

$2,500

$5,000

$2,500

$5,000

Parks and Natural

Reserves;

Sustainable

Environment.

$2,500

$5,000

TOTAL

$7,500


PAGE 112

Woodvale

Recreation

Reserve

Committee of

Management

Woodvale Recreation

Reserve Improvement

Project

(staged improvements and

to the Reserve facilities

identified through the

master planning process).

$400,000 $12,500 Building and

Property; Parks and

Natural Reserves;

Recreation.

$12,500

$510,943 $87,443 $84,913


PAGE 113

4.4 SISTER CITY RELATIONSHIPS


Author Suzie Mansell, Manager Community Partnership s Barb Dalloway, Cultural Diversity Officer Responsible Pauline Gordon, Director Community Well being Director

Summary/Purpose

The purpose of this report is for Council to acknowledge the work undertaken by the Bendigo Sister Cities Committee and consider the request for Council to formally revoke its Sister City relationship with the City of Tianshui, Gansu province, People’s Republic of China and to consider a change of name to the existing Sister City relationship with Penzance in the United Kingdom to incorporate St Just.

Policy Context

Recognise, support and celebrate cultural and ethnic diversity.


What are Sister Cities? Sister Cities International provides the following definition on their website: ‘A sister city, county or state relationship is a broad-based, officially approved, long-term partnership between two municipalities in two countries…officially recognised after the highest elected or appointed official from both communities sign off on an agreement. A city may have anywhere from one to an unlimited number of sister cities, ranging from a half dozen members to hundreds of volunteers and received support from the local government. Sister City relationships offer the flexibility to allow connections to form between communities that are mutually beneficial and take on issues that are most relevant for the partners.’ The City of Greater Bendigo has four international relationships; three Sister City relationships and one Friendship relationship. A Bendigo Sister Cities Community Committee was formed in 1987 as an Advisory Committee of Council with aims to:

• Maintain links to further the cultural, tourism and economic benefits for the City of Greater Bendigo

• Undertake programs to develop, promote, improve and enhance the Sister City concept within the City of Greater Bendigo

• Keep Council informed of any significant initiatives.


PAGE 114

The Committee’s role is still directed towards social, educational and cultural activities. Activities primarily focus on letter writing for school students, supporting cultural activities/exchanges and building people to people international goodwill. To some extent, the choice of relationships reflects Bendigo’s 19th century settlement history rather than contemporary settlement patterns. In late 2012, the Committee became an incorporated association. In January 2013, its Section 86 Advisory Committee status was revoked. The objectives of the committee remain the same, its independent status will allow greater flexibility to pursue funding opportunities and undertake their activities without the compliance and reporting requirements required for a Section 86 committee. Sister City relationships include:

• Los Altos, California, United States of America (USA), established 1987 • Tianshui, People’s Republic of China (PDR) established 1993 • Penzance, Cornwall, United Kingdom (UK), established 1996 • A formal friendship relationship with Maubisse, East Timor was established in 2006.

The Committee’s cultural and educational activities with the English speaking cities of Los Altos and Penzance are frequent and positive. In contrast, contact with the City of Tianshui has been sporadic over the past 20 years.

Report

Ending the Sister City relationship with the City o f Tianshui Sister City contact with Tianshui has included; presenting a dragon to Bendigo’s Golden Dragon Museum and sponsoring two Sister City Committee members to participate in the Gansu International Study Fellowship program in 2009. The last contact with Tianshui was on 22 June 2010 with receipt of an official invitation to the opening ceremony of the 21St China Tianshui Cultural and Tourism Festival. A letter in Mandarin, dated 21 June 2011, was sent from the (then) Mayor Councillor Rod Fyffe inviting the Mayor of Tianshui to visit Bendigo to discuss improving the relationship. An offer of assistance with fares, accommodation and associated travel was included in the invitation. No response was received. On 27 September 2011, Cr Fyffe, on behalf of the Committee requested the Chinese Consulate in Melbourne make contact with the Municipal Government of Tianshui regarding the relationship. The Consulate representative did not receive any reply from Tianshui. The Committee advised the Mayor and Councillors of its intention to cease efforts to continue with the relationship at its annual forum presentation in January 2012.

The process adopted to date accords with the process recommended by Sister Cities Australia (SCA) for ending a Sister City relationship where one or either party have lost contact, as advised by Matt Jessop, National Secretary, Sister Cities Australia via email on 8 January 2013, that:


PAGE 115

‘..either the Mayor or CEO write to the sister city flagging the idea of closing the relationship and asking for agreement/feedback from the sister city. If no response is received or a response agreeable to closing the relationship is returned, then a report should go to an ordinary meeting of Council with a recommendation to close the relationship.’

The Committee made the following recommendation at its meeting of 14 February 2013: ‘Bendigo Sister Cities Community Committee request of Council that the existing Sister City relationship between Bendigo and Tianshui be formally discontinued.’ Tianshui is a small, remote and under-developed city and it had been difficult to maintain regular communication which is required to sustain a successful long term relationship. The Committee report that they have learnt important lessons about selecting Sister Cities. They believe there is a need to develop strategic goals for such relationships, i.e. economic, tourism or cultural/educational and to identify and approach a city with similar goals, demographics and geography. The committee also recognise that consultation and engagement with the Bendigo community is an important part of the process to determine if there is community interest and support for additional sister city/ friendship relationships. Opportunity for New Friendship in the People’s Repu blic of China

Bendigo Sister Cities Community Committee, as an independent committee of Council, is exploring relationships with two cities in Jiangsu Province, People’s Republic of China; Huai’an and Haimen. This friendship relationship could focus on citizen-based educational and cultural exchange. The Committee is also advocating that the City of Greater Bendigo pursue a municipal – level working relationship with these two cities in China.

The Chair and Deputy Chair of Bendigo Sister Cities Community Committee met the Mayor, Councillor Ruffell on 10 December 2012 to convey the Committee’s preference to replace the Tianshui relationship with two municipal- level Friendship relationships. The Committee report that they intend to seek community feedback about this proposal.

Through its education contacts in China, the Committee is aware of potential interest, at the municipal level in Huai’an and Haimen, of discussing Friendship City relationships. A Sister City is more likely to be described as a ‘Friendship City’ in the PRC.

The geography and economic base of both suggested cities is somewhat different to that of Bendigo. Huai’an can be described as a principal city comprising a main central urban area and multiple counties and county-level cities. Haimen, although a similar size to the City of Greater Bendigo, is a highly industrialised county-level port on the northern bank of the Yangtse River.


PAGE 116

Formalising the relationship with Penzance/St Just

The Committee wishes to formally extend their current friendship with Penance, Cornwell. An informal friendship has existed between Bendigo and St Just as it is a ward of Penzance Council. A Sister City is described as ‘Twinning’ in the UK.

Councillor Christ Goninan (St Just Councillor and Cornwall Councillor) emailed the Bendigo Sister Cities Community Committee Chair in December 2012. The correspondence was from Ms Teresa Fogarty, Committee Administrator, Cornwall Council and read:

‘I have been approached by Cllr Christ Goninan (St Just Councillor and Cornwall Councillor) who is keen to establish a formal twinning link between St Just and Bendigo so that St Just can put up a road sign stating that they are twinned with Bendigo. Would it be possible for your twinning association to issue a ‘formal’ invitation for St Just to join Penzance in twinning with Bendigo so that the Town Council can use this as proof that St Just is actually twinned with Bendigo?’

Bendigo Sister Cities Community Committee at its meeting on 14 February 2013 made the following recommendation to Council:

“That St Just be invited to join the City of Greater Bendigo’s Sister City relationship with Penzance”


The Committee presented to Council in January and March 2013 to provide an update of their recent activities and intention to seek support to:

• Formally revoke the friendship between the City of Greater Bendigo and the City of Tianshui

• To formally acknowledge St Just in the current Sister City relationship between Bendigo and Penzance

• To explore further City Friendships with Huai’an and Haimen in the People’s Republic of China.

Council has suggested that the Committee seek support from the community to guide its proposal for future relationships with Huai’an and Haimen.

The Committee have acknowledged that consultation is an important element of identifying community interest and need to develop and maintain future Sister City relationships.


PAGE 117


Additional resources should not be required to:

• Formalise the relationship with Penzance/St Just as this arrangement does not constitute a new Sister City relationship

• To close the relationship with the City of Tianshui. However, there are significant resource implications if the City of Greater Bendigo enters into a formal Friendship relationship with the two new proposed cities in China; Huai’an and Haimen. If the Friendship is sanctioned by the City of Greater Bendigo it will be required to send a delegation to these cities for formalise the agreement. This visit would then be reciprocated by representatives from the Friendship Cities. Ongoing activity to acknowledge and celebrate the Friendship will have cost implications for Council.

Conclusion

The Bendigo Sister Cities Community Committee is active and positive in its work to cultivate good will through formal Sister City arrangements. This recent work has culminated in the opportunity to formalise and extend the current Penzance relationship to include St Just. It is timely to consider formally closing the Friendship between Tianshui and Bendigo. Before further international relationships are pursued, Council may wish to consider the purpose and future direction of these relationships. This could be achieved as part of the review and development of the City of Greater Bendigo’s Arts and Culture Strategy. Consideration can then be given to the alignment of future Sister City and Friendship activities within the context of Council’s strategic direction. Alternatively and in the interim, the Committee, independent of Council, can pursue its own friendship relationship to foster cultural and educational exchanges and continue linking with Bendigo organisations and Schools that also pursue similar programs in China.

Attachment

1. Background to the Proposal by the Bendigo Sister Cities Committee to form Sister City or Friendship City Relationships with Huai’an and Haimen, Jiangsu Province, People’s Republic of China.


PAGE 118

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. acknowledge the work undertaken by the volunteers of the Bendigo Sister Cities Committee.

2. agree to formally close its relationship with the city of Tianshui, located in Gansu Province the People’s Republic of China, and request Sister Cities Australia remove Tianshui from its national register of affiliations with the City of Greater Bendigo.

3. encourage the Bendigo Sister Cities Committee to consult with the community to guide its proposal for future relationships.

4. defer any decision on future international relationships to replace Tianshui until the review and development of the City of Greater Bendigo’s Arts and Culture Strategy.

5. endorse a change of name to the existing Sister City relationship with Penzance in the United Kingdom to incorporate St Just.

RESOLUTION Moved Cr Fyffe, Seconded Cr Campbell. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED FOR VOTE - UNANIMOUSLY

Our People, Our Processes Ordinary Meeting - 17 April 2013

PAGE 119

5. OUR PEOPLE, OUR PROCESSES

5.1 POTENTIAL SALE OF FOUR PROPERTIES


Author Naomi Fountain, Strategic Property Analyst Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning and D evelopment Director

Summary/Purpose

The properties contained within this report are identified as potentially surplus. We recommend that Council proceed with the required consultation to formally determine if the sites are surplus; and if the sites are formally identified as surplus, proceed to disposal.

Policy Context

Council Plan 2009-2013 (Updated 2012)

Built and Natural Environment 1.11 Continue to implement initiatives to maintain and provide physical assets and

infrastructure to meet community and organisational needs. 1.11.6 Develop a strategic assets sales program starting with the former

Bendigo Advertiser property. Community Engagement Policy (December 2011)

10 Year Financial Plan

Building Asset Management Plan (Draft)

Statutory and Discretionary Reserve Policy (November 2012)

Related Legislation/Policies/Guidelines

Asset management at State level: • The Asset Management Principles Parts 1 to 3, (Victorian Department of Treasury

and Finance, November 1995) • Sustaining Our Assets – Government Asset Management Policy Statement 2000

(Victorian Department of Treasury and Finance)

Asset management at local government level: • Sustaining Local Assets – Local Government Asset Management Policy Statement

2003 (Victorian Department for Victorian Communities) • Asset Management Policy, Strategy and Plan. Guidelines for Developing an Asset

Management Policy, Strategy and Plan 2004 (Victorian Department for Victorian Communities)


PAGE 120

• Local Government Financial Sustainability Nationally Consistent Frameworks, Framework 2 Asset Planning and Management 2009 (Local Government and Planning Ministers Council)

• National Asset Management Assessment Framework – 2010 to 2012 (Local Government and Planning Ministers’ Council (LGPMC), 2006. The LGPMC disbanded 30 June 2011, as a result of COAG reforms agreed upon 20 April 2010)

Property transactions: • Local Government Best Practice Guideline for the Sale, Exchange and Transfer of

land 2000 (Department of Planning and Community Development) • Government of Victoria Policy and Instructions for the purchase, compulsory

acquisition and sale of land 2000 (Government Land Monitor, Department of Infrastructure)

• Local Government Act 1989 (Vic) (S189) • Subdivision Act 1988 (Vic) (S20) (S24A) • Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic) (S173) • Environmental Protection Act 1970 (Vic) (S62A) • Land Acquisition and Compensation Act 1986 (Vic)


Broader Context Between the early 1970s and 1995 Victorian Government agencies produced over 250 policies, guidelines and pieces of legislation around different aspects of asset management1. During the early 2000s the Victorian Government produced more policy statements and guidelines on sustaining local assets and asset management, to guide and assist government departments and local government. Between 2006 and 2009 State and Territory ministers for local government developed three nationally consistent frameworks on financial sustainability measures. Their aim is to provide consistent reporting and assist councils to improve their asset management, financial management and planning. These are the three frameworks that were developed:

• Assessing local government financial sustainability; • Asset planning and management; and • Financial planning and reporting.2

All of these policies, guidelines and frameworks set the scene for professional asset management.

1 The Asset Management Series Part 3 Catalogue of References, Victorian Department of Treasury and Finance, November 1995 2 http://www.lgpmcouncil.gov.au/publications/sus_framework.aspx as viewed 18/11/12


PAGE 121

The above frameworks are being implemented at the City of Greater Bendigo. The City has an electronic asset register (Conquest), conducts regular valuations for insurance purposes and financial reporting (as required by the Australian Accounting Standard AAS27 Financial Reporting by Local Government, 1990) and is developing a 10 Year Financial Plan and Asset Management Plans. Local Context The City of Greater Bendigo’s Building and Property Services Unit manages a portfolio of about 750 buildings and 100 structures. The land and buildings are valued in excess of $302M. However, the Council does not own all of these properties. Many of the Council’s buildings are on Crown Land.

As part of the City’s strategic asset management, properties that do not meet the current or future needs of the City will be investigated as potentially surplus. Not all land identified as surplus needs to be sold. “The options for disposal include alternative use, rental, sale, or sale and lease-back…”3. Ongoing consultation and communication will inform which method of disposal is recommended, on a case by case basis, informed by community feedback.

Report

Putting it into Effect The process flow chart below shows the process and decision points along the way.

3 The Asset Management Principles Part 1 1995, Victorian Department of Treasury and Finance


PAGE 122

Potentially Surplus Land The below properties have been identified as potentially suitable for disposal in the short term because they do not meet the City’s current or future needs. They are not subject to the Council Plan, any Strategies, Township Structure Plans, Place Based Plan or Reports.


PAGE 123

The four properties that have been identified are listed below:

• 2-28 High Street, Axedale • 29 Happy Valley Road, West Bendigo • Crown Allotment 10 Huntly-Fosterville Road, Fosterville • 994 Wellington Street, Strathfieldsaye Background research has included (but was not limited to):

• Proof of ownership • How we came to have ownership of the property • Why we have retained it • Whether or not it is identified for future use • Historical uses of the land (especially, are there potential contamination issues) • Zoning • Planning overlays (including environmental and land subject to inundation) • Native vegetation • Blights, easements or other encumbrances on the land • Storm water and overland flows (i.e. drainage issues) • Surrounding ownership and development • City of Greater Bendigo infrastructure • Heritage aspects and • Whether or not there are uses for the property. 2-28 High Street, Axedale This property, 12,800m² of Low Density Residential Zoned land was purchased by the Shire of Strathfieldsaye for potential recreational reserve purposes. Since the Axedale Township Structure Plan in 2008, the identification and purchase of an alternate site was undertaken with full support of the community, this land is no longer required.


PAGE 124

Arguments for surplus: Arguments against surplus:

• Surplus to the City’s requirements • Expense to Rate payers (annual

maintenance and it will be subject to the Fire Services Property Levy from 1 July 2013)

Key stakeholders identified for engagement:

• Internal stakeholders • The community, Public Notice

How to comment:

Telephone, written or internet submission to Council.

Suggested outcome / recommendation:

Final decision after considering responses to Public notice.

29 Happy Valley Road, West Bendigo This property is 809.4m² of Residential 1 Zone land that was purchased for unpaid rates in January 2012. A non-compliant building was removed from the site in January 2013. It has no strategic purpose for the City.


PAGE 125


• Surplus to the City’s requirements • Expense to Rate payers (annual

maintenance and it will be subject to the Fire Service Property Levy from 1 July 2013)



How to comment:




Crown Allotment 10 Huntly-Fosterville Road, Fosterville This property is 1,117.1m² of Farm Zoned land that came into the ownership of the City of Greater Bendigo in 1997 due to unpaid rates. It has no strategic purpose for the City.


PAGE 126


• Surplus to the City’s requirements. • Expense to Rate payers (will be

subject to the Fire Services Property Levy from 1 July 2013)


• Internal stakeholders • The Community, Public Notice

How to comment:




994 Wellington Street, Strathfieldsaye This property is to be 1.512Ha of land. Subdivision and re-zoning to Business 3 Zone are currently underway. It is part of the former Shire of Strathfieldsaye Depot. The rear section of the site is to be retained.


PAGE 127

The front section of the property, proposed lot one, has no strategic purpose for the City. It was identified in the Strathfieldsaye Township Plan (2009) as being privately occupied and its rezoning needed to reflect this usage before it could be sold. The property has been surplus to the City’s requirements and leased to private enterprise for 15 years.


• Surplus to the City’s requirements • Has been leased to private enterprise

for 15 years • Expense to Rate payers (annual

maintenance and it will be subject to the Fire Service Property Levy from 1 July 2013)



How to comment:



Rezoning to be completed.


PAGE 128

Subdivision to be completed. Final decision to sell after considering responses to Public notice.


Consultation has been conducted with internal stakeholders from all Directorates in the organisation and the Executive Management Team. The aim has been to ensure that no land is disposed of without considering the strategic context, adopted organisational priorities or identified needs. Community engagement will be undertaken on a case by case basis and is detailed in each of the property reports above. The extent of engagement and time taken will depend on legislative requirements. Property services professionals such as real estate agents, valuers and environmental auditors will be consulted where required.

Conclusion

A considerable amount of background research has been done to identify these properties as potentially surplus to Council requirements and have potential to be disposed of. At the conclusion of the consultation period a further report will be made to Council to formally decide the future of these properties (sale, lease or retain), on a case by case basis.

RECOMMENDATION

1. That Greater Bendigo City Council resolves to sell: a. 2-28 High Street, Axedale b. 29 Happy Valley Road c. CA 10, Huntly - Fosterville Road, Fosterville d. 994 Wellington Street, Strathfieldsaye (part) when the land has been rezoned

(Planning Scheme Amendment C159) and the subdivision of the land has occurred

subject to Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989; 2. That Council authorises public notice of its intention to sell the above land in

accordance with Section 189 of the Act; 3. That Council nominate three Councillors to hear any submissions in relation to the

sale of the above land; 4. That if no submissions are received, the above land be sold and that the Council

authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign and seal all relevant sale documents.


PAGE 129

RESOLUTION Moved Cr Campbell, Seconded Cr Fyffe. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED


PAGE 130

5.2 CONTRACTS AWARDED UNDER DELEGATION


Author Leeanne Taig, Administration Assistant, Proj ect Coordination Responsible Marg Allan, Director Organisation S upport 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 Excluded)

Delegated Officer

Date Signed

CT000022

Road Construction Jobs Gully Road between Edwards Road and Howard Street

Global Contracting Pty Ltd

649,967.00 Craig Niemann 12/03/13

CT000035

Marong Business Park Development Plan

Urban Enterprise Pty Ltd 40,960.00 Richard Morrison

14/03/13


PAGE 131

RESOLUTION Moved Cr Fyffe, Seconded Cr Lyons. That the recommendations for the Our People, Our Process Report No. 5.2 (Record of Assemblies) and the Our People, Our Processes Report No. 5.3 (Contracts Awarded Under Delegation) be adopted.

CARRIED


PAGE 132

5.3 RECORD OF ASSEMBLIES


Author Peter Davies, Manager Executive Services Responsible Craig Niemann, Chief Executive Offi cer 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.

Report

Meeting Information Meeting Name/Type

Waste and Resource Management Advisory Committee

Meeting Date 13 November, 2012 Matters discussed 1. Confirmation of committee purpose

2. Visioning workshop 3. 'Yammer'


PAGE 133

4. Project update 5. Community resident survey 6. Engaging with business sector 7. Pre-collection options 8. Release of State draft Waste and Resource Recovery Policy

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Barry Lyons Apology: Cr Peter Cox

Staff/ Community Representatives

Darren Fuzzard Susan Hayes Jeff Cummins Veronica Hall Chris Harrington Verity Lougoon Danny Potter Glen Morrison Brian Stanmore Apologies: Rebecca Dempsey Don Erskine Nicole Hood

Conflict of Interest disclosures

Matter No.

Councillor/officer making disclosure Councillor/officer left meeting

Nil



Meeting Date 11 December, 2012 Matters discussed 1. Councillor representation on the committee

2. Confirmation of meeting purpose 3. Pre-collection options 4. Resident survey 5. Other surveys (business/industry; schools; CBD traders) 6. Project update 7. Video - Econotre 8. Post-collection options

Attendees/Apologies Councillors Cr Peter Cox

Cr Elise Chapman Apology: Cr Barry Lyons


PAGE 134


Darren Fuzzard Susan Hayes Jeff Cummins Nicole Hood Chris Harrington Verity Lougoon Danny Potter Brian Stanmore Apologies: Rebecca Dempsey Don Erskine Veronica Hall Glenn Morrison


Matter No.

Councillor making disclosure Councillor left meeting

Cr Cox (associated with Future Employment Opportunities)

Danny Potter (associated with Patho landfill)


Audit Committee Meting

Meeting Date 21 February, 2013 Matters discussed 1. Election of Chairperson

2. Internal Audit Planning 3. Chief Executive Officer's Report 4. Internal Audit Plan 5. External Audit update 6. Future meetings

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Rod Campbell Cr Barry Lyons Cr James Williams


Craig Niemann Marg Allan Travis Harling Janine Gould Pauline Gordon Sam Stanton John Salter Kate Scarce Ken Belfrage Graham Bastian Mark Holloway Alison Campbell


PAGE 135

Conflict of Interest disclosures Matter

No. Councillor/officer making disclosure Councillor/officer left

meeting Nil



Meeting Date 26 February, 2013 Matters discussed 1. Primary purpose of the meeting

2. Initial draft version of Greater Bendigo Waste and Resource Management Strategy

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Peter Cox Cr Barry Lyons Apology: Cr Elise Chapman


Darren Fuzzard Robyn Major Neville Stewart Linda Foley Jeff Cummins Chris Harrington Verity Lougoon Brian Stanmore Rebecca Dempsey Glenn Morrison Don Erskine Veronica Hall Apologies: Danny Potter Nicole Hood


Matter No.

Councillor/representative making disclosure

Councillor/representative left meeting

Nil


Finance Committee Meeting

Meeting Date 28 February, 2013 Matters discussed 1. Eaglehawk Landfill

2. Eaglehawk Soccer Club 3. Heritage Planning 4. Albert Roy Reserve Pavilion Upgrade


PAGE 136

5. Monthly Financial Report for January 2013 6. Formula 1% update 7. Pricing Policy 8. Payment of rates 9. Financial Management report 10. Capital Works report

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Peter Cox Cr Barry Lyons Cr Lisa Ruffell Cr James Williams Apology: Cr Mark Weragoda


Craig Niemann Marg Allan Darren Fuzzard Pauline Gordon Neal Wrigley Janine Gould Kate Scarce Graham Bastian Ken Belfrage


Matter No.


Nil



Meeting Date 12 March, 2013 Matters discussed 1. Primary purpose of the meeting

2. Feedback on draft strategy with Hyder consultants 3. Demolition and industrial waste 4. Public education 5. Implementation Plan

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Peter Cox Cr Elise Chapman Cr Barry Lyons


Darren Fuzzard Robyn Major Linda Foley Jeff Cummins Don Erskine Veronica Hall


PAGE 137

Chris Harrington Verity Lougoon Danny Potter Glenn Morrison Apologies: Rebecca Dempsey Brian Stanmore Neville Stewart Nicole Hood


Matter No.


Nil


Bendigo Easter Festival Advisory Board Meeting

Meeting Date 12 March, 2013 Matters discussed 1. Noise issues - St Killian's Parish

2. Torchlight and Gala Parades letters regarding road closures 3. Budget update 4. Dragon City Marshalls 5. Severe Weather Contingency Plan 6. Staff report

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Helen Leach


Terry Karamaloudis Raph Beh Rory Somerville Paul Rohan David Wright Ken Deveraux Phil Redmond Barry McDowell Fiona Chibber Apologies: Gary Frank Gail Hardy Lyn Brown


Matter No.


Nil


PAGE 138

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type

Bendigo Easter Festival Advisory Board Meeting

Meeting Date 12 March, 2013 Matters discussed 1. Noise issues - St Killian's Parish

2. Torchlight and Gala Parades letters regarding road closures 3. Budget update 4. Dragon City Marshalls 5. Severe Weather Contingency Plan 6. Staff report

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Helen Leach


Terry Karamaloudis Raph Beh Rory Somerville Paul Rohan David Wright Ken Deveraux Phil Redmond Barry McDowell Fiona Chibber Apologies: Gary Frank Gail Hardy Lyn Brown


Matter No.


Nil


Councillors' Forum

Meeting Date 13 March, 2013 Matters discussed 1. Cathedral precinct

2. Heritage Advisory Committee presentation 3. Sister Cities Committee presentation 4. Integrated Transport and Land Use Strategy Project Brief 5. Kangaroo Flat footpath issue 6. Eaglehawk Junior Football Club letter 7. Health and Wellbeing Plan 8. Town Hall fees 9. Sandakan Memorial Service 10. Junortoun playground


PAGE 139

11. Marong Business Park 12. Audit of contaminated land 13. Former Blueline Offices Supplies 14. Green heritage paintwork on light poles etc. 15. CBD fountains 16. Golden Square mediation 17. Waste and Resource Management Advisory Committee 18. California Gully main drain 19. Recreation land subdivisions 20. Easter Festival volunteers 21. Bendigo Creek 22. Superannuation 23. Follow-up of Council decision 24. Naming of the community theatre 25. Parking of trucks across driveway 26. Roof on bus stop 27. Priorities for Greater Bendigo Booklet 28. Kangaroo Flat Aquatic Centre update 29. Bendigo Airport Advisory Committee 30. Fortuna

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Rod Campbell Cr Elise Chapman Cr Peter Cox Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Helen Leach Cr Barry Lyons Cr James Williams Apologies: Cr Lisa Ruffell Cr Mark Weragoda


Craig Niemann Stan Liacos Pauline Gordon Ross Douglas Marg Allan Darren Fuzzard Peter Davies Alison Campbell Apology: Prue Mansfield


Matter No.


11. Cr Chapman Yes

Meeting Information Meeting Councillors' Forum


PAGE 140

Name/Type Meeting Date 20 March, 2013 Matters discussed 1. Planning matters and draft Ordinary Meeting

agenda review 2. Fire Services Levy/Section 89 Confidential Report 3. Regional Growth Plan 4. Fortuna 5. Drainage projects 6. Outstanding actions 7. Small Township meetings 8. Former Blueline Office Supplies building 9. War on rubbish/recycling initiatives 10. Kangaroo Flat footpath 11. VCAT appeal for supermarket at 2 Club Court 12. Bendigo Creek 13. Bendigo East Hall 14. Ministerial Advisory Committee 15. Town Hall booking

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Rod Campbell Cr Elise Chapman Cr Peter Cox Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Helen Leach Cr Barry Lyons Cr James Williams Apologies: Cr Lisa Ruffell Cr Mark Weragoda


Craig Niemann Stan Liacos Ross Douglas Marg Allan Darren Fuzzard Peter Davies Alison Campbell Apologies: Prue Mansfield Pauline Gordon


Matter No.


Nil


Maiden Gully Structure Plan Meeting


PAGE 141

Meeting Date 20 March, 2013 Matters discussed 1. Briefing to Councillors and the status and key elements

of the Maiden Gully Precinct Structure Plan project

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Elise Chapman Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Barry Lyons


Andrew Cockerall Steven Abbott


Matter No.


Nil


Consultation Meeting: Planning Application DS/21/2013 - 2-Lot Subdivision at 40 Hopetoun Street, Bendigo

Meeting Date 21 March, 2013 Matters discussed 1. Flooding issues

2. Streetscape character 3. Amenity

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Peter Cox Apologies: Cr Lisa Ruffell Cr James Williams


Liz Commadeur Applicant Objectors


Matter No.


Nil

RECOMMENDATION

That Council endorse the record of assemblies of Councillors as outlined in this report. Refer to page 131 - recommendation adopted


PAGE 142

6. URGENT BUSINESS

Nil.


PAGE 143

7. NOTICES OF MOTION

7.1 NOTICE OF MOTION: EXTENSION OF PORTER DRIVE, EAGLEHAWK CR PETER COX That Council notify the Department of Sustainability and Environment that it has no objection to the extension of the road reserve at the end of Porter Drive, Eaglehawk, so long as the property owner enters into an agreement with Council to maintain the extension until the surrounding land is developed. Officer Comment: (Darren Fuzzard, Director Present ation and Assets) Some 8 months ago, the owner of 12 Crowther Street approached Council officers requesting that the road reserve for Porter Drive be extended from its current termination point through Crown land to connect with the rear of his property (see attached map). The landowner was met onsite and subsequently advised in writing that, as he currently has legal access provided via Crowther Street, the City would not agree to this request. The premise for the landowner’s request was and remains that, while he has practical access to the rear of his property via Porter Drive and the vacant crown land, he is concerned that this is illegal and therefore he should not be doing it. To address this concern, Council officers contacted DSE and sought advice on whether the landowner need have concern about his use of the crown land in this way. DSE confirmed in writing that it has no objection to this occurring and stated that, while it could not say this position would not alter one day, there are no plans to prohibit the resident from using the crown land in this way in the foreseeable future. On the basis of DSE’s advice and in response to the resident’s specific concern, the officers wrote to the resident advising that he could continue to use the crown land to access the rear of his property until such time as DSE determines otherwise. The resident advised that this was not satisfactory and requested again that the road reserve be extended to his property boundary. While it remains unclear as to why DSE’s offer is not acceptable to the resident, officers requested advice from DSE on the possibility and process for private land acquisition (the second preferred option after ‘do nothing’) and conversion to a Council road reserve. DSE has advised that private land acquisition and creation of a road reserve are both possible for the land in question. In either case, DSE advised that currently the Native Title Act applies.


PAGE 144

In the instance of private land acquisition, the proponent is required to negotiate an agreement with the traditional owners (Dja Dja Wurrung in this instance). Under the current legislation this process is open ended and very few of these agreements are in place. However DSE anticipates that, as of August 2013, future acquisitions involving Dja Dja Wurrung will be considered under the Traditional Owners Settlement Act 2010 and the associated process will be substantially improved. Accordingly, if the landowner wishes to establish long-term security over his access via Porter Drive, there is adequate time for private acquisition to be pursued and it appears that the associated process will soon offer greater certainty of result. If a road reserve extension over the crown land is pursued, Council would similarly be required to enter into negotiations with the Dja Dja Wurrung under the Native Title Act. Council cannot abdicate from this role as it is deemed the applicant under the legislation. To do so, Council would be required to notify the Dja Dja Wurrung of its application to DSE and the Dja Dja Wurrung would have 40 days to indicate its interest in the land. It is understood that an indication of interest is likely to be received. If so, negotiations would then commence in regard to what “consideration” is required by Dja Dja Wurrung. These negotiations are permitted to continue for up to 6 months and after that time, Council could seek arbitration from DSE as to whether its offer of consideration has been reasonable. It is understood that consideration usually involves a financial contribution and/or other commitments and the negotiating process can be expected to require considerable officer time. Once established, the road reserve would not become Council’s responsibility under the Road Management Act until it had been constructed to Council’s minimum standard. At that time, it is unlikely that Council could avoid accepting responsibility for the maintenance of the road. The establishment of a road reserve in response to the concern expressed by the resident is the least favoured option as it provides no broad community benefit, duplicates existing legal access and does not appear to be warranted for practical access on the basis of DSE advice. If Council wishes to permit this to occur, it is recommended that the landowner be required to first enter into a legal agreement whereby he accepts all costs, including CoGB officer time, associated with the establishment of the road reserve. MOTION Moved Cr Cox, Seconded Cr Williams. That Council notify the Department of Sustainability and Environment that it has no objection to the extension of the road reserve at the end of Porter Drive, Eaglehawk, so long as the property owner enters into an agreement with Council that the owner will pay all costs associated with creating the road reserve and will maintain the extension until the surrounding land is developed.

CARRIED


PAGE 145


PAGE 146

7.2 NOTICE OF MOTION: PROPERTIES AT 26 TO 30 EAGLE HAWK ROAD CR PETER COX That Council install bollards and chain along the rear of properties 26 to 30 Eaglehawk Road and move the entrance gate into the recreation reserve to allow access to the rear of the properties and that the existing drain be relocated so that it runs out onto the open space. Officer Comment: (Darren Fuzzard, Director Present ation and Assets) This notice of motion comes as a result of works that were undertaken by VicRoads on Eaglehawk Road in front of the above properties (see attached map). In the past, property owners and their visitors were able to park on the roadside in front of the properties however, due to the duplication works, this is no longer possible. In response to the residents' concerns about this loss of parking and associated safety impacts, City of Greater Bendigo (CoGB) officers requested that VicRoads address the matter directly with the residents. It is understood that VicRoads officers have met with the residents, however to date there has not been any agreement reached. That said, the changes made by VicRoads are not unusual and in this circumstance, as the attached photos show, there is adequate room for all vehicles reversing out of properties to see oncoming traffic before entering the slow lane. In addition, with the exception of one property, all have low fences that permit good vision of the footpath and road while reversing. Where the one exception exists, this property owner has already created a turnaround area at the front of the house which allows vehicles to exit in a forward direction. All properties have driveways to garages that permit the storage of at least two vehicles inside the property boundaries. Therefore, while it is appreciated that circumstances have been changed at these properties, it is considered that they are common in Bendigo and not unreasonable. However, should Council wish to further improve the situation, it is considered that the residents' concerns could best be addressed through works within the property boundaries. Mal Kersting, Regional Director for VicRoads Northern Region, has indicated his willingness to work with Council and the residents to resolve the matter in this way.


PAGE 147

The approach outlined in this Notice of Motion is not supported for the following reasons: 1. There are numerous properties throughout Bendigo that abut passive and active

recreation reserves for which the proposed works would serve as a precedent. The City of Greater Bendigo receives regular requests for similar access to such properties and currently these are refused.

2. The result over time of such a precedent would be the erosion of ‘exclusive’

pedestrian use in reserves thereby increasing the risk of conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles and the loss of amenity and peaceful enjoyment of such areas. It also effectively reduces the size of the area available for leisure purposes directly and indirectly (through the presence of vehicles).

3. Grassed areas cannot sustain concentrated vehicle traffic and therefore either additional maintenance or a gravel surface (in turn requiring maintenance) would be required. Again, there would be a cumulative effect of this financial impost on Council over time.

4. The introduction of other vehicles into open space areas means that additional traffic

management may be required to meet WorkSafe and Code of Practice requirements. In addition to reducing the efficiency of maintenance works, this has a direct cost to Council.

5. The introduction of fencing requires additional maintenance and replacement

obligations on Council and reduces the efficiency of mowing. 6. Council recently adopted the Gateway Park Master Plan and has specifically

nominated the removal of existing access to the rear of private residences via the reserve from Alder Street. The proposal in this notice of motion would be inconsistent with that adopted position of Council.

The second part of the notice of motion regarding realignment of the open drain is not supported for the following reasons: 1. The open table drain is located in the reserve at the rear of the properties as the

properties fronting Eaglehawk Road fall to the rear towards Garden Gully Reserve. The drain is used to direct the water collected from the properties to the underground drainage network at the carpark for the reserve.

2. Removing this drain would allow stormwater to run down the steep embankment to

the sports fields (including the cricket field, cricket nets and shared path) as there is no other formal drainage to manage this volume of water in these areas.

If Council does deem it appropriate to establish access via the reserve, the cheapest and simplest solution would be to install a piped crossing to access the properties (this is usually done at the landowner’s expense) and leave the open drain in its current location. If the open drain were removed, an underground system would be required. This would be the most costly option but would minimise the area required for access and would allow the new path to be located between the two existing large plane trees and the fence.


PAGE 148

As previously noted, surfacing of the access with crushed rock would be required to enable all weather access to the properties and to minimise the amount of maintenance required of the track. The estimated cost of work is:

• Relocation of gate and new bollard and chain fence (105m) - $8,000

• Concrete pipe for table drain - $600 per property

• Sheeting of gravel path - $3,000

• Costs for maintenance of path and additional park maintenance - $3,000 per annum


PAGE 149


PAGE 150

RESOLUTION Moved Cr Cox, Seconded Cr Williams. 1. That Council install bollards and chain along the rear of properties 26 to 30

Eaglehawk Road and move the entrance gate into the recreation reserve to allow access to the rear of the properties and that the existing drain be relocated so that it runs out onto the open space.

2. That Council organise a site meeting with VicRoads, Council officers, Ward

Councillors and residents involved. AMENDMENT Moved Cr Campbell, seconded Cr Lyons. 1. That Council install bollards and chain along the rear of properties 26 to 30

Eaglehawk Road and move the entrance gate into the recreation reserve to allow access to the rear of the properties and that the existing drain be relocated so that it runs out onto the open space.

2. That Council organise a site meeting with VicRoads, Council officers, Ward

Councillors and residents involved. 3. That VicRoads pay for a formal roadway at the rear of the properties.

CARRIED The amendment became the substantive motion and was put and CARRIED


PAGE 151

7.3 NOTICE OF MOTION: 2 CLUB COURT, STRATHFIELDSAYE CR HELEN LEACH That Council prepare the necessary documentation to commence the process to rezone land at 2 Club Court, Strathfieldsaye, from a Business 1 Zone to a Residential 1 Zone, including seeking Ministerial authorisation to exhibit the amendment. Officer comment (Prue Mansfield, Director Planning and Development): Background Previous planning controls that applied to the land at 2 Club Court, prior to the Strathfieldsaye Township Plan, effectively meant it could only be used for an extension to the adjoining Primary School despite its Business 1 zoning. The Department of Education subsequently advised they had no interest in expanding the school on to the subject land. The Strathfieldsaye Township Plan proposed that the site be used for residential purposes. Amendment C137 subsequently proposed to rezone the site from Business 1 to a Residential 1. No submission was received from the school or the Department of Education. Following careful deliberation and considering the evidence before it, the Independent Panel appointed to consider the amendment recommended that the Business 1 Zone be retained. The amendment was ultimately adopted by Council and approved by the Minister for Planning. Since this time proponents for the proposed supermarket on the subject property have undertaken a significant amount of work in preparing documentation for planning approval aligned with the provisions of Business 1 Zone and the approval by the Minister for Planning. Strategic Justification Prior to commencing any planning scheme amendment process it is first necessary to provide strategic justification for that amendment. In this instance there are a number of discrete pieces of work that need to be undertaken. The specific town planning analysis includes: 1. Preparation of an assessment to determine when a future supermarket would be

required to service the Strathfieldsaye community and that there is enough supply of Business zoned land to meet Strathfieldsaye’s long term needs.

2. Prepare an Urban Design Framework for the town centre to determine the most appropriate site for a second supermarket should it be required.


PAGE 152

3. Complete a traffic impact assessment which considers the longer term traffic impacts of a second supermarket in a revised location. This would normally be prepared at the time a planning application is being considered, however it is likely to be a significant issue for this particular planning scheme amendment and it should be done as part of the planning scheme amendment stage.

Resource Implications The cost of the additional strategic work to support a revised planning scheme amendment to 2 Club court would be in the order of $60,000. While the strategic justification is necessary to progress a revised planning scheme amendment, there is no guarantee that Ministerial approval would then be received to exhibit the amendment. Should the amendment progress to exhibition, assessment, review and associated Panel costs for the planning scheme amendment could cost in the order of $50,000 over two financial years. This project is not in the current work program and no budget provision has been made. In addition to the financial costs outlined above, the project would consume significant Officer time. If this project is to proceed this will cause significant delays to the Residential Strategy Review. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Leach, Seconded Cr Chapman. That Council prepare the necessary documentation to commence the process to rezone land at 2 Club Court, Strathfieldsaye, from a Business 1 Zone to a Residential 1 Zone, including seeking Ministerial authorisation to exhibit the amendment.

LOST


PAGE 153

8. COUNCILLORS' REPORTS

Cr Fyffe reported on the successful Easter Festival, his attendance at the visit by the US Consul General and his attendance at the opening of the Croquet Championships. Cr Lyons reported on his attendance at the Budget meetings, the meetings regarding Fortuna and participation in other community meetings. Cr Cox reported on the Elmore Small Town Meeting, his attendance at the presentation relating to the trams, celebration of 50 years of Elmore Field Days and thanked staff for the work undertaken in Watson Street. Cr Cox advised he would be attending the launch on Saturday of the Harvey Town signs and advised of the new edition of the 3556 Magazine. Cr Chapman reported on attendance at Volunteer Week, participation in meetings relating to Fortuna, attendance at Budget meetings and the Kangaroo Flat Chapel restoration. Cr Chapman reported on her attendance at the Kangaroo Flat Arts Centre Meeting and the Waste Committee. Cr Williams reported on his attendance at the Murray Darling Basin Plan meeting, Project Renew and the Elmore Small Town Meeting. Cr Weragoda reported on his presentation about Council at the Vintage Veteran Classic Car Club, his attendance at events during the Easter Festival, the official opening of the Affordable Housing Development in Chapel Street and the exhibition opening at the Art Gallery. Cr Leach discussed issues relating to a Child Friendly City. Cr Campbell reported on his attendance at the Volunteers' Expo, a presentation to Girton Students and his attendance at events during the Easter Festival.


PAGE 154

9. MAYOR'S REPORT

Her Worship the Mayor, Cr Lisa Ruffell, tabled a report on her attendance at the following meetings and events: � Attended interviews with Bendigo Advertiser, ABC Radio, ABC TV, WIN News and

RPH Vision Australia Radio. � Met with various residents and groups regarding a range of issues. � Attended Independent Review Committee meeting. � Attended the Dja Dja Wurrung & State of Victoria to settle native title claims -

Signing Ceremony. � Spoke at the official opening of the 'Dragon' Playspace in Hargreaves Mall. � Attended the Rotary Club of Bendigo Easter Art Exhibition Gala Launch - Awards

& Opening Sales at the Bendigo Town Hall. � Attended and spoke at the Bendigo Bank Bendigo Easter Festival Function. � Participated in the official salute during the Bendigo Easter Festival’s Torchlight

Procession. � Participated in the Bendigo Advertiser’s Gala Easter Parade. � Attended Councillors Workplace Behaviours Training. � Attended presentation to Councillors by Joseph Gould regarding a new tram

proposal. � Chaired the Presentation and Strategy Councillors Forum. � Meet with the Auxiliary Bishop Matthias Koenig from Paterburg in Germany along

with Monsignor Frank Marriott. � Attended Independent Review Committee meeting. � Attended meetings with local Politicians regarding recently released Priorities

Booklet. � Attended various meetings regarding Fortuna. � Attended and spoke at the Bendigo Easter Festival Volunteer Acknowledgment

Reception. � Chaired the draft operating budget review meeting. � Chaired the Loddon Campaspe Council meeting. � Chaired the draft operating budget review meeting. � Attended Regional Cities Victoria Breakfast with the Premier of Victoria. � Attended the Regional Cities Victoria meeting. � Chaired the Special Council Meeting – Fortuna. � Held the monthly Mayor’s Open Office session attended by 8 people. � Attended and spoke at the Bendigo Diabetes Support Group 45th Birthday

Celebrations. � Attended Whipstick Ward meeting in Elmore. � Attended on-site meeting with Sandhurst Hockey Club. � Visited residents at the Mirridong Aged Care Facility. � Attended presentation by Professor John Dewar, La Trobe University. � Chaired draft operating budget review meeting.


PAGE 155

10. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT

The Chief Executive Officer, Mr Craig Niemann, tabled a report on his attendance at the following meetings and events: � Attended the launch of the Hargreaves Mall play space � Attended the signing of the Dja Dja Wurrung Agreement � Participated in meetings relating to the Independent Review � Participated in numerous meetings relating to 2013/14 Capex and Operating

Budgets � Met with representatives from the Department of Education and Early Childhood

Development � Attended meetings with local politicians to promote recently released priorities

booklet � Attended numerous meetings relating to Fortuna � Participated in various media interviews � Attended meeting of Loddon Campaspe Councils � Attended recent announcement of successful tenderer for Bendigo Hospital

redevelopment � Attended meeting of Regional Cities Victoria which included a breakfast meeting

with the Premier � Attended presentation by Vice Chancellor John Dewar – La Trobe University � Attended meeting with representatives from Bendigo Health regarding the hospital

redevelopment


PAGE 156

11. CONFIDENTIAL (SECTION 89) REPORTS

11.1 Proposed Development

RECOMMENDATION

That the meeting be closed to the public to consider a report in accordance with Section 89(2)(e) of the Local Government Act 1989, as amended, relating to a proposed development. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Fyffe, seconded Cr Campbell. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED

There being no further business, the meeting closed at 8.30 pm

Confirmed:

8 May, 2013 Chair


PAGE 157

council meeting minutes 17 april 2013

Documents

notice of motion

lot subdivision of land

community representatives

goal areas ordinary

development of mixed

bendigo town hall copies

proposed development

notices of motion