inner melbourne action plan - imap - homeimap.vic.gov.au/uploads/meeting agendas/2007 august... ·...

AGENDA Committee Meeting 7 31 August 2007

Inner Melbourne Action Plan Making Melbourne More Liveable’

1

Agenda

Inner Melbourne Action Plan Implementation Committee

Meeting No 7

8.00 am Friday 31 August 2007 City of Melbourne

Council Meeting Room 2nd Floor Melbourne Town Hall, Melbourne

Committee Members

Cr Jenny Farrar - Mayor, City of Yarra Cr Janet Bolitho – Mayor, City of Port Phillip Cr John Chandler – Mayor, City of Stonnington Cr Catherine Ng - Chair Planning Committee, City of Melbourne Mr Justin Hanney - Chief Executive Officer, City of Yarra Mr David Spokes - Chief Executive Officer, City of Port Phillip Mr Geoff Lawler - Director Sustainability and Regulatory Services, City of Melbourne Mr Hadley Sides – Chief Executive Officer, City of Stonnington

Associate Partner

Representatives

Julian Hill, Acting Executive Director, Metropolitan Planning

IMAP Implementation

Officer

Martin Hartigan

Guests

Cr Steve Stefanopoulos, City of Stonnington Gary Spivak, Housing Development Officer, City of Port Phillip David McCaffrey, Senior Transport Officer City of Port Phillip Meg Selman, Sustainable Transport Officer, City of Port Phillip John Wisniewski, Sustainable Environment Co-ordinator, City of Stonnington David Mayes, Manager Strategic Planning and Sustainability, City of Melbourne Dwayne Carter, Service co-ordinator parks and open space, City of Port Phillip

PRELIMINARIES

Item Time Alloc.

Agenda Topic Responsibility

1. 1 min Appointment of Chair – Cr Catherine Ng Cr Ng

2 1 min Apologies

Cr Ng

3. 1 min Suspension of City of Melbourne’s Local Law No. 1 Conduct of Meetings (No I of 2001)

3.1 That pursuant to Division 6, clause 14 of the Melbourne City Council's Conduct of Meetings Local Law 2001, the provisions of the Local Law be suspended for the duration of the meeting of the Inner Melbourne Action Plan Implementation Committee.

Recommendation

Cr Ng



2

ITEMS 4.

10 mins

Confirmation of Minutes (Attachment 1) Recommendation 4.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to confirm the

minutes of the IMAP Implementation Committee held on 25th

May, 2007.

Cr Ng

5. 30 mins Business Arising (Attachment 2)

Recommendation 5.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the

actions undertaken in response to business arising from the minutes of the IMAP Implementation Committee held on 25th

May, 2007.

Cr Ng

6. 10 mins Recurrent Budget August 2007 (Attachment 3) Recommendation 6.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to receive the

recurrent budget for August 2007 – 2008.

IMAP Implementation Officer

7. 10 mins Communications Plan and Media Protocol (Attachment 4) Recommendation 7.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to approve the

“IMAP Communications Plan and Media Protocol (August 2007)”.


8. 15 mins Action 2.2 Coordinated Pedestrian and Public Transport Signage (Attachment 5) Recommendation 8.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to: (a) note the progress of Action 2.2 Coordinated Pedestrian &

PT Signage and (b) support progressing to an implementation phase

with a demonstration route, located within the Cities of Yarra and Stonnington.

David McCaffrey

9. 15 mins Action 2.4 Walking links / Pedestrian Priority Areas (Attachment 6) Recommendation 9.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to: (a) note the progress of Action 2.4 Walking Links &

Pedestrian Priority (b) support the Regional Greenlight Project Stage 1

investigation to the finalisation of this stage of the project; and

(c) approve the IMAP Regional Greenlight Project brief, being undertaken as part of IMAP Action 2.4 Walking Links & Pedestrian Priority Areas.

Meg Selman

10. 15 mins Action 9.6 Use of recycled water for parks (Attachment 7) Recommendation 10.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to:

(a) note the progress of Action 9.6 Use of Recycled Water for

John Wisniewski



3

Open Space, (b) approve the publication and distribution of “Water

Management for Open Space Technical Notes and Case Studies”, and

(c) support the implementation of the collaborative study.

11. 5 mins Audit of Melbourne 2030 (Attachment 8) Recommendation 11.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to provide a

joint response to the audit of Melbourne 2030 and approve the draft submission.

City of Melbourne

12. 5 mins IMAP Draft Annual Report 2006 – 2007 (Attachment 9) Recommendation 12.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to:

(a) note the proposed contents of the IMAP 2006 – 2007 Annual Report; and

(b) endorse the IMAP Implementation Officer to draft the

document, in consultation with relevant IMAP Council officers and the Director Sustainability and Regulatory Services, City of Melbourne.


CONFIDENTIAL ITEMS Meeting to be closed in accordance with Sections 89 (2) (d,e,f,h) of the Local Government Act (1989)

13. Nil

OTHER BUSINESS 14. 2 mins Next Meeting – Friday 30th November 2007 (8.00am)

City of Stonnington Cr Ng

Attachments:

Attachment 1 Minutes of Meeting No. 6 (25 May 2007) Attachment 2 Business arising

2a Letter to Meredith Sussex re Integrated Accessible Tram Stop Design 2b Letter to Meredith Sussex re Review of Public Transport Operations. 2c Letter to Hon Tim Pallas Minister for Roads and Ports re IMAP Briefing. 2d Letter to Mr Peter Harris Sec DSE re Inner Melbourne Action Plan Forums. 2e Minutes of briefing to Hon Tim Pallas Minister for Roads and Ports. 2f Minutes of Briefing to Mr Peter Harris Secretary DSE. 2g Affordable Housing Progress report. 2h Minutes of the IMAP Mayors’ and Councillors’ forum

Attachment 3 Recurrent Budget August 2007 Attachment 4 Communications Plan and Media Protocol Attachment 5 Action 2.2 Coordinated Pedestrian and Public Transport Signage Attachment 6 Action 2.4 Walking links / Pedestrian Priority Areas Attachment 7 Action 9.6 Use of recycled water for parks Attachment 8 Audit of Melbourne 2030 Attachment 9 Draft Contents - Annual Report

MINUTES Committee Meeting 6 25 May 2007


1

Attachment 1 Minutes

Inner Melbourne Action Plan Implementation Committee

Meeting No 6

Attendees Cr Jenny Farrar - Mayor, City of Yarra; Cr Peter Logan – Deputy Mayor, City of Port Phillip; Cr John Chandler – Mayor, City of Stonnington; Cr Catherine Ng - Chair Planning Committee, City of Melbourne; Mr Justin Hanney - Chief Executive Officer, City of Yarra; Mr Geoff Oulton - Chief Executive Officer, City of Port Phillip; Mr Geoff Lawler - Director Sustainability, City of Melbourne; Mr Hadley Sides – Chief Executive Officer, City of Stonnington

Associate Partner

Representatives

Sally Semmens - Senior Project Manager Integrated Transport Planning, Department of Infrastructure

IMAP Implementation

Officer

Martin Hartigan

Guests Cr Steve Stefanopoulos, City of Stonnington; Pauline Semmens, Coordinator Strategic Planning, City of Yarra; David McCaffrey, Senior Transport Officer, City of Port Phillip Jack Holden, Team Leader Sustainability, City of Melbourne; Sheridan Blunt, Sustainable Water Program Coordinator, City of Melbourne; Helen Hardwick, Program Manager, Melbourne Tourism, City of Melbourne; Gary Spivak, Housing Development Officer, City of Port Phillip Katrina Terjung, Coordinator Strategic Planning, City of Stonnington

PRELIMINARIES

1. Appointment of Chair MOVED Cr Chandler / Mr Lawler Recommendation 1.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to appoint Cr Farrar as the Chair of the meeting. A vote was taken and the MOTION was CARRIED

2. Apologies MOVED Cr Chandler / Mr Sides Recommendation

2.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the following apologies: Cr Janet Bolitho, City of Port Phillip (Peter Logan (Deputy Mayor) attending on Cr Bolitho’s behalf); Mr David Spokes - City of Port Phillip (Geoff Oulton attending on his behalf); Mr Geoff Millar – Department of Innovation, Industry and Regional Development; Ms Kate Stapleton, Department of Sustainability and Environment; Ms Lynn Sweeney, Vic Urban. A vote was taken and the MOTION was CARRIED

3. Suspension of City of Melbourne’s Local Law No. 1 Conduct of Meetings (No I of 2001) Recommendation 3.1 That pursuant to Division 6, clause 14 of the Melbourne City Council's Conduct of Meetings Local

Law 2001, the provisions of the Local Law be suspended for the duration of the meeting of the Inner Melbourne Action Plan Implementation Committee.

MOVED Mr Sides / Mr Lawler



2

A vote was taken and the MOTION was CARRIED

ITEMS

4.

Confirmation of Minutes It was agreed that the words in Resolution 6.2 be amended to include the words “DRAFT” before “St Kilda Road Masterplan”. It was agreed that “Business Arising” be included on the agenda in future as a standing agenda item. Recommendation 4.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to confirm the minutes of the IMAP

Implementation Committee held on 23rd

February, 2007. MOVED Crs Chandler / Ng A vote was taken and the MOTION was CARRIED Action: IMAP Implementation Officer to amend minutes as agreed.

5. St Kilda Road Flagship Project Report Ms Sally Semmens provided a progress report that was received and discussed. It was noted that the City of Melbourne had recently met with the Minister for Roads and Ports The Hon Tim Pallas to discuss Draft St Kilda Road Masterplan, amongst other issues, City of Melbourne has undertaken to complete the St Kilda Road traffic analysis. The City of Melbourne will provide the report to the Department of Infrastructure upon completion. Cr Stephanopoulos, City of Stonnington, raised a concern that Department of Infrastructure and Yarra Trams were progressing the introduction of standard design DDA compliant tram stops on Dandenong Road without appropriate consultation. The Committee discussed that Dandenong Road is a major regional boulevard and tramway arterial that acts as a southern gateway to the cities of Stonnington, Port Phillip and the IMAP Region. It was further noted that it is an identified boulevard in the IMAP document (Map 2) to be preserved and maintained and was a priority boulevard where the quality and design should be maintained. It was agreed that IMAP should arrange a meeting with key stakeholders to discuss the issue and seek more thorough consultation. Recommendation

5.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the progress of the St Kilda Road Project.

5.2 That IMAP convene a meeting with key stakeholders to discuss the development of quality design DDA compliant tram stops on Dandenong Road and other key IMAP boulevards and places.

MOVED Mr Sides/ Cr Chandler A vote was taken and the MOTION was CARRIED Action: The IMAP Implementation Officer to arrange a meeting with stakeholders to discuss integrated tram

stop design in the inner region.

6. Action 9.3 Water sensitive urban design project report Ms Sheridan Blunt, City of Melbourne, provided a progress report on behalf of the working group that was received and discussed. It was noted that an important group that is undertaking a long term effort that will assist in the fundamental change in the way building design is considered.



3

Recommendation

6.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the progress of Action 9.3 Water Sensitive Urban Design.

A vote was taken and the MOTION was CARRIED MOVED Cr Chandler / Mr Lawler

7. Action 2.3 Bicycle network legibility project report Mr David McCaffrey, City of Port Phillip, provided a progress report on behalf of the working group that was received and discussed. In principle support was provided for the directions taken. Recommendation

7.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the progress of Action 2.3 Bicycle Legibility and support the finalisation of the project.

A vote was taken and the MOTION was CARRIED MOVED Mr Sides / Mr Hanney

8. Action 9.1 Regional sustainability targets project report Mr Jack Holden, City of Melbourne provided a progress report on behalf of the working group that was received and discussed. Mr Lawler noted that the work being undertaken by the working group would relate directly to the City of Melbourne’s link to the ‘Clinton Foundation’ that addressed environmentally sustainable development in buildings. A regional response would be to identify conglomerates of businesses that could be targeted for action. Mr Holden noted that a rapid regional response would be to act to insulate hot water services in residential (in particular high rise) and business buildings. Mr Lawler stated that he would provide further information to the IMAP partners. Recommendation

8.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the progress of Action 9.1 Sustainability Targets and Programs.

A vote was taken and the MOTION was CARRIED MOVED Mr Hanney / Mr Lawler

9. Action 11.1 Inner Melbourne map and Action 11.2 Regional tourism program report Ms Helen Hardwick, City of Melbourne, provided a progress report on behalf of the working group that was received and discussed. In principle support was provided for the directions taken. It was discussed whether IMAP could get recognition on websites or other avenues from the key partners Tourism Vic and Destination Melbourne Ltd. Recommendation

9.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note and support the process being pursued by the IMAP Tourism Working Group, and the program outlined.



4

A vote was taken and the MOTION was CARRIED

MOVED Cr Chandler / Mr Lawler Action: IMAP Action 11.1 and 11.2 Working Group to explore the opportunities to include IMAP recognition

on tourism initiatives with partner organisations.

10. Action 5.2 Affordable housing Mr Gary Spivak, City of Port Phillip, provided a progress report on behalf of the Inner Regional Housing Working Group. Mr Spivak noted that the Inner Regional Housing Working Group had recently briefed the Office of Housing who indicated in principle support for the work undertaken to date. Issues discussed included:

That the establishing mechanisms were being investigated but there was some concern that the research establishing need had not been undertaken. Mr Spivak noted that SGS Economics had undertaken this needs analysis and identified the level of housing stress in the community. The housing needs website development would provide the tool that used the data to more specifically identify the need in the inner region.

That a key issue was to analyse what housing mix is required across a number of levels of affordability.

That the IRHWG was undertaking the IMAP Action 5.2 to: Work collaboratively to investigate new funding sources and models, and build the capacity of registered and not-for-profit housing organisations working in the Inner Melbourne Region to provide and manage an increased number of affordable houses.

Recommendation

10.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the progress of IMAP Action 5.2 Affordable Housing and support the continuing investigation of the proposal.

10.2 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to convene a meeting of interested members of

the Committee to discuss IMAP Action 5.2 Affordable Housing. MOVED Mr Hanney / Cr Chandler A vote was taken and the MOTION was CARRIED Action: The IMAP Implementation Officer to arrange a meeting of IMAP partner councils to discuss key

issues about the Affordable Housing action. 11. Mayor and Councillor’s Forum

It was noted that formal minutes would be provided for the Mayor and Councillors Forum. Recommendation 11.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the key issues raised at the Mayor and

Councillor’s Forum and the Briefing to the Minister for Planning. MOVED Crs Chandler/ Ng A vote was taken and the MOTION was CARRIED Action: The IMAP Implementation Officer to provide formal minutes from the Mayor and Councillor’s Forum.

12. CEO’s / Senior Management Forum Mr Sides presented the minutes of the CEO’s and Senior Management Forum. Key issues raised included:

In principle agreement that City of Melbourne will host the IMAP Implementation Officer position over 2007/08 and that the incumbent officer would continue his role.



5

That the IMAP budget had been considered and no concerns raised.

Recommendations regarding prioritisation of new IMAP Actions for 2007/08 had been considered and were presented to the Committee today (Attachment 9a).

That meetings with Minister and Pallas and Mr Peter Harris (Secretary DSE) had been arranged and a meeting with Minister Wynn will be arranged at an appropriate time.

Mr Lawler tended his apology for the meeting with Minister Pallas but suggested that the CEO City of Melbourne to attend instead. This is to be confirmed. It was agreed that Minister Kosky’s office would be contacted to follow up previous correspondence to determine if a briefing time may be obtained. The recommendations contained in Attachment 9a were discussed, as raised at the CEO’s and Senior Management Forum. Four Actions were recommended for prioritisation from the ‘IMAP Three Year Implementation Plan (August 2006)’. Action 2.5 Complete Regional Bicycle Network Action 2.6 Tram Network / fixed Rail Improvements Action 3.3 Regional Approach to Car Parking Action 10.4 Riparian Open space project It was noted that typographical errors in the briefing notes appended to Attachment 9a would be amended. Recommendation 12.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note and confirm the minutes of the Executive

Officer’s Forum. 12.2 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to:

a. Agree to the prioritisation of the IMAP actions: Action 2.5, Action 2.6, Action 3.3 and Action 10.4.

b. Progress Action 2.6 - Tram Network / fixed Rail Improvements in consultation with OCGI. c. Not commence Actions 2.5, 3.3 and 10.4 until completion of: Action 2.3, Action 5.2, Action

7.4, Action 9.3, Action 9.6, Action 11.1 and Action 11.2. MOVED Cr Chandler / Mr Lawler A vote was taken and the MOTION was CARRIED Actions:

The IMAP Implementation Officer to progress IMAP Action 2.6 with appropriate officers of the IMAP Councils and DoI.

The IMAP Implementation Officer to contact Minister Kosky’s office to request a briefing time.

CONFIDENTIAL ITEMS Meeting to be closed in accordance with Sections 89 (2) (d,e,f,h) of the Local Government Act (1989)

13. Non listed

OTHER BUSINESS 14. Next Meeting – Friday 31st August 2007 (8.00am)

City of Melbourne

As there was no further business, the meeting was closed at 10.19 am Confirmed: Next meeting 31

st August 2007

Chairperson: Cr Jenny Farrar _____________________ RESOLUTIONS

1.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to appoint Cr Farrar as the Chair of the meeting.



6

2.2 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the following apologies:

Cr Janet Bolitho, City of Port Phillip (Peter Logan (Deputy Mayor) attending on Cr Bolitho’s behalf); Mr David Spokes - City of Port Phillip (Geoff Oulton attending on his behalf); Mr Geoff Millar – Department of Innovation, Industry and Regional Development; Ms Kate Stapleton, Department of Sustainability and Environment; Ms Lynn Sweeney, Vic Urban. 3.1 That pursuant to Division 6, clause 14 of the Melbourne City Council's Conduct of Meetings Local Law 2001,

the provisions of the Local Law be suspended for the duration of the meeting of the Inner Melbourne Action Plan Implementation Committee.

4.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to confirm the minutes of the IMAP Implementation

Committee held on 23rd

February, 2007. 5.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the progress of the St Kilda Road Project.

5.2 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to convene a meeting with key stakeholders to discuss the development of quality design DDA compliant tram stops on Dandenong Road and other key IMAP boulevards and places.

6.2 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the progress of Action 9.3 Water Sensitive Urban

Design. 7.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the progress of Action 2.3 Bicycle Legibility and

support the finalisation of the project. 8.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the progress of Action 9.1 Sustainability Targets

and Programs. 9.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note and support the process being pursued by the

IMAP Tourism Working Group, and the program outlined. 10.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the progress of IMAP Action 5.2 Affordable

Housing and support the continuing investigation of the proposal. 10.2 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to convene a meeting of interested members of the

Committee to discuss IMAP Action 5.2 Affordable Housing. 11.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the key issues raised at the Mayor and Councillor’s

Forum and the Briefing to the Minister for Planning. 12.1 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the minutes of the Executive Officer’s Forum. 12.2 That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to:

a. Agree to the prioritisation of the IMAP actions: Action 2.5, Action 2.6, Action 3.3 and Action 10.4. b. Progress Action 2.6 - Tram Network / fixed Rail Improvements in consultation with OCGI. c. Not commence Actions 2.5, 3.3 and 10.4 until completion of: Action 2.3, Action 5.2, Action 7.4, Action

9.3, Action 9.6, Action 11.1 and Action 11.2.

ACTIONS PUBLIC RECORD

Responsibility Action Due IMAP Implementation Officer

IMAP Implementation Officer to amend minutes as agreed.

31 August 2007


The IMAP Implementation Officer to arrange a meeting with stakeholders to discuss integrated tram stop design in the inner region.

19 June 2007

IMAP Action 11.1 and 11.2 working group

IMAP Action 11.1 and 11.2 Working Group to explore the opportunities to include IMAP recognition on tourism

31 August 2007



7

initiatives with partner organisations.


The IMAP Implementation Officer to arrange a meeting of IMAP partner councils to discuss key issues about the Affordable Housing action.

31 August 2007


The IMAP Implementation Officer to provide formal minutes from the Mayor and Councillor’s Forum

31 August 2007


The IMAP Implementation Officer to progress IMAP Action 2.6. The IMAP Implementation Officer to contact Minister Kosky’s office to request a briefing time.

31 August 2007

Attachment 3

1

IMAP Implementation Committee Briefing Paper – Recurrent Budget

August 2007 _____________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND 1. The recurrent budget was last noted by at the CEO and Senior Management Forum in April 2007. 2. On 1 July 2007 the IMAP finances were transferred from the City of Port Phillip to the City of

Melbourne along with the responsibilities of hosting the IMAP Implementation officer. 3. At transfer, the balance of the account stood at $188, 933.23. DISCUSSION 4. To date, expenditure for professional services and items related to implementation of IMAP Actions

is $76,249, including $31,693 in this financial year. 5. State Government grants received total $143,000 with a further $32,000 outstanding. These State

grants relate to funding for Stage 1 of ‘Action 2.2 Pedestrian Signage’ Stage 1 of ‘Action 2.4 IMAP Greenlight’ and the Housing Needs Project of ‘Action 5.2 Affordable Housing’. Actions 2.2 and 2.4 have significant Stage 2 (implementation) components that will entail progressing State Government grant funding applications of approximately $300,000.

6. In addition to IMAP council recurrent contribution of $80,000, IMAP Councils have committed a

further $238,000 to implementation of IMAP actions. RECOMMENDATION 7. That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to receive the recurrent budget for August 2007 –

2008.

Attachment 3Innner Melbourne Action Plan - Budget 2007 / 08

YTD TOTAL Comments 31 Jan 2008 2007 / 08

Opening Surplus - 1 July 2007 188,933 188,933

Income

Sundry 60,000 80,000 4x $20K IMAP Council Partner Contributions

Recycled Water on Parks 60,000 80,000 Contributions from IMAP Council Partners

Tourism Programme 70,000 80,000 Contributions from IMAP Council Partners

Pedestrian Signage Project 5,250 0 Contributions from IMAP Council Partners

DOI (LAAP) - Greenlight Project 0 25,000

DOI (LAAP) - Pedestrian Signage Project 5,682 6,250

DVC (LAPSP) - Affordable Housing Project _______________ 75,000 Managed by the City of Port Phillip

Total Operating Income 200,932 346,250

Expenditure

Funding of External Funding DOI (LAAP) - Greenlight Project 50,000

Recycled Water on Parks 80,000

Tourism Programme 80,000

DOI (LAAP) - Pedestrian Signage Project 25,000

DVC (LAPSP) - Affordable Housing Project ________ 75,000 Managed by the City of Port Phillip

0 310,000Other Expenditure Salaries & Wages 34,942 109,068

Professional Services 151,681 70,000

Printing, Copying & Fax 3,318 500

Stationary 7,000 500

General Admin Expenses 500

Telephone 1,200

Staff Training 1,000

Conference & Courses 1,000

Local Travel 500

Interstate Travel 1,000

Catering 381 500

Entertainment 500

Equipment 395

Subscriptions 80 500

Total Operating Expenditure 197,797 186,768

Surplus (Deficit) 192,068 38,415

Attachment 4

1

IMAP Implementation Committee Briefing Paper – Communication Plan and Media Protocol

___________________________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND 1. At the IMAP Implementation Committee meeting of the 23 February 2007, the following resolution

was passed by the IMAP Implementation Committee:

“That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to prepare a Communications Strategy that will address key messages and a clear communications protocol.”

2. The “Communication Plan and Media Protocol” (see reverse) has been drafted in consultation with

the media units of the other partner councils and in accordance with the requirements of the Operational Protocol of the IMAP Implementation Committee. The City of Port Phillip media unit was of particularly assistance in the drafting of the document.

DISCUSSION 3. The “Communication Plan and Media Protocol” will:

• provide clear guidance to IMAP members as to content, spokespersons and leadership of media activities.

• identify key messages, opportunities, risks and implementation activities to strengthen IMAP’s visibility in the community, internally among member councils and with State Government Partners.

4. The document addresses communications objectives and considers a media protocol in relation to

the purpose of media management, the IMAP spokespeople and joint statements by IMAP partner Councils.

5. A spokesperson rotation methodology is recommended, based on the IMAP Implementation

Committee meeting cycle. 6. In addition, a ‘communications plan’ template is provided for IMAP actions and projects. RECOMMENDATION 7. That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to approve the “IMAP Communications Plan and

Media Protocol (August 2007)”.

Attachment 4

2

Inner Melbourne Action Plan Communications Plan & Media Protocol August 2007 Objective:

1. A media protocol that provides clear guidance to IMAP members as to content, spokespersons and leadership of media activities.

2. A Communications plan identifying key messages, opportunities, risks and implementation activities

to strengthen IMAP’s visibility in the community, internally among member councils and with State Government Partners.

IMAP Implementation Committee Operational Protocol The IMAP Communications Plan and Media Protocol should be read in the context of the IMAP Implementation Committee’s Operational Protocol (August 2006). ‘Section 15: Joint Statements’ reads as follows:

15.1 To enable a collaborative approach to new initiatives that may be rolled-out by the State Government or other organisations from time-to-time, the IMAP Member Councils may from time-to-time release ‘Joint Statements’ to media or via other public releases.

15.2 Any such ‘Joint Statements’ shall be co-ordinated through the IMAP Implementation

Officer and be agreed by the appropriate media officers of each IMAP Council.

15.3 Individual IMAP member Councils shall be able to add distinct content to an agreed ‘Joint Statement’, where an action has particular local relevance, provided the distinct content does not contradict the intent of the agreed ‘Joint Statement’.

Strategy summary A coordinated and systemic approach to communication activities across the four IMAP member council to achieve objectives. Key messages • The Inner Melbourne Action Plan (IMAP) project has the objective: “to make Melbourne more liveable”

• The four Councils are working together collaboratively and it is an effective relationship.

• Progress on actions is strong with planning for future actions well advanced to make Melbourne more liveable and economically viable.

• IMAP strategies and actions benefit visitors, residents, business owners and the community as a whole.

• IMAP actions make our communities user-friendly through collaborative initiatives such as uniform signposting, directions and maps for visitors, advocacy for planning and transport policy change, agreed infrastructure and sharing knowledge.

• All IMAP Councils are supporting the strategies and actions with resources. This reinforces the cooperation, commitment and willingness of IMAP Councils to IMAP.

• Regional collaboration is recognition by each municipality that some actions can be better implemented at a regional level, with input from each Council and support of State Government and State Agencies.

Communications objectives • Educating community on IMAP – raise awareness

• Highlight achievements

Target audience

Objective Activity Tactic

Residents/ media/

Achieve visibility of IMAP brand, awareness of participating

Uniform letterhead IMAP officer to produce standard letterhead for all joint

Attachment 4

3

visitors and tourists

councils and partner organisations (particularly state government)

statements/media releases

Online pages Consistent content & logos about IMAP on all council member websites – coordinated by IMAP officer

Media releases: min four per year (one each quarter)

Media opportunities, where applicable, will be identified at quarterly IMAP Implementation Committee meetings. It is the responsibility of member council hosting IMAP that quarter to provide and circulate as per media protocol.

Residents of member councils

Promote IMAP achievements and purpose

Council newsletters - copy circulated at least twice a year

Content opportunities identified & allocated by IMAP officer. Circulated to member councils for approval as per media protocol and then distribution in newsletters.

IMAP member council staff

Consistent approach to communication planning

Communication plan

Utilise communication plan in project planning (example attached for reference)

_____________________________________________________________________________

Media Protocol

1. Purpose of media management

a. To enhance awareness of IMAP and its actions

b. To reinforce key IMAP messages

c. To provide accurate information

2. IMAP spokespeople:

a. The role of spokesperson will be used in joint statements, and for media comment on issues as they arise, where a joint IMAP response is required.

b. The IMAP spokesperson will be rotated in accordance with the rotation of meetings – the host council Mayor is IMAP spokesperson for the following quarter. (See rotation below)

c. Where the host Mayor is not available, the Mayor of the previous quarter will be spokesperson

d. Member council Mayors are able to make comment related to IMAP activities on local issues

3. Joint statements:

a. Joint statements will be coordinated through the IMAP implementation officer.

b. Topics, if identified during quarterly meetings or prior, will be assigned to a member council media office

c. Joint statements will be circulated through designated media office contacts of IMAP member council (see contacts below) for approval

d. Distribution to metro media will be coordinated through the hosting council. All other member councils shall distribute joint statements to their local media outlets as part of usual practice

e. Individual IMAP member Councils shall be able to add distinct content to an agreed ‘Joint Statement’, where an action has particular local relevance, provided the distinct content does not contradict the intent of the agreed ‘Joint Statement’.

Attachment 4

4

4. Spokesperson rotation

Council Spokesperson Media Office Period during which leading media activities

City of Melbourne Chair Planning Committee Michelle Coffey 9658 9191

Aug 31 – 29 Nov 2007

City of Stonnington Mayor Helen Preston 8290 1330

30 Nov – 22 Feb 2008

City of Port Phillip Mayor Carmel Shute 9209 6163

23 Feb – 24 May 2008

City of Yarra Mayor Angela Buckley 9205 5120

25 May – 30 Aug 2008

City of Melbourne Chair Planning Committee Michelle Coffey 9658 9191

31 Aug – 29 Nov 2008

City of Stonnington Mayor Helen Preston 8290 1330

30 Nov – 28 Feb 2009

City of Port Phillip Mayor Carmel Shute 9209 6163

29 Feb – 29 May 2009

City of Yarra Mayor Angela Buckley 9205 5120

30 May – 28 Aug 2009

Attachment 4

5

Communication Plan Template Project name: Project objective: Themes: Key challenges: Budget: Date: Strategy summary Key messages Communication objectives

Target audience

Objective Activity tactic Date Status

Media Plan Activity Key messages Media outlets Date Status Media release schedule

Advertising schedule

Radio

Television

PR (events etc)

Attachment 5

* Three research papers were conducted as part of the Stage 1 report to develop the principle steps 1

Inner Melbourne Action Plan Briefing Paper - Action 2.2 Coordinated Pedestrian & PT Signage

__________________________________________________________________________________ Background 1. Every regional journey has a walking component. The Inner Melbourne Region currently provides an

attractive and pedestrian friendly walking environment that will continue to be enhanced by the provision of well-located informative signs across the Region, which will support the growth and promotion of walking as both a primary and secondary mode of ‘transport’ in addition to its recreational and health based benefits.

2. IMAP Action 2.2, “to introduce consistent pedestrian oriented and public transport signage systems

across the Region” seeks to contribute to the delivery of IMAP Strategy 2, which is to “effectively link transport routes so that the Inner Melbourne Region is accessible throughout by walking, cycling and public transport.

3. City of Melbourne has already made substantial progress with provision of pedestrian signage and to a

lesser extent the City of Port Phillip. Ensuring that new signage is consistent with existing signage is a priority and the knowledge gained from these installations will assist in evaluation, design refinement and installation techniques.

4. This project has been co-funded through contributions from the IMAP councils and a $25000 grant from

the Department of Infrastructure’s Local Area Access Program (LAAP). Progress to Date 5. A walking/wayfinding consultancy (J A Grant and Associates) was employed to develop Stage 1 of the

project. The report identifies and recommends the locations for a hierarchy of signs that lead people to and through the network of routes, linking origins to destinations within and between the IMAP precincts (pedestrian priority areas). This includes the identification of priority regional signage locations.

6. The report also recommends a proposed demonstration project as an example of an “integrated

walking, cycling and public transport signage strategy”, including the types of signs that need to be installed and the locations where they need to be installed along the demonstration project route.

7. The recommended demonstration project route leads from the CBD (Federation Square) via the Sports

Precinct, to the Swan Street Precinct, via Church Street to the Chapel Street Precinct, and back to Federation Square via residential streets and parklands.

Next Steps 8. Stage 2 will consist of the implementation of a demonstration route through the cities of Yarra and

Stonnington. 9. Stage 3 will be a wider rollout into other areas identified in Stage 1, informed by the lessons of Stage 2. Key Outcomes 10. The key outcome of Stage 1 has been the development of a methodology to determine a single and

consistent pedestrian wayfinding signage system across the IMAP area, which consists of three principle steps *. WHAT: ‘Best Practice in Pedestrian Wayfinding in Urban Areas’* determines what signage and content is needed for the IMAP wayfinding system and has been used to evaluate the existing pedestrian signage. WHERE: ‘Precincts, Destinations and Stops’* contains the rules for determining map & signage content. A list of precincts, their attractions and major public transport access points has been compiled. INTEGRATION: ‘Location & Content’* identifies possible sign content to fulfil the project objective at the identified locations.

11. The Stage 1 report provides an initial estimate of the costs of implementing the demonstration project

(circa $110,000 plus manufacture and installation of the signage) together with options for project evaluation methods.

Recommendation 12. That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the progress of Action 2.2 Coordinated

Pedestrian & PT Signage and support progressing to an implementation phase with a demonstration route, located within the Cities of Yarra and Stonnington.

Attachment 6

1

Inner Melbourne Action Plan Briefing Paper - Action 2.4 Walking Links and Pedestrian Priority

__________________________________________________________________________________ Background 1. Inner Melbourne municipalities have a particular challenge to retro-fit established infrastructure as they

seek to provide for increased walkability in the context of growing population density. 2. Pedestrian operated signals (POS) create gaps in the traffic flow, allowing pedestrians to cross the

road. They should allow adequate crossing time for a safe and comfortable journey. The Working Group engaged Booz Allen Consultants to investigate possible treatments to deliver greater access and safety for walking at 20 POS across the IMAP region. Latent pedestrian demand exists where a destination is either not currently accessible or access is unsafe and uncomfortable. Crossing busy roads especially for the young and the elderly can be very daunting and sometimes it feels unsafe. Signal crossings on major roads demand particular pedestrian behaviour to complete the road crossing safely and comfortably.

Specific Progress to Date 3. As at August 2007:

• Stage 1 Investigation has is well underway. 20 POS sites (five in each IMAP council area) have been audited and early data has been analysed. The final results, due in mid October, are expected to present new thinking on movement of all modes through these crossing points to maximize safe efficient movement of people with consideration for all travel modes. Close consultation with VicRoads both regional and main office has been sought.

• Draft Working Paper from consultant has been received & reviewed by Working Group. • Preliminary data has been collected at all 20 sites and is in the process of being analysed.

• A working description of the critical measure for POS performance has been established. This is subject to change in response to results of analysis.

Next Steps 4. The next steps include:

• Preparation of a second draft Working Paper of the gap analysis map and explanatory notes

• Presentation Working Paper to stakeholders including VicRoads, Yarra Trams, Department of Infrastructure and bus operators.

• Finalisation of the recommended treatments and presentation of results to VicRoads in consultation with relevant council officers.

• Determine timeline for implementation of recommended treatments. Key outcomes 5. Stage 1 Investigation - Possible treatments/improvements will include more time allocated to walk

phase, headstart for pedestrians against turning car movements, less walk call-up waiting time to deliver priority for walkers.

6. The overall goals of the IMAP Regional Greeenlight;

• Enhance the walking journeys which involve crossing busy roads to and from Activity Centres in Inner Melbourne

• Acknowledge and provide for the reality that people love great urban places and rarely recognise municipal boundaries

• Build the connectivity between the Cities of Melbourne, Port Phillip, Yarra, Stonnington and Vic Urban, seeing the inner region as a whole rather than a patchwork of municipalities

• Realise the great potential for success in creating safer and more comfortable pedestrian networks than would otherwise be possible by individual Councils

Recommendation 7. That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the progress of Action 2.4 Walking Links &

Pedestrian Priority and support the Regional Greenlight Project Stage 1 Investigation to the finalisation of this stage of the project.

Attachment 6

2

Project Brief

IMAP Action 2.4 Walking Links & Pedestrian Priority Areas ______________________________________________________________________________________ Project Title IMAP Regional Greenlight Project - Redirecting pedestrian priority on busy roads Key IMAP Contact Martin Hartigan – IMAP Implementation Officer Project Team Lead: City of Port Phillip Meg Selman City of Melbourne Alison Lee City of Port Phillip Paul Smith City of Yarra Maureen Brewer City of Stonnington Ian McLauchlan DOI Evelyn Legare VicRoads Sam Pirrotta Purpose The Regional Greenlight Project presents a redesign opportunity for collaborative joined-up State and local government work to improve safety and comfort levels for pedestrians using pedestrian operated signals on busy roads. This project will increase safety and comfort crossing busy roads to and from Activity Centres in Inner Melbourne. To progress IMAP Action 2.4, this project will provide for:

• Improved connections to public transport

• Pedestrian responsive signals

• Pedestrian priority at intersections and street crossings Inception of Project The Inner Melbourne Action Plan responds to the demands of Melbourne 2030, the State Government's blueprint for managing sustainable growth and change across metropolitan Melbourne. Inner Melbourne municipalities have a particular challenge to retro-fit established infrastructure as they seek to provide for increased walkability in the context of growing population density. Pedestrian operated signals create gaps in the traffic flow, allowing pedestrians to cross the road. They should allow adequate crossing time for a safe and comfortable journey. Latent pedestrian demand exists where a destination is either not currently accessible or access is unsafe and uncomfortable. Crossing busy roads especially for the young and the elderly can be very daunting and sometimes it feels unsafe. Signal crossings on major roads demand particular pedestrian behaviour to complete the road crossing safely and comfortably The Greenlight Project was launched by Minister Batchelor in June 2005 with the first successful application of its initiatives at the Richardson / Pickles / Liardet site, Port Melbourne. Increased pedestrian activity will emerge with new trip generators or redesign of crossing facilities. Evaluation of demonstration site, Richardson / Pickles / Liardet site, reveals significant benefits of treatments. Safer, more comfortable pedestrian crossing on busy roads contributes to increase of recreation and commuting walking journeys Project Goals Greenlight initiatives or traffic treatments

• the increased time to walk through use of the recommended 0.7 m/sec for overall time allowed

• a headstart for pedestrians of a few seconds over vehicle turning movements

• elimination of left turning arrows where possible

• quicker cycle time to reduce wait for pedestrians – 30 second maximum wait for pedestrians

• late call up (instant) or auto call-up for pedestrian display site dependent Project Objectives Project objectives include:

• Safer road environments for pedestrian

• More comfortable pedestrian crossing on busy roads

• Increased numbers of recreational and commuting walking journeys

Attachment 6

3

The above objectives are supported by the State Government’s transport policy Meeting our Transport Challenges, the inner regions strategic landuse and transport plan Inner Melbourne Action Plan and the individual transport strategies and statements of the five authorities involved in the project. Improvements flowing from the IMAP Regional Greenlight Project will benefit all pedestrians and especially:

• Older and younger pedestrians

• Pedestrians with lower mobility

• Pedestrians commencing and completing a public transport journey The project team will:

• Meet monthly (or as required)

• Provide 6 monthly & annual updates to the IMAP Implementation Officer

• Deliver the project outcomes within the agreed timeframe

• Agree on the project scope and brief

• Agree on project timetable

• Appoint consultant to determine treatment detail options to deliver pedestrian priority at 20 selected sites

• Receive consultant report and determine priorities for action

• Oversee implementation process

• Evaluate changes

• Produce report/s as required that provide recommendations for action Regional Greenlight Implementation summary process

Action Timeframe Responsibility

Devise project Sept 2007 Partner councils

Secure funding Dec 2006 Partner councils

Engage consultant March 2007 Project Working Group

Detailed analysis of 20 nominated sites April – July 2007 consultant

Survey and analysis of current pedestrian site crossing activity at key intersections/modal interchanges.

April – July 2007 consultant

Working Group partners input & comment to consultants report

15 May 2007 Project Working Group

Stage 1 Complete 31 May 2007

Context specific treatments selected July 2007 Project Working Group

Stage 2 Commence 31 August 2007

Media release from IMAP partner Councils of roll out of retro fit treatments of timings and phasings

Feb 2008 Partner councils

Articles written for local Council websites, publications Feb 2008 Partner councils

Implementation of changes at priority regional sites End August 2008 VicRoads

Stage 2 Complete End August 2008

Stage 3 Commence End November 2008 VicRoads

Regional evaluation Promotion & communication of results

End February 2009 Project Working Group VicRoads

Final report End May 2009 Project Working Group VicRoads

Stage 3 Complete End August 2009

Consultation VicRoads, DoI, IMAP partner Councils Timing Stage 1 – Investigation 20 sites August 2007 Stage 2 – Implementation August 2008 Stage 3 – Evaluation August 2009 Budget IMAP Councils DoI VicRoads Total 2006/07 $50K $50K $100K

2007/08 $100K $200K $300K

2008/09 $25K $25K $50K

Total $450

Attachment 7

1

Inner Melbourne Action Plan Briefing Paper - Action 9.6 Use of Recycled Water for Open Space

__________________________________________________________________________________ Background 1. The irrigation of open space is the major potable water consuming activity at all four IMAP Councils.

Substituting the use of recycled water for potable water therefore has the potential to achieve major savings in potable water consumption, allowing it to be reserved for uses requiring high quality water (e.g. human consumption).

2. The project team broadened the scope of this Action to allow the development of a more holistic approach

to the management of potable water usage in open space, rather than focusing solely upon one approach, the “Use of Recycled Water for Open Space”. A review of inner regional potable water consumption reduction and recycling methods highlighted information gaps, such as:

• The analysis of risks associated with the utilisation of alternative water sources.

• No sewer mining projects have been implemented within the IMAP area. and also emphasised that the majority of projects implemented to date by the IMAP participants have focused on the capture, storage and use of either rainwater or stormwater and the installation of warm season grasses.

Specific Progress to Date 3. Development of a draft publication “Water Management for Open Space Technical Notes and Case

Studies” (attached) that addresses: o Demand management through landscape and species selection, irrigation technology and

management. o Factors to consider (e.g. greenhouse gas emissions) when assessing the feasibility of using non-

potable water supplies for the irrigation of open space. o Methods (e.g. triple bottom line) to assess the feasibility of using non-potable water supplies for the

irrigation of open space. o IMAP case studies detailing the utilisation of non-potable water supplies for the irrigation of open

space. 4. Development of a brief for a collaborative project that would engage a consultant to investigate the

opportunities to reduce water demand at five locations nominated in each IMAP municipality, and to then determine whether any opportunities (e.g. stormwater, sewer, groundwater, industrial waste water) existed to utilise alternative water supplies to meet the residual potable water demand at the nominated locations.

Next Steps 5. Prepare for publication the document “Water Management for Open Space Technical Notes and Case

Studies”. It is envisaged that this will be a live document with information added as projects evolve. It will be distributed on a CD and also be made available on the websites of IMAP 9.6 group members.

6. The City of Port Phillip to act as the lead Council in the implementation of the collaborative project. It is

anticipated that this project will be completed by the end of this year (December 2007). Key outcomes 7. The sharing of knowledge between project team members has been a key outcome of Action 9.6.

Information provided by different group members and invited technical experts forms the basis of the technical notes and case studies, providing a valuable resource available to group members and potentially others outside of the group. Maintaining the technical notes and case studies as a live document allows for the ongoing evolution of these technical skills. The group has also provided a useful forum for dialogue between local government, water retailers, state government representatives and other managers of large areas of open space within the IMAP region (i.e. Parks Victoria and Royal Botanic Gardens).

8. The collaborative project should result in the identification of potable water demand reduction opportunities

at five nominated sites within each municipality. In addition, opportunities to utilise alternative water supplies, if present, shall also be identified. These study findings can then be used as the basis of future capital works programs at those locations and to support funding applications made to the State and Federal Governments.

Recommendation 9. That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to note the progress of Action 9.6 Use of Recycled

Water for Open Space, approve the publication and distribution of “Water Management for Open Space Technical Notes and Case Studies”, and support the implementation of the collaborative study.

Attachment 8 IMAP Implementation Committee

Briefing Paper –Audit of Melbourne 2030 _____________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND 1. On Tuesday, August 21, 2007, the Minister for Planning announced the first 5 yearly audit of

Melbourne 2030. 2. Submissions can be made until 24 September 2007. 3. An independent Audit Expert Group, announced in July, will review submissions from the

community, local councils, industry and key stakeholders, to ensure all interested parties about the ongoing implementation of Melbourne 2030.

4. The Audit Expert Group 'to provide advice to the Minister for Planning to inform the Government's

Audit of Melbourne 2030'. The Audit Expert Group is to provide a set of conclusions on issues it sees as relevant to the effective implementation of Melbourne 2030. Submissions will be called for in the near future.

5. The expert group is expected to submit its report and recommendations to the Minister in early 2008. DISCUSSION 6. In anticipation of the call for submissions, senior strategic planners from the IMAP Councils met in

early August to discuss a regional response on common regional issues - reflecting IMAP's intent as a regional response to the Melbourne 2030 Strategy. Individual councils may choose to provide an additional response that addresses local concerns.

7. A regional response (attached) has been drafted based on the following six key areas:

a) Affordable and Accessible Housing - Regional Priorities associated with the Delivery of Housing Growth

b) Activity Centres Land use management and growth c) Economic Development d) Environment - Climate Change and Adaptation e) Transport f) Government Coordination, Delivery and Funding

8. The submission seeks to emphasise IMAP’s key priorities in areas currently being progressed in the

endorsed ‘Three Year Implementation Plan’. RECOMMENDATION 9. That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to provide a joint response to the audit of

Melbourne 2030 and approve the draft submission for finalisation.

AUDIT OF MELBOURNE 2030

August 2007

0

A Response from the IMAP group of Councils

Port Phillip, Yarra, Stonnington and Melbourne

Introduction

Melbourne's inner metropolitan Councils and VicUrban have worked Loge Action Plan to strengthen the liveability, attractiveness and prosperi demands of Melbourne 2030.

the Inner Melbourne and respond to the

four IMAP Coun•• Phillip, "to make Melbou jrnore

e joi y supporting e delivery of the eration and commitment to the Plan.

n be more effectively implemented State Agencies.

The Inner Melbourne Action Plan (IMAP) is a collaborative Melbourne, Yarra, Stonnington and the State govemmen with liveable". That is, to work together on strategic issues. All 1MAP ° strategies and actions in IMAP with resources reinforcing their spirit Regional collaboration is recognition by each m ality that some ac •

at a regional level, with input from each Council of State Gove ;

The following submission focuses on key inner regio

Th

1

cad (post elbourne 2030) through:

006)

Whilst well-established to into tangible actions to effect real change.

What outco

te olic , 'yes — r

The p without in

of affordable hou è jj on, will largely

or bo pear b

1. Affordable and Accessible Housing Regional Priorities associated with the Delivery of Housing Growth

The inner Region Council's participated constructively in the delivery of the Inner Regional Housing Statement — 2005, a key initiative to implement Melbourne 2030. The Statement provides a regionally specific strategy for delivering the projected 90,000 new dwellings by 2031, focusing on the substantial growth on opportunities provided by major renewal sites and precincts throughout the region.

The Statement highlighted the importance of delivering housing growth in a way that also achieves a range of broader social, environmental and economic outcomes, with key priorities being to:

Reverse the region's rapidly declining housing affordability. Increase the proportion of housing which is 'accessible'.

1.1 Delivering Affordable Housing

Melbourne 2030 Policy Context

Direction 6— 'A fairer city' - establishes a clear policy to 'Increase the su (Policy 6.1)

M20303 Initiatives include

6.1.1 Monitor supply and demand in affordable housing

and regi

6.1.2 Increase the supply of affordable housing throug join ams

local councils and the not-for-profit sector.

6.1.5 Develop and implement initiatives to in e se the supply of ap throughout the metropolitan area.

nal levels.

tbs? URLC, the 0 of Housing,

ately located affordable housing

ated affordable housing'

The policy importance of housing affordability has 1. A Fairer Victoria, and 2. Towards an Integrated me,•T • Housing Stra

eed to addres eclining housing affordable must now be translated gnising that dire t!'Itervention in the housing market will be essential

and purchase) is rapidly declining within the inner region and, e year 2030.

Affordable housm and competitive eco

s a pivotal s, and

in supporting social and cultural diversity - essential elements of innovative tamable communities.

Implementation of Melbo 30 must:

■ Ensure a meaningful proportion of the new 90,000 dwellings in the region are 'affordable'.

■ Increase the supply of affordable housing 'across the spectrum' to achieve social diversity objectives — ie • provide for households on low to moderate incomes and across all tenures.

• Deliver 'key worker' housing, essential to the cultural and economic base of the inner region.

What needs to be done?

Recommended Implementation Priorities

To achieve Policy Direction 6,1 — increase the supply of well-located affordable housing, the above outcomes, the Implementation of Melbourne 2030 and related Government programs, the following initiatives are considered priorities:

• Improve cross-government leadership and funding commitments to deliver affordable housing including:

2

ou s approach is

A regional •

A level of con ransparency

andatory i. ity —0

ns to sect re •

State Government commitment to a National Affordable Housing Agreement, and active participation in a National framework for action on affordable housing.

- Increased public investment in the renewal of public housing — ensuring its continued supply level and ensuring stock is more relevant to current and future needs (to meet initiative 6.1.3 in M2030).

• Set informed 'benchmarks' for affordable housing at the local, regional and metropolitan levels.

• Investigate innovative models of provision (by the private, public and community sectors). In particular, attention need to be given to facilitating the private sector to deliver affordable housing (both home ownership and private rental) (to meet initiative 6.1.5 in M2030).

• Pursue new funding sources for social housing (including from the private sector).

Continue to build the capacity of 'not-for-profir housing organisations to deliver and manage social housing stock.

Monitor housing affordability (to meet Initiative 6.1.1 in M2030).

1.2 Inner Regional Affordable Housing Initiative

The Inner Regional Affordable Housing Initiative (arising from both th many of these actions (acknowledging that this initiative is on affordability issue).

• S an a of a bro

has already progressed olution to the housing

The State Government now need to work collaborati • progress this initiative.

The initiative has 3 components (refer Appendix 1):

j ith the I er Regional Cou refine and

1. A Housing Needs Web-site Project des • Inform the setting of affordable • 'Target housing delivered to m • Provide (consistent. and compara

on-going 11;1 Ftlit?: of housing aft' be Ira rable er regions a pr • I 7

• • need key worker housing

se 'porting IT framework, to enable the ility across ;• • region. The framework is designed to could provide the basis of a State-wide monitoring

marks

2. A Model Affordable e Vi a Planning Provisions which would achieve private TT-4 -'

P,t, the pro' .et 6 fforda ble Housing. This is well-established practice as been successfully applied elsewhere in Australia. The rational for

in Api.i.11Jth the model ensuring: ach — • / broad based to 'spread the load'

O tion th ." is 'non-distortive' of property market 1 a la 'flight of capital' / costs not passed on

oach — to deliver certainty is for the form of contributions (land 1$!units)

US,

3. A Delive Model — which establishes arrangements for the allocation of contributions, and the delivery of ordable housing 'on the ground' (ie in accordance with Housing Plans and Structure Plans): • Contributions to be allocated to registered Affordable Housing Associations. • Increased I certainty of funding - essential to building the capacity of AHA's to play a

significant role in affordable (social) housing provision.

1.3 Delivering Accessible Housing


Policy Initiative 1.3.4 establishes the requirement for State Government to:

Work_with councils to deyeloplocal housing strategies that address local housing issues and needs, including:

- Providing for a range of housing opportunities to meet increasingly diverse housing needs.

Mech. ms

3

To date this work has not been achieved with the Inner Regional Councils.

What outcomes are sought?

An increase in the supply of accessible housing is crucial to cater not only for people with disabilities but also for an aging community. Ensuring new housing is accessible prevents costly retrofitting and enables people to stay in their homes longer.

Establishing accessibility standards for new housing development is the key opportunity to increase the supply of accessible housing. As a minimum, standards should require that:

• All new housing be 'visitablev.

• I in 5 new higher density and medium density dwelling units be accessible.



The IMAP Councils recommend the following implementation initiative policy objectives of M2030:

To ensure housing growth delivered through Melbourne 2030 community, the State Government must:

Release the report of the Accessible Housing -las

Initiate a State-wide Accessible Housing Program (in lin with clear timelines for delivery.

Allow local planning schemes to estab 1 dards in relation —wide standards under the VPP's as a m cy.

meet the diverse housing

elevant to an aging

e Government's 200 Election Policy) -

ssible housing or introduce State

1 Visitable housing ensures access into a dwelling, use of a toilet and ability to sleep in a bedroom or other rocim on the ground floor. It provides not only access for guests with a disability, but for the future needs of occupants (acquired disability or reduced mobility).

4


Direction I A more compact city

Policy 1.3: Locate a substantial proportion of new housing in redevelopment sites that offer good access to services and trans

centres and oth trategic

The policy clearly stated that a significant prop activity centres locations noting that locations, th large residential development (>100 units) should

of large residentia ss to services

pment would occur outside existing an •ort options, with potential for

•

•

In or within easy welkin • In or beside Neighb • Abutting tram, ha;

Activity centres • In or near ma • Major

se

The locations lb metropolitan M

What outcomes are so

or Activity res erved by local public transport

of the PPTN and close to Principal and major

le to prow'

, r.,!

or more dwelling units, close to activity centres and well-tare not in Principal or Major Activity Centres

Ily-excl e and there is no referencelo any_order of priority_for_selecting w redential development, which can meet the future housing needs of

In and around the Central Activities District

oda, pub s-

rincipal and entres that a

routes that

2. Activity Centres Land use management and growth

2.1 Housing ctrowth in or close to activity centres

M2030 does not intend that activity centres be the only recipient of the future housing growth and substantial residential development. M2030 supports a greater proportion of new housing to be located at strategic redevelopment sites. Strategic redevelopment sites include locations in and around activity centres, and major redevelopment sites located close to the Principal Public Transport Network. It encourages an increased proportion of new housing to be developed within the established urban area, at key strategic sites suitable for redevelopment, and these include activity centres.

Major redevelopment sites have been identified across inner Melboumiwith potentia or large residential redevelopment which are close to! outside activity centres and are sites that off

to services and public

transport.

• Support for the implementation of the Inner Regional Housing Statement which identifies a majority of potential new residential development outside the Central Activities District at strategic redevelopment sites.

• A less generic approach to Activity Centre planning



• A review of the Activity Centres Policy under M2030, specifically a refinement of policy directions that recognises the different characteristics and management issues that apply to the Inner Region's Major

Activity Centres

1.2— Broaden the base of activity centres that a 4.171,v- sky dominated by services over longer hours and restrict out of cent ;,4i vliV• ent.

1.3— Locate a substantial proportion of new housing 1 redevelopment sites that offer ess to services

mg to include a wider range of

res and other strategic

Direction 5 — A Great P design that makes pa

What outcomes a

s to ulmprov 5.3). (Initiatives

mmunity safety and encourage neighbourhood , 5.3.2 and 5.3.4)

al, entertainment and commercial uses needs to be effectively on the amenity of the area.

2.2 Inner Regional Housing Statement (1RHS)

The Inner Regional Housing Working Group (IRHG), comprising representatives from the Cities of Melbourne, Port Phillip, Yarra and Stonnington (west of Kooyong Road) with representatives form DSE and Department of Human Services (Office of Housing), have prepared the Inner Regional Housing Statement (IRHS) to guide and assist in planning for the housing needs of present and future households in Melbourne's Inner region.

Analysis undertaken during the preparation of the Statement indicates the Inner Region can accommodate projected growth of around 90,000 additional households by 2030, and that a greater (than current) proportion of this demand can be accommodated within strategic locations. Very few sites in the Inner Region are located a significant distance from activity centres and the public transport services in the area.

2.3 Managing conflict in activity centres


Direction 1 — A more compact city

A strong focus of Melbourne 2030 is to enhance the role of acti

Policies under Direction 1 — A more compact city inclut .

1.1 — Build up activity centres as a focus for high quality developme vity and living for the whole community.

Recommended Imp iorities

• As a matter of p ,the State Government lead and coordinate the implementation of the recommendatio s of the Inner City Entertainment Precincts Taskforce Final Report and support local government implementation as relevant.

• Introduce initiatives which address the potential conflicts between the mix of activities in Activity Centres - such as the introduction of noise standards for residential dwellings in the Building Code/Planning Scheme (as appropriate). [Refer City of Melbourne work below.]

Discussion

Areas in and around 'activity centres' (including the smaller local and neighbourhood centres) play an increasingly significant role in providing retall-and entertainment roles.

6

While enhancing the role of activity centres is a clear direction in Melbourne 2030, it does not address the need to manage the night time economy and to minimise conflict between the mix of residential, entertainment and commercial uses. There is no specific policy or initiative in Melbourne 2030 that aims to address the issue of inter-use conflicts.

However in 2003 the Minister for Police and Emergency Services established the Inner City Entertainment Precincts Taskforce (ICEPT), comprising representatives of all key stakeholders including the Inner Regional Councils to provide advice on safety and security in Melbourne's inner city entertainment precincts. In February 2005, the Taskforce produced a discussion paper titled `A Good Night for All'. The Final Report of the ICEP Taskforce, including 28 recommendations, was endorsed by the Minister in April 2006.

The ICEP Taskforce Report recommendations identify that the appropriate way of effecting the majority of these changes is at a State, rather than local level. Immediate and effective implementation of !CEP recommendations is critical in achieving safe and vibrant activity centres. The Department of Justice (Crime and Violence Prevention Unit) is currently coordinating the implementation of recommendations arising from th: report however progress appears slow and relies on effective cross government coordination. In addition .41 agencies are identified as being responsible for the implementation of specific recommendations. Tilesç. Local Councils, the Municipal : Association of Victoria, Consumer Affairs Victoria — Liquor Licensing, Vict• Crime Prevention Victoria

,;•1` Direc u and the Department of Sustainability and Environment, Metlink and the

Local Councils are identified as being responsible for the imp le = • - of six of the re r* ndations. These

relate to: • Enforcement Protocols (with Victoria Police) • Information for stakeholders about the mechanisms availa •••`

rais Ire plaints or con

regarding the operation of licensed premises (with Liquor Licensing Victoria

ona olice)

• Inner City Safe Taxi Ranks Program (with e Taxi Directorate) • • Late Night Transport Communications Pla 0,;),i etlink) • Special Operations to Target Poor Driver Be "kr• .; Victoria Police

ess

Initiatives underway

IMAP Action 6.3 — Managin • Develop a common • Implement the fin • Work with ICEPT to addr • Introduce into th • Develo

one a • De

standards fo

rotec

ctivity Centr

ecifically r- • • res Councils to: aging mixed us nd the night-lime economy

e a permit for all food and drink premises er tools to

nage issues of local and regional roles in activity centres nme

fl oach by

CEPT

Each of

Li

other actions met to share info

-Councilt-h-as-ntribute to th

n but have

individ y implementing a number of-ICEPT-recommendations as well as I i .

nagement of leisure and entertainment precincts. The NAP Councils have engaged in any co-ordinated projects to date.

Examples of Local Co

nclude:

• All four Councils hay, established Licensees Accords (though many were in place before ICEPT).

• The City of Melbourne has revised its current information pack for Licensees and has released the 'Run a Better Venue Resource Pack'. Melbourne is also working with DSE to investigate changes to the definitions for taverns, nightclubs and bars.

• The City of Yarra has been working closely with the Victoria Police to clarify the role of police in the enforcement of street / public behaviour and music noise, and has prepared a revised Licensed Premises Policy.

• The City of Port Phillip has established the Fitzroy Street Community Taskforce, developed enforcement protocols with the Victoria Police, introduced safe taxi rank initiatives and are reviewing planning permit conditions / land use definitions and

7

1.3 Locate a substantial proportion of new hous'ng in or close to act - •

redevelopment sites that offer good access to se mv, • - nd transport. ntres and other strategic

A hierarchy of Activity Centres is defined in Melbou the Central Activities District, Principal Activity Centre Neighbourhood Activity Centres

What outcomes are so

• A clear framework Melboum

• A prta

anftpetwork of cso res is identified. These include ctilitfGe e 'Specialised Activity Centres and

pnnent across the Inner Region and metropolitan

e strategic intent of the Activity Centre policies.


Recommend plementation orities

Refinement of Activity OA f'vj i

• The City of Stonnington has developed a Local Planning Policy for Licensed Premises,

'mg; also recommends the development of standards for noise protection for new dwellings from noise generated by commercial, entertainment and retail uses. Work on this topic has not yet been progressed by the IMAP group. However the City of Melbourne has produced a large amount of material on this issue including guidelines and fact sheets. The City of Melbourne has also discussed possible noise attenuation amendments to the Building Code of Australia with the Building Commission. The main focus is to provide noise attenuation requirements for the external facades to reduce the level of noise entering residential dwellings. To date no response has been received from the Building Codes Board.

2.4 Designation of Activity Centres


Direction 1 —A more compact city

A strong focus of Melbourne 2030 is to enhance the role of activity centre compact city include:

1.1— Build up activity centres as a focus for high quality develo

range of 1.2— Broaden the base of activity centres that are currentl ra services over longer hours and restrict out of centre developma

t, ac

ated by s

ity and living

ping to include a

nder Direction 1 — A more

whole community.

There is a need e reflnemerjt6f the Activity Centre Policy a ross Melbourne. The current approach of "one size fits a I is too generic. The Activity Centre policy needs to be further refined to provide greater clarity and direction regarding the specific management and growth of activity centres displaying different characteristics across the metropolitan area.

• The varying characteristics and potential of different activity centres need to be clearly identified, described and acknowledged in future planning policy direction and any implementation tools.

• The role and term "Specialised Activity Centres' (currently incorporating health, education and research institutes should be reviewed and redefined to differentiate them from the broader mixed use 'activity centres' and to provide clarity and direction regarding planning for their future (eg Parkville, Alfred). Port Melbourne/Fisherman's Bend provides a specialised economic and research function and should be included in this category.

8

ses

Discussion

It is inappropriate to group all Major Activity Centres throughout metropolitan Melbourne together under a single Activity Centre policy approach. This approach is too simple and fails to recognise and address the characteristics of the Inner Region's Major Activity Centres and how they differ to those in the middle and outer ring areas.

The current approach in M2030 that °one size fits alr and the provision of one solution or planning direction for the future management of Major Activity Centre's is not considered appropriate or indeed useful for all centres.

The MAC's of the inner Melbourne region are generally strip centres along key tram routes, and the areas adjoining the centres are generally established low rise residential areas comprising many small lots in different ownerships. Many MAC's of inner region have intrinsic heritage attributes.

The MAC's and the land immediately behind them are locations which are identified as having significant heritage value and/or a distinct urban character so intact as to warrant additional planning MAC's and the abutting land are covered by heritage overlays and any future de objectives for these areas and also respect the amenity of the low rise reside centres. The IRHS has recognised this factor and has not included them significant redevelopment potential.

ols. Many of the inner t must meet the heritage

d mixed areas adjoining the redevelopment sites offering

considered tthhih19 xt 20-30 years, Analysis u 1,ken during the modate . • ected growth of a . la 90,000

rtio ...,,is demand can bccommodated

The characteristics of the MACs in the Inner Melbourne Region appropriate locations for future growth and development in th preparation of the IRHS indicates that the Inner region ca additional households by 2030, and that a greater (than curren at key strategic locations near Activity Centres.

ring and organisations, corporate . ir Lawrence Wackett Centre

ntre' will promote support for evelopments.

The Port Melbourne/ Fisherman's Bend area is fmt - to many large ma entities and aerospace-related organisations ind irik• s research fad for Aerospace Design Technology. The designatio cialised Acti investment attraction and the profile of precinct for ter: ed resa'AVi ti ! hi te

2.5 Mana eme

Melbourne 2030 Policy Co

Direction 1 whole co

Ach community

wilL be develop s and also be,

entres s for high-quality development, activity and living for the

centres usiness, shopping, working and leisure. Most will contain dant 1 ations for the development of different types of housing...

M2030 clearly en

broaden the m

What outcomes are sou ht?

development and business synergies and a key objective is to:

s appropriate to the type of centre and the needs of the population served.

• The development of effective implementation tools to manage a mix of uses and achieve the strategic intent of the Activity Centre policies.



• Review and refinement of existing business zones with a view to creating specific zones to implement the Activity Centre Policy.

• Investigate the role and treatment of mixed use areas within the Inner Region and review the way in which the Mixed Use Zone is operating

9

• Look at vertical zoning options.

Discussion

While some additional housing may be appropriate in and around activity centres, it is also important that they retain and in some cases broaden the mix of activities they provide so they serve as key community destinations. The economic viability of the Major Activity Centres and Principal Activity Centres must be managed. A true mix of uses is crucial for their sustainability and to improve the community's accessibility to services and facilities at the local level, be they retail, entertainment, community facilities, recreation etc.

A mix of activities in activity centres is important for their ongoing economic viability and social and commercial vitality. Major Activity Centres are also an important source of local employment

Treatment of Mixed Use Areas

In addition, within the Inner Region there are many mixed use areas that hav ,i0,.mmodated a mix of commercial and other uses since the original settlemeht of these suburbs •N'Ilkvk:, for each of these areas varies however in a broad sense they are supportive of the retention of ting bu tiv es and the establishment of new businesses within them. Melbourne 2030 does not provide egio kpn the ro ese areas. Given the Region's overall objectives for the area it is inappropria o at commercial u s out of centre" and to apply the proposed out of centre guidelines to proposals I area.

10

3. Economic Development

3.1 Lack of vision and direction for inner city industrial areas


Direction 4 — A more prosperous city

Policy 41 aims to "Maintain access to productive natural resources, adequate supply of well-located land for energy generation, infrastructure and industry.*

• Initiative 4.1.4 — Increase protection for natural resource based industries, industrial land and energy infrastructure against competing and incompatible uses.

• Initiative 4.1.6 — Implement measures to encourage manufacturing and s se industries that generate significant volumes of freight to locate close to air, rail and road freigh

• Initiative 4.1.7 Ensure an adequaie supply for all categories o d al land a 4ork with the land development sector to address discrepancies in supply and c14


• Clear direction for future economic role of the Inner Re and the State, its importance to the State economy and an

• Increased investor confidence and ca to deliver on econ



xt of the metro °titan Melbourne tending supply requirements.

evelopment aspirations

• Develop a me role of Indus to emerging econo gro

wide) industn lie and particul

L LJ ' future bu

trategy to provide clear direction regarding the future the Inner Region to ensure a strategic approach

ss and employment opportunities and housing

nce of existing planning controls in steering economic development, special use zones etc

Discussion

Pressure for housing industrial land supply in value of retaining future in regional/metropolitan and requirements.

ion is driving significant land use change and has the potential to deplete ear strategic direction about the future economic role of the Inner Region, the

and manufacturing, from a business and employment perspective and in a tate wide context, is required to ensure adequate land supply is retained for future

'Manufacturing in Inner Melbourne has declined significantly over the past 15 years, in line with Australia wide trends. The inner city still however includes some of Melbourne's biggest companies as well as businesses at the leading edge of technology and innovation.

Melbourne 2030 tends to focus geographically on outer industrial areas and in terms of industry itself on natural resources-based industry and energy infrastructure. It provides no clear direction regarding the future demand and overall value of the inner city industrial land base which is under increasing pressure from other uses.

11

developmen tions across the econo lc

• check?) Dedicated freig introduced, and the


• Sustainable growth in Port activifies and operation • investor confidence and increased capacity to deliver

Inner Region, metropolitan Melbourne and Victori • Employment availability where people live


Recommended Implementation Prior

4,4be ecogn'sed in Policy in Melbourne 2030 j) ete and1m'iJJT1ent the Port Environs Plan fled and delin ated (on Port of Melbourne land -

• •

The significance of the Port and surroundin and s As a priority, the State 6 • rnment needs to The buffer areas ar• 1 ),117:• should be ide

e Port of Melbo strategic pl

inking the catchment and portals need to be fling and investment promoted.

Discussion

s to/fro rail

3.2 Role of the Port of Melbourne and land surrounding the Port


Direction 4 — A more prosperous city

• Policy 4.3— Further develop the key transport gateways and freight links and maintain Victoria's position as the nations premier logistics centre.

• Initiative 4.3.2 — Protect options for access to, and future development at, the ports of Melbourne, Geelong and Hastings and ensure all port areas are protected by adequate buffer areas to prevent land use conflicts at the perimeter.

• 4.3.3 — Improve rail access to the Port of Melbourne through improvements t

ynon Hub and inner west rail network and reconnect the Webb Dock rail link when funds become av

The etiability and efficie q_ P. ffiP • lane is a high priority. The protection and enhancement of port peratiR and the sustainill anage t thereof is critical to both metropolitan Melbourne and the State. Statements a 1.he importance ie Po of Melbourne and the need to ensure that development does not jeopardise the n ds of the port ar :only highlighted in the text rather than policy in M2030.

The need for adequat a , the provision of intermodal facilities and a freight and logistics strategy is essential to protect and en . • Port operations.

• Buffer areas around the Port have not yet been finalised.

12

C)

4. Environment Climate Change and Adaptation

Initiatives addressing climate change and ways of adapting for it are key regional priorities.

4.1 Melbourne 2030 Policy Context

Direction 7 - A Greener City 7.1.1 — Implement programs for sustainable water management 7.1.2 — Implement planning policies on renewable energy 7.1.4 — Adopt guidelines to encourage use of alternative water sources such as rainwater tanks, storm water and

recycled water by local government, developers and households. 7.2.1 — Establish resource efficiency and waste minimisation guidelines and large 7.3.6 adapt to the impacts of climate change 74.1 — Develop measures to achieve best practice performance objective • rgrj :d in the BMW Guidelines 7.4.2— Support integrated planning of stommater quality at all scales, t • gh a m: on on-site measures and

developer contributions. 744— Work with local government to develop and implement st•40--, management I hat incorporate

integrated drainage management principles

4.2 IMAP Initiatives

IMAP has several regional projects underway to On-going State Government and Agency support hoped that the partnership model's developed and effective way forward and can ultimately be rolled cu

Initiatives underway include.

ro eyon

a coordinated and efficient way. I implementation. It is

on will provide a strong

• ss the policies a is critical to it

in the Inner •

Action 9.1 Reg targets green emissions, water and waste staina

nergies (or ove rt CMA, DS ed the need

xtemal

The objective of region. IMA Some ref. community

Con tde Phillip and councils. MAP i i

performance. A rant influence of local goveTh

;# greenhouse emissionst-water and waste in the inner 'sting targe d programs for water, waste and greenhouse outcomes.

ouncil use only.

xists w otheragencies in-the target setting process. Waterauthorities,Port_ d Sus anability Victoria have all contributed to this project with the IMAP estrict itself to targets that provide useful measures of a Council's

ors that contribute to sustainability outcomes remain outside the direct e targets and programs should be designed accordingly.

Inadequate data collectioqi y utilities is an ongoing barrier for development of measurable municipal targets.

The Committee has identified significant value in using uniform measurements and baselines for assessing performance against targets. It remains the role of individual councils to determine the extent of these targets. Existing performance measurement activities or standards such as the ICLEI or Australian Greenhouse Office processes are a useful basis for this.

Currently, the group is identifying the range of sustainability programs within IMAP Councils and opportunities for alignment of these programs. This is likely to be completed by December 2007.

Greenhouse - Climate change adaptation targets and programs have been identified as a significant, but difficult, gap by the Committee and this is now being addressed collaboratively. Greenhouse emissions targets should be

focussed on actual emissions rather than energy use.

13

Waste - Waste targets are heavily influenced by Statewide programs such as Towards Zero Waste. Council based targets may not be effective, meaningful or manageable.

Water- A reduction in potable water use is the primary water target. Expert work on municipal water quality targets is currently being compiled.


• Targets and programs to facilitate the delivery of reduced greenhouse emissions, water and waste in the Inner Region.



• IMAP seeks ongoing support from the State Government and relev particular improved data collection by utilities to assist the deve municipal greenhouse targets.

encies for this program in easurable regional and

Action 9.3 Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD)

IMAP has been developing a regional approach and strategy to erlsevsitive urban de n in the inner region, including: • sharing WSUD tools (common guidelines, tandard conditions, ass1 ment tools) that help protect catchment

pact of urban development; d Federal Government;

fling schemes (considering local, treat stormwater quality and flow,

hydrology and water quality, particularly aq • advising and advocating for supporting regul • providing information, education and professio It will also include providing recommendations for co regional and State opportunities ng requirement reduce wastewater and cons ater.

abitats by reducin uidelines from

opportuniti

IMAP has been underta n WSUD. The preliminary finding areas. It is suggested that whilst greenfield s gig* lot and re n f ialbuildin A ,°

The SUi .on IMAP workin conditions, lkl hning,policy, a used more expa y and adop

of the proposed dments to the Building Regulations to require ere are gap y e legislative coverage for infill (inner regional)

ents to Clause 56 of the VPPs to address WSUD in e is requi der clause for Clause 55 Two or more dwellings on a

up has been developing a range of planning tools; including draft permit region WSUD guidelines for the Inner Region Councils. These tools can be

a metropolitan or State scale.

What outcomes are sq„ • Water sensitive' 3, design outcomes in all new residential dwellings across the Region and ultimately

the metropolitarOrea.



• Preparation and adoption of a Statewide planning policy to address WSUD in land development proposals, to be incorporated in the VPP's

• Revise Clause for Clause 55 Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings' to incorporate requirements for WSUD.

• Consider the inclusion of WSUD guidelines in planning schemes to provide and promote a holistic policy commitment to WSUD.

14

Action 9.6 Use of recycled water for parks

IMAP partner councils are undertaking a joint study into the key regional potable water conservation and recycling opportunities for parks and open space in consultation with DSE, Parks Victoria and the Royal Botanic Gardens of Victoria.

1MAP is also undertaking development of Inner Region guidelines and pase studies for potable water conservation in the Inner Region's open space. These guidelines and case studies will be made widely available and the principles are universal,

What outcomes are sought? Significant water conservation and recycling across the Inner Region and ultimately the metropolitan area.



State Government support for the development of key water conservation are identified.

ere feasible opportunities

0

15

stem in al Melbourne.

'Liveable, Walkable Me an initiative of the Inner Me

e Structure, Character and Significance of Inner Melbourne'. This Statement is me Action Plan (IMAP).

5. Transport

Integrated Transport is a key plank of Melbourne 2030 and this is reflected and expanded in the State Governments transport implementation Strategy 'Meeting Our Transport Challenges'. It is also reflected in the emphasis that the Inner Melbourne Action Plan brings to this subject

We are all seeking an efficient and effective road transport network. One of the optimum ways to achieve this goal will be by supporting policies and actions that permit a number of transport modes — walking, cycling, public transport and vehicles — to safety and efficiently use the road network. This also supports the movement of freight and the improvement of bus and tram service provision across the Inner Region.

IMAP strategies and actions progress the policy issue of 'improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the Inner Region's transport network'. IMAP seeks ongoing and continuous support for these s ategies and actions.

5.1 Melbourne 2830 Policy Context

Direction 4 A more prosperous City 4.2.4 Investigate ways to improve the capacity of the public trans .o

Direction 5 A great place to be 5.1.2 Review and revise urban design guidelines 5.2.1 Research the relationship between sense of pl 5.5.3 Apply the Neighbourhood Principles.., planning for the

characte nd neighbourhoo orkredevelopmen

racter. f existing areas.

Direction 8 Better transport links 8.1.1 Upgrade and develop the Principal Putt

connect activity centres and link Melbou 8.1.4 Identify key public transport, freight and p

to cross-town transport corridors Give more priority ct and walking in system and neigh Continue to de Implement w Develop a bicycle Develo ,Myed syst

ed.ch

5.2 I Ii. . Initiatives

ort Network an public transport services to gional cities tes, ietween a, ity centres that can be upgraded

rung urba velopment and in managing our road

7

8.7

8.7.1 8.7.2 8.7.5 8.8.3

a

oo the princ

tion pl an

In

bicycle networ and give pr ority to sections that link activity centres.

ntially inc se bicycle use. nsive travel information so that people can make

Action 1.1 er Melbou Statement of Significance

The Statement has been prepared by the Inner Melbourne Urban Design Group, comprising representatives from the IMAP partner Councils, VicUrban and the DSE.

The Statement documents a common understanding between the inner Melbourne municipalities and partner organisations of the structure, character and significance of inner Melbourne to inform future decision making and policy development.

The Statement has been adopted by the IMAP Implementation Committee to be used by urban designers and planners across the Inner Region. It will be used to inform: • review/s of their respective Municipal Strategic Statements (MSS's) as they are undertaken, and • future strategy development, structure planning and local policy.

16

high demand

arking strategies.

Initiative 8.3.1 is to 'Requi and industrial develop transport outcomes, in

nd deve vision

transport pia be prepare or all new major residential, commercial uidelines for

maximum rather than the minimum provision)...' ...De rifr zt„.;. f. ng req

lopers and councils that emphasise sustainable

Action 3.3 Regional Approach to Car Parking

The demand for travel in the Inner Melbourne Region will continue to grow as the wider metropolitan area grows and new development occurs across the Region. Increased congestion will increase costs for inner Melbourne businesses and residents and compromise the Region's capital city, business, entertainment and cultural functions. Addressing the impacts of traffic congestion requires managing road space and traffic flows. A critical part of this objective is determining how car parking should be managed. This will include investigating mechanisms designed to reduce car use at congested times.

IMAP Action 3.3 seeks a regional approach to parking management. The work will include the preparation of a common and consistent approach to parking management across the Inner Melbourne Region based on the economic, environmental, streetscape, travel patterns and traffic impacts of different on and off-street car parking arrangements (including park and ride facilities).

It is aimed at • encouraging alternatives to car travel and implementing appropriat • limiting car spaces in major new and re-use development. • restricting the eligibility of new dwellings to on-street parkin

its in ar

• charging for parking in high use areas • encouraging alternatives to car travel

The "Cutting Red Tape in Planning" (Carbines) report incl planning schemes and associated guidelines documents, A review of Clause 52.06 and submitted a discussion paper in early government response to the review and it is ex ted this will significa IMAP project M2030 provides no clear policy di iu e managing car p actions relating to reducing the demand for car pa 11 .0.1d improving lr coordination of all transport modes.

don to Mini 4 NI- .

.1. i. .

• '.Pit

iew the car parki .visions in ommittee has dertaken a

7. IMAP members are awaiting uenoe the implementation of this L* and there are no initiatives or

thks and supporting the

ent of car par other sustainab 'ntroductIon-of

uirem oul s consider the minimum provision in areas well served by public sport r0,4;ai and include an assessment of opportunities for sharing of car -Travel .ns e.g:car sharing;as-a-condition-of the-planning-approval.

An asse trans

r

spaces an.

M2030 should p alternate transport a develop shared parkin transport.

direction o and i

wising on-site car parking in new development in areas well served with u of such provision require developer contributions, which could be used to

on key sites and improve key bike and walking routes in support of sustainable


IMAP seeks stronger policy alignment and rigour to support sustainable transport outcomes via the planning scheme.



!MAP Council's welcome the review of Clause 52.06 of the planning scheme and seek the following: • DSE to implement a process to fast track its incorporation into the planning scheme, • The inclusion of flexible mechanisms allowing for the consideration of sustainable (reduced) parking

-rates for particular uses in particular locations satisfying particular conditions;

17

A complete a

What neetIS to be done

d off roa network.

d Implementatio iorities Reco

IMAP recommen strategy that will

at DSE andiD I continue to work closely with IMAP to develop an appropriate investment e larges ).00ssible increase in cycling numbers to further sustainable objectives.

• The inclusion of a mechanism allowing for the collection of cash-in-lieu of car parking provision to fund sustainable transport infrastructure / services - walking, cycling, public transport, travel demand management initiatives, etc - rather than just providing more car parking.

Action 2.3

Bicycle Network Legibility (November 2007) Action 2.5

Complete Regional Bicycle Network

The NAP working group has audited the 'gaps' in the existing regional on-road and off-road bicycle network. These gaps will be mapped and a strategy developed to ensure that the inner region will have a complete and seamless on and off-road bicycle network.

The project team recognised that a highly legible bicycle network is one with no gaps and which serves the origins and destinations of as many cyclists as possible in the 'MAP area. The first step towards completing all the gaps in the network is to identify missing links and prioritise them for improvement. TheOfn engaged Bicycle Victoria to draft a map of missing links in the IMAP area along with explanatory not-1,1-10information from this gap analysis will feed into Action 2 5 of IMAP, which is a review of the Princle,!1. -icycle Network (PBN). The gap

I analysis was not restricted to current PBN routes but considered all bic rou at serve a regional function. As the project developed, it became clear that we needed to addres trot onl . between existing bicycle facilities, but also gaps in the quality and sophistication of the nek 4 10 need '41,i,, addressed if we are to stimulate significantly greater use of bicycles in inner Melbourne

The most important outcome of this project to date has be of people to cycle in the IMAP area will require a bicycle netwo

that encouragingSii cInt numbers quality than weprrently have.

ork will remain a wo ansport networks.

ity usage da ese counts

14) - route - .

rogress for many years to come, in the will need a process of continuous

per Tuesday counts are a n in 2008. Development of the

At the top will be "priority" routes nsed by high levels of separation and

d local or neighbourhood routes. In the

The project has highlighted that the bicycle ne same way as the existing road network or p improvement based on thorough analysis an significant step forward in data gathering. It is p network will need to be more sophisticated, with a which will carry cyclists across icipal boundaries priority for cyclists over other, 0 i1 he bottom wi middle will be "support" ro

What outcomes are sough

rarchy be c

quiet road

Action 2.2

Coord 1 ated pedestrian and public transport signage Action 2.4

Walking Links I Pedestrian Priority Areas (Regional Greenlight project)

The objective of the IMAP "Coordinated pedestrian and public transport signage" project brief is to facilitate the introduction of consistent and informative regionally oriented pedestrian signage across the Inner Region, including indicative walking times and public transport information. The signage would be clear, legible and accessible to all (i.e. satisfy all legislative requirements — DDA etc, illuminated and generally Located and directed at and to key sites and Regional assets e.g. Activity Centres, the CBD, recreational and entertainment facilities, the Bay, Albert Park etc).

Stage 1 is the development of a 'Strategic Business Plan' to deliver consistent and informative regionally oriented pedestrian signage across the Region. This will act as a tool to expedite delivery noting that the staging of delivery across the Region will be dependent on local prioritisation and the availability of funding. Stage 2, comprises signage demonstration projects in selected Activity Centres; the results of which will be available for broader dissemination. IMAP is working in collaboration with Mali* and Dol in this project.

18

The "Regional Greenlight Project° presents a redesign opportunity for the State Government and local government Work collaboratively to improve safety and comfort levels for pedestrians using pedestrian operated signals on busy roads. This project will increase safety and comfort crossing busy roads to and from Activity Centres in Inner Melbourne. To progress IMAP Action 2.4, this project will provide for: • Improved connections to public transport • Pedestrian responsive signals • Pedestrian priority at intersections and street crossings.

Action 2.6

Tram Network/Fixed Rail Improvements Action 4.3

'Think Tram' Program Action 4.7 • Improvements to Public Transport Services


Improvements to public transport services across the Inner Region. RI'. udes improvements to existing services and facilities (eg Think Tram) and investigating the constructs 14' -.".{!r., tracks to address network gaps, improve route connections and provide extensions.



IMAP seeks support for the following public transport service and tra rifted rail improvements:

(1 \ : . , , ,:_. e_. '",..' . ...... ' 'I= : ,..,1. • '

. D., t link •

Tr-- • Sm',c r:v i _,• - I de St to Victoria Pde) • \ :sria St to m Melbourne Station link • D_ klands - a! .n. Footsore Rd to Footsore Station new tram line •

Operational • In a. ased night time and early morning services — including increased freq . and later/earlier services.

[Tram network / fixed rail] In sing information to public transport users dressing service disruption

_ • Contra-flow pedestrian management at railway stations e.g. opening all

en and exit sates at Richmond station

:4 • Rail reserve Review of Hurstbridi e and E. . in • line stous - Jolimont to Clifton Hill •

IMAP Action 4.3 9it. Tram" voviding support for existing programs and on-going improvements to tram services which influe ryk,„ -vet haviour. These actions have commenced via various local advocacy projects and programs including -*.; VI a Road, Fisherman's Bend bus, implementation of City of Melbourne Transport Strategy and support for r-.1. ant State 'Meeting our Transport Challenges' strategy programs.

5.3 Tram stop design

The Inner Melbourne Action Plan (IMAP) has four key strategies regarding sustainable transport and the preservation of the Inner Region's boulevards and major roads, including:

Strategy 1 Celebrate the unique and concentrated 19t) Century heritage of Inner Melbourne. This Strategy includes an action to improve or preserve the character of boulevards and major roads identified within the IMAP document. Action 1.4 "Boulevards and Major Roads' identifies a network of boulevards, major roads and activity centres where the community 'ownership' of the road space, which often includes the tram network, is high.

The principles of design should be integrated at an early stage in the process of rollout of Accessible tram stops across the Inner Region -in particular, prior to the roll-out of the "DDA 2" stage Accessible Tram Stops in the Inner Region.



• A set of urban design principles should be developed in consultation with appropriate stakeholders such as IMAP partner councils, Department of Infrastructure and Yarra Trams.

Consideration and resolution of this issue would assist both the State GovernmenCs and IMAP partner's objectives for sustainable urban design, and the Department of Infrastructure's challenge to ensure that the Accessible Tram Stop project is progressed and managed in a coordinated, efficient and timely manner.

20

nt in the 'M20.30 Response to • An undertaking to honour commitments ma Submissions Nov 20 vent and still u

• A 'whole of government' implementatio anis and five yea ' plans are required for key priorities to ensure funding is coordinated and in a timely mann d ultimately for all projects/M2030 actions).

of governmen for M2030 related initiatives such as the:

IRHS):—T i is a partnership initiative that requires a

by local government with, or in some instances, without funding

entedin partnership with the State Government/agencies/other_ .

be further developed collaboratively (by one, some or all parties) prior to ent (eg affordable housing 'models')

r Section 1 of Submission above)

• Funding & sup

The Inner Regional calla roach V

7. Government Coordination, Delivery and Funding

7.1 Government Coordination

The successful implementation of Melbourne 2030 relies on strong leadership and a co-ordinated and strategic 'whole of government approach to underpin the effective delivery of strategy and policy. It also relies on strong partnerships with relevant agencies, local government, stakeholders and the community.


• An on-going commitment by the State Government and all relevant partners to deliver on M2030 • An effective suite of planning and other tools (including funding mechan' o facilitate and enable

policy delivery • Effective, efficient and adaptable funding model/s and partnership ements



Provision of on-going leadership and direction for that! success.

ey M2030 strateg critical to its

The Inner City ertainrnent Precinct Taskforce (ICEPT) Report A fully detailed and costed implementation plan is required to enable a whole of State Government approach and coordinated delivery across the Inner Region. Many of these initiatives will be of benefit metropolitan and State-wide as relevant. (Refer Section 2.3 of Submission above)

21

7.2 Statutory Tool Kit and Victorian Planning Provisions

There are critical gaps in the existing statutory tools available to facilitate delivery of M2030 which inhibit effective delivery of M2030. These need to be addressed promptly to facilitate delivery and ensure a holistic and sustainable outcome is achieved. This Audit will assist in both identifying and developing such tools.


An improved statutory tool kit and Victorian Planning Provisions to deliver on M2030 aspirations.



• Review statutory tools and extent to which they facilitate implementation of M2pjt:spirations • • Identify 'missing' State policies and develop as relevant e.g. parking, transpo sustairtability, accessibility,

housing affordability • Explore vertical zoning and inclusion ary zoning

7.3 Funding

Funding

The existing Development Contribution Plan Overlay (DC PO) proms and administer, contributes a small proportion overall cost of the lag between the collection of the monetary contrit-til -nd infrastructure

elatively costly and onerous to develop ed infrastructure and results in a time

ry.


Improved community fading, d infrastructur ▪ Strategic investme kèy rt ucture to ensu etc)

What needs t

f ered in a Die y manner commensurate growth future delivgry (eg public transport, hospitals, schools

nt need for the nt in consultation with all relevant players to:

echanisms deliver i O cvstructure 'up front and on the ground' commensurate with population and

• • 're e

O fund e ; affordable housing O fund/clp er open space through developer contributions as an investment in the public

domain in the Inner Region, developing areas and around new development.

• fund and/or deliver 'real' developer contributions to social and community infrastructure, affordable housing etc in accord with population growth.

8. Conclusion

The IMAP group of Councils welcomes this opportunity to provide input to the Melbourne 2030 Audit and looks forward working further with you to achieve a more thriving and sustainable Melbourne.

22

Attachment 9

1

IMAP Implementation Committee Briefing Paper – Annual Report 2006 - 2007

_____________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND 1. The agreed Terms of Reference (7 February 2006) for the IMAP Implementation Committee requires

under ‘Reporting’ that:

“The committee shall provide an annual report to the member Councils.” 2. It is proposed that an annual report for the Year 2006 – 2007 be developed for submission to IMAP

member councils. The annual report would be available to other interested parties including IMAP Associate Partners and State Government agencies and departments.

DISCUSSION 3. A draft list of contents has been prepared (see reverse) that will broadly address the following items:

• Forward

• Introduction

• Governance

• Successes

• Program Statement

• Financial Statement

• Appendix 5. Costs and resources would include IMAP Implementation Officer and IMAP partner Councils’ officer

time. It may also include some graphic design, artwork and printing costs resourced via the IMAP budget (est. $5,000).

RECOMMENDATION 7. That the IMAP Implementation Committee resolve to:

a) note the proposed contents of the IMAP 2006 – 2007 Annual Report; and

b) endorse the IMAP Implementation Officer to draft the document, in consultation with relevant IMAP partner council officers and the Director Sustainability and Regulatory Services, City of Melbourne.

Attachment 9

2

IMAP Annual Report 2006 – 2007

DRAFT Contents

1. FORWARD 2. INTRODUCTION

2.1 Inner Melbourne Action Plan

2.2 Launch – April 2006

3. GOVERNANCE 3.1 IMAP Implementation Committee membership

Members 2006 - 2007 Associate Committee Members

3.2 Elected representatives and IMAP Councillor’s Forum 3.3 Executive Officers’ Forum

- November 2006 meeting of the CEO’s/Senior Management Forum - April 2007 meeting of the CEO’s/Senior Management Forum

4. SUCCESSES

4.1 Plummer Street Bypass 4.2 “Liveable Walkable Melbourne” - Action 1.1 Inner Melbourne Statement of

Significance 4.3 Meeting with the Minister for Planning the Hon Justin Madden 4.4 Partnership Agreements (by June 30) e.g Tourism Vic / Destination

Melbourne / NZ Itineraries 5. PROGRAM STATEMENT

5.1 Flagship Project - St Kilda Road 5.2 Priority Demonstration Projects

Action 2.2 Coordinated Pedestrian and Public Transport Signage Action 9.1 Regional Sustainability Targets Action 9.6 Water Conservation for Open Space Action 2.3 Bicycle network legibilty

5.3 Other Actions Action 2.4 Walking Links Pedestrian Priority Areas Action 5.2 Affordable Housing Action 6.3 Managing Conflicts in Activity Centres Action 7.4 Regional Economic Development Statement Action 9.3 Water Sensitive Design Action 11.1 Inner Melbourne Map Action 11.2 Regional Tourism Program

6. FINANCIAL STATEMENT 7. APPENDIX

List of meetings Statement of Attendance

inner melbourne action plan - imap - homeimap.vic.gov.au/uploads/meeting agendas/2007 august... ·...

Documents