ordinary meeting of council - city of greater bendigo · prayer 5 present 5 apologies 5 suspension...

MINUTES

Ordinary Meeting of Council

6.00pm Wednesday 15 July 2015

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

VENUE:

Reception Room,

Bendigo Town Hall,

Hargreaves Street, Bendigo

NEXT MEETING:

Wednesday 5 August 2015

Bendigo Town Hall

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

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

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

Council Vision

Greater Bendigo - Working together to be Australia's most liveable regional city.

Council Values Council wants the community to continue to have reason to be proud of the city and will do this through:

Transparency - Information about Council decisions is readily available and easily understood;

Efficiency and effectiveness - Council provides services based on evidence of need and demonstrates continuous improvement in the delivery of services;

Inclusion and consultation - Council uses a range of engagement strategies to ensure community members can understand and take part in discussion that informs the development of new strategies and actions;

Clear decisive and consistent planning - In a rapidly growing municipality, Council undertakes to plan effectively for our long-term future;

Respect for community priorities and needs - Council will advocate for improved services for community members and will consider community impact and feedback the decisions it makes.

Themes 1. Planning for Growth

2. Presentation and Vibrancy

3. Productivity

4. Sustainability

5. Leadership and Good Governance

ORDINARY MEETING WEDNESDAY 15 JULY 2015

ORDER OF BUSINESS:

ITEM PRECIS PAGE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY 5

PRAYER 5

PRESENT 5

APOLOGIES 5

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS 5

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 5

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS 6

CR FYFFE'S REPORT 6

DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST 7

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 8

1. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS 9

1.1 Response to Petition: Request to Provide an Additional

Access Road and Car Parking within the Big Hill Primary

School Vicinity

9

1.2 Further Response to Petition: Kronk Street Alternative

Options for Traffic Management

17

2. PLANNING FOR GROWTH 28

2.1 340A High Street, Kangaroo Flat - Staged Subdivision of

the Land Into 61 Lots, the Removal of Native Vegetation

and the Removal of a Drainage Easement

28

2.2 27-51 Powell Street, White Hills (Former White Hills

Landfill) - Planning Application for Temporary Use of the

Site for Materials Recycling

38

3. PRESENTATION AND VIBRANCY 51

3.1 Municipal Fire Management Plan 2012-2015 51

3.2 Revised Neilborough Community Plan 2015 53

4. PRODUCTIVITY 57

5. SUSTAINABILITY 57

6. LEADERSHIP AND GOOD GOVERNANCE 58

6.1 Record of Assemblies 58

7. URGENT BUSINESS 63

8. NOTICES OF MOTION 63

9. COUNCILLORS' REPORTS 63

10. MAYOR'S REPORT 64

11. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT 65

12. CONFIDENTIAL (SECTION 89) REPORTS 65

____________________________

CRAIG NIEMANN CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Ordinary Meeting - 15 July 2015

PAGE 5

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

PRAYER

PRESENT

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

APOLOGIES

Mr Darren Fuzzard (Director, Presentation and Assets) Mr Stan Liacos (Director, City Futures)

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

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

CARRIED

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME


PAGE 6

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

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

CARRIED

CR FYFFE'S REPORT

Cr Fyffe reported on his attendance at the following meetings and events:

- Changeover dinners for a number of service clubs - 100 years celebration of Chinese in Bridge Street - Cycling Victoria Team championship - Announcement of Oceania Table Tennis Championships at Ulumbarra Theatre - Knuldoorong Community Art Exhibition at part of NAIDOC Week - NAIDOC Week flag raising - Dance and music sections of Bendigo Competitions - Wished Christine McGinn from the Bendigo Weekly all the best


PAGE 7

DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

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


PAGE 8

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Wednesday 24 June 2015. The following items were considered at the Ordinary Council meeting held on Wednesday 24 June 2015 at 6:00pm.

Adoption of 2013-2017 Council Plan - 2015-2016 Update

Greater Bendigo Indoor Aquatic Centre in Kangaroo Flat

Adoption of 2015/16 Budget

Petition: Keep the Discovery Science and Technology Centre Open

Planning Scheme Amendment C200 and Planning Permit DS/327/2013 - Big Hill Enterprise Park - Consider Panel Report and Adoption of Amendment

Home and Community Care Service

Progress Report: Independent Review Implementation

Record of Assemblies

Contracts Awarded Under Delegation

Contract No. CT000204 - Internal Audit Services

Confidential Section 89 Attachment in accordance with Section 89(2)(a) and (c) of the Local Government Act 1989, relating to personnel and industrial matters.

The unconfirmed minutes have also been posted on the City of Greater Bendigo website pending confirmation at this meeting. RECOMMENDATION That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Wednesday 24 June 2015, as circulated, be taken as read and confirmed. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Campbell, seconded Cr Leach. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED


PAGE 9

1. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS

1.1 RESPONSE TO PETITION: REQUEST TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL ACCESS ROAD AND CAR PARKING WITHIN THE BIG HILL PRIMARY SCHOOL VICINITY

Document Information

Author Brett Martini, Manager Engineering & Public Space Responsible Darren Fuzzard, Director, Presentation and Assets Director

Summary/Purpose

The purpose of this report is to provide a response to a petition from concerned residents requesting the City of Greater Bendigo upgrade access and car parking in the vicinity of Big Hill Primary School, Big Hill.

Policy Context

Council Plan Reference: City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013-2017 (2014-2015 Update):

Theme: 4 Productivity

Challenges and Opportunities

Essential infrastructure, footpaths, drainage, well built and maintained roads are essential for economic and social purposes.

Theme: 5 Sustainability


Keeping our assets and infrastructure in good repair is an important principle.

Background Information

The following petition was tabled at Council's Ordinary Meeting on 27 May 2015 from residents in the Big Hill (Primary School) area, as outlined below:

"This is a petition for the Bendigo City Council to act on securing the safety of our children and the general community by creating a second access road for the McInnes Street area. Also to increase the parking facilities due to the rapid increase at Big Hill Primary School. The current environment is a traffic and fire hazard. The area is a known high risk red zone for fire activity, and therefore requires more than one exit road.


PAGE 10

We the undersigned are concerned citizens who urge our leaders to act now to provide additional road and car parking in the Big Hill Primary School vicinity".

The petition contained 115 signatures. Council resolved "that the petition be received and a response be prepared within two (2) meetings." Big Hill Primary School (BHPS) currently hosts 279 students and 22 staff members. After concerns were raised earlier in the year by BHPS's School Council President regarding traffic management in the immediate vicinity of the Primary School, City of Greater Bendigo's (CoGB) Transportation Engineer met with BHPS's Acting Principal and the School Council President on the afternoon of 18 February 2015 to observe school traffic. Vehicle movement was relatively smooth with only minimal queuing observed. Comparatively, the level of congestion seen at BHPS at this time was considered negligible when measured against other schools such as Camp Hill Primary School in Bendigo and St Francis of the Fields Primary School in Strathfieldsaye. A traffic count was conducted at the start of McInnes Street in early June 2015, recording an average of 870 vehicles per day. A peak of 170 vehicles per hour was observed at school pick up time, a figure obviously generated by school related traffic. The CoGB have provided 16 formalised angle parking bays next to the school, partly on the McInnes Street road reserve and partly on the school grounds. There are also 19 formalised parking bays in the school loop. Informal parallel parking along Prospectors Way offers space for a further 13 cars. Teachers park their vehicles in an informal car-park within the school grounds at the back of the multipurpose room. A sealed off-road shared path between Furness Street, Kangaroo Flat and BHPS was constructed to encourage students to walk and ride to school. The shared path also encompasses a school crossing of the Calder Highway in order to provide safe access to the path link for students and families on the western side of the highway. With the intention of avoiding traffic congestion around BHPS, particularly on McInnes Street, many parents wait for their children to walk 1300m north, along the shared path, picking them up at Phillis Street, Kangaroo Flat. The Ravenswood bus service also stops at BHPS to drop off and pick up approximately 20 children from the school every morning and afternoon.


PAGE 11

Report

Two issues have been raised by the petitioners in this case; the ability of residents to evacuate efficiently in case of emergency and parking facilities around BHPS. Bushfire Emergency Management: Whilst BHPS provides students and their families with unique educational opportunities courtesy of its close proximity to native bushland, that same proximity can present challenges in emergency related risk management. In response to the tragic fire events that transpired in February 2009, the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission made several recommendations to ensure the ongoing safety of communities around the state located in bushfire prone areas. One such recommendation saw the implementation of a new fire rating system, including the classification of Code Red days. Residents in high bushfire risk areas are urged on Code Red days to leave these areas the night before or early in the day. In addition to this, schools, kindergartens and child care facilities located in these high risk areas are closed on days declared as Code Red. Petitioners have raised concern about the ability of local residents and BHPS to evacuate in the event of a bushfire emergency, due to a single entry and exit from the area, namely McInnes Street. One alternative exit option for BHPS involves construction of the unmade road reserve between BHPS and Gee Road (details for which will be covered in the following section of this report relating to parking infrastructure). With a second exit, vehicles departing BHPS would be dispersed between the Gee Road and McInnes Street access points, however, traffic returning to Bendigo from Gee Road would be required to make a U-turn at the McInnes Street break in the Calder Highway median. As detailed in Figure 1, this U-turning traffic would have priority over the traffic trying to exit from McInnes Street, ultimately exacerbating any congestion along McInnes Street by potentially creating longer delays for traffic trying to exit onto the Calder Highway. In addition to generally increasing traffic congestion in the vicinity of BHPS, in the case of fire emergency, residents of McInnes Street would see no benefit from a Gee Road alternative as no direct connection with McInnes Street would be provided. The only other option for an alternate fire emergency exit would involve the formal construction of the unmade road reserve to the east of McInnes Street and BHPS, parallel to the railway line - a continuation of Railway Street (see Figure 2). From McInnes Street, this road reserve runs north to Gee Road and south to Tuckermans Lane. No formal road exists along this section, and the road reserve and surrounds are heavily treed. Due to the vegetation surrounding the road reserve this is not considered to be a safe alternate access to the Calder Highway in the event of a bush fire.


PAGE 12

Figure 1 - Traffic Movements at McInnes Street Intersection resulting from upgrade of Gee Road as an alternative exit:

Figure 2 - Location of unmade road reserve - continuation of Railway Street:

Unmade Road Reserve - Continuation of Railway Street


PAGE 13

School and residential vehicles leaving the area in the event of a bush fire would head directed to the Calder Highway rather than east toward the bush land. It is also of note that when the residential development for Garland Rises (Prospectors Way) was referred to the CFA and VicRoads in 2008, VicRoads placed no conditions on traffic management at the Calder Highway for the development and CFA only placed standard conditions on the subdivision that related to hydrant locations and road widths. Parking Infrastructure: One of the options outlined above remains relevant in the discussion of additional parking infrastructure. The unmade road reserve behind 5648 Calder Highway, located north of BHPS and intersecting with Gee Road (see Figure 3) provides an opportunity for the creation of up to 15 additional parking spaces adjoining BHPS. Figure 3 - Unmade Road Reserve behind 5648 Calder Highway:

In order to construct the 75m of road between BHPS and Gee Road, a Land Use Activity Agreement with the Dja Dja Wurrung Aboriginal Corporation would be required as no road currently exists on the reserve. Compensation for this use would be expected. In addition, several environmental factors would need to be considered including the requirement of a planning permit for removal of native vegetation and the considerable costs associated with any subsequent vegetation offsets. The bushland area surrounding the school is also inhabited by the endangered Eltham Copper Butterfly. Therefore any road or car park construction would need to be sensitive to the butterfly's habitat.

Unmade Road Reserve via Gee Road


PAGE 14

An upgrade of Gee Road from gravel to sealed would also be deemed necessary, with VicRoads also likely to require works to the intersection with the Calder Highway including construction of a left turn slip lane and an acceleration lane on the Calder Highway. These factors bring the cost estimate of this project to between $300,000 and $500,000. Resulting traffic from any upgrade to Gee Road also needs to be considered. Traffic from Gee Road would need to negotiate the intersection of the Calder Highway and McInnes Street (as briefly mentioned in the section of this report covering Bushfire Emergency Management). Bendigo-bound traffic from Gee Road is required to cross two lanes of Melbourne-bound traffic and enter the turning lane in the space of 140m. This additional turning traffic would likely impede traffic turning right from McInnes Street. The upgrade of Gee Road has been evaluated against criteria within the CoGB's Capital Works Program. Whilst utilisation of Gee Road would provide an alternative access to the school and additional parking, the cost of the works against the lack of significant traffic benefit and impact on the environment, mean that this project does not rate highly within the Capital Works Program when compared with other road construction projects. An alternative at a significantly lower cost than the proposed works associated with Gee Road, involves additional angle parking being constructed to the west of the existing angle parking in McInnes Street (see Figure 4). These works would require approval from the Department of Education, as construction would occur partly within the school site. Ten additional parking bays could be constructed at this location where currently approximately three cars informally parallel park. Formal construction of ten additional angle parking bays would cost approximately $29,000. Figure 4 - Additional Parking in McInnes Street:

Potential location of additional parking


PAGE 15

However, evaluation of this project against criteria for the Capital Works Program, even with the reduced cost, still results in a relatively low priority score when compared to other projects. Projects rating as higher priority include various pedestrian safety treatments such as pedestrian bridges at Wattle Street, Bendigo and Barrack Street, Heathcote, and other traffic safety treatments such as roundabouts and traffic lights at intersections; Chum Street/Booth Street and Chum Street/Thistle Street. Although less costly, additional parking at BHPS, in light of recent site inspections and traffic volume data is not a high priority within the current traffic management program. Taking into consideration strategies outlined in the draft Integrated Transport and Land Use Strategy (ITLUS), encouragement of walking and cycling to school would see traffic congestion improved at drop-off and pick-up times. As part of the implementation of ITLUS, each school will be provided with a toolkit which will assist BHPS to encourage sustainable travel and offer an incentive program for students that ride or walk to school. In discussions between CoGB's Transportation Engineer and the BHPS Principal, changing the five minute parking areas in the school loop to a two minute pick up / drop off area would also encourage turn over in the drop off / pick up area. Discussions regarding appropriate parking signage will continue with representatives from BHPS and CoGB.

Conclusion

Although two unused road reserves exist in the vicinity of BHPS and McInnes Street, their suitability as alternative access points during a fire emergency is limited due to lack of connectivity, significant levels of vegetation and subsequent safety concerns in such an emergency. Taking into account the closure of BHPS during Code Red days, students will not be at the school during the highest risk periods. At other times and for residents in the area, the safest option for evacuation of the area would be to travel directly to the Calder Highway. Traffic congestion and parking challenges are common around schools at drop-off and pick-up times. Construction of additional car parking for the school between BHPS and Gee Road is particularly expensive with potentially significant, adverse environmental impacts. Whilst extension of the existing angled parking on McInnes Street would create an additional ten formal parking bays at an estimated cost of $29,000, this project rates as low priority when compared to other projects within the Capital Works traffic management program. Changes to the parking restrictions for the drop-off and pick-up area within the school, as supported by the school Principal, would work to improve the efficiency of this area. As part of the implementation of ITLUS, assistance will be provided to all schools in order to assist students and parents in choosing more active transport options. Encouraging more students to walk or ride all or a part of the way to school is a key principle of ITLUS and represents the most effective way to reduce traffic congestion and demand for parking around the school during the drop-off and pick-up times.


PAGE 16

Attachments

Nil

RECOMMENDATION

That Council, having considered the above petition, existing bushfire emergency management recommendations, and current priority of outlined options against other projects in the CoGB Capital Works Program:

1. Work with Big Hill Primary School to improve parking signage within the school loop to encourage turnover at the drop-off and pick-up point,

2. Assist Big Hill Primary School in establishing a program for the encouragement of active travel as part of the implementation of ITLUS; and

3. Inform the submitter of the petition of Council’s resolution.

RESOLUTION Moved Cr Lyons, Seconded Cr Fyffe. That the matter be deferred for two meetings to allow time to meet with parents and officers on site.

CARRIED


PAGE 17

1.2 FURTHER RESPONSE TO PETITION: KRONK STREET ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS FOR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT


Author Andrew Smith, Transportation Engineer Michelle Stedman, Personal Assistant to Manager of Engineering and Public Space

Responsible Darren Fuzzard, Director, Presentation and Assets Director

Summary/Purpose

The purpose of this report is to respond to Council's resolution from 25 March 2015 Ordinary Meeting regarding the continued investigation of alternative solutions for traffic calming in Kronk Street, Golden Square.

Policy Context

Council Plan Reference: City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013-2017 (2014-2015 Update):

Theme: 4 Productivity


Essential infrastructure, footpaths, drainage, well built and maintained roads are essential for economic and social purposes.

Theme: 5 Sustainability


Keeping our assets and infrastructure in good repair is an important principle.


At Council's Ordinary Meeting on 11 February 2015, the following petition was tabled from concerned residents in Golden Square regarding speeding issues in Kronk Street, as outlined below:

“To the City of Greater Bendigo re speeding issues in Kronk Street, Golden Square, we urge the Council to act on this urgent matter before there is a fatality by installing speed humps or close the street access at Marong Road or some other device to stop reckless behaviour. We the undersigned are concerned citizens who urge our leaders to act now”.


PAGE 18

Signatures – 92 Council resolved "that the petition be received and a response be prepared within two (2) meetings." The response to the petition was tabled at Council's Ordinary Meeting on 25 March 2015, with the following resolution: That Council, having considered the petition in relation to speeding in Kronk Street:

1. Not support the closing of Kronk Street at the Calder Highway.

2. Not support the installation of road humps along Kronk Street

3. Acknowledge the following:- traffic count data has been provided to Victoria Police for targeted enforcement; a Speed Alert Mobile (SAM) trailer will be used to inform drivers of their speed in Kronk Street; a request for approval to install additional 50km/h speed signs has been made to VicRoads.

4. Continue to investigate practical and innovative solutions to address the problem

and reporting back within three (3) months.

5. Notify the submitters of the petition of Council's decision. Following Council's resolution in March, a number of actions have been undertaken to address the speeding in Kronk Street. The Speed Alert Mobile Trailer was located in Kronk Street between the 16th and 24th of April 2015 in order to educate road users on the appropriate speed limit. Victoria Police added Kronk Street to their task list for four weeks during April and May. After an initial enforcement peak, Kronk Street was removed from the task-list towards the end of the four week period as the number of speeding vehicles caught was significantly reduced. Further discussions have been held with VicRoads regarding the installation of additional 50km/h repeater signs in Kronk Street. The City of Greater Bendigo (CoGB) has been advised that it would be possible to install three sets of repeater signs in the urbanised section at 60, 160 and 470 metres north of Symonds Street. Note: The regular placement of curve warning signs with advisory speeds further north, beyond the urban area, means there is no suitable location for 50km/h repeater signs in this section; nor is there any requirement, as vehicles have to slow below 50km/h to negotiate the bends. A formal application along these lines has been submitted to VicRoads.


PAGE 19

Report

Local area traffic management (LATM) has been an ever-present challenge for traffic engineers and the community for many decades. Over the years, a considerable amount of research has been conducted in the identification of effective and efficient traffic safety treatments, concluding that there is much variability in how different treatments reduce speed. This variability is reflected by the nature of treatments and the planning and quality of their installation. Traditionally, if traffic safety treatments are undertaken in isolation rather than being widespread across a problem area, safety problems and traffic volume can inadvertently be migrated to other areas in close vicinity. Whilst the road layout around Kronk Street does not lend itself to many alternative routes, there is a risk that any speed reduction treatment of Kronk Street will increase the volume of traffic on Symonds Street. The previous report presented to Council on 25 March 2015, outlined road humps as being an unsuitable traffic calming treatment for Kronk Street due to the additional traffic noise generated not only by vehicles braking and accelerating, but more so by the noise of vehicles impacting with road humps. Several other treatments for LATM are suggested by advisory bodies such as Austroads, however their ability to manage traffic safety concerns relies on their correct application. The application of these treatments on Kronk Street has been evaluated in sections 1 - 4 as follows: 1.0 - Horizontal Displacement Devices: Angled slow points or chicanes across one or two lanes can reduce traffic speed by requiring a change of direction in order to drive through the treatment. With good design, they can significantly decrease traffic speed in the vicinity of the treatment. However, there are negative impacts accompanying these types of treatment. Slow points reduce the availability of on street parking at the treatment and on the approach and departure side of the treatment. Secondly, whilst they avoid the noise of vehicles impacting with a road hump, they still create traffic noise associated with vehicles braking and accelerating near the treatments. To be effective over a length of road, slow points or chicanes would need to be regularly spaced. In the case of Kronk Street, appropriate spacing for horizontal treatments such as these (and other treatments outlined later in this report) has been outlined with red stars in Figure 1.0. Each of these devices would need to be lit, requiring new lights in six locations (marked with yellow dots in Figure 1.0.), four of them utilising underground power. The upgrade of two existing lights would also be necessary. Given the traffic volume in excess of 1500 vehicles per day on Kronk Street, a single lane slow point or chicane is not recommended as congestion and crash risk may increase near the treatment. A two lane treatments would require kerbing and widening of Kronk Street to slow down traffic, whilst still allowing two way flow.


PAGE 20

Approximate cost for a slow point or chicane based treatment is $220,000. Although this may be a satisfactory treatment from a traffic safety perspective, when referred to the CoGB's Capital Works Program the project rates relatively low in priority when compared with other traffic safety treatments to be funded across the city. Figure 1.1 - Appropriate spacing of horizontal displacement treatments to provide speed reduction over the length of Kronk Street, and subsequent lighting placement:


PAGE 21

Figure 1.2 - Diagram of two lane slow point:

Driveway links are similar to one-lane slow points and take the form of a single lane meandering road that allows two-way traffic. As detailed in Figure 1.3, this treatment is generally longer than an angled slow point and is designed to not only slow traffic but also discourage through-traffic. The minimum length for a driveway link to be effective is 30m. Examples of this treatment around the city include Baxter St at McIvor Rd and Mackenzie Street at Honeysuckle Street. The Austroads Guide for LATM recommends that driveway links are not used when daily volumes exceed 1000vpd, as congestion and crash risk may increase. Therefore, a driveway link would not be a suitable treatment for Kronk Street given its traffic volume, likely resulting in vehicle queuing and confusion which may cause traffic to reverse in an unsafe manner. The traffic volume of the above noted locations is lower than Kronk Street, making this treatment appropriate in those cases, however unsafe if applied in this instance.


PAGE 22

Figure 1.3 - Diagram of Driveway Link:

A centre blister as shown in Figure 1.5 over the page, can be used at mid-block locations to slow traffic and consists of a central island that creates a horizontal deflection in the road. This treatment needs to be placed in a location that will not obstruct driveways and will impact on the availability of on street parking. Some parts of Kronk Street would require widening for a centre blister to be installed. Centre blisters are expensive compared to other treatments with the approximate cost to install one centre blister being $52,000. At least three of these treatments would be required in the urban section north of Symonds Street to satisfactorily address speeding issues. This represents a minimum cost of $156,000. As with slow points and chicanes, this treatment can also impact on amenity of residents, with increased traffic noise from braking and acceleration. Ultimately, when referred to the City's Capital Works Program, the installation of centre blisters along Kronk Street is a low priority when considered against other traffic safety projects around the city.


PAGE 23

Figure 1.4 - Example of centre blister treatment:

Figure 1.5 - Diagram of centre blister application in Kronk Street:


PAGE 24

Roundabouts are another LATM approach for slowing traffic. In this case, the only suitable location for a roundabout is at the intersection of Kronk Street and Symonds St at an approximate cost of $350,000. Although a roundabout would work well at this location and would slow traffic in Symonds Street, it would have minimal effect on the speed of traffic in Kronk Street. 2.0 - Kerb Outstands at Intersections Kerb outstands involve extending the kerb to narrow the traffic lanes. Lane narrowing can create the perception of restricted road space and affects the perceived comfortable driving speed. This treatment is often used at intersections where there is no kerbside parking and it also improves pedestrian safety by reducing the crossing distance for pedestrians. A good location for kerb outstands in this instance would be at the intersection of Kronk Street and Golden Heights Drive. Kronk Street is very wide at this location, which can encourage speeding. By narrowing the road and tightening the intersection it will potentially reduce the speed of traffic in Kronk Street at this location. At an approximate cost of $30,000, this is a low cost treatment with potential to impact driver speed, however implementation of this project again rates low when assessed in conjunction with other traffic safety priorities across the City of Greater Bendigo. Figure 2.1 - Diagram of potential kerb outstand treatment application in Kronk Street:


PAGE 25

3.0 Perimeter (threshold) treatments: At the entry to a residential area or at the change from one land use to another, an entry threshold can be used to help identify the change in road environment and expected driver behaviour. These may be similar to kerb outstands in that they often involve narrowing of the traffic lane and are often at intersections. However they usually include some form of change in pavement treatment (see Figure 3.1) at the threshold and can be either at-grade or raised. Figure 3.1 - Diagram of Perimeter (Threshold) Treatment:

Given that the Symonds Street is a residential area with the same speed zone, a treatment at the intersection of Kronk and Symonds Street is not considered appropriate. However a threshold treatment just north of Grange Terrace, where the land use changes from typical residential to more rural living or low density residential, may be a more appropriate location for this type of treatment. Although an appropriate location for now, if over time the land to the north of Grange Terrace becomes increasingly developed and more typical of a residential area, any threshold treatment at this location would become redundant. This combined with advice from a national survey conducted by ARRB Group, an advisory entity for Australia's road industry, stating that threshold treatments were considered to have a very low effectiveness in managing speed, leaves this treatment unlikely to combat the issues experienced in Kronk Street for an extended time.


PAGE 26

4.0 - Bike Lanes: Painting bike lanes on a wide roadway can appear to narrow the road, which can work to slow driver speeds. Kronk Street is only wide enough to have bike lanes installed for 200m of its 1500m length. This is not considered a sufficient road length in order to create an impact on vehicle speeds. Capital Works Program: Whilst traffic counts as detailed in the previous report identified speeding in Kronk Street, community desire to treat speed concerns on residential streets is not isolated to Kronk Street. Secondly, traffic safety issues are not limited to excessive speed. In the CoGB's Capital Works Program, there are currently 342 traffic safety projects listed for treatment at a value of $29.6 million. Projects remain in this program for annual assessment until such time as they become high priority and are submitted for consideration in the Council Budget process. Several pedestrian crossings, pedestrian bridges and intersection treatments are currently rated as higher priority than Kronk Street based on their cost benefit analysis throughout this process. Currently, projects with higher priority rating include intersection treatments such as Chum Street/Thistle Street and Chum Street/Booth Street, as well as pedestrian crossings in the CBD at St Andrews Terrace, Garsed Street, and Hargreaves Street/Mundy Street.

Conclusion

Local area traffic management techniques can affect traffic speeds to varying degrees; reliant on the application of suitable treatments at the most effective locations. Treatment impact is also limited to a relatively short distance each side of installed devices, therefore careful design is required to maximise the benefit of any traffic safety treatment. Although local area traffic management can have a positive impact on traffic speeds, in built up residential areas it can introduce a number of disadvantages; the biggest of these being the significant increase in traffic noise in the vicinity of the treatment. Ultimately, the assessment of traffic safety funding priorities, regardless of investigated treatment effectiveness along Kronk Street, must consider other projects within the municipality. At this point in time, application of treatments on Kronk Street rate as a lower priority when compared with other traffic safety projects across Greater Bendigo. Noting the reduced speed activity as a result of police enforcement, the impact of the SAM trailer, and the imminent formal approval from VicRoads regarding the installation of 50km/hr repeater signs in the Kronk Street area, regular enforcement will be requested and traffic speeds monitored as required.

Attachments

Nil


PAGE 27

RECOMMENDATION

That Council having considered the further traffic management options investigated for Kronk St, their relative priority against other identified projects across Greater Bendigo and the impact of recent Police enforcement on speeding in Kronk St, resolve to:

1. Install 50km/hr repeater signs following VicRoads approval;

2. Continue to work with Victoria Police regarding ongoing enforcement; and

3. Inform the submitter of the petition of this approach.

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

CARRIED

Planning for Growth - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 15 July 2015

PAGE 28

2. PLANNING FOR GROWTH

2.1 340A HIGH STREET, KANGAROO FLAT - STAGED SUBDIVISION OF THE LAND INTO 61 LOTS, THE REMOVAL OF NATIVE VEGETATION AND THE REMOVAL OF A DRAINAGE EASEMENT


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

Summary/Purpose

Application details: Staged subdivision of the land into 61 lots, the removal of native vegetation and the removal of a drainage easement

Application No: DS/63/2013

Applicant: Total Property Developments

Land: 340A High Street, KANGAROO FLAT

Zoning: General Residential Zone; abuts a Road Zone Category 1

Overlays: Schedule 1 to the Environmental Significance - Watercourse Protection

Summary: Council has refused to grant a permit to subdivide the subject land because of concerns about traffic impacts and flooding. The applicant is seeking a review of Council’s decision by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal and the hearing will begin on 27 July. A creek traverses the subject site. Some councillors have expressed a desire for the proposed subdivision to include a pedestrian and cycle crossing of the creek. A motion to this effect was moved (but lost) at the Council Meeting. The applicant is agreeable to constructing a creek crossing on a shared-cost basis. The crossing is estimated to cost $60,000 and the City would be required to make a $10,000 contribution to its construction, with the balance met by the applicant. If Council accepts the applicant’s offer and withdraws its refusal to grant a permit then the VCAT matter can be settled without the need for a hearing.


PAGE 29

The creek crossing is in the public interest, creating a subdivision layout with enhanced pedestrian movement and accessibility. Achieving a negotiated outcome with the applicant also avoids the expense of a VCAT hearing. For these reasons it is recommended that Council agree to the offer made by the applicant and rescind the current resolution.

Policy Context

City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013 – 2017 (2014)

Planning for Growth

Adaptability for change and population growth through good design and careful planning of infrastructure and facilities.

Diverse, affordable and sustainable, housing choices.

Productivity

Fostering business and industry growth.

Sustainability

Distinctive natural setting and buildings are celebrated and conserved.

Report

In September 2014 Council considered a permit application to subdivide the subject site into 61 residential lots. The site is split in two by an ephemeral creek. The lots created by the proposed subdivision will be arranged either side of the creek – 17 lots on the south side and 44 lots on the north side. No crossing of the creek was proposed. The application was the subject of debate at the Council Meeting. A motion was moved (but lost) to the effect that the subdivision should include a pedestrian and cycle crossing of the creek. Council ultimately resolved to refuse to grant a permit on these grounds

1. The proposal would result in an adverse traffic impact contrary to Clause 56 Residential Subdivision of the City of Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.

2. The proposal would result in an unacceptable flooding risk to the site and the

surrounding area contrary to Clauses 13.02 Floodplains and 42.01 Environmental Significance Overlay of the City of Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme.

The applicant is seeking a review of Council’s decision by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. The hearing will begin on 27 July. The applicant and the City are the only parties to the proceedings (there are no objector parties). Russell Kennedy lawyers have been engaged to act for the City and they will be supported by expert traffic evidence.


PAGE 30

In an effort to resolve the VCAT matter without the need for a hearing the applicant has made an offer to the City. The applicant will construct a low-flow pedestrian and cycle crossing of the creek on a shared-cost basis. The crossing is estimated to cost $60,000. The City would be required to make a $10,000 contribution to the construction of the crossing, with the balance met by the applicant. The City’s Manager of Engineering and Open Space has confirmed that the City’s contribution could be accommodated within the capital works budget. The crossing will comprise twin concrete box culverts suitable for pedestrian and cycle use during times of non-flooding (low flows). The preliminary crossing design is supported in principle by the North Central Catchment Management Authority and the City’s engineering department. The crossing is in the public interest. It will provide a pedestrian connection to the linear path along the Bendigo Creek and will provide better movement options for residents within the proposed housing estate. Furthermore, informal routes across the creek are less likely to become established if there is a permanent crossing in place. By agreeing to the applicant’s offer the City will avoid the expense of a VCAT hearing. The hearing is scheduled for two days. The City’s legal fees are expected to be between $15,000 and $20,000, in addition to expert evidence fees of $6,200.

Conclusion

For the reasons described above it is recommended that Council agree to the terms offered by the applicant in order to settle the VCAT matter.

Options

Council may accept or reject the terms offered by the applicant to settle the VCAT matter. Council must respond to the applicant’s offer as soon as possible before the hearing scheduled for 27 July.

Attachments

Objections

RECOMMENDATION

That Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to: (1) Rescind the 10 September 2014 resolution to refuse to grant a permit for the staged

subdivision of the land at 340A High Street Kangaroo Flat into 61 lots, the removal of native vegetation and the removal of a drainage easement.

(2) Inform the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal that it consents to a permit

being granted with conditions for the staged subdivision of the land at 340A High Street Kangaroo Flat into 61 lots, the removal of native vegetation and the removal of a drainage easement subject to the following conditions


PAGE 31

1. PLAN TO BE ENDORSED The plans to be endorsed and which will then form part of the permit are the plans submitted with the application.

2. PLAN MUST NOT BE ALTERED The layout of the subdivision as shown on the endorsed plan must not be altered without the written consent of the responsible authority.

3. VEGETATION REMOVAL The removal of vegetation allowed for by this permit is limited to the patches and scattered trees shown in the Ecological Assessment With Net Gain report prepared by Garry and Brenda Cheers dated May 2012 but excluding the Red Gum tree located in the south west corner of the site.

4. TREE PROTECTION MANAGEMENT PLAN (a) Before works start on Stage 3 of the subdivision, the stage that contains the

Red Gum tree marked for retention, a tree protection management plan must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. This management plan must show how the subdivision works can be achieved to meet AS 4970 Protection of Trees on Development Sites.

(b) The Tree Protection Management Plan must be implemented to the satisfaction of the responsible authority

5. LANDSCAPE PLAN

Before a statement of compliance is issued for each stage of the subdivision a landscape plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority for the relevant stage. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and then form part of the permit.

6. COMPLETION OF LANDSCAPING Before a statement of compliance is issued for each stage of the subdivision the landscaping works shown on the endorsed landscape plan must be carried out and completed for that stage to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

7. LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE The landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority for 12 months after the works are completed, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.

8. REMOVAL OF OUTBUILDINGS Before a statement of compliance is issued for each stage of the subdivision all buildings located within the relevant stage must be removed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

9. DETAILED DRAINAGE Before a plan of subdivision is certified for the approved subdivision detailed drainage plans to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and then will form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and must include


PAGE 32

• direction of stormwater runoff • a point of discharge for each lot • independent drainage for each lot • approval from the relevant authority for the point of discharge.

10. DRAINAGE EASEMENTS

The subdivision must provide easements for drainage within and through the subject land for external outfall drainage to a point of lawful discharge to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

11. STORMWATER DETENTION Before a statement of compliance is issued for the subdivision the developer must provide onsite surface and stormwater detention to pre-development levels in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Allowable discharge: Q5 = 13.4 l/s per ha.

12. STORMWATER QUALITY Before the subdivision starts the developer must provide a stormwater treatment system to achieve the Best Practice Environmental Guidelines storm water quality (Victoria Stormwater Committee 1999) in accordance with plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

13. CONSTRUCTION OF WORKS Road works, drainage and other civil works must be constructed in accordance with the Infrastructure Design Manual and plans and specifications approved by the responsible authority and must include

• fully sealed pavement with kerb and channel • paved footpaths • underground drainage • underground conduits for water, gas, electricity and telephone • appropriate intersection and traffication measures • appropriate street lighting and signage • high stability permanent survey marks.

14. DECORATIVE LIGHTING

The decorative lighting style is to be consistent with any adjacent decorative lighting. The Responsible Authority shall determine decorative lighting style where conflicts arise. The applicant shall submit for approval full details of any proposed decorative lighting to the Responsible Authority prior to commencement of works. Prior to the issue of the statement of compliance the applicant will make payment to the Responsible Authority in accordance with Table 15 of the Infrastructure Design Manual.

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


PAGE 33

pay for any damage caused to any public infrastructure caused as a result of the development or use permitted by this permit.

16. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN (a) Prior to commencement of works the owner or applicant must submit a

Construction Management Plan (CMP) for approval by the responsible authority. The plan must include • a site specific plan showing proposed erosion and sedimentation control works • techniques and intervention levels to prevent a dust nuisance • techniques to prevent mud and dirt being transported from the site to adjacent streets • the protection measures taken to preserve any vegetation identified for retention.

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

17. COLIBAN WATER

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

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

18. POWERCOR

(a) The plan of subdivision submitted for certification under the Subdivision Act 1988 shall be referred to Powercor Australia Ltd in accordance with Section 8 of that Act.

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

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

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

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

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


PAGE 34

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

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

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

(b) Before the issue of a statement of compliance for any stage of the subdivision under the Subdivision Act 1988, the owner of the land must provide written confirmation from • a telecommunications network or service provider that all lots are connected

to or are ready for connection to telecommunications services in accordance with the provider’s requirements and relevant legislation at the time

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

21. COUNTRY FIRE AUTHORITY

Hydrants (a) Operable hydrants, above or below ground must be provided to the satisfaction

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

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

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

22. NORTH CENTRAL CMA

(a) Prior to issuing a statement of compliance a certified survey plan undertaken by a licensed surveyor must be submitted to the responsible authority and North Central CMA for its comment/approval. The certified survey plan must confirm the following

• all new allotments must be filled to a minimum of 300mm above the 1% AEP flood level

• unless otherwise agreed in writing by the responsible authority and the North Central Catchment Management Authority, Barnett Drive and Bronzewing Boulevard must be filled to no lower than the 1% AEP flood level. This excludes the section of Barnett Drive adjacent to Lot 47 which must be graded/shaped to enable overland flows from Barnett Drive to the south to pass through to the waterway

• a balance of cut and fill must be achieved to offset where the development is extending into the active flow areas on the development site, i.e. where the existing depth of flooding exceeds 0.5m.


PAGE 35

(b) During construction, no polluted or sediment laden runoff may be permitted to enter the waterway/s. Prior to the commencement of works, silt control measures must be put in place to minimise the amount of sediment entering the waterway.

(c) A separate permit, direct from the North Central CMA is required for any reshaping/works to the waterway or any new or modified stormwater connection. Please contact the North Central CMA on telephone 5440 1896 to gain a full understanding of the North Central CMA’s requirements.

(d) A landscape management plan for the proposed public open space reserve must be submitted to the responsible authority and North Central CMA for approval. The landscape plan must detail works that will be undertaken to improve the long term health of the waterway traversing the site. This includes, but not limited to, protecting existing key indigenous vegetation, removal of exotic weed species and replanting with locally indigenous species.

(e) Prior to issuing a statement of compliance, landscaping works must be undertaken in accordance with the approved landscape management plan.

23. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND PRIMARY INDUSTRIES

(a) In order to offset the removal of 0.02 habitat hectares of native vegetation of Alluvial Terraces Herb-rich Woodland Ecological Vegetation Class and 0.02 habitat hectares of Creekline Grassy Woodland EVC, each of high conservation significance, and 5 trees of Alluvial Terraces Herb-rich Woodland Ecological Vegetation Class of low conservation significance approved as part of this permit, the applicant must provide for • the protection and management for conservation purposes of 0.03 habitat

hectares of Alluvial Terraces Herb-rich Woodland Ecological Vegetation Class of high conservation significance native vegetation, and 0.03 habitat hectares of Creekline Grassy Woodland Ecological Vegetation Class of high conservation significance native vegetation

• the protection and management for conservation purposes of 4 trees >40cm Diameter at Breast Height of Alluvial Terraces Herb-rich Woodland Ecological Vegetation Class of high conservation significance

• the planting and protection of 370 trees of Alluvial Terraces Herb-rich Woodland Ecological Vegetation Class

• or an alternative to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. To provide the required offset, within 12 months of the vegetation removal or prior to the issue of statement of compliance, whichever is sooner, the applicant or owner must either • provide to the responsible authority an Allocated Credit Extraction issued by

the Department of Environment and Primary Industries Native Vegetation Credit Register which satisfies the required offset, or

• commence management of an offsite in accordance with an offset plan endorsed by the responsible authority. The offset plan must be prepared to the satisfaction of and approved by the responsible authority. When approved the offset plan will be endorsed and form part of this permit. The offset plan must include • a description of the site, including a plan, where the offset site will be

provided • a schedule of works required to achieve the offset over a 10 year period,

detailing


PAGE 36

• management actions to be performed (e.g. fencing, weed control, pest control, revegetation)

• the person(s) responsible for implementing the specified management actions

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

(b) Within 12 months of the native vegetation removal or prior to the issue of statement of compliance, whichever is sooner • the offset site must be permanently protected to the satisfaction of the

responsible authority such as through an encumbrance on title • a copy of the endorsed offset plan and protection mechanism (e.g. title

showing encumbrance) must be lodged with the Department of Environment and Primary Industries

(c) Prior to the commencement of works, a protection fence must be erected around the native vegetation that is to be retained as indicated in the report titled ‘Ecological Assessment with Net Gain of Proposed Development 340 High Street Kangaroo Flat’. The delineated area will define a ‘Tree Protection Zone’. The protection fence must be constructed of paraweb to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The tree protection fence must remain in place until all works are completed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

(d) Adequate signage to indicate the ‘Tree Protection Zone’ must be attached to the protection fence and maintained until all works are completed. Except with the written consent of the Responsible Authority, within the Tree Protection Zone • no vehicular or pedestrian access, trenching or soil excavation is to occur • no storage or dumping of tools, equipment or waste is to occur • no construction of any permanent or temporary infrastructure

24. LOW FLOW BRIDGE

Before a statement of compliance is issued for the second stage of the subdivision, the permit holder must design and construct a low flow culvert crossing over the waterway on the subject land to the satisfaction of the responsible authority and the North Central CMA generally in accordance with the plan prepared by Total Property Developments (Vic) Pty Ltd – reference Post Development Flood Extent Plan FEP02 Rev D dated 06/03/15 Sheet 1 of 1.

25. EXPIRY OF THE PERMIT (a) This permit will expire unless • all stages of the approved subdivision have been certified within 3 years of

the date of this permit or • any stage of the approved subdivision is not completed within 5 years of the

certification of the plan of subdivision under the Subdivision Act 1988. (b) The responsible authority may extend the time for certification of a plan of

any stage of the subdivision if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or thereafter, within the period allowed by section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.


PAGE 37

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

CARRIED


PAGE 38

2.2 27-51 POWELL STREET, WHITE HILLS (FORMER WHITE HILLS LANDFILL) - PLANNING APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY USE OF THE SITE FOR MATERIALS RECYCLING


Authors Prue Mansfield, Director, Peter O'Brien, Senior Planner and Simon Clay, Manager Waste Services

Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development Directors Rachelle Quattrocchi, Acting Director Presentation & Assets

Summary/Purpose

This report considers the planning application by Hopley Recycling for temporary use of the former White Hills Landfill site, taking into consideration:

1. The City's short and long term obligations as the land manager.

2. The site testing and rehabilitation necessary to meet those obligations.

3. Land owner (DELWP) and land manager (Council) permission to be on the site.

Council is not the decision maker on this planning permit application given the applicant’s decision to lodge an appeal at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) for 'failure to determine' as a decision had not been made with the statutory timeframe. This report therefore seeks Council’s position on the application in order to prepare its case for a future VCAT Hearing listed for October 2015. The City leases the land from the Crown for sole purpose of rehabilitation; the testing of the site and preparation of a rehabilitation/aftercare plan remains ongoing and tenure for the site is not available, therefore approval of a use (even on a temporary basis) is premature. It is recommended that Council advise the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal that it does not support Hopley Recycling's application for temporary use of the former landfill site at 27-51 Powell Street, White Hills.

Policy Context

City of Greater Bendigo Council Plan 2013 – 2017 (2015-2016 Update)

Productivity

Council fosters business and industry growth.

Sustainability

The built and natural qualities that make Greater Bendigo an attractive and appealing place are valued and conserved.

Council manages its resources, assets & infrastructure for the long term.


PAGE 39


Land Manager Obligations In order to meet its obligations as the contaminator and leasee of this site and to meet the objective of having the site available for beneficial purposes for the future, the City needs to 1. Understand the nature and extent of the contamination (the site testing underway).

2. Complete the detailed plan for how the site needs to be rehabilitated, and have the plan signed off by DELWP and EPA. (Required by the Minister responsible for Crown Land and the EPA.)

3. Scope, cost, procure (given the estimated scale of the works most likely by tender) and project manage satisfactory completion of the works.

4. Depending on the outcome of those two processes and therefore the potential beneficial uses of the land and the nature of any ongoing monitoring obligations, decide whether the City should enter into a new lease, or relinquish the lease. If the land is generally available for use, there may be no need or requirement for the City to be an intermediary in the process. The land could be leased directly from, or sold by the Crown.

5. If the City decides to enter a new lease, and sublease the site to suitable end users, the City needs to establish and complete the appropriate legal process. This will need to include the formal Local Government Act process of advertising and considering submissions, depending on the value and length of the lease.

6. If the Council decides to terminate the lease and return the site to the Crown, then DELWP will decide whether to lease or sell the site for an appropriate use.

The information required to make a decision on steps 4, 5 and 6 will not be known until after the completion of steps 1, 2 and 3. The Crown may require Council to have ongoing management of the site to ensure the integrity of the rehabilitation works. Site Testing & Rehabilitation The former Shire of Strathfieldsaye operated the White Hills landfill at Powell Street, White Hills from approximately 1970 through to its closure in 1988. The landfill is likely to have received a wide range of municipal, commercial and building waste during its period of operation. The landfill was capped in 1988 using approximately 600 mm of material that was placed over the landfill tipping area. Between 1988 and the early 1990s further clean fill was brought onto the site and used to provide further capping of the landfill. The licence issued by EPA for the White Hills licence did not specify a standard of rehabilitation but made reference to the compliance with the General Sanitary regulations. This was generally understood to be 500 mm of compacted earth. In July 2013, the City commissioned a preliminary site assessment of the former landfill. This site assessment included digging 10 test pits across the site to assess the depth of the cap and the type of waste present immediately under the cap. From this work it was concluded that the cap thickness varied from 0.4 metres (m) up to over 1.2 m.


PAGE 40

A scope for the additional investigation work was developed in August 2014, which involved the installation of additional ground water and gas monitoring bores in the geological reserve adjacent to the White Hills landfill site. The geological reserve is managed by Parks Victoria. This testing is ongoing and it is likely to be mid 2016 before it is complete. Land Owner & Land Manager Permission to Occupy the Site In February 2014, Council approached the Minister for Environment and Climate Change (who is responsible for Crown Land), advising if the land could be transferred to Hopley Recycling now. The Minister's letter was an unequivocal refusal, stating:

"While I acknowledge the council's suggestion of direct sale or lease to Hopley Demolitions, sale of the site can only be considered once the site has been rehabilitated to the satisfaction of DEPI and the Environment Protection Authority (EPA). I also believe it is important for the council, as the former operator of the landfill, to retain responsibility for developing and implementing a rehabilitation plan."

This was further reinforced in the recent response to the planning permit application referral by DELWP which states:

“I refer to my letter of 3 September 2014 regarding the above planning permit applications. It has come to my attention that there is an inconsistency in the recommendations contained in this letter with those provided by Minister for Environment and Climate Change on 6 June 2014 with respect to the sublet arrangements for the site/s. It is noted particularly the Minister’s willingness to consider a sublet arrangement is dependent on Council developing and implementing a rehabilitation plan prior to any subletting arrangements”.

In short, Council cannot sub-lease the site to anyone. Even if Council formed a view that the planning merit of the proposal was acceptable, such an approval would be futile as tenure to the land could not be granted. The Minister has advised that a rehabilitation plan to the satisfaction of DELWP and EPA must be completed before any other use options are considered. This was reiterated in the referral response from DELWP. VCAT Enforcement In 2014, VCAT conducted a mediation session between the City and Hopley regarding the City’s Enforcement Order application. With the consent of both parties, the Enforcement Order was allowed (with Hopley agreeing they were in breach of the Planning Scheme) with timeframes for the removal of all material from the former landfill agreed to. The date by which Hopley agreed to remove all material from the site was 10 May 2015. This date has passed and the Order has not been met. Since the VCAT hearing, Hopley has requested VCAT to extend the time stipulated in the enforcement application for vacation of the former landfill site. This process is ongoing.


PAGE 41

Availability of Suitable Sites Since it was determined that the former landfill should not be occupied, City officers have been working with Hopley to identify other, suitable properties for his operation. He has been referred to nine sites. Mr Hopley also identified five sites and sought advice from the Planning Department. Most sites were unsuitable but officers strongly suggested he pursue the one particular site.

Report

The temporary use application on the former landfill was submitted to the City on 8 April 2014. The Planning Department did not make a decision on this application as it was intended that the results of testing commissioned by the Waste Services Unit would help inform the decision on the Planning Application. This matter (temporary use application) is listed to be heard by VCAT over 3 days commencing 19 October 2015. An outcome of a compulsory conference convened by VCAT was that the City was directed by VCAT to resolve and then communicate its position on this application following a formal decision by Council. Application details: Temporary use of land for materials recycling facility

Application No: DI/252/2014

Applicant: Hopley Recycling Pty Ltd

Land: 27-51 Powell Street, WHITE HILLS 3550

Zoning: Industrial 1 Zone and Public Park & Recreation Zone (Part)

Overlays: Vegetation Protection Overlay 2 (Part)

Key considerations: Is a temporary use of land appropriate having regard to the State and Local Planning Policy Framework and provisions of the Planning Scheme;

Is the application premature as it is unknown whether the site conditions are appropriate for the use.

Is there another way to bring the site into conformity with the Planning Scheme; and

Whether Council (as the land manager) agrees that the land can be sub-leased to a third party, when the purpose of the City’s lease of the land from the Crown is for rehabilitation.

Conclusion: It is recommended that Council advise VCAT and the permit applicant that it does not support the temporary use application as:

There is insufficient evidence currently available that the site is suitable for short or longer term use of the site. As a result Council is not satisfied the use is appropriate having regard to clause 13.03-1 Use of contaminated and potentially contaminated land’; and


PAGE 42

Approval of the application would be premature as a rehabilitation plan has not been prepared and implemented and tenure cannot be granted to applicant (who is currently illegally occupying the site).

The land owner has prohibited the land from being subleased until the rehabilitation plan is prepared & approved by DELWP and EPA.

It is recommended that the City's Economic Development Unit continue to offer assistance to Hopley to find a suitable location for his operation.

Subject Site and Surrounds

Figure 1: Location map showing subject site.

Area 1 on the map is the site of a former Shire of Strathfieldsaye landfill and the subject of this report. To the east of the site is a part constructed extension of Murphy Street, and further east recently subdivided industrial land on the site of the former B&B Brickworks land. To the north east of the site is an area of former Chinese Diggings (protected by a Heritage Overlay). Area 2 is the site Hopley Recycling is permitted to operate from (under permit AM/406/2008/A amended on 19 December 2014).


PAGE 43

Proposal

The applicant’s supporting material outlining the rationale of the temporary use permit for the whole landfill site and its relationship with the permitted site is:

“Hopley has indicated that no further material will be placed on the site (CA432E) however they have raised concerns regarding the timing of removal as an alternative site has not yet been identified to accept all of the material. To provide an appropriate planning outcome with this matter it is proposed that a transitional Planning Permit be issued for the temporary use of the land (CA432E) to allow for the efficient and orderly removal of the existing stockpiles over a defined period of time. A separate planning permit is proposed from the existing permit to provide clarity and to separate the approved functions of each parcel of land as follows: Permit No. 1 – (DI/406/2008) Regulate the ongoing use and development of resource recovery facility on CA432C. Permit No. 2 – (this application) Regulate the removal of stockpiles and time limit to terminate the use of CA432E”.

Planning Controls - Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme

Why is a planning permit required? The property is zoned Industrial 1 and Clause 33.01-1 (Use) and 33.01-4 (Building and works) of the Planning Scheme requires that planning approval is required for the use and development of land for the purpose of Materials Recycling. Material recycling is defined at clause 74 of the Planning Scheme as:

“Land used to collect, dismantle, treat, process, store, recycle or sell used or surplus material”.

The use has a condition that must be met in order for discretion to exist to consider the proposal. The condition is:

“The land must be at least 30 metres from land (not a road) which is in a residential zone or land used for a hospital or an education centre or land in a Public Acquisition Overlay to be acquired for a hospital or an education centre.”

This condition is met as the closest residential zoned land is approximately 300 metres west of the application site. The following clauses of the Planning Scheme are relevant in the consideration of this proposal: State Planning Policy Framework

Clause 13.04-1 Noise abatement

Clause 13.04-2 Air quality

Clause 17.02-1 – Industrial land development


PAGE 44

Clause 17.02-4 – Innovation and research

Clause 19.03-5 – Waste and resource recovery

Municipal Strategic Statement

Clause 21.07 Economic Development

Clause 21.07-2 Industrial

Local Planning Policies

Clause 22.05 Industrial Policy Other Provisions

Clause 33.01 - Industrial 1 Zone (IN1Z)

Clause 52.06 – Car parking

Clause 52.07 – Loading and unloading

Clause 52.10 – Uses with adverse amenity potential

Clause 52.45 – Resource recovery

Clause 65 – Decision guidelines

Clause 66 – Referral and notice provisions

Clause 74 - Definitions

Consultation/Communication

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

Referral Comment

City of Greater Bendigo Waste Services Unit

It is recommended that approval for occupation of the former White Hills landfill is not granted for the following reasons:

Any requirement the EPA may have for development of a landfill rehabilitation plan and aftercare management plan can only be determined after the scope of the current hydrogeological assessment, landfill gas risk assessment, landfill cap assessment is completed and the extent of any impact on human health or the environment, if any, has been determined. This is unlikely to be before May 2016.

Any additional work related to rehabilitation of the site may involve a requirement for additional capping work including profiling the site to remove depressions and further compaction. The ability to undertake any additional rehabilitation work would probably require any


PAGE 45

Referral Comment

third party to vacate all or part of the site.

City of Greater Bendigo Building and Property Unit

It is recommended that approval for occupation of the former White Hills landfill is not granted for the following reasons:

If the site conditions in the future were found to be suitable for an alternate use; the City would then need to make a decision about the long term use of the land. As it is known that other parties are also interested in using the site, any lease process would need to adhere to the principles of good governance and transparent decision making; and

The fairest way to do this could be either to hand the land back to DEWLP to manage an expression of interest process, followed by a planning permit then a lease being entered into. Alternatively, the City may wish (in fact may be required) to maintain its current land manager role and facilitate this process.

Environment Protection Authority (EPA)

No objection subject to conditions relating to rehabilitation of the site. The views of the EPA are expanded upon in this Assessment section of this report.

Department of Environment, Land, Water & Planning (DEWLP)

No objection subject to conditions relating to rehabilitation of the site. The views of the Department are expanded upon in the Background - Land Owner & Manager section of this report.

Public Notification VCAT directed that direct notice of the application for review be given to the owners and occupiers of adjoining and nearby land. A total of 39 owners and occupiers were given notice. As a result of the giving of notice, no nearby owner or occupier has sought to be joined as a party to the appeal.

Assessment

Is a temporary use of land appropriate having regard to the State and Local Planning Policy Framework and provisions of the Planning Scheme; and is the application premature as it is unknown whether the site conditions are appropriate for the use.


PAGE 46

Clause 13.03-1 from the State Planning Policy Framework of the Planning Scheme relates to the use of contaminated and potentially contaminated land. The objective of this policy is to “ensure that potentially contaminated land is suitable for its intended future use and development, and that contaminated land is used safely”. The objective is to be met by requiring adequate information on potential contamination and its impacts on the future use of land. Preliminary findings from the testing conducted to date indicated some elevated levels of contaminants in groundwater samples and the presence of landfill gas in some of the boreholes adjacent to the former landfill. The investigation into the cover material indicated it was an un-compacted material of variable depth. The suitability of the site for the use is a key planning consideration. Based on the evidence available to date (Meinhardt report which identified the potential for site contamination and impact on the landfill cap integrity) and preliminary testing results by Coffey Environmental which identified further investigations are needed before the base conditions, extent of risk and required rehabilitation is known. Insufficient evidence exists as to whether the site is suitable for the illegal use being conducted, even on a temporary basis. Given the past inability of the permit applicant to meet mutually agreed timelines for taking action, Council could not be satisfied that even if permit conditions were applied to require the site be vacated in order to be available to carry out any remediation works that this would occur in a timely manner, if at all. It is also relevant to note that whilst the application has been made on a ‘temporary’ basis, the key referral agency, being the EPA, in their response to the permit application advised that:

“EPA does not agree with Council issuing ‘temporary’ permits, due to the difficulty of having them revoked if agreements are not abided by. For this reason we have omitted the ‘temporary’ from the referral response”.

EPA has consented to the grant of a permit; however did so having reference to the City’s ongoing obligations as the operator of the former landfill stating:

“Land ownership has not been considered by EPA when assessing this permit. It is up to Council and Hopley to determine appropriate leases and the like” “Council must ensure that all works associated with the former White Hills Landfill site are carried out in accordance with Best Practice Environmental Management, Siting, Design, Operation, and Rehabilitation of Landfills (EPA Publication 788.2 2014) or as amended”

(Note: It is outside the legislative responsibility of the EPA to comment on land tenure.) Planning officers are satisfied that there are a range of other planning policies and provisions that afford support of the use, if not for the unresolved threshold issue of land owner and manager permission to be on the site and the City’s ongoing rehabilitation obligations. The other relevant planning provisions are listed and responded to in turn:


PAGE 47

Clause 13.04-1 Noise abatement; and Clause 13.04-2 Air quality would be met by the implementation of an Environmental Management Plan and enforcement of EPA conditions. Clause 17.02-1 – Industrial land development has an objective to “ensure availability of land for industry” is met as the site is within an established industrial area with reasonable separation from sensitive land uses. The site has good access to roads and other necessary infrastructure, including the water right from Coliban Water (from which a pipeline fills the dam) which is so important to the ongoing operation of the use on the site permitted for the use. Clause 19.03-5 – Waste and resource recovery has an objective to “avoid, minimise and generate less waste to reduce damage to the environment caused by waste, pollution, land degradation and unsustainable waste practices”. Clearly the use by Hopley implements this policy as the nature of the business is to maximising the amount of resources recovered from waste material that can be reused in other ways. The Local section of the Planning Scheme at Clause 21.07 Economic Development (sub clause 21.07-2 Industrial) has objectives to

To encourage diversification of the municipality’s industrial base.

To promote the expansion of existing industries.

To attract new industries to appropriate locations, particularly in East Bendigo, including the Wellsford Estate and the Goornong Industrial Estate.

To encourage development with good design principles, environmental standards and amenity.

The City’s Industrial Policy at Clause 22.05 includes a key policy objective relevant to this application such as this as being to “facilitate and promote innovation and leadership within the various industrial sectors located in the municipality”. There is no dispute that Hopley is an operator who has demonstrated innovation in the processing and recycling of product that may have, in the past, taken up valuable landfill space which is in short supply. Clause 33.01 (Industrial 1 Zone) has a purpose to “provide for manufacturing industry, the storage and distribution of goods and associated uses in a manner which does not affect the safety and amenity of local communities” [author emphasis]. The zone itself its purpose suggests that if the conditions were appropriate for the use, that material recycling is clearly a use that would be supported by the zone purpose. Clause 52.10 relates to Uses with Adverse Amenity Potential. This clause nominates ‘threshold distances’ for various industrial uses, which are potentially offensive to sensitive uses of land such as residences. Some of the distances are set and if not met, the use simply cannot occur and others are ‘variable’ meaning that the actual activities and their intensity are assessed to determine an appropriate separation. In this case, the use of land as a Construction and Demolition materials recycling facility has a ‘variable’ buffer. The use is separated from sensitive uses as follows: North – over 1,000 metres; East – approx. 600 metres; South – approx. 900 metres; West – approx. 300 metres.


PAGE 48

The main potential impacts of the use, (aside from the issue of illegal occupation and the risk to the cap) are dust and noise. As was noted previously, noise could be regulated by permit conditions requiring adherence to EPA standards and material submitted with the application (being an Environmental Management Plan) demonstrated that Hopley has established processes with regard to dust, although access to the dam needs to be regularized. Odour would not be an issue as the site (by way of EPA conditions) does not currently, nor is permitted to store or process putrescible material; accept green waste; or undertake composting. Clause 52.45 – Resource Recovery has a purpose to:

“facilitate the establishment and expansion of a Transfer station and/or Materials recycling facility in appropriate locations with minimal impact on the environment and amenity of the area”.

The purpose regarding having a ‘minimal impact on the environment’ is not met owing to the insufficient evidence of the suitability of the site owing to its former use. In summing up the planning assessment, materials recycling as a use of former landfill sites could be an appropriate use of land depending on the details of the operation, after a site is rehabilitated and deemed to be suitable for an alternate use. In this case, as the site is not yet rehabilitated and deemed suitable for the use, the threshold issue of the suitability of the site for this use of the land means that the application should not be supported on a planning basis. Is there another way to bring the site into conformity with the Planning Scheme? The vacation of the site by Hopley achieves this requirement. Council applied for, and with the consent of Hopley, negotiated an outcome in VCAT mediation. Hopley agreed they were in breach of the Planning Scheme in occupying the site illegally. Hopley agreed to the ceasing the use and vacating the site by May of this year. Despite agreeing to the outcome and the timeframe, Hopley has not complied with the Order. Hopley has recently applied to VCAT to amend the enforcement order to extend the time to vacate the site. One of the City’s key outcomes is for the site to be vacant to allow identified rehabilitation work to be undertaken when all the detailed site investigations are completed. The process of extending the VCAT Enforcement Order is the most appropriate way to facilitate the efficient and orderly removal of stockpiled material on the site, rather than a temporary permit. Whether Council (as the land manager) agrees that the land can be sub-leased to a third party, when the purpose of the City’s lease of the land from the Crown is for rehabilitation? As noted earlier in the report, Council cannot sub-lease the site. Even if it formed a view that the planning merit of the proposal was acceptable, such an approval would be futile as tenure to the land cannot be granted.


PAGE 49

Conclusion

The City leases the land from the Crown for sole purpose of rehabilitation. Council resolved at its 21 August 2013 Ordinary Meeting to not sub-lease the former landfill site to any other third party until a rehabilitation plan for the site was prepared and implemented. The testing of the site and/or preparation of a rehabilitation/aftercare plan remains ongoing with an uncertain end date. The most recent advice from the City’s Waste Services Manager is the site assessment work may not be complete until May 2016. As testing of the site is incomplete, two precautionary principle apply in this case:

Approval of a use (even on a temporary basis) is premature until Council is satisfied the site conditions are appropriate for the use. This overrides the policy support from other parts of the Planning Scheme.

The risk of VCAT issuing a temporary permit, that based on evidence to date, is likely not to be honoured in a timely way without requiring further formal action.

A further issue (which ultimately means approval of the application would be futile) is that the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning would only agree to a sub-let arrangement once the required remediation plan is complete and approved. It is recommended that Council advise the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal that it does not support the temporary use application for the above reasons.

Options

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

RECOMMENDATION

That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolve to: A. Advise VCAT that it does not support the granting of a planning permit for the

following reasons: 1. There is not yet conclusive evidence available that the site is suitable for short or

longer term use. As a result Council is not satisfied the use is appropriate having regard to clause 13.03-1 Use of contaminated and potentially contaminated land’.

2. Approval of the application would be premature and ultimately futile as a rehabilitation plan has not been prepared and implemented and tenure thus cannot be granted to the applicant (as per advise from the Minister responsible for Crown Land and DELWP); and

3. The VCAT enforcement proceedings is an appropriate way to facilitate the orderly and timely removal of all processed and unprocessed materials from CA 432 E (Section E) and these should be finalised.

B. Continue to offer assistance to Hopley Recycling to find a suitable location for his

operation.


PAGE 50

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

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

Presentation and Vibrancy - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 15 July 2015

PAGE 51

3. PRESENTATION AND VIBRANCY

3.1 MUNICIPAL FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN 2012-2015


Author Susannah Milne, Manager Environmental Health & Local Laws Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning & Development Director

Summary/Purpose

The purpose of this report is to:

1. Advise Council that the current Municipal Fire Management Plan (MFMP) is effective to 22 October 2015.

2. Advise Emergency Management Victoria has requested all Local Government Authorities delay the review of the current plans until they release a new template that is to be used.

3. Request that Council extend the effective date of the current MFMP to 30 October 2016, to allow time for the review to be completed in line with the Emergency Management Victoria’s request.

Policy Context

Council Plan 2013-2017 (2015-2016 Update)

Strategy: 3.5 People are supported to learn about and make decisions that enable them to be

safe and the healthiest they can be. 3.5.2 Assist and encourage vulnerable people and their families to prepare a

plan for extreme weather periods and emergencies. Legislative Context

Section 55A Country Fire Authority Act 1958

Emergency Management Act 1986

Emergency Management Act 2013

Emergency Management Manual Part 6A.3

Report

The current Municipal Fire Management Plan 2012-2015 was formally adopted by the Greater Bendigo City Council at its ordinary meeting on 26 September 2012 and has a three year life. The current plan was due to be reviewed this year, however correspondence from Emergency Management Victoria has advised that they are


PAGE 52

formalising a new template for Local Government to utilise. They have requested that Local Government delay the review of their plans in order to utilise the new template. The Municipal Fire Management Planning Committee and the Municipal Emergency Management Planning Committee have been advised of Emergency Management Victoria’s request and have moved to extend the effective date of the existing plan to allow the review process to be conducted once the template is received. Also although the City has been previously advised that the template should be available mid to late June 2015, we are yet to receive it. Both Committees have moved that the current plan be extended to allow for adequate process and consultation with key agencies, local CFA Brigades and the community. Council is advised that it is a requirement of the CFA Act 1958 section 55A (1) that Council must prepare and maintain a Municipal Fire Management Plan. To enable this compliance and ensure an effective document is in place over the forthcoming Fire Danger Period (2015-2016), an extension of time is appropriate. Also, in accordance with the CFA Act 1958 Section 55B the current Municipal Fire Management Plan will be audited in the second half of 2015.

Consultation/Communication

Both the Municipal Fire Management Planning Committee and the Municipal Emergency Management Planning Committee discussed the proposal at their meetings on the 2 June 2015. A motion to approve the recommendation to extend the effective date for the Municipal Fire Management Plan was carried.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Greater Bendigo City Council resolves to: 1. Extend the effective date of the City of Greater Bendigo Municipal Fire Management

to 30 October 2016. 2. Support the review of the existing Municipal Fire Management Plan, when the

approved template is available from Emergency Management Victoria. RESOLUTION Moved Cr Campbell, Seconded Cr Fyffe. That the recommendation be adopted.

CARRIED


PAGE 53

3.2 REVISED NEILBOROUGH COMMUNITY PLAN 2015


Author Lyn Talbot, Corporate and Community Planner Responsible Prue Mansfield, Director Planning and Development Director

Summary/Purpose

To advise Council of the revision of the Neilborough Community Plan that was recently launched in May 2015 at a shared community meal.

Policy Context

Council Plan Reference:

Community Plans provide an important form of engagement in the various small town and neighbourhood communities, and they can facilitate a strong basis for connection and communication between the City of Greater Bendigo and the communities. Review and renewal of the Small Town Community Plans is an ongoing priority of Council. It has been listed as a priority action in the 2013-2017 Council Plan. In addition, Council has made a strong commitment in the Council Plan to undertaking diverse community engagement as a means of achieving mutual understanding about ongoing priorities and future developments, and implementing strategies that support people to feel connected to their communities. Regular review of a community plan provides an important opportunity to bring community members together to reflect on what has been achieved, what is yet to be done, and to develop new goals and actions that reflect changing community profile and priorities. In a number of communities, including Neilborough, revising the Community Plan has brought some new people and additional enthusiasm for getting involved in community projects and activities.

Greater Bendigo 2036:

Council made a strong commitment in 2005 to support the development of community plans, including the Greater Bendigo +25 Community Plan which set a long-term agenda for the whole municipality. The Greater Bendigo 2036 community plan was completed in 2011, and it represents an updated long-term (25 year) vision by the community. One recommendation in that plan was to ensure that local community plans continue to have significance and resonance in various Council discussion forums. Greater Bendigo 2036 identifies a community priority to "Plan strategically to foster community inclusiveness" and “Provide genuine opportunities for public input into locality plans before they are finalised, to overcome the perception of tokenism”.


PAGE 54

The 2036 Community Plan is identified in the Council Plan Integrated Planning Framework as a major document providing input into yearly planning processes.


Following the development of the over-arching Greater Bendigo +25 Community Plan in 2005 a process was commenced to support small towns to develop their own community plan with a shorter time-frame. The City of Greater Bendigo has continued to endorse the provision of resources for plan preparation, revision and implementation. It is a normal cycle that plans need review and renewal periodically, perhaps when some of the goals have been achieved, or others are no longer priorities for the community. This review process provides an opportunity to look back and celebrate what has been achieved, and to look forward to what can be achieved together in the future. Many small towns are challenged by the need to maintain their local services and facilities and ensure the viability of their local groups, organisations and traditional community activities. In the past, each new or revised community plan has been endorsed by Council to be used as a primary document of advice regarding identified community priorities, and with regards potential funding opportunities.

Report

The Neilborough and Progress Association wanted to provide opportunities to bring local groups and community members together and increase the number of people active in the organisation. They felt that undertaking a revision of their Community Plan was a means of achieving this aim. The community planning review processes involved a range of community consultation opportunities including a survey and social events designed to engage community members.

The goals areas identified by the community are:

1. Community Connection and Welcome. The goals relate to activities that bring the community together for social purposes and ensuring there is improved access to telecommunications, health and other support services.

2. Community Sustainability. The goal describes a range of actions designed to ensure that Neilborough has equitable access to transport learning and health needs to enable good quality of life in this rural community and that local assets and facilities are well-maintained.

3. Environment. The goal describes actions designed to value and protect the unique environmental and historical features and increase their accessibility for relevant uses, including cycling and walking.

In the plan, each of these goal areas has a number of practical actions that have been put forward by the community.


PAGE 55

The plan was officially launched by Ms Isabelle Gaye, a long-term community and Progress Association member who spoke of the many assets about living in Neilborough. Cr James Williams emphasised the value of community planning and of working with rural communities to ensure a bright future for the entire municipality.

Conclusion

Members of the Neilborough Progress Association have worked together to deliver a renewed Community Plan that will provide a framework for local action and contribute in a strategic manner to informed exchange of advice and information between the community and the City of Greater Bendigo, and other interested organisations. The community goals are set to be achieved by a number of specifically documented local actions. Specific activities are being undertaken to make relevant City of Greater Bendigo staff members aware of the community aspirations and to discuss these in more detail where necessary. As with all Small Town and Neighbourhood community plans, the goals outlined in these plans should be considered when new Council Plan actions and other strategic planning processes are being undertaken.

Resource Implications

The City of Greater Bendigo has continued support for the development of new community plans in the small towns and neighbourhoods, and the review of these plans when appropriate. During the process of development and review the communities are provided with a range of in-kind assistance, such as document development, printing and mailing. These costs are covered in the annual Community Planning budget. Resource implications for the implementation phase of the Community Plans are supported by staff from the Community Wellbeing Directorate, who assist with grants funding applications and support a range of other community development activities and celebrations.

Attachments

1. The revised Neilborough Community Plan.


PAGE 56

RECOMMENDATION

That Greater Bendigo City Council:

a. Acknowledge the review, finalisation and launch of the Neilborough Community Plan 2015.

b. Endorse the principle that City of Greater Bendigo involvement in the Neilborough area and community be guided by the relevant Community Plan.

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

CARRIED

Productivity / Sustainability - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 15 July 2015

PAGE 57

4. PRODUCTIVITY

Nil.

5. SUSTAINABILITY

Nil.

Leadership and Good Governance - Reports Ordinary Meeting - 15 July 2015

PAGE 58

6. LEADERSHIP AND GOOD GOVERNANCE

6.1 RECORD OF ASSEMBLIES


Author Peter Davies, Manager Executive Services Responsible Craig Niemann, Chief Executive Officer Officer

Summary/Purpose

The purpose of this report is to provide the record of any assembly of Councillors, which has been held since the last Council Meeting, so that it can be recorded in the Minutes of the formal Council Meeting.

Policy Context

Strong leadership to meet future needs and challenges; effective community engagement.


The Local Government Act provides a definition of an assembly of Councillors where conflicts of interest must be disclosed. A meeting will be an assembly of Councillors if it considers matters that are likely to be the subject of a Council decision, or, the exercise of a Council delegation and the meeting is: 1. A planned or scheduled meeting that includes at least half the Councillors (5) and a

member of Council staff; or 2. an advisory committee of the Council where one or more Councillors are present. The requirement for reporting provides increased transparency and the opportunity for Councillors to check the record, particularly the declarations of conflict of interest.


PAGE 59

Report

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type

Governance Meeting

Meeting Date 9 June 2015

Matters discussed 1. Budget discussion - Rates/Surplus 2. Communication needs 3. Electronic petitions 4. Communication about Section 89 matters 5. Office of the Mayor and Councillors 6. CEO Performance Plan 7. Outstanding actions from Council resolutions 8. Budgeting for exhibitions, theatrical performances, events etc 9. Community Satisfaction Survey 10. Catering 11. Memberships 12. Citizens' Jury 13. Occupancy Certificate

Attendees/Apologies

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

Staff/ Community Representatives

Mr Craig Niemann Mr Peter Davies Ms Marg Allan Mr Travis Harling Mr Michael Smyth Mrs Alison Campbell

Conflict of Interest disclosures

Matter No.

Councillor/officer making disclosure Councillor/officer left meeting

Nil


PAGE 60

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type

Councillors' Forum


Matters discussed 1. Professional culling of kangaroos 2. Premier's visit 3. Future of Local Government Conference 4. Hargreaves Mall anti-social behaviour 5. Quality Living Options Bendigo 6. Planning matters and draft Ordinary Agenda review 7. Loddon Mallee Waste and Resource Recovery Group 8. Meeting with Coliban Water 9. Discovery building 10. 38th Battalion King's Colours 11. Potential conflict of interest 12. Home and Community Care efficiencies report 13. Bendigo Creek Levee Investigation 14. Bendigo Stadium Limited Constitution and Council representation

Attendees/Apologies

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


Mr Craig Niemann Ms Marg Allan Ms Prue Mansfield Mr Darren Fuzzard Ms Pauline Gordon Mr Stan Liacos Mr Peter Davies Mrs Alison Campbell


Matter No.


Nil


PAGE 61

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type

Consultation meeting


Matters discussed Planning application DU/105/2015 134 Spring Gully Road, SPRING GULLY 3550 Use of land as a food and drink premises (cafe), buildings and works (extension at rear and retaining wall), liquor licence and waiver of car parking

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Lisa Ruffell Cr Rod Fyffe Cr Barry Lyons


Kahlia Reid and Leah Morris Applicant Objectors


Matter No.


Nil

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type

Consultation meeting


Matters discussed Planning application DS/237/2015 86 Strickland Street, ASCOT 3551 2 lot subdivision and variation of drainage easement

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Peter Cox


Liz Commadeur Applicant Objectors


Matter No.


Nil


PAGE 62

Meeting Information

Meeting Name/Type

Meeting with Kangaroo Flat Community Enterprise


Matters discussed 1. Support for the 50 metre pool over the 25 metre option 2. $1m difference between the 25m and 50m pool 3. Commitment by Kangaroo Flat Community Enterprise to cover the $1m difference over four (4) years

Attendees/Apologies

Councillors Cr Peter Cox Cr Rod Campbell Cr Elise Chapman Cr Helen Leach Cr Mark Weragoda


Mr Craig Niemann/ Mr Alan Besley Mr Geoff Bowyer Mr Jack Lyons Mr Anthony Radford


Matter No.


Nil

RECOMMENDATION

That Council endorse the record of assemblies of Councillors as outlined in this report.

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

CARRIED


PAGE 63

7. URGENT BUSINESS

Nil.

8. NOTICES OF MOTION

Nil.

9. COUNCILLORS' REPORTS

Cr Leach reported on her attendance at the dance section of the Bendigo Competitions and attendance at a Lioness Fundraiser. Cr Lyons reported on his attendance at a number of service clubs’ changeover dinners; attendance at the celebrations of 100 years of Chinese in Bridge Street; attendance at a dinner meeting on the restaurant tram; NAIDOC flag-raising; attendance at a Bendigo Inventor’s Awards meeting and attendance at the Snooker championships. Cr Ruffell highlighted next week’s Women Showing the Way forum with 170 students attending on Wednesday. Cr Campbell reported on his attendance at rural communities meeting at Heathcote; discussion on proposed closure of Fosterville Mine (if they were to close in the future); attendance at ITLUS Steering Committee meeting; attendance at the opening of Mary Poppins at the Ulumbarra Theatre; flag-raising for NAIDOC Week; attendance at reception for Royal Australian Army Survey Corps; expressed appreciation for Marg Allan for her service at the City of Greater Bendigo. Cr Chapman reported on her attendance at the world record ‘crocheting’ attempt and highlighted a forthcoming suicide prevent event on 3 August. Cr Williams reported on his attendance at the 100 years celebration of Chinese in Bridge Street; attendance at the Murray Darling Association meeting; attendance at the opening of Mary Poppins by the Bendigo Theatre Company; visited KR Castlemaine food processing unit; meeting with John Wagner about the airport; attendance at a meeting of the Huntly Historical Society. Cr Weragoda reported on his attendance at a number of service clubs changeover dinners; attendance at the NAIDOC flag-raising ceremony; attendance at the opening night of Mary Poppins at the Ulumbarra Theatre; visit to Keech Castings; attendance at the Eppalock Ward meeting at Heathcote; expressed appreciation to Marg Allan for her work at the City of Greater Bendigo.


PAGE 64

10. MAYOR'S REPORT

His Worship the Mayor, Cr Peter Cox, tabled a report on his attendance at the following meetings and events: Attended meeting with Bendigo Traders Association

Attended ITLUS Steering Committee Meeting

Attended the Bendigo South Rotary Club Changeover Dinner

Attended Draft Commercial Land and Activity Centre Strategy Submissions Hearing

Attended Gala Dinner to celebrate the 100th Year Anniversary of the Bendigo Chinese in

Bridge Street Bendigo

Hosted Civic Reception to welcome attendees to the 100th Anniversary celebrations of the

Australian Survey Corps

Attended Dinner celebrations for the 100th Anniversary celebrations of the Australian

Survey Corps

Attended the NAIDOC Flag Raising Ceremony at Bendigo Civic Gardens

Met with Bendigo RSL representatives regarding the recent removal of the 38th Battalion

Colours from Bendigo

Chaired Whipstick Ward Meeting at White Hills

Attended Business Community Network 3556 Meeting

Participated in RCV teleconference to discuss the proposed privatisation of the Port of

Melbourne

Attended interview with the La Trobe University for research into Local Government

Attended Rural Community Strategy meeting at Raywood

Attended the Opening Night Performance of Mary Poppins at Ulumbarra Theatre

Presented certificates to students participating in the ANZAC School Project at Bendigo

South East College

Attended Bendigo Northern District Community Enterprise Grants presentations

Attended Empowering Eaglehawk meeting

Participated in numerous radio, newspaper and television media interviews

Met with many residents regarding a wide range of issues.

Thank you to those Councillors who represented the Mayor at events I could not attend.


PAGE 65

11. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT

The Chief Executive Officer, Mr Craig Niemann, tabled a report on his attendance at the following meetings and events: Guest speaker at IPAA Public Sector Week - Local Government Careers Event

Attended a Steering Committee Meeting of ITLUS

Inspected the Axedale to Heathcote O'Keefe Rail Trail

Attended the launch of the Regional Jobs and Infrastructure Fund at Castlemaine

The Chief Executive Officer highlighted the service of Marg Allan over many years at the City of Greater Bendigo and wished her well for the future.

12. CONFIDENTIAL (SECTION 89) REPORTS

Nil.

There being no further business, the meeting closed at 7:45 pm.

Confirmed: 5 August, 2015 Chairman

ordinary meeting of council - city of greater bendigo · prayer 5 present 5 apologies 5 suspension...

Documents