to be the city of choice to live, work and raise a family. · councillor damien rosario councillor...

Council MeetingTuesday 17 June 2014

Notice and Agenda of Meetingto be held in the Council Chamber,

Magid Drive, Narre Warren

Commencing at 6.30 p.m.

Chairperson: Mayor, Cr Geoff Ablett

Members: Deputy Mayor Cr Amanda StapledonCouncillor Sam AzizCouncillor Louise BerkelmansCouncillor Rosalie Crestani Councillor Rafal Kaplon Councillor Mick Morland Councillor Damien Rosario Councillor Gary Rowe Councillor Susan Serey Councillor Wayne Smith, JP

Chief Executive Officer: Mike Tyler

Vision for the future

To be the city of choice to live, work and raise a family.

ORDER OF BUSINESS1. Reading of the Prayer and Faith Message

2. Statement of Acknowledgement

3. Apologies

Cr KaplonCr Smith

4. Confirmation of Minutes of: Council Meeting held on 3 June 2014

5. Declaration by Councillors of any Conflict of Interest or Personal Interests pursuant to Sections 79 and 79B of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) in any items on the Notice Paper. (Note that Section 79(2)(a)(i) of the Act requires Councillors to disclose the nature of a Conflict of Interest or a Personal Interest immediately before the relevant consideration or discussion). Section 79B also requires that the Councillor declaring a Personal Interest must seek consent from Council to be exempt from voting on the item.

6. Officers’ Reports – Initial Consideration Services for Casey’s Community

Planning for Casey’s Community

Building and Managing Casey’s Assets

Achieving Best Practice in Governance at Casey

7. Public Question Time

8. Officers’ Reports – Deferred for Consideration

9. Consideration of Reports of Committees Assembly of Councillors

General Purposes Committee Meeting held on 10 June 2014

10. Petitions and Joint Letters

11. Notices of Motion

12. Reports by Council Delegates

13. Urgent Business

14. Closed Council

I N D E X T O S E R V I C E S F O R C A S E Y ’ S C O M M U N I T Y R E P O R T1 7 J u n e 2 0 1 4

SECTION ITEM PAGE FILE WARD(if applicable)

SUBJECT

Community Development

General 1 1 Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation Plan 2014-2018 and 2014-2015 Draft Budget

Community Strengthening

2 5 The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts User Representative Group Minutes

Sport and Leisure

3 7 Casey Fields Steering Committee

I N D E X T O P L A N N I N G F O R C A S E Y ’ S C O M M U N I T Y R E P O R T1 7 J u n e 2 0 1 4


SUBJECT

Infrastructure Services

Transport 1 1 Springfield Traffic Safety Concerns at Westfield Fountain Gate

Planning and Development Services

Strategic Development

2 3 Amendment C165 to the Casey Planning Scheme - Shared Accommodation Policy & Rooming Houses Strategy

3 8 Mayfield Amendment to the Cranbourne East Development Plan

4 11 Mayfield/

Balla Balla

Cranbourne West Precinct Structure Plan Review

5 14 Plan Melbourne Update

I N D E X T O B U I L D I N G A N D M A N A G I N G C A S E Y ’ S A S S E T S

1 7 J u n e 2 0 1 4


SUBJECT

Infrastructure Services

Engineering & Asset Management

1 1 Balla Balla Oroya Grove, Clyde

2 8 Shared Cost Fencing Policy

3 12 Edrington Special Charge Scheme – Market Lane, Narre Warren South

Transport 4 22 Isolated Local Traffic Management Treatment Sites

5 31 Four Oaks Local Traffic Management Scheme –Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard, Endeavour Hills

6 38 Springfield Local Traffic Management Scheme –Narre Warren South Area Wide

7 47 River Gum Traffic Concerns – Hinrichsen Drive, Hallam

Planning and Development Services

Sports & Leisure 8 52 River Gum Play and Open Space Amenities in Doveton

I N D E X T O A C H I E V I N G B E S T P R A C T I C E I N G O V E R N A N C EA T C A S E Y R E P O R T

1 7 J u n e 2 0 1 4


SUBJECT

Corporate Services

Governance 1 1 Advisory Committee Policy

I N D E X T O N O T I C E S O F M O T I O N1 7 J u n e 2 0 1 4

COUNCILLOR NO. PAGE WARD(if applicable)

SUBJECT

Notices of Motion

Crestani 2838 1 Angel Light Link Presentation to GP Committee

Ablett 2839 1 Balla Balla Heritage Park, Selandra Rise

SERVICES FOR CASEY’S

COMMUNITY

Services for Casey’s Community17 June 2014

ITEM 1CASEY-CARDINIA LIBRARY CORPORATION PLAN 2014-2018 AND 2014-2015DRAFT BUDGET

Sophia Petrov Council Plan Reference: 1.1

Purpose of Report: To consider the Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation Library Plan for 2014-2018 and its 2014-2015 Draft Budget.

Background

The City of Casey is a member of the Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation (CCLC) and has four representatives on the Board, Crs Wayne Smith and Susan Serey (Cr Damien Rosario, alternate) plus two Council officers.

The CCLC operates five libraries in the City of Casey (Endeavour Hills, Doveton, Narre Warren, Hampton Park and Cranbourne), and two in the Shire of Cardinia (Pakenham and Emerald), as well as a Mobile Library Service visiting areas of the Shire of Cardinia.

2014-2015 Budget

The CCLC has forwarded, for Council’s consideration, its Library Plan for 2014-2018(Attachment 1) and 2014-2015 Draft Budget (Attachment 2), which have been approved by the Board.

The Draft Budget proposes a Council Contribution to the CCLC for 2014-2015 of $4,863,415.In addition to the contribution to the service delivery, Council also provides the five library buildings and funds the maintenance and operating costs of these buildings. This is included in Council’s 2014-15 Draft Budget.

The average municipal contribution per capita (Casey) for the draft budget is $17.68,compared to last financial year’s figure of $17.98. The latest available Victorian state-wide average municipal per capita expenditure for 2012-2013 was $32.12.

Core expenditure on library materials will be $1,400,500.

The CCLC provides a service at a lower cost per loan than the State average, and does this utilising lower staffing levels than the State average. As a consequence the average municipal contribution is lower than the State average.

2012-2013 Financial Year(latest data available from DPCD) CCLC State Average

Average hours open per week 53.43 45.83Population served per staff member 35,385 25,986Staff per 10,000 people 2.30 3.34Loans per opening hour 141.92 86.75Loans per member 13.14 14.26Cost per loan $3.08 $5.24Total expenditure per capita $25.10 $40.85Items in collection per capita 1.14 1.98Number of Internet terminals per 10,000 pop. 9.09 10.41Municipal contribution per capita* $19.61 $32.12

* These figures exclude capital expenditure

Council Meeting Page 1


ITEM 1

Library Corporation Library Plan 2014–2018

The CCLC Board determines policy and monitors the performance of the CCLC. The Board is made up of four representatives from the City of Casey and two representatives from the Shire of Cardinia. The Board meets at least four times a year with the position of Chairman and meeting venues rotating between Councils. A Chief Executive Officer is appointed by the Board and is responsible for the financial and administrative decisions of the Board, and for day to day operation of the Library Service.

In his introduction to the Library Plan, Mr Peter Carter, the CEO of the CCLC states:

“This Library Plan establishes the direction for the development and improvement of CCLC’s services for the next four years. It is a major part of the CCLC’s planning framework. It is a requirement under Section 125 of the Local Government Act 1989 and forms the primary planning document for the delivery of library services. The Library Plan includes a Strategic Resource Plan in the form of standard statements describing required financial resources and non–financial resources, including human resources for the next four financial years.

The Plan is reviewed annually and presented to the Board for approval and confirmation, before being provided to the member Councils.

The CCLC is committed to these values in the provision of its services:

Ease of access for all usersEquality of service for allA comprehensive and well balanced collectionWell trained and committed staffCourtesy and helpfulnessA fair and impartial serviceWelcoming and safe facilitiesThe use of appropriate technology to enhance service deliveryA commitment to privacyContinuous improvement in service delivery.

Conclusion

The City of Casey is a member of the Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation. The Draft Library Plan 2014-2018 (Attachment 1) and the 2014-2015 Draft Budget (Attachment 2) require the approval of member Councils.

Recommendation

That Council approves the Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation Draft Library Plan2014-2018 and 2014-2015 Draft Budget.



ITEM 1ATTACHMENT 1

Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation Draft Library Plan 2014-2018


Library Plan 2014-2018 DRAFT

Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation Draft: 23-Apr-2014 Library Plan Authorised by: Peter Carter

CASEY-CARDINIA LIBRARY

CORPORATION DRAFT

Library Plan 2014 - 2018

April 2014


Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation 1 Draft: 23-Apr-2014 Library Plan Authorised by: Peter Carter

Contents Description Page No.

Contents .............................................................................................................................. - 1 - The Vision ................................................................................................................................ 2

The Mission .............................................................................................................................. 2

Statement of Values ................................................................................................................ 2

1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 3

2.0 Key Strategic Direction 2014-18 ................................................................................ 4

Space .................................................................................................................................................4 Community Technology Access .....................................................................................................4 Staff Professional Development ......................................................................................................5 Collections ........................................................................................................................................5 Outreach Services ............................................................................................................................6 Community Events and Programs ..................................................................................................6 Lifelong Learning ..............................................................................................................................7 ‘Tomorrow’s Library’ ........................................................................................................................7

3.0 Performance Statements ........................................................................................... 8

4.0 Snapshot of Library Use by our Community .......................................................... 10

5.0 Local Trends and Issues – Casey and Cardinia ..................................................... 11

6.0 Library Industry Trends and Issues ........................................................................ 12

7.0 Development of Library Buildings .......................................................................... 13

8.0 Our Community ........................................................................................................ 14

9.0 Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation Service Points ............................................. 15

10.0 Context: Policies and Operations ........................................................................... 16

Key CCLC Policies and Plans ........................................................................................................... 16

11.0 Strategic Resource Plan .......................................................................................... 17

11.1 Financial Resources ................................................................................................................ 17 11.2 Notes to the Strategic Resource Plan Financial Report ........................................................... 20 11.3 Non-Financial Resources ........................................................................................................ 22

12.0 References ................................................................................................................ 23

Appendix 1 – Key Public Library Principles ........................................................................ 24

Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation Locked Bag 2400, Cranbourne, 3977

Telephone: 5990 0100 Fax: 5996 2533 www.cclc.vic.gov.au



The Vision

‘To inform, inspire and engage our community.’

The Mission

Imagine: library services that encourage creativity and growth for people of all ages. Explore: a pathway to a worldwide range of knowledge and information. Understand: high quality resources to inform and support life-long learning.

Statement of Values The Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation is committed to these values in the provision of its services:

Ease of access for all users Equality of service for all A comprehensive and well-balanced collection Well trained and committed staff Courtesy and helpfulness A fair and impartial service Welcoming and safe facilities The use of appropriate technology to enhance service delivery A commitment to privacy Continuous improvement in service delivery

The Library Corporation endorses and supports the UNESCO Public Library Manifesto and relevant professional and industry standards and guidelines, eg. “People Places: a guide for public library buildings in NSW” (3rd edition 2012), concerning the provision of and access to library services, and current Australian Library and Information Association statements and policies. The Corporation has adopted these principles as fundamental statements about the service, to be used to inform, as appropriate, library plans, charters and other key policies, statements, documents and processes. (See Appendix 1 Key Public Library Principles).



1.0 Introduction Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation (CCLC) incorporates five libraries within the City of Casey: Cranbourne, Doveton, Endeavour Hills, Hampton Park and Narre Warren, and another three libraries: Emerald and Pakenham and a Mobile Library in Cardinia Shire. CCLC’s role in the community is to encourage creativity, self-discovery and lifelong learning. Since its establishment in 1996, CCLC has expanded with several new libraries and the renovation and expansion of existing buildings to accommodate rapidly increasing usage of the library’s facilities and services. This Library Plan establishes the direction for the development and improvement of CCLC’s services for the next four years. It is a major part of the Corporation’s planning framework. It is a requirement under Section 125 of the Local Government Act 1989 and forms the primary planning document for the delivery of library services. The Library Plan includes a Strategic Resource Plan in the form of Financial Statements describing required financial resources and non-financial resources including human resources for the next four financial years. The Plan is reviewed annually and presented to the Board for approval and confirmation before being provided to the member Councils. This major revision of the Library Plan has incorporated trends and information from a number of highly important studies that are shaping the wider landscape of public library service delivery. The studies include:

The Ministerial Advisory Council on Public Libraries review of Victorian Public Libraries: Tomorrow’s Library The Public Libraries Victoria/State Library of Victoria: Victorian Public Libraries 2030 The CCLC online survey of library users: Re-thinking the Library The CCLC study on future library services: Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation - The Future: 2030 and

Beyond Internet and PC usage in Victorian Public Libraries Technical Report

The Library Plan is reviewed and updated annually based on the results we have achieved and on what our communities tell us they like and dislike. Every financial year we review our planned Key Strategic Activities, and we identify what we will achieve, how we will achieve it and how we will show that we really have achieved it. It is a dynamic Library Plan, regularly reviewed, including the thoughts and ideas from our current members, the broader community, the Corporation’s Board, and library service staff.



2.0 Key Strategic Direction 2014-18

Space

The provision of functional attractive spaces within the library branches to provide increased study, interaction and flexible technology areas.

Key Strategic Activity Short Term

Review individual library layouts and assess collection space requirements with Branch Managers.

Identify required study and additional computer spaces.

Implement new study spaces and move shelving as required.

Provide space and furniture for new specialist public access computer and related software.

Medium Term

Identify the appropriate ratio of collection, subject specialties and activity spaces for each branch and make changes to meet the identified balance.

Implement and enhance additional study, general use and technology spaces.

Indicators Increased public satisfaction with space allocations within branches, especially study and technology spaces.

Community Technology Access

Provide increased community access to specialist high quality computer technology, and specialist staff support for this equipment, service and software.


Identify specific equipment and software to be provided.

Identify branch locations for various computer equipment and software –investigate options for mobile library.

Source computer equipment and software and install as required.

Survey users to develop equipment and software support routines for staff and public.

Develop budget and capital replacement requirements.

Medium Term

Introduce additional specialist equipment, computers and software at library branches.

Develop specialist technology options for use in library branches.

Indicators Increased numbers of computers/items available for use.

Increased bookings and/or use data for technology items.

Customer satisfaction with equipment provided and support from staff.



Staff Professional Development

Implement a program of structured staff training and instruction in technical and internet services to support library users.


Analyse results of skills audit to identify gaps and/or training requirements for IT and Internet support to the public.

Expand training to more staff beyond the initial team.

Medium Term Review and introduce additional specific technical and internet service training needs as required; identify

training providers both internal and external and implement program.

Provide well trained and competent staff capable of assisting library users with internet and technology support, for example iPads, smart phones, digital cameras and tablets.

Prepare staff for participation in the National Year of Digital Literacy 2016

Indicators Staff trained and demonstrating required competencies.

Improved customer satisfaction levels with staff assistance and support. Collections

Undertake a staged re-allocation of the library materials budget, balancing between traditional and new e-resources, and improving downloadable and remote services to match local community needs.


Review current traditional material expenditure and establish new funding allocation tables for library materials and e-resources over the next four years for inclusion in the Annual Budget and Strategic Resource Plan.

Medium Term

Improve collections by developing e-resources, while maintaining an appropriate range of traditional and appropriate popular materials.

Indicators

Customer satisfaction with collection quality and relevance.

Monitor usage of traditional collection items. Increased use of e-resources, software and equipment.



Outreach Services

Develop significantly improved outreach services to targeted sections of the community including: socially isolated or housebound; retirement villages, and nursing homes.


Develop options to re-allocate resources to provide improved outreach services.

Develop scoping plan for a sustainable outreach program by expanding the use of library staff and volunteers.

Medium Term

Identify funding and budget allocations required to support increased outreach programs.

Indicators

Increased service delivery to identified target outreach groups (for example: visits, loans and programs).

Increased targeted user satisfaction with service delivery methods and service quality. Community Events and Programs

Provide additional community events and activities using external grant funding, sponsorships and partnerships as a major funding source, over and above the established range of programs.


Identify initial program and targeted events.

Develop grant application and funding program and begin staging of initial events.

Utilise current internal staff skills and develop further staff skills to support this program.

Medium Term

Develop and maintain partnerships with community, government and local business organisations.

Indicators Major sequence of annual events and programs to encourage and support literacy and library related activities,

using grant funding, partnerships and sponsorships.

Attendance and community satisfaction levels with events held.



Lifelong Learning

Develop the levels of educational assistance, (such as early literacy initiatives, homework help, career support and informal lifelong learning) to members of the community in Casey-Cardinia at all levels of education.


Promote current resources to targeted groups.

Engage community members through enhanced relationships with local service providers.

Medium Term

Assess and develop homework and career support services and programs including e-resources.

Improve study areas and staff assistance in the library branches by reviewing space allocations and support opportunities through staff time, and potential use of external resources.

Indicators Increased use of library facilities and programs by all age groups.

Increased satisfaction levels with study and lifelong learning support services as measured by user satisfaction levels.

‘Tomorrow’s Library’

Participate in the Ministerial Advisory Council ‘Tomorrow’s Library’ review of Victorian Public Libraries and contribute to the debate on the funding and sustainability of Victorian Public Libraries.


Participate in any implementation, planning and development programs as appropriate.

Medium Term

Advocate for implementation of Tomorrow’s Library initiatives by State Government.

Ensure Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation is fully involved in the processes around the development of the Victorian Library concept.

Indicators Improved funding and resourcing for the operations of the Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation leading to

improved sustainability.

Implementation of Victorian Library developments that enhance the provision of library services to the Casey and Cardinia communities.



3.0 Performance Statements The Library Corporation regularly gathers statistics on its services and facilities. These statistics are collated annually and incorporated into the Annual Report, and are also submitted to the State Government through the Annual Survey of Public Libraries. The Library Plan evaluation process reviews actual performance in relation to a range of targets in July each year and also sets new targets for the forthcoming year. The following table shows Key Performance Indicators with actual performance and targets for the next year. The latest available State average figures are supplied by Local Government Victoria and include all public library services in Victoria. The Swift figures include the 16 Victorian public library service members.

*Activity includes loans; information inquiries; programs

Measure Actual 2012/13

State Average 2012/13

Target 2014/15

Visits/Virtual Visits per capita 5.6 7.3 6.2

Visits per opening hour 67.5 48 73 Hours open per week 374.25 249 374.25 Loans per capita 8.15 8.32 8.32 Loans per opening hour 141.92 86.76 150 Loans per item 7.13 4.89 7.6 Loans per member 26.14 18.43 27.0 Program attendance per member 0.55 0.55 0.55

Membership per capita 0.31 0.48 0.33 Activity* per staff member 37,279 31,268 39,000


Swift Average 2012/13

Target 2014/15

Catalogue searches per member CCLC/Swift 3.18 3.15 3.2

Holds as a % of loans CCLC/Swift 11.9% 12.5% 12.5%



CCLC participates annually in a community survey conducted by Nexus Research (an independent company) together with participating Regional Library Corporations across Victoria covering a total population of approx. 1.9 million people aged 14 years+. The survey of users and non-users evaluates satisfaction levels, awareness of services, reasons why non-users currently do not use the service and many other indicators. The table below shows CCLC measures and results from the community survey to measure performance.


Regional* Average 2012/13

Target 2014/15

Overall Satisfaction 8.28 8.42 8.3 Satisfaction rate with ease of location of resources 8.01 8.05 8.0

Satisfaction rate with range/quality of resources 8.1 7.9 8.2

Satisfaction with staff assistance 8.23 8.49 8.3 Satisfaction rate for Information Services 7.91 7.89 7.95

Satisfaction with Internet access at the Library 7.78 7.93 7.95

Satisfaction of Lending Services 8.27 8.22 8.3 Satisfaction of presentation of buildings 8.09 8.99 8.1

*Regional average is all 13 participating libraries in Nexus survey 2012



4.0 Snapshot of Library Use by our Community During the 2012/13 financial year CCLC lent 2,839,601 items from its collection of 386,997 items. This represents a turnover rate of 7.34. These loans are a key business of the Corporation, and the collection represents close to a $10 million investment. The use of the internet and electronic resources has become highly significant (website visits are close to 50% of the number of physical visits for example). The internet bookings are across 92 computers, representing on average 1,719 bookings of each computer. Of equal interest and importance, however, are some other figures:

Nearly 55,000 children and carers attend programs for children at our branches, or received an external visit by staff

Nearly 14,000 pre-school children and their carers come to story time at our branches, with a similar number attending Tinies’ Time for babies and toddlers.

Over 7,500 children come to school holiday programs 10,690 primary and secondary students either visited our branches or had library staff visit them to

learn about the support we can provide to their studies 230 children attended our literacy development program ‘Read Like a Demon’, held in partnership with

the Melbourne Football Club CCLC has run a federally funded literacy program ‘Library has Legs’ in the Cranbourne area since

2006. The program has been identified as a ‘Promising Practice Program’ by the Federal Government A specially targeted version of ‘Library has Legs’ program was implemented in Cardinia Shire over the

last 4 years, supporting particularly vulnerable children and families to improve their literacy skills. In a typical year, the Corporation adds around 60,000 new items to the collection, expending $1.3

million to get new materials of all types and formats to our users There are nearly 90,000 information inquiries from our community There are 163,500 bookings of our public internet computers 951,558 visits are made to our website and catalogue 68,937 visits are made to the various library blogs 159,928 uses of specialised library databases are made – anything from newspaper articles,

genealogy searches on Ancestry, computer learning, audio books 1,656 students use our free homework help tutoring service through our website 786 visits are made by home library volunteers to housebound residents who can’t get to the library

themselves 4,094 people attend our adult programs, ranging from book talks, guest speakers and music programs 46,840 logins are made to our free Wi-Fi routers, allowing the community to access the World Wide

Web from our branches using their laptops, smart phones and tablets. There were 1,315,025 physical visits to the library in 2012-13 which represents an average of 25,289

people visiting the library per week.



5.0 Local Trends and Issues – Casey and Cardinia The Corporation conducted its ‘Rethinking the Library’ project in 2012, which surveyed the local community to identify valued current services and new services they would like to see, or believe the library should include in their service delivery in the future. Important points from the survey results included a desire for:

Changes in the dynamics of library collections and resources both physical print and digital Lifelong learning and the demand for study resources and space Growth and development in the quantity and type of programs offered to all ages including youth Provision of key services to children including the developing of reading and literacy habits Changes and extensions to service points outreach, taking the library and its services to the

community Partnerships between public libraries, educational institutions and community programs and services. Development of easily accessible and sustainable models for the provision of e-Books and other

electronic downloadable material to library users Introduction of specialised technology PCs for music, audio visual and other digital resources.

Trends in the local region have highlighted the increased use of the library branches for access to electronic resources; increased use of the library website, and a measurable decrease in the use of traditional print materials, offset by demand for a wide range of audio formats. How these trends continue in the light of growing personal connectivity in a digital world remain to be seen. Use of library branches for study (especially during term time), casual meetings and community groups has noticeably increased. The ‘social’ use of library facilities may well be the quiet driver for public libraries into the next couple of decades. What we can readily predict is the inexorable increase in the provision of information in digital form. This will in turn impact on the quality of technology and communications required at the library branches. The key to dealing with these issues will be flexibility and connectivity

Creating informed communities through assisting the community to access the maze of information provided from government business and private sources

Providing convenient and comfortable places of learning where residents can learn basic skills to take part in economic and social life

Building social capital by providing a welcoming and inclusive environment for learning and interaction – a sense of pride of place

Overcoming the digital divide, by making technology accessible to the community. Other important issues relating to library use and service provision include:

The continued role and importance of print based materials – what will it be and what will be the impact on the use of space in library buildings?

Literacy and reading issues – implications for the role of the library Cost and access issues for the community, particularly for digital format material – information haves

and have nots Lifelong learning and personal development requirements Aging populations and their related changing leisure needs and opportunities Traditional library role and function merging with other services and roles People trends: longer living populations, disability issues, cultural requirements and special needs

groups Sustainable funding support Buildings that are economically and ecologically sustainable.



6.0 Library Industry Trends and Issues Libraries have remained valued community facilities and services despite changing community demographics and social factors, including technological advances. Libraries need to continue to evolve and adapt to our changing environment and community. The Ministerial Advisory Council (MAC) report ‘Tomorrow’s Library’ forecasts the future of Victorian Public Libraries as a seamless network of public library services that would enable easy access for information, resources and services for all Victorians, either in person or online in a variety of formats, regardless of where they live, work, study or relax. The following are some key considerations identified for inclusion or investigation in the key goals for this Library Plan.

The accelerated move to digitised information and the electronic delivery of that information including downloadable resources

Access to digitised data from home or elsewhere particularly web based 24/7 access to information and resources

The use of information and resources in a variety of audio-visual formats Use of wireless based access for personal data units – combination of smart

phones/notebooks/tablets/laptops – emphasising mobility Improvements in the presentation and readability of digital information The merging/blurring of a range of information sources through digital formats Uncertainty over the future of print based media – or at least changes in the relative balance between

electronic and traditional print formats Time constraints that appear to be impacting the amount of reading (and hence public library loans,

particularly adult loans) The ‘immediate’ demand for information or service access The pervasiveness of ‘social media’ sites and services (Twitter, Facebook and the like) into everyday

life The apparent decline (or at least major change) in the concept and perception of personal privacy The significantly increased use of e-books and associated platforms (although the digital rights

management issues have not been resolved to any satisfactory degree). The costs associated with digital content, particularly for the private individual The use of the Internet and other digital resources to resolve initial information inquiries, particularly

school project inquiries - the Library becomes a secondary source only if the initial searches fail or are not sufficient

Improvements in data communication speeds (including wireless access) and projects such as the National Broadband network.

The economic benefits from public libraries have been clearly identified in a recent study called ‘Dollars, Sense and Public Libraries’ (March 2011), examining the economic return to the community from investment in public libraries. Using rigorous analysis the report has identified a return of $3.56 for every $1 spent on public libraries. The results for this Victorian study are comparable to other similar overseas studies. The study is heartening in terms of quantifying a public return on investment: the challenge is to ensure that the return on investment is maintained in the next decade or two.



7.0 Development of Library Buildings The provision of any library facilities should be focussed on ensuring that:

Buildings are designed to be flexible, with the ability to easily modify spaces in the light of changing service delivery requirements.

Buildings are designed to be attractive and interesting to match changing community tastes, particularly the young. The use of colour and appropriate electronic media is important.

Buildings should be maintained and cleaned to a high standard. Buildings are designed to allow changing technology to be installed with the minimum of building

modifications or alterations. Buildings are accessible, with adequate car-parking and other transport access. Buildings are located in key community centres as identified by the member municipalities. That buildings are co-located with a range of public, cultural and commercial facilities. Buildings are designed to ensure the maximum service delivery benefit for the construction cost per

metre. Buildings are designed to minimise operational costs while meeting the above criteria.



8.0 Our Community CCLC provides public library services in the municipalities of Casey (275,116 pop.) and Cardinia (84,065 pop.) which have a combined population of 359,181 (ABS Estimated Residential Population June 2013). Casey’s area is 409 sq. km, and Cardinia’s is 1,281 sq. km, totalling 1,690 sq. km. Both municipalities have significant rural and semi-rural areas. As one of the fastest growing areas in Victoria, consistent population growth is a feature of our community, with an increase of 3.26% across the region. Casey is Victoria’s most populous municipality with new residential development, particularly in the south, around Cranbourne and Clyde North. The northern part of the City has a particular focus around the regional shopping centre, and there has been significant expansion in the Lyndhurst and Hampton Park areas. Cardinia is also part of the extension of the urban growth boundary into the south-east growth corridor stretching along the Princes Highway to Pakenham. Cardinia’s population is centred along ribbon development on major roads around Pakenham, with another significant concentration in the northern hills district. There are a number of smaller townships in the south and east. There are significant new residential developments in Officer and Pakenham. Some useful information about the member Councils:

The median age is younger than that of Melbourne as a whole, with Casey’s median age at 33 years, Cardinia 34 and Melbourne 36 years.

The number of residents aged between 0 and 17 is significantly higher than the average of Greater Melbourne.

Casey and Cardinia both have lower than the Greater Melbourne number of older residents (ie. 60 years+); both municipalities have experienced minor growth in this segment.

The number of couples-with-children households is higher than average; thus a key segment for Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation is young families.

Over three quarters of households have an internet connection; and more households now have Broadband than Dial-up.

Vehicle ownership is higher than the Melbourne average, with more than 90 percent of households across both councils owning at least one vehicle.

Education: more residents than the Melbourne average hold vocational or no qualifications. Industry: manufacturing, retail trade and construction are significant in both council areas and the

agricultural division is higher than average. More than a quarter of City of Casey residents speak a language other than English at home.

The SEIFA index measures the relative socio-economic disadvantage based on attributes from the Census that reflect disadvantage including low income, low educational attainments, high unemployment and jobs in relatively unskilled occupations. City of Casey is more disadvantaged with an index of 1006.5, than Melbourne with an average of 1022.9. However, there are pockets in Casey where the community is more disadvantaged than the average Casey resident including those in Doveton (845.9), Cranbourne (943.1), Hampton Park (955.00), Cranbourne West (967.5) and Hallam (978.1). Compared to the Melbourne SEIFA average of 1022.9, Cardinia overall is less disadvantaged with 1024, however there are pockets that are more disadvantaged, including Gembrook(1017.5), Pakenham (999.5), Koo Wee Rup (967.3) and Lang Lang (960.4). More detailed information relating to the demographic profile and forecasts is available from both municipalities.



9.0 Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation Service Points

Cardinia Mobile Library Stops at the following sites:

Bunyip, Cockatoo, Garfield, Gembrook, Koo Wee Rup, Lang

Lang, Maryknoll, Tynong and Upper Beaconsfield.



10.0 Context: Policies and Operations The Corporation’s Board determines policy and monitors the performance of the Corporation. The Board is made up of four representatives from the City of Casey and two representatives from Cardinia Shire. The Board meets at least four times a year with the position of Chairman and meeting venues rotating between the Councils. A Chief Executive Officer is appointed by the Board and is responsible for the financial and administrative decisions of the Board, and for day-to-day operation of the Library Service. The Corporation’s Vision and Mission Statement, Statement of Values and Key Public Library Principles, were originally developed from our community surveys and what our communities have told us through their comments and suggestions over time. We believe they continue to reflect the expectations and needs of our communities and members. The Corporation is committed to continuously improving the quality and range of the services and facilities it provides. It does this by undertaking regular studies and reviews of its services and delivery methods, as well as annual surveys of library users and non-library users. The Corporation also regularly compares its performance with other Victorian Library services. This Library Plan should also be read in conjunction with the key documents below that the Corporation reviews regularly and which form its major policy and strategy documents. The Corporation refers to a number of external bodies when preparing its strategies and key documents including: Department of Planning and Development (DPCD), Ministerial Advisory Council (MAC) on Public Libraries; the State-wide Public Library Development Projects and the SWIFT Consortium.

Key CCLC Policies and Plans

Lending Services Manual (adopted 23/11/2011) Information Services Strategy (adopted 28/8/2013) Community Engagement Strategy (adopted 10/12/2008) LOTE (Languages other than English) Strategy (draft in process 2014) Home Library Services Provision (presented to the Board in February 2009) Youth Services Plan (adopted 27/06/2012) Regional Library Agreement (endorsed 24/10/2012) Library Budget/ Strategic Resource Plan (included in the current Library Plan) Procurement Policy (draft 4/2014) Staff Development and Training Plan (adopted 27/06/2013) Management Procedure Manual (Ongoing) Facilities Development Plan (draft 4/2014) Information Communications Technology Plan (adopted 28/8/2013) Collection Development and Content Policy (draft 4/2014) Purchasing Plan (adopted 26/06/2013) Promotion Action Plan (adopted 22/2/2012) Nexus Regional Libraries Community Survey (2013)

Performance Outcomes Statements are reported in:

Annual Report/Annual Financial Report Annual Statistical Performance



11.0 Strategic Resource Plan

11.1 Financial Resources The Corporation is funded by the two member Councils and the State Government. It is funded according to the Funding Formula in the CCLC Agreement. State Government funding is currently negotiated every four years with the Corporation and is calculated primarily on a per capita basis. The State Government specifies a number of conditions of subsidy, including annual reporting requirements, free core library services and reciprocal membership of all Victorian public libraries.

Budgeted Comprehensive Income Statement For the Years ending June 2015-2018

Note Budget 2014-15

Forecast Est

2015-16

Forecast Est

2016-17

Forecast Est

2017-18 Revenue Council Contributions 1 6,572,850 6,770,040 6,973,145 7,182,345 LASF Funding State Government Grants 2 2,274,610 2,342,855 2,413,145 2,485,555 CFC Grant Funding 136,050 Interest on Investments 135,000 139,050 143,225 147,525 Other income 231,670 238,630 245,800 253,180 Total Income 9,350,180 9,490,575 9,775,315 10,068,605

Expenditure Employee Costs 3 6,604,285 6,755,990 6,958,680 7,167,460 CFC Expenditure 15,890 IT & Communications 4 600,750 618,775 637,355 656,490 Library Materials 5 236,460 243,555 250,875 258,410 Promotions & Marketing 72,000 74,160 76,390 78,685 Administration 679,755 695,025 715,940 737,480 Depreciation 1,357,588 1,355,189 1,391,883 1,429,679 Total Expenditure 9,566,728 9,742,694 10,031,123 10,328,204 Net Gain(loss) disposal of plant & Equipment -8,500 -8,600 -8,500 -8,700

Net result for the reporting period -225,048 -260,719 -264,308 -268,299

Budgeted Statement of Capital Works For the Years ending June 2014-2018

Note Budget 2014-15

Forecast Est

2015-16

Forecast Est

2016-17

Forecast Est

2017-18 Capital Expenditure Library Material 5 1,129,040 1,162,915 1,197,825 1,233,780 Motor Vehicles 65,000 66,950 68,960 71,030 Community Tech Access 5 20,000 20,600 21,220 21,860 Furniture & Equipment 215,000 176,050 177,135 178,255 1,429,040 1,426,515 1,465,140 1,504,925



Budgeted Balance Sheet As at June 2014-2018

Note Budget 2014-15

Forecast Est

2015-16

Forecast Est

2016-17

Forecast Est

2017-18 ASSETS $ $ $ $ Current Assets Cash Asset 106,130 111,130 96,130 106,130 Financial Assets 2,443,642 2,229,937 1,921,192 1,662,877 Receivables 15,000 25,000 25,000 15,000 2,564,772 2,366,067 2,042,322 1,784,007 Non-Current Assets Fixed Assets 5,056,898 5,601,322 5,625,764 5,650,785 TOTAL ASSETS 7,621,670 7,967,389 7,668,086 7,434,792 LIABILITIES Current Liabilities Payables 435,000 460,000 415,000 435,000 Employee Entitlements 1,310,000 1,370,000 1,380,000 1,390,000 Superannuation 1,745,000 1,830,000 1,795,000 1,825,000 Non-Current Liabilities Employee Entitlements 20,000 20,000 20,000 25,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 25,000 TOTAL LIABILITIES 1,765,000 1,850,000 1,815,000 1,850,000 NET ASSETS 5,856,670 6,117,389 5,853,086 5,584,792 EQUITY Members Contribution on Formation 2,051,239 2,051,239 2,051,240 2,051,241 Accumulated Surplus 3,805,431 4,066,150 3,801,846 3,533,551 TOTAL EQUITY 5,856,670 6,117,389 5,853,086 5,584,792



Budgeted Statement of Cash Flow Year ended June 30, 2014 - 2018

Note Budget 2014-15

Forecast Est

2015-16

Forecast Est

2016-17

Forecast Est

2017-18 $ $ $ $ Cash Flow from Operating Activities Income from: Council Contributions 6,572,850 6,770,040 6,973,150 7,182,350 LASF Contribution Government Grants 2,410,660 2,342,855 2,413,145 2,485,555 Interest Income 134,000 129,050 143,225 157,525 Overdue Fines 114,800 118,245 121,795 125,450 Other Income 116,870 120,385 124,005 127,730 9,349,180 9,480,575 9,775,320 10,078,610 Payments for: Employee Costs 6,567,494 6,690,990 6,968,680 7,147,460 Library Materials 236,460 243,555 250,875 258,410 Computer Services 600,750 618,775 637,355 656,490 Other Costs 712,644 749,185 817,330 801,165 8,117,348 8,302,505 8,674,240 8,863,525 Net Cash Inflow from Operating Activities 1,231,832 1,178,070 1,101,080 1,215,085 Cash Flow from Investing Activities Payments for: Proceeds for sale of Plant & Equipment 38,000 39,140 40,315 41,525

Payment for Books, Furniture, Plant & Equipment -

1,429,040 -

1,425,915 -1,465,140 -1,504,925

Net Cash (Outflow) from Investing Activities -

1,391,040 -

1,386,775 -1,424,825 -1,463,400 Net Increase/Decrease in Cash -159,208 -208,705 -323,745 -248,315 Cash at the beginning of the year 2,708,980 2,549,772 2,341,067 2,017,322 Cash Held at End of Year 2,549,772 2,341,067 2,017,322 1,769,007



11.2 Notes to the Strategic Resource Plan Financial Report

1 Council Contributions Contributions are calculated based on the funding formula in the Library Agreement. The Population figures are based on the ABS estimates as at June 2013 (ABS figures released April 3, 2014)

Budget Est

2014-15

Forecast Est

2015-16

Forecast Est

2016-17

Forecast Est

2016-18 Population 359,181 371,752 384,764 398,230 Councils Contribution 6,572,850 6,770,040 6,973,145 7,182,345 Avg Contribution per capita 18.30 18.21 18.12 18.04

2 State Government Grants State Government funding is primarily based on population. The State Government reviews its funding agreement with Council and Regional Libraries every four years. The current agreement expires June 2014.

Budget Est

2014-15

Forecast Est

2015-16

Forecast Est

2016-17

Forecast Est

2016-18 State Funding 2,274,610 2,342,855 2,413,145 2,485,555 Contribution per capita 6.33 6.30 6.27 6.24

3 Employee Costs Employee costs include salaries and wages, overtime, travel cost, staff training and development, and on-costs. Increases allow for banding adjustments and scheduled EBA increases.

Budget Est

2014-15

Forecast Est

2015-16

Forecast Est

2016-17

Forecast Est

2016-18 Employee costs 6,604,285 6,755,990 6,958,680 7,167,460 % of total expenditure 68.5% 68.8% 68.9% 68.9% Expenditure per capita 18.39 18.17 18.09 18.00 Loans 2,988,385 3,048,153 3,109,116 3,171,298 Loans per capita 8.32 8.20 8.08 7.96 Loans per EFTstaff 37,192 37,725 38,384 38,912 Total Staffing EFT 80.35 80.80 81.00 81.50



4 IT and Communications

The Corporation is a member of the Swift Library Consortium which allows the Corporation access to a sophisticated ILMS computer system at a reduced cost while sharing the development and implementation costs of new technology. The Corporation constantly monitors use of its broadband technology to ensure high speed communications are delivered to the branches. All PC’s and related equipment for staff and the public are maintained and replaced regularly to guarantee a high standard of service provided to the community.

Budget Est

2014-15

Forecast Est

2015-16

Forecast Est

2016-17

Forecast Est

2016-18 Telecommunications 32,250 33,220 34,220 35,250 Data communications 185,000 190,550 196,270 202,160 ILMS 195,000 200,850 206,880 213,090 Computer software and support 178,500 183,855 189,375 195,060 Total IT and Communications 590,750 608,475 626,745 645,560 % of total expenditure 6.1% 6.2% 6.2% 6.2% Expenditure per capita 1.64 1.64 1.63 1.62

5 Library Resources and Community Technology access The Corporation is redefining its collection as it balances demand for traditional library materials, electronic resources, data bases and downloadable services with an increasing demand for high quality computer technology including specialist software. The Corporation over the next four years will re-deploy some expenditure from traditional library materials to enable the provision of specific software and technology including the introduction of tablets, e-book readers and iMac computers.

Budget Est

2014-15

Forecast Est

2015-16

Forecast Est

2016-17

Forecast Est

2016-18 Library Resources - Materials 1,365,500 1,406,510 1,448,750 1,492,255 Community Technology Access 35,000 36,050 37,135 38,255 Total Library Resources 1,400,500 1,442,560 1,485,885 1,530,510 % of total expenditure 14.5% 14.7% 14.7% 14.7% Expenditure per capita 3.90 3.88 3.86 3.84



11.3 Non-Financial Resources

The previous section includes Human Resource estimates for the next four financial years. Detailed below are the service points provided by the member Councils for the delivery of library services across the region.

The Corporation has a collection of library materials which it administers on behalf of the member Councils. As of end of March 2014, the collection totalled 394,541 items in a range of print and non-print formats for various demographics. Library buildings and the mobile library are owned and maintained by individual Councils.

There are five service points in the City of Casey: Cranbourne Library Doveton Library Endeavour Hills Library Hampton Park Library Narre Warren Library

There are three service points operating in Cardinia Shire: Pakenham Library Emerald Library Cardinia Mobile Library

A Library Headquarters building is located in leased premises at the Cranbourne Complex. An ICT network links all service points in the region and provides a platform for access to electronic resources via the library website. The Corporation also provides public access computers at all branches, as well as public access Wi-Fi network connection.



12.0 References Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation (2012) Re-thinking the Library Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation (2011) The Future: 2030 and Beyond Municipal Advisory Council on Public Libraries Tomorrow’s Library (Part 1, 2012) (Part 2, 2013) State Library of New South Wales (2012) People Places: A guide for Public Library Buildings in New South Wales 3rd Edition. State Library of Victoria, (2011) Dollars, Sense and Public Libraries State Library of Victoria, (2013) Victorian Public Libraries Strategic Framework: 2013 – 2030, Tighe and Associates Pty, Ltd.



Appendix 1 – Key Public Library Principles (from the Regional Library Agreement endorsed 24/10/2012 )

The following statements and principles have been drawn from UNESCO Public Library Manifestoes (1973 and 1995) and from Australian Library and Information Association statements and policies. The Corporation adopts these principles as fundamental statements about the service, to be used to inform, as appropriate corporate plans, tender documentation, users’ charters and other key policies, plans, statements documents and processes.

1. Freedom, prosperity and the development of society and of individuals are fundamental human values. The public library, by providing free access to knowledge, thought, culture and information, enhances the potential for constructive participation in society and the development of democracy.

2. The library service has a role as an independent learning centre, a popular materials library, a

reference library, a children’s door to learning, a community information centre, a community activities centre a formal education support centre and a research centre.

3. The services of the library are provided on the basis of equality of access for all, regardless of age,

race, sex, religion nationality, language or social status.

4. Notwithstanding the commitment to universal access and equity the library service has a particular responsibility to encourage in children an enthusiasm for books, reading and the habit of using libraries and their resources.

5. All age groups must find material relevant to their needs. Collections and services have to include all

types of appropriate media and modern technologies as well as traditional materials. High quality and relevance to local needs and conditions are fundamental. Material must reflect current trends and the evolution of society, as well as the memory of human endeavour and imagination.

6. Collections and services should not be subject to any form of ideological, political or religious

censorship, nor commercial pressures.

7. The library service will strive to provide the highest level of service through well-located and attractive libraries, appropriate and usefully organised collections, equitable and accessible services and policies, skilful, accurate and unbiased responses to all legitimate requests for assistance and efficient and effective management.

8. The library service will be active and positive in its outlook, demonstrating the value of its services

and encouraging their use.

9. The library service will nurture the state, national and international network of libraries and information providers through cooperation and the professional exchange of knowledge and information, and through the training and development of librarians and people working in libraries.

10. Each library user’s privacy will be protected with respect to information sought or received, and

materials consulted or borrowed. Personal details of users will not be released to any party for any purpose without the express permission of the individual/s concerned.


ITEM 1ATTACHMENT 2

Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation 2014-2015 Draft Budget


Budget 2013-2014 DRAFT

Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation Draft: 23-Apr-2014 Budget Authorised by: Peter Carter

CASEY-CARDINIA LIBRARY

CORPORATION DRAFT Budget

2014 - 2015

April 2014

Budget 2014--2015 DRAFT

Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation 1 Draft: 23-Apr-2014 Budget Authorised by: Peter Carter

Budget

Contents Description Page No. The Vision 2 The Mission 2

Statement of Values 2

1.0 Introduction 3 2.0 Budget Financial Statements 2012-13 Budgeted Comprehensive Income Statement 4 Budgeted Statement of Capital Works 4 Budgeted Balance Sheet 5 Budgeted Statement of Cash Flow 6

3.0 Notes to Financial Statements year ended 2015 7 4.0 Member Council Contributions 2014-15 9 5.0 Schedule of Fees and Charges 2014-15 11 6.0 Performance Statements 13 7.0 Statement of Activities and Initiatives 15

Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation Locked Bag 2400, Cranbourne, 3977

Telephone: 5990 0100 Fax: 5996 2533 www.cclc.vic.gov.au

2014-15



The Vision

‘To inform, inspire and engage our community.’

The Mission

Imagine: library services that encourage creativity and growth for people of all ages. Explore: a pathway to a worldwide range of knowledge and information. Understand: high quality resources to inform and support life-long learning.

Statement of Values The Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation is committed to these values in the provision of its services:

Ease of access for all users Equality of service for all A comprehensive and well-balanced collection Well trained and committed staff Courtesy and helpfulness A fair and impartial service Welcoming and safe facilities The use of appropriate technology to enhance service delivery A commitment to privacy Continuous improvement in service delivery

The Library Corporation endorses and supports the UNESCO Public Library Manifesto and relevant professional and industry standards and guidelines, eg. “People Places: a guide for public Library Buildings in NSW” (2nd edition 2005) concerning the provision of and access to library services, and current Australian Library and Information Association statements and policies. The Corporation has adopted these principles as fundamental statements about the service, to be used to inform, as appropriate, library plans, charters and other key policies, statements, documents and processes. (See Appendix 1 Key Public Library Principles.)



1.0 Introduction CCLC provides public library services in the municipalities of Casey and Cardinia, which have a combined estimated population of 359,181. Casey’s share is 275,116 and Cardinia has 84,065. Consistent population growth is a feature of our community, with an increase of 3.6% across the region. Casey is Victoria’s most populous and fastest growing municipality and Cardinia is at the ‘front” of the south-east growth corridor stretching along the Princes Highway to Pakenham.

Casey’s area is 395 sq. km., and Cardinia’s is 1,283 sq. km, totalling 1,678 sq. km. Both municipalities have significant rural and semi-rural areas. Casey’s population previously has been concentrated in the northern half of the municipality, however there is significant residential development now occurring in the southern area of the municipality. Cardinia’s population is centred in the township of Pakenham (with new development in the Officer area) with another significant concentration in the northern hills district. There are a number of smaller townships in the south and east.

The Corporation is funded by the two member municipalities and the State Government. It is funded according to the Funding Formula in the Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation Agreement. State Government funding is negotiated every four years with the Corporation and is calculated primarily on a per capita basis. The State Government specifies a number of conditions of subsidy, including annual reporting requirements, free core library services and reciprocal membership of all Victorian public libraries. The Library Budget sets out in more detail what activities and initiatives will be funded in the next financial year in order to contribute to the key directions in the Library Plan. The following four Financial Statements for the Budget form a special purpose financial report prepared specifically to meet the requirements of the Local Government (Planning and Reporting) Regulations

Cardinia Shire



2.0 Budgeted Financial Statements 2014-15

Budgeted Comprehensive Income Statement For the Years ending June 2014-2015

Note Budget 2013-14

Forecast Actual

Budget 2014-15

Revenue Council Contributions 1 6,366,245 6,366,245 6,572,850 LASF Funding 1,573,231 State Government Grants 2 2,185,623 2,187,386 2,274,610 CFC Grant Funding 136,050 137,250 136,050 Interest on Investments 150,000 130,000 135,000 Other income 232,320 248,580 231,670 Total Income 9,070,238 10,642,692 9,350,180 Expenditure Employee Costs 3 6,190,590 6,120,055 6,604,285 CFC Expenditure 21,850 15,850 15,890 IT & Communications 4 589,350 550,350 600,750 Library Materials 5 228,800 228,800 236,460 Promotions & Marketing 72,000 72,000 72,000 Administration 643,600 640,106 679,755 Depreciation 1,430,615 1,349,563 1,357,588 Total Expenditure 9,176,805 8,976,724 9,566,728 Net Gain(loss) disposal of plant & Equipment -8,500 -8,893 -8,500 Net result for the reporting period -115,067 1,657,075 -225,048

Budgeted Statement of Capital Works For the Years ending June 2014-2015

Note Budget 2013-14

Forecast Actual

Budget 2014-15

Capital Expenditure Library Material 5 1,068,160 1,068,160 1,129,040 Motor Vehicles 65,000 63,500 65,000 Community Tech Access 5 85,000 56,900 20,000 Furniture & Equipment 240,000 190,000 215,000 1,458,160 1,378,560 1,429,040



Budgeted Balance Sheet As at June 2014-2015

Note Budget 2013-14

Forecast Actual

Budget 2014-15

ASSETS $ $ $ Current Assets Cash Asset 61,130 86,130 106,130 Financial Assets 2,235,172 2,622,850 2,443,642 Receivables 25,000 14,000 15,000 2,321,302 2,722,980 2,564,772 Non-Current Assets Fixed Assets 4,682,367 4,581,851 5,056,898 TOTAL ASSETS 7,003,669 7,304,831 7,621,670 LIABILITIES Current Liabilities Payables 455,000 359,000 435,000 Employee Entitlements 1,300,000 1,296,209 1,310,000 Superannuation 1,758,553 3,513,553 1,655,209 1,745,000 Non-Current Liabilities Employee Entitlements 20,000 18,000 20,000 20,000 18,000 20,000 TOTAL LIABILITIES 3,533,553 1,673,209 1,765,000 NET ASSETS 3,470,116 5,631,622 5,856,670

EQUITY Members Contribution on Formation 2,051,239 2,051,239 2,051,239 Accumulated Surplus 1,418,877 3,580,383 3,805,431 TOTAL EQUITY 3,470,116 5,631,622 5,856,670



Budgeted Statement of Cash Flow Year ended June 30, 2014 - 2015

Note Budget 2013-14

Forecast Actual

Budget 2014-15

$ $ $ Cash Flow from Operating Activities Income from: Council Contributions 6,366,245 6,280,445 6,572,850 LASF Contribution 1,659,031 Government Grants 2,321,673 2,324,636 2,410,660 Interest Income 150,000 126,287 134,000 Overdue Fines 127,300 115,400 114,800 Other Income 105,020 132,916 116,870 9,070,238 10,638,715 9,349,180 Payments for: Employee Costs 6,256,565 7,696,059 6,567,494 Library Materials 228,800 228,800 236,460 Computer Services 589,350 550,350 600,750 Other Costs 732,450 740,571 712,644 7,807,165 9,215,780 8,117,348 Net Cash Inflow from Operating Activities 1,263,073 1,422,935 1,231,832 Cash Flow from Investing Activities Payments for: Proceeds for sale of Plant & Equipment 38,000 37,265 38,000 Payment for Books, Furniture, Plant & Equipment

-1,458,160 -1,378,560

-1,429,040

Net Cash (Outflow) from Investing Activities -

1,420,160 -1,341,295 -

1,391,040 Net Increase/Decrease in Cash -157,087 81,640 -159,208 Cash at the beginning of the year 2,453,389 2,627,340 2,708,980 Cash Held at End of Year 2,296,302 2,708,980 2,549,772



3.0 Notes to Budgeted Financial Statements year ending June 2014-2015

1 Council Contributions Contributions are calculated based on the funding formula in the Library Agreement. The Population figures are based on the ABS estimated as at June 2013. (ABS figures released 3 April 2014

Budget 2013-14

Forecast Actual

2013-14

Budget Est

2014-15 Population 346,677 346,677 359,181 Councils Contribution 6,280,445 6,366,245 6,572,850 Avg Contribution per capita 18.12 18.36 18.30

2 State Government Grants State Government funding is primarily based on population. The State Government reviews its funding agreement with Council and Regional Libraries every four years. The current agreement expires June 30, 2014

Budget 2013-14

Forecast Actual

2013-14

Budget Est

2014-15 State Funding 2,185,623 2,187,386 2,274,610 Contribution per capita 6.30 6.31 6.33

3 Employee Costs Employee costs include salaries and wages, overtime, travel cost, staff training and development, and on-costs. Increases allow for banding adjustments and scheduled EBA increases.

Budget 2013-14

Forecast Actual

2013-14

Budget Est

2014-15 Employee costs 6,190,590 6,120,055 6,604,285 % of total expenditure 67.3% 68.0% 68.5% Expenditure per capita 17.86 17.65 18.39 Loans 2,896,800 2,896,800 2,988,385 Loans per capita 8.36 8.36 8.32 Loans per EFT staff 36,668 36,668 37,192 Total Staffing EFT 79.00 79.00 80.35



4 IT & Communications The Corporation is a member of the Swift Library Consortium which allows the Corporation access to a sophisticated ILMS computer system at a reduced cost while sharing the development and implementation costs of new technology. The Corporation constantly monitors use of its broadband technology to ensure high speed communications are delivered to the branches. All PC’s and related equipment for staff and the public are maintained and replaced regularly to guarantee a high standard of service provided to the community.

Budget 2013-

14

Forecast Actual

2013-14

Budget Est

2014-15 Telecommunications 29,350 30,250 32,250 Data communications 183,000 155,000 185,000 ILMS 170,000 182,500 195,000 Computer software and support 192,000 168,000 178,500 Total IT and Communications 574,350 535,750 590,750 % of total expenditure 6.2% 5.9% 6.1% Expenditure per capita 1.66 1.55 1.64

5 Library Resources and Community Technology access The Corporation is redefining its collection as it balances demand for traditional library materials, electronic resources, data bases and downloadable services with an increasing demand for high quality computer technology including specialist software. The Corporation over the next four years will redeploy some expenditure from traditional library materials to enable the provision of specific software and technology including the introduction of tablets, e-book readers and iMac computers.

Budget 2013-14

Forecast Actual

2013-14

Budget Est

2014-15 Library Resources - Materials 1,296,960 1,296,960 1,365,500 Community Technology Access 85,000 72,700 35,000 Total Library Resources 1,381,960 1,369,660 1,400,500 % of total expenditure 15.0% 15.2% 14.5% Expenditure per capita 3.99 3.95 3.90



4.0 Member Council Contribution 2014-15

Summary: Total Casey Cardinia Core Library Service Population (ABS June 2013) 359,181 275,116 84,065 76.6% 23.4% Usage: April 2013 - March 2014) 2,666,201 1,897,485 768,716 71.2% 28.8% 73.9% 26.1% Income Operations 790,720 551,935 238,785 Total State Funding 2,274,610 1,680,525 594,085 Council General Funding 6,572,850 4,863,415 1,709,435 Total Operating Income 2014-15 9,638,180 7,095,875 2,542,305 Expenditure Operating Expenditure 8,214,140 6,043,765 2,170,375 Capital Expenditure 1,424,040 1,052,110 371,930 9,638,180 7,095,875 2,542,305 Annual CCLC Operating Budget 2014-15 Population (ABS June 2013) 359,181 275,116 84,065 Core Council Contribution 6,572,850 4,863,415 1,709,435 Core Council Cont 2013-14 6,280,445 4,682,635 1,597,810 Core Council Cont 2014-15 6,572,850 4,863,415 1,709,435 Council Contribution 4.66% 3.86% 6.99% Total cost for the Corporation per capita $26.83 $25.79 $30.24 State Contribution per capita (Est 2014-15) $6.33 $6.11 $7.07 Budgeted Est 2014-15 - Council contribution $18.30 $17.68 $20.33 Current Budget 2013-14 Council contribution $18.12 $17.55 $20.03 0.99% 0.73% 1.52% Municipal State Average 2012-13 $32.12



Contribution Allocation Total Casey Cardinia

Population (ABS June 2013) 359,181 275,116 84,065 76.6% 23.4% Usage: April 2013 - March 2014 2,666,201 1,897,485 768,716 71.2% 28.8% 73.9% 26.1% Income Capital Replacement Reserves 250,000 177,950 72,050 Operations Income 269,670 199,240 70,430 Interest on Investments 135,000 99,745 35,255 CFC funding 136,050 75,000 61,050 Sub Total 790,720 551,935 238,785 State Government Funding Est Premiers Reading Challenge 55,000 40,635 14,365 State Subsidy 2,108,630 1,557,895 550,735 Local Priorities 110,980 81,995 28,985 Total State Funding 2,274,610 1,680,525 594,085 Expenditure Employee Costs 6,484,125 4,790,585 1,693,540 Employee Costs (CFC staffing) 120,160 65,810 54,350 CfC Cranbourne Expenditure 9,190 9,190 0 CfC Pakenham Expenditure 6,700 0 6,700 IT & Communications 600,750 443,845 156,905 Library Materials 236,460 174,705 61,755 Promotions & Marketing 72,000 53,195 18,805 BMI 2,000 2,000 0 Administration 682,755 504,435 178,320

8,214,140 6,043,765 2,170,375 Capital Expenditure Library Material 1,129,040 834,155 294,885 Motor Vehicles 65,000 48,025 16,975 Furniture & Equipment 230,000 169,930 60,070 1,424,040 1,052,110 371,930 Total Expenses Core Library Service 9,638,180 7,095,875 2,542,305 Annual CCLC Operating Budget 2013-14 Population (Est Oct 2013) 359,181 275,116 84,065 Core Council Contribution 6,572,850 4,863,415 1,709,435 6,572,850 4,863,415 1,709,435 Core Council Cont 2013-14 6,280,445 4,682,635 1,597,810 Core Council Cont 2014-15 6,572,850 4,863,415 1,709,435 Council Contribution 4.66% 3.86% 6.99%



5.0 Schedule of Fees and Charges: 2014-15

1. Overdue Fines: 10 cents per day, which accrues to a maximum of $3.00 per item. There is no grace period. The maximum amount charged is $45.00 if paid in one transaction.

2. Replacement membership cards: $3.30 to replace a lost card. 3. Miscellaneous charges: A standard $3.30 charge is made for minor damage or loss: eg

Damaged/lost RFID tag, damaged/lost One-Time™ lock, damaged/lost barcode, damaged/missing jacket, scribble, soiled/stained item, torn/missing pages, missing Playaway lanyard/battery cover.

4. Replacement single disks (from sets): A standard $17.00 per CD and $11.00 per cassette

charge is made for the replacement of each individual damaged or lost CD or cassette from any talking book set.

5. Lost or damaged items: A charge is made to replace the item, based on the retail price, (GST

inclusive). Applications for refund for items valued at more than $10.00 must be accompanied by the receipt.

6. Discard Library Materials: A standard $1.10 per item is charged, although individual pricing may

be applied to particular items. 7. Computers and Electronic Resources: Printouts (see Photocopying/printing) Access to

information via library computers, ie. the Internet, databases or CD-Roms is free.

8. Photocopying and printing: Black & White Photocopying Colour Photocopying A4 20¢ A4 $1.00 A3 30¢ A3 $1.50

9. Overdue Recovery Charge: $15.00 is placed on the patron’s account, if items are not returned

and the matter is referred to a debt collector. 10. Other Charges: Library Bags $1.00, Ear Phones $1.00

Sundry fees may be charged for some holiday or other activities offset costs. 11. Library Meeting Room Hire: Community Groups: $15.00 per hour Commercial Groups: $30.00 per hour 12. Local History Reproduction Fees

Contact Local History Officer At Narre Warren Library (03) 9704 7696



Local History Schedule of Reproduction Fees As the custodian of the Casey-Cardinia Local History Archive, the Corporation charges a fee for the reproduction of material held in the Local History Archive. This fee is not a copyright fee. Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation does not hold the copyright for all material in the collection. It is the responsibility of the user to obtain permission from the copyright owner. The fees stated below are for the publication of ONE item for ONE specified purpose. If another use is required, a new application must be made. A consent form outlining the exact purpose of the copied material and agreeing to acknowledge the source must be adhered to. All prices are per copy: Black & White Photocopying Colour Photocopying Digital Image A4 20¢ A4 $1.00 Hi Resolution $11.00 A3 30¢ A3 $1.50 Low Resolution $5.50



6.0 Performance Statements The Library Corporation regularly gathers statistics on its services and facilities. These statistics are collated annually and incorporated into the Annual Report, and are also submitted to the State Government through the Annual Survey of Public Libraries. The Library Plan evaluation process reviews actual performance in relation to a range of targets in July each year and also sets new targets for the forthcoming year. The following table shows Key Performance Indicators with actual performance and targets for the next year. The latest available State average figures are supplied by Local Government Victoria and include all public library services in Victoria. The Swift figures include the 16 Victorian public library service members.

*Activity includes loans; information inquiries; programs


State Average 2012/13

Target 2014/15

Visits/Virtual Visits per capita 5.6 7.3 6.2

Visits per opening hour 67.5 48 73 Hours open per week 374.25 249 374.25 Loans per capita 8.15 8.32 8.32 Loans per opening hour 141.92 86.76 150 Loans per item 7.13 4.89 7.6 Loans per member 26.14 18.43 27.0 Program attendance per member 0.55 0.55 0.55

Membership per capita 0.31 0.48 0.33 Activity* per staff member 37,279 31,268 39,000


Swift Average 2012/13

Target 2014/15

Catalogue searches per member CCLC/Swift 3.18 3.15 3.2

Holds as a % of loans CCLC/Swift 11.9% 12.5% 12.5%



CCLC participates annually in a community survey conducted by Nexus Research (an independent company) together with participating Regional Library Corporations across Victoria covering a total population of approx. 1.9 million people aged 14 years+. The survey of users and non-users evaluates satisfaction levels, awareness of services, reasons why non-users currently do not use the service and many other indicators. The table below shows CCLC measures and results from the community survey to measure performance.


Regional* Average 2012/13

Target 2014/15

Overall Satisfaction 8.28 8.42 8.3 Satisfaction rate with ease of location of resources 8.01 8.05 8.0

Satisfaction rate with range/quality of resources 8.1 7.9 8.2

Satisfaction with staff assistance 8.23 8.49 8.3 Satisfaction rate for Information Services 7.91 7.89 7.95

Satisfaction with Internet access at the Library 7.78 7.93 7.95

Satisfaction of Lending Services 8.27 8.22 8.3 Satisfaction of presentation of buildings 8.09 8.99 8.1

*Regional average is all 13 participating libraries in Nexus survey 2012



7.0 Statement of Activities and Initiatives The 2014-15 Budget has been developed to fund and support the following activities and initiatives to achieve the goals/objectives of the Library Corporation. This statement should be read in conjunction with the Library Plan 2014-18

Space

The provision of functional attractive spaces within the library branches to provide increased study, interaction and flexible technology areas.


Review individual library layouts and assess collection space requirements with Branch Managers. Identify required study and additional computer spaces. Implement new study spaces and move shelving as required. Provide space and furniture for new specialist public access computer and related software.

Medium Term Identify the appropriate ratio of collection, subject specialties and activity spaces for each branch and

make changes to meet the identified balance. Implement and enhance additional study, general use and technology spaces.

Indicators Increased public satisfaction with space allocations within branches, especially study and technology

spaces. Community Technology Access

Provide increased community access to specialist high quality computer technology, and specialist staff support for this equipment, service and software.


Identify specific equipment and software to be provided. Identify branch locations for various computer equipment and software –investigate options for mobile

library. Source computer equipment and software and install as required. Survey users to develop equipment and software support routines for staff and public. Develop budget and capital replacement requirements.

Medium Term Introduce additional specialist equipment, computers and software at library branches. Develop specialist technology options for use in library branches.

Indicators Increased numbers of computers/items available for use. Increased bookings and/or use data for technology items. Customer satisfaction with equipment provided and support from staff.



Staff Professional Development

Implement a program of structured staff training and instruction in technical and internet services to support library users.


Analyse results of skills audit to identify gaps and/or training requirements for IT and Internet support to the public.

Expand training to more staff beyond the initial team. Medium Term

Review and introduce additional specific technical and internet service training needs as required; identify training providers both internal and external and implement program.

Provide well trained and competent staff capable of assisting library users with internet and technology support, for example iPads, smart phones, digital cameras and tablets.

Prepare staff for participation in the National Year of Digital Literacy 2016 Indicators

Staff trained and demonstrating required competencies. Improved customer satisfaction levels with staff assistance and support.

Collections

Undertake a staged re-allocation of the library materials budget, balancing between traditional and new e-resources, and improving downloadable and remote services to match local community needs.


Review current traditional material expenditure and establish new funding allocation tables for library materials and e-resources over the next four years for inclusion in the Annual Budget and Strategic Resource Plan.

Medium Term Improve collections by developing e-resources, while maintaining an appropriate range of traditional

and appropriate popular materials. Indicators

Customer satisfaction with collection quality and relevance. Monitor usage of traditional collection items. Increased use of e-resources, software and equipment.



Outreach Services

Develop significantly improved outreach services to targeted sections of the community including: socially isolated or housebound; retirement villages, and nursing homes.


Develop options to re-allocate resources to provide improved outreach services. Develop scoping plan for a sustainable outreach program by expanding the use of library staff and

volunteers. Medium Term

Identify funding and budget allocations required to support increased outreach programs. Indicators

Increased service delivery to identified target outreach groups (for example: visits, loans and programs).

Increased targeted user satisfaction with service delivery methods and service quality. Community Events and Programs

Provide additional community events and activities using external grant funding, sponsorships and partnerships as a major funding source, over and above the established range of programs.


Identify initial program and targeted events. Develop grant application and funding program and begin staging of initial events. Utilise current internal staff skills and develop further staff skills to support this program.

Medium Term Develop and maintain partnerships with community, government and local business organisations.

Indicators Major sequence of annual events and programs to encourage and support literacy and library related

activities, using grant funding, partnerships and sponsorships. Attendance and community satisfaction levels with events held.



Lifelong Learning

Develop the levels of educational assistance, (such as early literacy initiatives, homework help, career support and informal lifelong learning) to members of the community in Casey-Cardinia at all levels of education.


Promote current resources to targeted groups. Engage community members through enhanced relationships with local service providers.

Medium Term Assess and develop homework and career support services and programs including e-resources. Improve study areas and staff assistance in the library branches by reviewing space allocations and

support opportunities through staff time, and potential use of external resources. Indicators

Increased use of library facilities and programs by all age groups. Increased satisfaction levels with study and lifelong learning support services as measured by user

satisfaction levels. ‘Tomorrow’s Library’

Participate in the Ministerial Advisory Council ‘Tomorrow’s Library’ review of Victorian Public Libraries and contribute to the debate on the funding and sustainability of Victorian Public Libraries.


Participate in any implementation, planning and development programs as appropriate. Medium Term

Advocate for implementation of Tomorrow’s Library initiatives by State Government. Ensure Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation is fully involved in the processes around the development

of the Victorian Library concept. Indicators

Improved funding and resourcing for the operations of the Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation leading to improved sustainability.

Implementation of Victorian Library developments that enhance the provision of library services to the Casey and Cardinia communities.


ITEM 2 THE FACTORY REHEARSAL CENTRE FOR THE ARTS USERREPRESENTATIVE GROUP MINUTES

Janette Green Council Plan Reference: 1.4

Purpose of Report: To provide Council with the minutes of The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts User Representative Group meeting held on 29 May 2014.

Executive Summary

Attached for information are the minutes of The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts (The Factory) User Representative Group meeting held on 29 May 2014 at The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts, Cranbourne East. This report and the attached minutes of the meeting are presented in accordance with this Committee’s Terms of Reference which state that a report summarising the activities and key achievements of the Committee are to be presented to Council.

Background

The Factory User Representative Group was established by Council and its role is to:

Facilitate communication between regular users, community representatives, Councilofficers and Council in matters related to The Factory, Rehearsal Centre for the Arts.Provide community input to Council which relates to the operation of The FactoryRehearsal Centre for the Arts.

Meetings of the Committee are chaired by the Chairperson of Casey Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee, Cr Smith, or his nominated representative.

Items of Note

Room bookings have continued to increase and in May the Factory has recorded its highest number since the facility opened in 2007.

Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have a direct or indirect interest in matters for consideration.

Conclusion

City of Casey’s The Factory User Representative Group continues to reflect Council’s commitment to a partnership between Council and the community and looks forward to further assisting Council to identify key issues in relation to the operation of The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts.

Recommendation

That the minutes of The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts User Representative Group (Attachment 1) of 29 May 2014 be noted.



ITEM 2 ATTACHMENT 1

The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts User Representative GroupMinutes


ATTACHMENT 1

The Factory Rehearsal Centre for the Arts User Representative Group meetingMinutes

Held in Practice Room 129 May 2014 at 6:00 pm

1. Welcome “The City of Casey acknowledges that we are on the traditional land of the Bunurong and Wurundjeri people and pays its respects to elders both past and present.”

Ian Gration was voted Chairperson for The Factory User Representative Group meeting in the absence of Cr Wayne Smith JP who was held up in traffic. Ian Grationwelcomed all.

2. Present: Cr Wayne Smith JP, Chris Stock, Ian Gration, Susan Bergman,Jennie Toyne, Andrew Stringer (Factory Co-ordinator).

Apologies: Vicky Brown (Arts and Events Team Leader).

Absent: John McCready.

3. Declaration by Councillors and Council Officers of Conflict of Interest or Personal Interest pursuant to Section 79 and 79B of the Local Government Act 1989.No conflict of interest declared.

4. Confirmation of the minutes of previous meetingMoved by Jennie Toyne, seconded by Chris Stock.

Carried

5. Business arising from the minutes of the previous meetingA copy of The Factory’s cancellation policy was emailed to all group leaders.

The Factory Coordinator passed on the User Representative Group’s thanks to the cleaner for acting so promptly following recent break-ins to the facility.

6. Storage Shed Project UpdateThe structure of the shed is now complete and the concrete will be poured during the next week. Completion of the project will be completed as scheduled by the end of June.

7. The Factory Coordinator’s report

The Factory Coordinator will be posting facility information on Facebook on a weekly basis. All groups have been emailed a request to provide information for the promotion of their groups activities.

There was a total of 1022 hours of room bookings in the month of May which is the highest amount recorded since the facility opened.

The annual floor polishing and painting was completed successfully in April with minimal disruption to user groups.

ATTACHMENT 1

The Factory hosted performing arts workshops for Youth and Family Services Rock’n’ Skate event held during national Youth Week in April.

A summary of the 2014 Minor Capital works requirements was presented to the group.

8. General Business

BATS performances, Cranbourne Chorale and the Cranbourne Lions Concert Band all provided information about upcoming performances

Susan Bergman has requested that a ducted vacuum system be fitted to the workshops. Action item: Factory Coordinator to consider funding a ducted vacuum system as part of the Factory’s 2014-2015 Minor Capital Works budget should there be surplus funds following completion of priority projects.

9. Urgent items without noticeNil.

10. Next Meeting The next meeting will be held in Practice Room 1 at 6.00pm on Thursday 28 August2014.


ITEM 3CASEY FIELDS STEERING COMMITTEE Balla Balla

Richard Amon Council Plan Reference: 1.10

Purpose of Report: To present the Casey Fields Steering Committee Minutes from the meeting held on 19 May 2014

Background

The Casey Fields Steering Committee comprises Councillors, Council Officers and representation from relevant organisations that have a role in the ongoing development of Casey Fields.

Attached for information are the unconfirmed minutes of the Casey Fields Steering Committee meeting held on 19 May 2014 (Attachment 1).

Key Items Discussed at the Meeting

Capital WorksMaster Plan ReviewMelbourne Football ClubCasey Fields Management GroupEventsSignageCasey Fields User Guide

Next Meeting

The next meeting of the Casey Fields Steering Committee is scheduled for Monday 18 August 2014.



Conclusion

The meeting of the Casey Fields Steering Committee provided an opportunity to discuss current issues relating to the operation and the future development of the Casey Fields sporting precinct.

Recommendation

That the minutes of the Casey Fields Steering Committee meeting of 19 May 2014 be noted.



ITEM 3ATTACHMENT 1

Minutes of Casey Fields Steering Committee held 19 May 2014


Casey

Minutes of Casey Fields Steering Committee Meeting (Unconfirmed)Monday, 19 May 2014, at 6:00pm

Casey Fields Regional Athletics Centre Community Room

1. Welcome

As there were no Councillors or CEO present, Richard Amon assumed the role of Chairperson for the meeting.

Richard Amon welcomed the two new elected Community Representatives to the committee, Kerril Burns (Continuing in role) and Lyn Scholes.

2. Attendance

Con Di Pietro (Cranbourne Tennis Club), Barry Freeman (Casey Cardinia HPV Club), Leo Hanger (Casey-South Melbourne Cricket Club), Glenn Weir (Cranbourne Football Club),Mark Jouvelet (Cranbourne Little Athletics Club), Hayley de Vries (Cranbourne Little Athletics Club), Mak Utatao (Casey Warriors Rugby League Club), Rob Colegneto (BASE), Kerril Burns (Community Representative), Lyn Scholes (Community Representative), Wright Paterson, Trevor Griffin, Richard Amon (City of Casey).

3. ApologiesCr Susan Serey, Cr Gary Rowe, Cr Geoff Ablett, Cr Amanda Stapledon, Debbie Lee (Melbourne Football Club), Bill Upston (BASE), Jodie Holt (Cranbourne Netball Club), Shaun Petrie (Cranbourne Cricket Club), Matthew Young (Casey Scorpions), Doug Smith, Shaun Connell (South East Junior Football League), Brian Reese (Devon Meadows Junior Football Club), Wayne Debruin (Casey Cardinia Athletics Club), Mike Tyler, Peter Fitchett, Ryan Czarnecki, Kirstie Bradshaw, Scott Stanley (City of Casey)

4. Confirmation of previous minutes

Moved: Mark JouveletSeconded: Glenn Weir

Carried

5. Items for discussion (includes actions arising from previous meetings)

5.1 Capital Works (2013/2014 program)

Bench seat installation ($30,000) – A small portable grandstand has been delivered and concrete ‘pads’ will be installed at various locations to allow the three portable stands to be placed at various locations. Criterium track rectification works ($30,000) – A preliminary independent analysis of the issues and short and medium term rectification works required has been completed. Short term works consisting of resealing of surface cracks to improve safety of the pavement surface have been completed.

- 1 -

Casey

Landscape works ($50,000) – Works in progress include new and replacement tree planting at various locations including regional playspaceand athletics precinct.Path construction ($40,000) – Paths completed around the north of the VFL oval precinct are complete. Other path works currently in progress. Rugby league precinct public art ($17,000) – Final design received from the artist, awaiting sign off from engineers, council and the Casey Warriors Rugby League Club.Works have been contracted to provide a new vehicle entrance south of the Athletics Centre off Casey Fields Boulevard.

5.2 Capital Works (2014/2015 program)A number of potential projects will be considered for funding (to be endorsed by Council as part of the 2014/15 budget process) including:

Rugby League pitch 2 floodlighting (including SRV grant of $80,000)Criterium track rectification worksInstallation of a shed at oval 2 / 3 for turf wicket maintenance equipment,AFL South East Commission administration base and ‘Sports House’ concept allowing presence of commission staff in addition to various State Sports Association development officers. Extended VFL pavilion willprovide additional corporate box facilities for match day use.Minor capital worksGround surface improvementsPath constructionMature tree installations

Glenn Weir enquired about the process moving forward following the adoption of the 2014/2015 budget. Richard Amon explained the process to come leading up to the adoption of the budget which includes opportunities for clubs to make a submission.

The Committee discussed the initial scope of the ‘Sports House’ concept with Richard Amon giving a brief description of the proposed project. Richard outlinedthe new office space to be added to the upper southern end of the VFL Pavilionand advised the space will be available for rent by various sporting groups including State Sporting Organisations. The overriding concept of the project is to increase the presence of State Sporting Organisations in the City of Casey and the flow on benefit this will have to sporting clubs and participation in sport within Casey.

Glenn Weir sought clarification on the influence of the VFL Pavilion upgrade onthe agreement in place between the City of Casey, the Casey Scorpions and the Cranbourne Football Club in relation to the use that the Cranbourne Football Club has of the VFL Oval Precinct. Trevor Griffin confirmed the upgrade would not influence the number of matches allowed to be played on the VFL oval in a single day.

5.3 Master Plan ReviewThe Casey Fields Master Plan review is currently being informed by a number of projects including:

- 2 -

Casey

Council’s recent endorsement for the future acquisition of an additional 8 Ha of land for a final expansion of the site to accommodate additional regional facilities. This will ‘square up’ the southern boundary and provide land for a potential indoor/outdoor regional netball complex. The outcomes of the Sport Cycling Strategy which have now been endorsed by Council for targeted public exhibition.The outcomes of the Leisure Facilities and Development Plan Review (LFDP) which is close to draft and public exhibition stage. Discussions with the AFL and Melbourne Football Club regarding a potential expansion of the VFL oval to provide a boutique stadium for AFL matches.

Richard Amon confirmed that Council has endorsed the purchase of land to the south of Casey Fields and this will complete land acquisitions for the site.

5.4 Melbourne Football ClubDebbie Lee to provide an update at next meeting scheduled for 18 August 2014.

With Debbie Lee as an apology, Richard Amon updated the committee on the Jim Stynes Memorial. Council has endorsed a photo montage depicting a range of Jim Stynes endeavors such as his work with the initial City of Casey and Melbourne Football Club agreement and the Reach Foundation. Council officers are working with Debbie Lee to agree on the final design of the montage.

5.5 Casey Fields Management Group Trevor Griffin provided an update, from the meeting held on 14 May 2014.

Trevor Griffen updated the committee on the second entrance roundabout works set to commence mid-year. The Works will see some partial road closures to the south of the Athletics centre while the roundabout and link road to Casey Boulevard are constructed.

ESTA emergency markers will be installed at various locations around Casey Fields to assist emergency services in finding each individual precinct within Casey Fields. Markers should be in place by late 2014.

5.6 EventsCasey Fields continues to host a number of events that consolidate its position as the south east’s premier regional outdoor sports venue.

It should be noted that Casey Fields was the venue for the recent “Destination Wellbeing” event on 9 April 2014 hosted by Cr Ablett. The event sought to increase awareness of the challenges facing young people and to informparticipants of the types of support they can access to assist their own positive development.

Future events include:

The national over 60’s cricket carnival in November 2014.

- 3 -

Casey

The Southern Master Cycling Club has submitted a proposal to Cycling Victoria to host the Victorian Criterium Championships for the next three years. Mark Jouvelet informed the committee that the Cranbourne Little Athletics Club on the back of the success of the 2013 Regional Athletics event at Casey Fields had secured the event for 21 and 22 February 2014. Mark also raised the possibility of Cranbourne Little Athletics Club with help from Council, bidding for the 2017 Little Athletics Victoria state Multi event.Richard Amon has initiated discussions with Council’s Economic Development Department in relation to their involvement in supportingthese large regional events by linking local businesses to the sporting clubs hosting the events.

5.7 SignageA Recreation Reserves Signage Policy has been finalised and will be presented to council for consideration in May/June 2014 which will then be incorporated into the Casey Fields User Guide.

5.8 Casey Fields User Guide ReviewOfficers continue to review and update the Casey Fields User Guide in accordance with the previous Steering Committee resolution. Completion of the review is awaiting the endorsement of the Advertising and Promotional Signage on Council Active Recreation Reserve Policy.

6. Other Business

It was raised that a preliminary application has been submitted to the State GovernmentCommunity Facility Funding Program seeking $650,000 towards an expansion of the Casey Fields cycling precinct to deliver a number of projects including:

New BMX competition trackNew pavilionLighting for existing criterium trackImproved general amenity, shade/shelter/taps etc.

Mak Utatao spoke about the need to try to stop dog use at Casey Fields by locking the gates to the ovals and also placing (similar to the VFL oval) ‘No Dogs Allowed’ signs around each oval. Trevor Griffin will look into the locks and signage issues.

Glenn Weir suggested that a specific ‘dog friendly’ area be constructed/allocated somewhere within Casey Fields and the Casey Fields Steering Committee should think about placing a Minor Capital Works bid for 2015/2016 to fund the works. Officers will consider a specific ‘dog area’ allocated in the update to the Casey Fields Masterplan – currently being updated.

7. Meeting Schedule

Next meeting is scheduled for Monday 18 August 2014.

8. Close

- 4 -

PLANNING FOR CASEY’S

COMMUNITY

Planning for Casey's Community17 June 2014

ITEM 1TRAFFIC SAFETY CONCERNS AT WESTFIELD FOUNTAIN GATE Springfield

Paul Hamilton Council Plan Reference: 3.1

Purpose of Report: To provide an update on the progress of discussions with Westfield Management regarding investigations into the provision of pedestrian crossing facility on Magid Drive.

Background

At its meeting on 16 July 2013 Council, in considering Urgent Business Item 1 moved by Councillor Aziz regarding Traffic Safety Concerns at Westfield Fountain Gate, resolved:

1. That Council initiate new discussion with the management of Westfield Fountain Gate to examine ways and strategies through which traffic calming can be introduced to the road network controlled by Westfield, to ensure pedestrian safety, the maintenance of patron amenity and accessibility to the precinct.

2. That a report return to Council on the progress of these discussions by the last Council meeting in August 2013.

Status reports were submitted to Council on 20 August 2013, 19 November 2013 and 18 February 2014 in relation to investigations into the need to provide a pedestrian crossing facility on Magid Drive linking to the shopping centre.

The section of Magid Drive where the crossing is proposed is a private road under the direct care and management of Westfield.

Magid Drive Pedestrian issues - Update

Investigations by Westfield’s consultants identified the site meets the warrants for a Flashing Lights pedestrian crossing treatment. Westfield commissioned design plans and submitted these for approval to VicRoads and Council. The pedestrian crossing facility has been approved and Westfield has sought quotations to determine the installation costs.

In a letter to Council on 22 May 2014 Westfield requested that the proposed costs associated with the installation of the pedestrian crossing be shared equally with Council. The cost of the proposed works is $90,000 + GST (50% share $45,000 + GST).

In support of their request, Westfield has suggested that the facility will not only be used by pedestrians accessing the shopping centre, but by patrons of the surrounding sporting clubs of the nearby reserves, the bus interchange, Casey Arc, Casey Library and the City of Casey offices.

Officers Comments

The section of Magid Drive where the crossing is proposed is currently a private road under the care of Westfield. Agreements have been in place since 1995 and most recently updated in 2006 whereby Westfield is responsible for this section of Magid Drive until such time as Westfield completes the full construction of the road as a dual carriageway boulevard connection. On completion of the road, it is expected to be handed over to Council for ongoing management.



ITEM 1

Under the terms of the agreement, full construction includes but is not limited to “signage, traffic treatments, pedestrian links and crossings”

The location of the crossing provides a pedestrian linkage from the residential area on the western boundary of the shopping centre; directly into the central east-west mall of the shopping centre.

It is the officer’s view that the pedestrian movements at this location are predominantly associated with people accessing the shopping centre.

Westfield Fountain Gate is a super-regional shopping centre with a retail floor area in the order of 175,000m2 placing it as the second-largest shopping centre in Australia, only just behind Chadstone Shopping Centre. The centre management has a responsibility to ensure its customers can access the centre safely and through a range of modes. Pedestrian access should be supported and encouraged by the Centre Manager as it reduces overall traffic and parking congestion within the centre.

There is currently no provision made in Council’s 5yr Capital Works Program for contributions toward a pedestrian facility within the Westfield Fountain Gate Shopping Centre precincts.



Conclusion

The section of Magid Drive identified for a pedestrian crossing facility is clearly within the current boundary of Westfield’s Fountain Gate Shopping Centre. Long standing agreements have been in place setting Westfield’s responsibility for the operation and upgrading of this section of Magid Drive.

As the operator of one of Australia’s largest shopping centres, Westfield also have a responsibility to ensure safe and convenient access by their customers to their centre across a range of mobility modes.

Westfield should be complemented on investigating the community concerns and progressing design and approval for the proposed crossing. Westfield should also be encouraged to implement the pedestrian crossing as a priority.

Westfield should be advised that Council does not have funds available to contribute to the installation of the pedestrian crossing, noting also Westfield’s responsibilities for Magid Drive under the 2006 S173 Agreement.

Recommendation

1. That Westfield should be complemented on investigating the community concerns and progressing design and approval for the proposed crossing and encouraged to implement the pedestrian crossing as a priority.

2. That Westfield should be advised that Council does not have funds available to contribute to the installation of the pedestrian crossing, noting also Westfield’s responsibilities for Magid Drive under the 2006, S173 Agreement.



ITEM 2AMENDMENT C165 TO THE CASEY PLANNING SCHEME - SHARED ACCOMMODATION POLICY & ROOMING HOUSES STRATEGY

David Wilkinson Council Plan Reference: 3.1

Purpose of Report: To consider submissions to Amendment C165 to the Casey Planning Scheme – Shared Accommodation Policy and theRooming Houses Strategy

Executive Summary

In February 2011 the Minister for Planning approved Amendment C146 to the CaseyPlanning Scheme to introduce a site-specific control for a site at 38-40 Shrives Road,Narre Warren, relating to its proposed use for a rooming house.The Minister’s expectation was that the City of Casey would develop a local planningpolicy to guide the establishment of a rooming house on this site and for similarproposals elsewhere in the municipality.On 7 February 2013 and 19 March 2014 the Minister for Planning approvedAmendment C171 and C191 to the Casey Planning Scheme to extend the site-specificcontrol at 38-40 Shrives Road, Narre Warren until December 2014.On 4 September 201 , Council resolved to exhibit Amendment C165 to the Casey Planning Scheme along with the draft Rooming Houses Strategy at its meeting.The draft Strategy intends to coordinate all the approval processes required at Councillevel under various pieces of legislation, including the Planning and Environment Act1987, the Building Act 1993 and the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008.The Amendment proposes to introduce a new Shared Accommodation Policy at Clause22.23 of the Casey Planning Scheme, which will include objectives and policies to takeinto account in the planning permit process for shared accommodation facilities withinthe municipality.The amendment was exhibited from 18 September until 8 November 2013. A total offive submissions were received, some being in favor, and some requested changes tothe amendment.The purpose of this report is to consider submissions received and recommend thenext stage in the amendment process, being the referral of submissions to anindependent panel.

Background

The primary purpose of the draft Rooming Houses Strategy is to develop planning guidelines for rooming house permit applications, due to there being limited policy guidance in the State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks of the Casey Planning Scheme to assist with the assessment of such applications. This became apparent when Council considered a permit application for a rooming house at 38-40 Shrives Road, Narre Warren South, resolving not to support the application at VCAT on 23 March 2010. The proposal attracted considerable community opposition. On 9 February 2011, the Minister for Planning approved a site-specific control on the site that prohibits the use and development of a rooming house containing more than 30 habitable rooms, on basis that Council prepares a Rooming House Strategy and Local Planning Policy to guide permit applications for rooming houses.



ITEM 2

At its meeting of 4 September 2012 Council, when considering a report on the Rooming House Strategy, resolved:

1. To exhibit the draft Rooming Houses Strategy alongside formal exhibition of proposed Amendment C165.

2. To adopt the Housing Diversity Statement.3. To write to the Minister for Planning to seek his authorisation, under Section 9(2) of the

Planning and Environment Act 1987, to prepare Amendment C165 to the Casey Planning Scheme to introduce a new Rooming Houses Policy.

4. To write to the Minister for Planning to request that he amends the Casey Planning Scheme to allow for an extension of the expiry date presently contained in the site-specific control under Clause 52.03 of the Planning Scheme relating to 38-40 Shrives Road, Narre Warren, to allow sufficient additional time for Amendment C165 to be determined.

The interim period has taken longer than anticipated due to requirements under the conditional authorisation. The conditions included changes requested by the Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure, the Department of Human Services and consultation with Consumer Affairs Victoria.

On 11 February 2014, the Minister for Planning approved an exemption from a requirement of Ministerial Direction 15. This was requested to give officers more time to assess changes necessary to the policy post submissions as some submissions were not strictly related to core planning matters. Council officers also met with key submitters to discuss these changes hoping to resolve the submissions without the need of a planning panel.

A prescribed Amendment C191 to Casey Planning Scheme was also approved by the Minister on 20 March 2014 extending the site specific controls at 38-40 Shrives Road, Narre Warren to enable time for the amendment process for the adoption of the Shared Accommodation Policy and Rooming Houses Strategy.

What does Amendment C165 do?

The amendment proposes to provide a clear direction for Council to make decisions on planning applications regarding shared accommodation. Specifically, the amendment:

Introduces a new Shared Accommodation Policy into the Scheme at Clause 22.23 tofacilitate the provision of high quality shared accommodation, which is located,designed and operated in a manner that maintains the amenity and character of theneighborhood, meets the needs of their residents, and reflects the needs, expectations and aspirations of the community.Makes associated changes to Clause 21.05 (Built-Up Area) and Clause 21.09 (Building New Communities) of the Municipal Strategic Statement, to provide additional strategic support for Council’s Shared Accommodation Policy at Clause 22.23.In the Schedule to Clause 66.06, includes relevant local community support serviceagencies as bodies to be notified under Section 52(1)(c) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, for any application to which Clause 22.23 applies.



ITEM 2

Exhibition

Amendment C165 was exhibited from 18 September 2013 until 8 November 2013 in local newspapers and the Victoria Government Gazette. Additionally, the owners, operators and residents of existing rooming houses within the City of Casey were notified. Objectors of the planning application at 38-40 Shrives Road, Narre Warren were also notified.

Five submissions have been received to the amendment. Some key issues raised from the submitters include the following:

Request for clearer definition of medium sized rooming houses and permit triggers.Requests for social and health impact assessments. Requests outside the scope of the Planning & Environments Act.

Attachment 1 summarises the submissions received in more detail and provides Officers’ recommendations for each submission.

Next Stage in the Amendment Process

Under Section 23 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, after considering a submission that requests a change to an amendment, Council must change the amendment in the manner requested, or refer the submission to an independent panel, or abandon the amendment. Council may also refer submissions which do not require a change to the amendment to a Panel.

Accordingly, it is recommended that the Minister for Planning be requested to appoint a Panel to consider all submissions to the amendment, under Section 23(1) (b) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Council would subsequently have the opportunity to consider the Panel’s report prior to making any final decision on the amendment.



Conclusion

The draft Rooming Houses Strategy and proposed Shared Accommodation Policy is a comprehensive investigation into rooming housing needs in Casey. Amendment C165 implements this study to ensure that all residential development meets the physical, social, environmental, health and economic needs of residents and local communalities. Referral of submissions to an independent panel will allow for consideration of all concerns from submitters prior to Council and the Minister for Planning making a final decision on the amendment.



ITEM 2

Recommendation

1. That Council requests the Minister for Planning to appoint a Panel under Section 153 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to consider submissions to Amendment C165 to the Casey Planning Scheme.

2. That Council refers all submissions to Amendment C165 to the Panel, in accordance with Section 23(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

3. That Council makes a submission to the Planning Panel in support of Amendment C165, generally in accordance with the exhibited version and updated and amended to reflect agreed submissions and planning changes as outlined in this report.

4. That all submitters to the amendment be advised of Council’s decision.



ITEM 2ATTACHMENT 1

Summary of Submissions


Am

endm

ent C

165

- Sum

mar

y of

Sub

mis

sion

s

Su

bmis

sion

Sum

mar

y O

ffice

rs re

spon

se

Offi

cers

Rec

omm

enda

tion

Way

ss L

td

Req

uest

for c

lear

er d

efin

ition

of m

ediu

m s

ized

room

ing

hous

es a

nd w

hen

a pl

anni

ng p

erm

it is

trig

gere

d. F

or th

e pl

anni

ng tr

igge

r to

be s

et a

t 12

room

s or

mor

e an

d em

phas

ises

the

ongo

ing

mon

itorin

g by

Cou

ncil

for h

ow th

e en

forc

emen

t of s

tand

ards

will

be

deliv

ered

.

Cou

ncil

is g

uide

d by

legi

slat

ion,

cur

rent

ly th

e pe

rmit

trigg

er is

set

at 1

0 or

mor

e ro

oms.

C

hang

es w

ill b

e m

ade

so th

at p

erm

it tri

gger

s ar

e m

ore

easi

ly id

entif

ied.

Cur

rent

ly, o

ffice

rs

are

also

dev

elop

ing

an in

tern

al p

roce

dure

w

ith o

ther

Cou

ncil

depa

rtmen

ts fo

r en

forc

emen

t.

Ref

er to

pan

el

Reg

iste

red

Acc

omm

odat

ion

Ass

ocia

tion

of

Vict

oria

Req

uest

for c

lear

er g

uide

lines

for w

hat i

s re

quire

d in

a

plan

ning

sub

mis

sion

for s

mal

l and

sm

all s

elf-c

onta

ined

ro

omin

g ho

uses

and

for t

he p

ublic

dis

play

of c

onta

ct d

etai

ls

on th

e ex

terio

r of t

he ro

omin

g ho

uses

for a

ll si

zes.

To

note

th

at th

e S

hare

d A

ccom

mod

atio

n P

olic

y w

as d

evel

oped

for

larg

e ro

omin

g ho

uses

pro

pose

d af

ter a

n ap

plic

atio

n fo

r a

very

larg

e ro

omin

g ho

use

at 3

8-40

Shr

ives

Roa

d. T

hat

appl

icat

ion

requ

irem

ent d

oes

not a

pply

to ro

omin

g ho

uses

w

ith 1

5 or

few

er h

abita

ble

room

s. T

hat C

ounc

il sh

ould

en

cour

age

self-

cont

aine

d ro

oms.

Cou

ncil’

s po

sitio

n on

the

Stra

tegy

and

Pol

icy

is n

ot to

rest

rict t

he s

mal

ler o

pera

tors

(as

Roo

min

g H

ouse

s un

der 1

0 ro

oms

does

not

tri

gger

a p

lann

ing

perm

it). H

owev

er d

ue to

le

gisl

atio

n, a

nyth

ing

abov

e 10

hab

itabl

e ro

oms

requ

ires

a pl

anni

ng p

erm

it. T

he

purp

ose

is to

out

line

requ

irem

ents

of p

oten

tial

Roo

min

g H

ouse

s. T

he a

pplic

atio

ns a

re

asse

ssed

cas

e by

cas

e ba

sis

with

a b

alan

ce

on p

olic

y. C

ounc

il is

in a

gree

men

t with

the

RA

AV

that

the

self-

cont

aine

d m

odel

s ar

e a

bette

r des

ign

outc

ome.

Ref

er to

pan

el

Ric

hard

and

A

nne

De

la R

ue

Req

uest

for b

ette

r foc

uses

to a

ddre

ss th

e po

tent

ial f

or s

ocia

l im

pact

s, p

artic

ular

ly fr

om h

ighe

r int

ensi

ty p

ropo

sals

. A

s pa

rt of

aut

horis

atio

n, D

epar

tmen

t of

Tran

spor

t, P

lann

ing

and

Loca

l Inf

rast

ruct

ure

requ

este

d th

at s

ocia

l and

hea

lth im

pact

s of

th

e dr

aft p

olic

y be

rem

oved

. Sub

mis

sion

ca

nnot

be

acco

mm

odat

ed.

Ref

er to

pan

el

G &

G C

ole

D

isap

prov

al o

f the

pol

icy,

requ

est t

hat c

ounc

il ad

dres

s ho

usin

g ne

eds

of th

e ho

mel

ess

usin

g th

e fra

mew

ork

'the

Roa

d H

ome:

a n

atio

nal a

ppro

ach

to re

duci

ng

hom

eles

snes

s'. T

hat r

oom

ing

hous

es s

houl

d be

regi

ster

ed

& p

olic

e ch

ecke

d, w

ith ro

oms

capp

ed a

t 10

habi

tabl

e ro

oms

and

15 p

erso

ns, w

ith n

o fu

rther

ext

ensi

on a

t fut

ure

poin

t.

Bui

ldin

g cl

ass

3 sh

ould

be

appl

ied

to a

ll ro

omin

g ho

uses

Man

y of

the

poin

ts ra

ised

by

this

sub

mis

sion

ar

e ou

tsid

e th

e sc

ope

of th

e P

lann

ing

&

Env

ironm

ents

Act

with

legi

slat

ion

chan

ges

(i.e.

Equ

al O

ppor

tuni

ty A

ct o

f Hum

an R

ight

s,

Bui

ldin

g A

ct, H

ealth

and

Wel

lbei

ng A

ct).

Ref

er to

pan

el

Am

endm

ent C

165

- Sum

mar

y of

Sub

mis

sion

s

with

insp

ectio

ns c

arrie

d ou

t bi-a

nnua

lly a

nd a

bilit

y to

pro

vide

ad

equa

te s

uppo

rt se

rvic

es fo

r the

max

imum

num

ber o

f R

oom

ing

Hou

se te

nant

s in

the

City

of C

asey

. D

epar

tmen

t of

Envi

ronm

ent

and

Prim

ary

Indu

strie

s

No

Obj

ectio

ns

Subm

issi

on n

oted

N

/A


ITEM 3AMENDMENT TO THE CRANBOURNE EAST DEVELOPMENT PLAN Mayfield


Purpose of Report: To seek Council adoption of an amended Cranbourne East Development Plan

Issues

Council officers have recently received a request from the landowner of 350 Narre Warren Cranbourne East (the subject land) seeking an amendment to the Cranbourne East Development Plan (CEDP), the relevant development plan for the subject site.

As there are no existing road connections between the two properties on the eastern side of the urban floodway zone the applicants have requested a minor amendment to the CEDP (Attachment 1). The amendment shows a North-South road link between the subject land and the Brindalee Estate at 80s Linsell Boulevard, Cranbourne East in order to ensure that the link as shown in Attachment 2 is provided upon future development of either of the two properties. It should be noted that Melbourne Water has agreed to future urban development within the fringe of the Urban Floodway Zone. This will however be dependent on a future re-zoning application.

As the only two affected landowners have given consent to the proposed change being made to the CEDP, the proposed change does not need to be placed on public exhibition and can therefore be adopted by Council.



Conclusion

The adoption of a revised Cranbourne East Development Plan showing a link between the subject site and Linsell Boulevard will facilitate future residential development in Cranbourne East and is a minor change only.

Recommendation

That Council adopt the revised Cranbourne East Development Plan (June 2014), generally in accordance with Attachment 1.



ITEM 3ATTACHMENT 1

Amended Cranbourne East Development Plan


Available as separate file


ITEM 3ATTACHMENT 2

Amended Cranbourne East Development Plan – Proposed Changes


Available as separate file


ITEM 4CRANBOURNE WEST PRECINCT STRUCTURE PLAN REVIEW

Mayfield/Balla BallaDavid Wilkinson Council Plan Reference: 3.2

Purpose of Report: To progress the review of the Cranbourne West Precinct Structure Plan.

Executive Summary

Significant progress has been made as part of the Cranbourne West Precinct Structure Plan review. This report presents an outline of work undertaken to date and a way forward that will see a positive outcome for the Council and key landowners in the precinct. The review will balance the Council Advocacy priority of providing opportunities for local jobs to be created for Casey residents with opportunities for alternative forms of development including some mixed use (including residential) outcomes.

Background

On 1 April 2014 Council resolved to review the Cranbourne West Precinct Structure Plan (CWPSP) as it relates to 200 hectares of undeveloped land identified for employment purposes. At this meeting it was also resolved to report back with an update on the progress of this review at tonight’s council meeting. It was also resolved to invite the proponents to present at the General Purposes Committee meeting following tonight’s report. Discussions with the proponent indicate a degree of satisfaction in the way the review is proceeding at this point in time and that the opportunity to present be deferred until a General Purposes Committee meeting in August 2014.

Over the last couple of months:

Officers have:- met regularly with key stakeholders;- conducted two tours of employment land (in Sydney and Melbourne) to determine

current best practice, innovation, market trends and employment density ratios;- undertaken a land use assessment matrix to analyse potential land uses and land

capability in Cranbourne West; and- sought feedback internally and externally about the operation of the CWPSP five

years into its implementation.

Plan Melbourne has been finalised and released by the State Government. This is subject to a separate noting report at tonight’s meeting. Relevant to this PSP review, it is noted that Cranbourne West Employment Area is now identified as an Investment and Employment opportunity by the State Government as part of the Dandenong South National Employment Cluster.

Findings to date are that:

After five years in operation, the CWPSP would benefit from a holistic review. In fact, there are review provisions in the document that identify this will be undertaken. The review is recommended to be broadened from the initial 200 hectare request by landowners for consideration because this is such a large area to review there is a ‘ripple effect’ that flows on to the entire PSP area;



ITEM 4

The CWPSP has been operating effectively as it relates to the residential landcomponent. Minor revisions to the PSP would improve this further still for land that has not yet developed; andThe CWPSP has been operating less effectively for employment land. Feedback has been received that a number of provisions limit the flexibility to allow for alternative viable or innovative options for land use and development outcomes on site. A number of significant revisions would greatly improve the market competitiveness of the Cranbourne West employment precinct as a place to invest, develop and create jobs in Casey. This includes allowing a greater variety of land uses, including the potential for integrated residential development, in the employment areas.

Way forward

The following key principles have been developed to guide the next phase of the review:

A minimum Job Target of 10,000 to be maintained the Cranbourne West Employment Area.

This will ensure that the important role of this area to be a place to work is not compromised.

Integrated residential/active mixed use areas are encouraged:- to form an interface between the conventional residential areas;- along areas of high amenity such as drainage/easements/open space; - in walkable catchments of sports reserves, town centres, schools and community

facilities; and- to act as a catalyst for investment into the employment areas by providing

necessary infrastructure to the area.

In accordance with the resolution from 1 April, in principle support for a straight conversion of all of the land from employment to residential is not agreed to. Discussions continue to understand what role (if any) limited higher density residential outcomes could play in this review and in light of the two key principles above. The opportunity for residential development is supported in a way that maximises the creation of jobs, also as per the resolution from 1 April 2014.

Next Steps

It is recommended that the following be undertaken as next steps of this review.

Consultation with major landowners/developers/consultants within the entire CWPSP. This will better help officers understand what works, what does not work and what changes would be beneficial to progress development in the area;

Consultation with relevant State Government Departments about the review process and Key Principles outlined above. This includes the Metropolitan Planning Authority (MPA) and the Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure (DTPLI) as being responsible for implementing Plan Melbourne. Targeted consultation with the Department of State Development, Business and Innovation (DSDBI) and relevant service authorities including VicRoads and Melbourne Water is also contemplated.



ITEM 4

Update the wording and plans in the CWPSP with a view to:- maximising flexibility to consider innovative and alternative developments that

meet the objectives of the CWPSP;- bringing the document in line with Plan Melbourne and recent State Government

changes to the zones which allow greater discretion of land uses;- providing a clear and concise document that is easy to interpret and understand;

and- implementing the two key principles outlined as part of this review, being to

maintain a minimum job target of 10,000 for the area and facilitating integrated residential/mixed use outcomes as appropriate.

Report back to Council with a suite of revised documentation for adoption and commence a consultation period to seek feedback from:- relevant landowners/developers/consultants; and- relevant State Government Departments as previously outlined.

Following this consultation period, report back to Council outlining outcomes, amendments and next steps through any approvals process that may be appropriate.



Conclusion

In conclusion, it is timely that a review of the Cranbourne West Precinct Structure Plan be undertaken to ensure the document remains current, useful and relevant as a guiding planning instrument for land use, development, investment and job creation in Casey.

The review process is proceeding satisfactorily and in order to maintain this momentum a bimonthly update report is recommended with regard to this important project for planning of Casey’s growth areas.

Recommendation

1. That Council note the progress to date on the review of the Cranbourne West Precinct Structure Plan.

2. That a report outlining the progress of this review be prepared for Council for its 19 August 2014 meeting.

3. That the proponents be given the opportunity to present to the following General Purposes Committee meeting.

4. That consultation commence with relevant State Government Departments and other major landowners/developers/consultants in the Cranbourne West Precinct Structure Plan area.



ITEM 5PLAN MELBOURNE UPDATE


Purpose of Report: To update Council on Plan Melbourne

Background

On 9 October 2013, the Victorian Coalition Government released the draft Plan Melbourne Metropolitan Planning Strategy. Officers commended the draft Plan Melbourne for embracing several recommendations and ideas following Casey’s response to Melbourne, let’s talk about the future Discussion Paper.

Council on 3 December 2013, endorsed Casey’s submission which provided a comprehensive response to the strategy which outlined key opportunities, gaps, advocacy points and recommendations. Council recommended that a copy be forwarded to Hon, Matthew Guy MLC, Minister for Planning, and the Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure. Council also recommended writing to the Hon. Dr Dennis Napthine MLA, Premier of Victoria requesting the Metropolitan Planning Authority (MPA) be made a referral authority for all State Government Department budget bids to ensure alignment with Plan Melbourne’s directions.

The State Government publicly released the final Plan Melbourne Metropolitan Planning Strategy on 19 May 2014. It is a strategy that sets the vision for Melbourne in terms of how to house, employ and connect people to jobs and services as the city grows to around 7.7 million people by 2051.

Plan Melbourne’s vision is underpinned by the delivery of an integrated economic triangle which will support seven objectives and outcomes. These include:

Delivering jobs and investmentHousing choice and affordabilityA more connected MelbourneLivable communities and neighbourhoodsEnvironment and energyA State of citiesImplementation

Following Casey’s earlier submission to the Discussion Paper and the draft Plan Melbourne,Council officer’s welcome a number of key recommendations which have been included in the strategy as initiatives. These initiatives directly align with Casey’s own Advocacy Priorities.

Implementation of the Plan Melbourne’s reform and planning initiatives are outlined according to short term (next four years), medium term (2017-2025) and long term (2025-2050) projections overseen by the newly formed Metropolitan Planning Authority (MPA) and the Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure (DTPLI) . On 30 May 2014, Amendment VC106 was gazetted which implemented Plan Melbourne into the Casey Planning Scheme.

A full copy of the report can be found at www.planmelbourne.vic.gov.au



ITEM 5

Key Advocacy Initiatives

Key Advocacy Initiatives are summarised as follows (refer to Attachment 1 for further commentary):

Port of Hastings/Cranbourne WestCasey welcomes the development of a major new transport gateway at the Port of Hastings given that it will improve the number and type of jobs in the Southern Subregion.The Cranbourne-Pakenham Rail Corridor Project is to be delivered within the next 4years and will increase capacity of the rail lines and enable additional services.The Western Port Highway upgrade is identified for long term delivery (2025-2050) but no timeframe is given on the delivery of a south-east rail link.Cranbourne West & Thompsons Road employment precincts are recognised as an ‘Investment and Employment’ opportunity sites by the DTPLI.

Berwick Health & Education PrecinctCasey Hospital and Monash Berwick identified in Plan Melbourne as a Health and Education Precinct as part of the Southern Subregion.Delivery of local jobs, health and education services near a major transport node is a good win for the residents of Casey.

Narre Warren Fountain Gate – Metropolitan Activity Centre (MAC)Having a stronger State Government focus for Narre Warren – Fountain Gate (because of its MAC status) is a good outcome for Casey residents.Plan Melbourne considers government actions that could enable viable private sector real estate investment trusts that provide long term housing options to lower-income households to be considered in the medium term.

Identification of a future South East AirportThis is a long term catalyst project for Casey that has the potential to provide significant employment opportunities and compliment the Bunyip Food Belt project.Casey supports the inclusion of a possible future South East Airport in the Southern Subregion to create future employment opportunities for Casey-Cardinia residents.Although a road link is planned, no rail link is proposed to the future airport.

Future employment precinct at Minta FarmMinta Farm is the only designated employment land with freeway access in Casey which presents a unique opportunity to accommodate high value jobs in a desirable suburban location.Minta Farm has changed from ‘State Significant Industrial Precinct - Future’ to ‘Business & Residential’ which is generally consistent with its designation as ‘Business & Residential’ in the South East Growth Corridor Plan. Further clarification on Minta Farm’s status will be sought from DTPLI/MPA.It is imperative that there be no net loss of jobs from earlier projections for this parcel of land.



ITEM 5

Flexible funding models using GAICThe introduction of GAIC Work-in-Kind Guidelines and model agreements will allow a GAIC Liable Entity to provide land and/or capital infrastructure works in a growth area in lieu of cash payment of GAIC. Council officers are progressing a GAIC Priority Infrastructure List to advocate for certain projects to receive GAIC funding in Casey.

The 20 minute neighbourhoodCasey supports having pedestrian-friendly active communities around new estates such as Selandra Rise. Disappointingly there is no timeframe for the delivery of Cranbourne East / Clyde Railway Station or other new stations and no new bus services planned in Casey to reflect the objective of a 20 minute neighbourhood; where the intention is that people can access goods and services within 20 minutes of where they live, travelling by foot, bicycle or public transport.

Establishing a permanent urban boundaryCasey welcomes the establishment of a permanent urban boundary for Melbourne.The MPA has advised that Harkaway and the UGB around it will be considered as part of the permanent urban boundary. At this stage, there is no definite timeframe.

Green Wedge Management Plan / Peri-urban planning statementCasey welcomes that Plan Melbourne still supports agricultural production on the urbanfringe with investigation of a high-value agricultural food overlay. This is a good result for local jobs and environmental outcomes.

Conclusion

Officers prepared a response to the draft Plan Melbourne that outlined key opportunities, gaps and advocacy points and recommendations. The final Plan Melbourne is not dissimilar to the draft strategy. Nonetheless, if many of these key projects are delivered for Casey in the short, medium and long term, it will assist in increasing accessibility to employment, housing and services. Council officers will continue to work with the MPA and DTPLI to ensure its implementation provides short, medium and long-term benefits for Casey’s residents and businesses.

In terms of the Councils Advocacy Priorities, the Council will need to continue to strongly advocate for investment in public transport, particularly bus services, key road and rail infrastructure and the creation of more jobs in the Casey Cardinia Region.



Recommendation

That Council notes the report.



ITEM 5ATTACHMENT 1

Plan Melbourne / City of Casey Submission - Comparison Table


Atta

chm

ent 1

: Pl

an M

elbo

urne

/ C

ity o

f Cas

ey S

ubm

issi

on -

Com

paris

on T

able

Key

Str

ateg

ic D

irect

ions

C

asey

’s re

spon

se to

the

Dra

ft Pl

an

Mel

bour

ne

Fina

l Pla

n M

elbo

urne

- w

hat d

oes

it sa

y?

How

will

it a

ffect

Cas

ey?

Port

of H

astin

gs /

Cra

nbou

rne

Wes

t

Cas

ey a

dvoc

ated

to s

ee th

e in

clus

ion

of

the

Cra

nbou

rne

Wes

t & T

hom

pson

s R

oad

empl

oym

ent p

reci

nct s

to b

e sh

own

as S

tate

-Sig

nific

ant I

ndus

trial

Pr

ecin

ct -

futu

re o

n M

ap 1

2.

Dev

elop

men

t of a

maj

or n

ew tr

ansp

ort

gate

way

at t

he P

ort o

f Has

tings

will

impr

ove

the

num

ber a

n d ty

pe o

f job

s in

th

e So

uthe

rn S

ubre

gion

. Th

at th

e pl

anni

ng fo

r the

rail

and

road

up

grad

e al

ong

the

Wes

tern

Por

t H

ighw

ay is

prio

ritis

ed d

ue to

its

pote

ntia

l to

unlo

ck e

cono

mic

op

portu

nitie

s in

the

Dan

deno

ng S

outh

an

d C

ranb

ourn

e W

est e

mpl

oym

ent

prec

inct

s.

Port

of H

astin

gs id

entif

ied

as a

Sta

te-

S ign

ifica

nt In

dust

rial P

reci

nct a

nd a

tra

nspo

rt ga

tew

ay.

Cra

nbou

rne

Wes

t and

Tho

mps

ons

Roa

d em

ploy

men

t pre

cinc

ts a

re

reco

gnis

ed a

s an

‘Inv

estm

ent a

nd

Em

ploy

men

t’ op

portu

nity

site

s, b

y th

e D

TPLI

. C

ranb

ourn

e -Pa

kenh

am

Rai

l C

orrid

or

Pro

ject

pla

nned

with

in th

e ne

xt 4

yea

rs.

Wes

tern

Por

t Hig

hway

upg

rade

is

iden

tifie

d fo

r lon

g te

rm d

eliv

ery

(202

5 -

2050

) but

no

timef

ram

e is

giv

en o

n th

e de

liver

y of

a s

outh

-eas

t rai

l lin

k.

The

wes

tern

end

of t

he H

alla

m

Indu

stria

l Est

ate,

whi

ch is

refe

rred

to a

s H

alla

m B

usin

ess

Par

k is

par

t of t

he

Dan

deno

ng S

outh

Em

ploy

men

t Clu

ster

.

It is

goo

d th

at C

asey

’s

empl

oym

ent p

reci

ncts

hav

e be

en id

entif

ied

by th

e D

TPLI

as

infra

stru

ctur

e-le

d em

ploy

men

t opp

ortu

nitie

s.

No

timef

ram

e is

giv

en o

n th

e de

liver

y of

a s

outh

-eas

t ra

il lin

k w

hich

brin

gs u

n-ce

rtain

ty o

ver t

his

vita

l lin

k to

the

Port

of H

astin

gs.

Ber

wic

k as

a H

ealth

&

Educ

atio

n Pr

ecin

ct

Cas

ey s

uppo

rts th

e id

entif

icat

ion

of

Berw

ick

Hea

lth a

nd E

duca

tion

Prec

inct

. C

asey

Hos

pita

l and

Mon

ash

Ber

wic

k id

entif

ied

in P

lan

Mel

bour

ne a

s a

Hea

lth

and

Edu

catio

n Pr

ecin

ct in

the

Sout

hern

Su

breg

ion.

Del

iver

y of

loca

l job

s, h

ealth

an

d ed

ucat

ion

serv

ices

nea

r a

maj

or tr

ansp

ort n

ode

is a

po

sitiv

e ou

tcom

e fo

r the

co

mm

unity

.

Key

Str

ateg

ic D

irect

ions

C

asey

’s re

spon

se to

the

Dra

ft Pl

an

Mel

bour

ne

Fina

l Pla

n M

elbo

urne

- w

hat d

oes

it sa

y?

How

will

it a

ffect

Cas

ey?

Nar

re W

arre

n Fo

unta

in

Gat

e M

etro

polit

an A

ctiv

ity

Cen

tre

(MAC

) to

prov

ide

a di

vers

e ra

nge

of jo

bs,

activ

ities

& h

ousi

ng fo

r su

b -re

gion

al c

atch

men

ts.

Cas

ey s

uppo

rts th

e S

tate

G

over

nmen

t’s d

ecis

ion

to m

ake

Foun

tain

Gat

e a

MAC

. (on

e of

ele

ven

MAC

s)

Mar

ket b

ased

ince

ntiv

es m

ust b

e in

trodu

ced

to s

timul

ate

inve

stm

ent t

hat

deliv

ers

dive

rse

and

affo

rdab

le h

ousi

ng

in o

uter

gro

wth

are

as.

Plan

Mel

bour

ne id

entif

ies

gove

rnm

ent

actio

ns th

at c

ould

ena

ble

viab

le p

rivat

e-se

ctor

real

est

ate

inve

stm

ent t

rust

s th

at

prov

ide

long

term

hou

sing

opt

ions

to

low

er-in

com

e ho

useh

olds

in th

e m

ediu

m te

rm.

Hav

ing

a st

rong

er S

tate

G

over

nmen

t foc

us fo

r Nar

re

War

ren

– Fo

unta

in G

ate

(bec

ause

of i

ts M

AC s

tatu

s)

prov

ides

a p

ositi

ve o

utco

me

for t

he c

omm

unity

and

po

tent

ial i

nves

tors

.

Iden

tific

atio

n of

a fu

ture

So

uth

East

(SE)

Airp

ort

Long

term

job

cata

lyst

pro

ject

for

Cas

ey. I

f rea

lised

it h

as th

e po

tent

ial t

o pr

ovid

e si

gnifi

cant

em

ploy

men

t op

portu

nitie

s an

d co

mpl

imen

t the

Bu

nyip

Foo

d Be

lt pr

ojec

t. Th

at th

e ar

ea id

entif

ied

for t

he S

E A

irpor

t be

show

n as

an

‘Inve

stm

ent a

nd

Em

ploy

men

t Opp

ortu

nity

’ on

Map

12.

U

nder

Initi

ativ

e 3.

6.3

an a

irpor

t rai

lway

lin

k in

vest

igat

ed a

nd p

lann

ed fo

r to

the

prop

osed

SE

Airp

ort.

Initi

ativ

e 1.

5.6

iden

tifie

s a

poss

ible

fu

ture

SE

Airp

ort t

hat w

ould

ser

ve o

ne-

third

of V

icto

ria’s

pop

ulat

ion

as s

how

n on

Map

34.

A

lthou

gh a

roa

d lin

k is

pla

nned

, no

rail

link

is p

ropo

sed

to th

e fu

ture

airp

ort.

Cas

ey s

uppo

rts th

e in

clus

ion

of a

pos

sibl

e fu

ture

SE

Airp

ort i

n th

e S

outh

ern

Sub

regi

on to

cr

eate

futu

re e

mpl

oym

ent

oppo

rtuni

ties

for C

asey

-C

ardi

nia

resi

dent

s.

Futu

re e

mpl

oym

ent

prec

inct

at M

inta

Far

m

Min

ta F

arm

is th

e on

ly d

esig

nate

d em

ploy

men

t lan

d w

ith c

urre

nt fr

eew

ay

acce

ss in

Cas

ey a

nd it

s lo

catio

n pr

esen

ts a

uni

que

oppo

rtuni

ty to

ac

com

mod

ate

high

val

ue jo

bs in

a

desi

rabl

e su

burb

an lo

catio

n.

That

Pla

n M

elbo

urne

be

amen

ded

to

high

light

Min

ta F

arm

as

a ‘S

tate

Si

gnifi

cant

Em

ploy

men

t Pre

cinc

t –

Futu

re’ t

hat c

onta

ins

a di

vers

ity o

f em

ploy

men

t and

resi

dent

ial u

ses.

Min

ta F

arm

has

cha

nged

from

‘Sta

te

Sig

nific

ant I

ndus

trial

Pre

cinc

t - F

utur

e’

to ‘B

usin

ess

& R

esid

entia

l’ w

hich

is

gene

rally

con

sist

ent w

ith it

s de

sign

atio

n as

‘Bus

ines

s &

Res

iden

tial’

in th

e S

outh

Ea

st G

row

th C

orrid

or P

lan.

Furth

er c

larif

icat

ion

on

Min

ta F

arm

’s s

tatu

s w

ill be

so

ught

from

DTP

LI/M

PA. I

t w

ill be

impo

rtant

to e

nsur

e th

at M

PA jo

b ta

rget

s ar

e m

aint

aine

d .

Key

Str

ateg

ic D

irect

ions

C

asey

’s re

spon

se to

the

Dra

ft Pl

an

Mel

bour

ne

Fina

l Pla

n M

elbo

urne

- w

hat d

oes

it sa

y?

How

will

it a

ffect

Cas

ey?

Flex

ible

fund

ing

mod

els

usin

g G

AIC

Th

at P

lan

Mel

bour

ne re

quire

s th

e ex

pend

iture

of G

AIC

fund

ing

on

proj

ects

with

in th

e re

leva

nt c

olle

ctio

n ar

ea, w

hich

are

iden

tifie

d in

a p

riorit

y lis

t to

ensu

re ti

mel

y de

li ver

y of

in

frast

ruct

ure

in g

row

th a

reas

.

The

GAI

C W

ork-

in-K

ind

Gui

delin

es a

nd

mod

el a

gree

men

ts w

ill al

low

GAI

C

Liab

le E

ntity

to p

rovi

de la

nd a

nd/o

r ca

pita

l inf

rast

ruct

ure

wor

ks in

a g

row

th

area

in li

eu o

f a c

ash

paym

ent o

f GAI

C.

Cou

ncil

offic

ers

are

prog

ress

ing

a G

AIC

Prio

rity

Infra

stru

ctur

e Li

st to

ad

voca

te fo

r cer

tain

pr

ojec

ts to

rece

ive

GAI

C

fund

ing

in C

asey

. Th

e 20

min

ute

neig

hbou

rhoo

d

The

stra

tegy

iden

tifie

s tw

o be

st p

ract

ice

case

stu

dies

in C

asey

; Sel

andr

a R

ise

Esta

te a

nd th

e R

oyal

Bot

anic

Gar

dens

C

ranb

ourn

e.

The

new

Met

ro O

pen

Spa

ce S

trate

gy

shou

ld s

et th

e cu

rrent

pro

visi

on fo

r Ac

tive

Ope

n S

pace

gre

ater

than

6%

to

mee

t the

spo

rting

nee

ds o

f our

co

mm

unity

. Th

at a

spe

cific

initi

ativ

e be

incl

uded

for

impr

oved

bus

ser

vice

s in

gro

wth

are

as

to a

ddre

ss th

e go

al o

f a 2

0 m

inut

e bu

s se

rvic

e fo

r a 2

0 m

inut

e ci

ty.

Nor

is th

ere

a co

mm

itmen

t to

exte

nd

the

railw

ay li

ne to

Cly

de.

Pla

n M

elbo

urne

now

cle

arly

def

ines

20

min

ute

neig

hbou

rhoo

ds w

here

peo

ple

can

acce

ss th

eir g

oods

and

ser

vice

s w

ithin

20

min

utes

of w

here

they

live

, tra

vellin

g by

foot

, bic

ycle

or p

ublic

tra

nspo

rt.

The

prop

osed

Met

ropo

litan

Ope

n Sp

ace

Stra

tegy

will

info

rm a

revi

ew o

f th

e PS

P G

uide

lines

. Pl

an M

elbo

urne

refe

rs to

new

er

subu

rbs

in M

elbo

urne

’s g

row

th a

reas

(s

uch

as S

elan

dra

Ris

e Es

tate

in

Cas

ey) t

hat a

re p

lann

ed to

be

pede

stria

n-fri

endl

y ac

tive

com

mun

ities

.

Goo

d to

hav

e pe

dest

rian-

frien

dly

activ

e co

mm

uniti

es

arou

nd n

ew e

stat

es.

Dis

appo

intin

gly

ther

e is

no

timef

ram

e fo

r the

del

iver

y of

C

ranb

ourn

e E

ast /

Cly

de

Rai

lway

Sta

tion

or o

ther

ne

w s

tatio

ns a

nd n

o ne

w

bus

serv

ices

pla

nned

in

Cas

ey to

refle

ct th

e ob

ject

ive

of a

20

min

ute

neig

hbou

rhoo

d.

The

Cou

ncil

will

need

to

cont

inue

to a

dvoc

ate

for

impr

oved

bus

ser

vice

s an

d pu

blic

tran

spor

t in

gene

ral,

emph

asis

ing

how

it

cont

ribut

es to

pro

duct

ivity

an

d jo

bs g

row

th

Key

Str

ateg

ic D

irect

ions

C

asey

’s re

spon

se to

the

Dra

ft Pl

an

Mel

bour

ne

Fina

l Pla

n M

elbo

urne

- w

hat d

oes

it sa

y?

How

will

it a

ffect

Cas

ey?

Esta

blis

hing

a p

erm

anen

t ur

ban

boun

dary

to

repl

ace

the

UG

B

That

the

perm

anen

t urb

an b

ound

ary

shou

ld h

ave

rega

rd to

issu

es th

at a

rise

from

the

dire

ct in

terfa

ce o

f urb

an

deve

lopm

ent o

n ag

ricul

tura

l act

iviti

es

and

the

rura

l am

enity

of v

illag

es s

uch

as; H

arka

way

.

No

chan

ge to

Initi

ativ

e 6.

1.1

and

inte

rface

of u

rban

dev

elop

men

t on

agric

ultu

ral a

ctiv

ities

.

This

is a

goo

d ou

tcom

e fo

r C

asey

. Th

e M

PA

has

adv

ised

that

H

arka

way

and

the

prop

osed

U

GB

aro

und

it w

ill be

co

nsid

ered

as

part

of th

e pe

rman

ent U

GB

proc

ess.

At

this

sta

ge, t

here

is n

o de

finite

tim

efra

me

for t

his

to

occu

r.

Gre

en W

edge

M

anag

emen

t Pla

n / P

eri-

urba

n pl

anni

ng s

tate

men

t

That

a s

ingl

e pe

ri-ur

ban

plan

ning

st

atem

ent i

s gi

ven

effe

ct th

roug

h th

e SP

PF a

nd L

PPF.

Dire

ctio

n 6.

2 ha

s be

en s

igni

fican

tly

wat

ered

dow

n an

d ha

s re

mov

ed

refe

renc

e to

pre

para

tion

of a

‘per

i -urb

an

plan

ning

sta

tem

ent’.

Plan

Mel

bour

ne s

till

supp

orts

agr

icul

tura

l pr

oduc

tion

on th

e ur

ban

fring

e w

ith th

e in

vest

igat

ion

of a

hig

h-va

lue

agric

ultu

ral

food

ove

rlay.

Th

is w

ill be

a g

ood

resu

lt fo

r lo

cal j

obs

and

envi

ronm

enta

l out

com

es.

BUILDING AND MANAGING CASEY’S

ASSETS

Building and Managing Casey's Assets

17 June 2014ITEM 1

OROYA GROVE, CLYDE Balla BallaDavid Richardson Council Plan Reference: 4.1

Purpose of Report: Consider the upgrade of Oroya Grove to Clyde Primary School and future development

Background

At its meeting on 1 April 2014 Council, in considering a petition with 197 signatures regarding traffic issues at Clyde Primary School, tabled by Cr Ablett, resolved:

1. That Council receives the petition, with 197 signatures, regarding the traffic issues at the Clyde Primary School and request for the sealing of Oroya Grove, Clyde.

2. That a report come back to Council in June 2014, on the options for constructing Oroya Grove, Clyde, between Clyde-Fiveways Road and Valetta Street.

3. That Council officers consult with the Clyde Primary School Principal and School Council President regarding the construction of Oroya Grove, prior to Council considering the report in June 2014.

4. That the head petitioner be notified of Council’s decision.

Cr Ablett and the Manager Engineering met with the Clyde Primary School Principal and School Council representatives on 15 May 2014.

Oroya Grove

Oroya Grove is a gravel, east-west, collector road that connects from Clyde-Five Ways Road to Clyde Township. Clyde Primary school fronts directly onto Oroya Grove.

Oroya Grove, the Clyde township and Clyde Primary school are all within the urban growth boundary to be developed in the future.



17 June 2014ITEM 1

Clyde Primary School

Clyde Primary School has for some time had difficulty in managing the traffic generated by the school on Oroya Grove. The primary school is already experiencing a high growth in student numbers due to the urban expansion in Clyde East. The rapid growth in student numbers is forecast to keep increasing with the development in Cranbourne East and Clyde West even before the directly abutting areas of Clyde are developed. This increase in student population has magnified the traffic management issues along Oroya Grove. The problems being experienced vary from:

Increasing traffic risks at the standard T intersection of Clyde-Fiveways Road and Oroya Grove due to the limited site distances and high traffic speeds and volumes along Clyde-Fiveways Road conflicting with the increasing turning movements into and out of Oroya Grove.Lack of formalised parking along Oroya Grove and surrounding streets of the primary school.No school crossings or defined parking bays because the gravel roads can’t be line marked.Uneven nature strips with shallow open drains becoming muddy when wet due to the high pedestrian activity.Insufficient road width to park in streets next to houses without illegally parking on the nature strip.

Some of the traffic issues being experienced by Clyde Primary school are unfortunately common to all state schools. Successive State Governments have ignored the need to plan and manage the traffic generated by schools. Hence the local road network becomes very congested at school drop off and pickup time.

Clyde primary school is in a worse situation due to the road network being unconstructed. The gravel road has the following problems:

no kerb and channel with underground drainage, meaning when it rains pedestrianshave to walk through the surface water;higher traffic volumes break the road down to dust or mud depending on the surface conditions;no line marking, hence no defined parking bays or the ability to line mark a school crossing;road widths vary and can prohibit the ability to park on the road which forces parents to park illegally on the nature strip.

Interim Traffic Management Improvements

There are ongoing concerns raised by the Clyde Primary School management and the school community about the traffic and parking conditions in Oroya Grove during school peak periods.

The most recent discussions between the school management and Council’s Transport Department representatives in March 2014, have identified the school’s desire to have a “drive in - drive out” type drop off pick up zone in Oroya Grove near the school’s pedestrian access gate.



17 June 2014ITEM 1

There are existing angle parking bays in Oroya Grove with appropriate parking restrictions to facilitate the drop off pick up activities. However the school management prefers these angle parking bays to be converted to a parallel parking arrangement which would then allow it to operate as a “drive in – drive out” facility. There will be some loss of parking over a short section as a result of this conversion from angle parking to parallel parking. The proposal is included as Attachment A. It is to be noted that the school has agreed in principle to this parking proposal.

There are existing parking restrictions in Oroya Grove, which are monitored and enforced by Council’s Local Laws team with the view of maintaining traffic flow and safety around Clyde Primary School.

Road Construction

The construction of roads is typically funded by the benefitting property owner. There arefour approaches to funding the construction of a road that is dependent on the demands for the road.

1. Existing gravel roads, that primarily provide access to abutting properties, are funded through a Special Charge Scheme where the property owners contribute to the full cost of the construction of the road.

2. Existing gravel roads, where the road also provides a strategic road network link thatbenefits the broader community as well as the abutting property owners, are jointly funded with construction costs shared between the benefitting property owners and Council. These roads are constructed within Council’s unsealed roads program. Oroya Grove could be nominated under this category, as the road provides access into Clyde and services a school for the broader area.

3. New residential street construction is funded by the developer and then the developer recoups the costs from the property owners when the lots are sold.

4. The construction of roads to support the broader community of new areas can be funded through a developer contribution. The developers within a precinct structure plan pay a contribution per lot for the construction of the road. The draft Clyde Development Contributions Plan (DCP) identified funding and prioritised Oroya Grove for construction. The Clyde DCP has not been finalised by the State Government and there is no certainty that Oroya Grove will remain within the DCP.

The draft Clyde DCP has allowed $1,052,800 to construct Oroya Grove from Clyde-FiveWays Road to Railway Parade in the Clyde township. The costs for construction of Oroya Grove have not included the extra works for parking, school crossings and paths to service the Clyde Primary school. Hence further funds and works are required above the DCP proposed funding to service the needs of Clyde Primary School.

Refer to Attachment B for a copy of the proposed cross section of Oroya Grove within the draft Clyde DCP.



17 June 2014ITEM 1

Oroya Grove Construction

Oroya Grove needs to be constructed to service the Clyde area in the future, when developed. Hence the funding has been identified in the Draft Clyde DCP. Unfortunately the existing Clyde Primary School is already attracting increased student numbers and traffic from Cranbourne East and the current development in Clyde West. The pressure will rapidly increase when Clyde begins to develop. Hence the urgency for the construction of Oroya Grove along the school frontage albeit a consequence of development is required before the development occurs and funding through the Clyde DCP, if adopted.

The construction of Oroya Grove could be prioritised through Council’s unsealed roads program if the draft Clyde DCP is adopted. Then the unsealed roads program could be reimbursed when the funds for the construction of Oroya Grove is collected in 5-10 years through the DCP.

The current timeline for the adoption of the Clyde DCP is expected later this calendar year. After the Clyde DCP is adopted, the prioritised unsealed roads program will be reported to Council with Oroya Grove to be considered within the program, if Oroya Grove is to be funded in the Clyde DCP. The report will consider the extra funds and possible sources above the DCP contribution to service the Clyde Primary School.

Preliminary Estimate Construction Cost Oroya Grove from Clyde-Five Ways Road to Valetta Street $550,000Clyde Primary School Parking in Oroya Grove $150,000

The Oroya Grove construction from Clyde-Five Ways Road to Valetta Street would be covered by the Clyde DCP, if adopted. Council would seek assistance from the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development to construct the parking to service the primary school.

Intersection of Oroya Grove and Clyde-Five Ways Road

The intersection of Clyde-Five Ways Road and Oroya Gove is controlled and managed byVicRoads. VicRoads have no plans to upgrade and improve the safety of the intersection. There are no turn lanes at the intersection to protect traffic turning from Clyde-Five Ways Road into Oroya Grove. The intersection has poor sightlines to the south along Clyde-Five Ways Road from Oroya Grove.

The development in the area will significantly increase the traffic movements along Clyde-Five Ways Road as well as increase the turning movements at the intersection. If Oroya Road is constructed then there will be a an attraction for traffic to use Oroya Road, Clyde-Five Ways Road intersection rather than the intersection of Clyde-Five Ways Road with the unsealed roads of Ballarto Road or Railway Parade. Hence the existing risks at the intersection will increase and needs to be managed.

VicRoads need to review the operation of the intersection of Clyde-Five Ways Road and Oroya Grove taking into account the increasing student numbers at Clyde Primary School and the forecast development of the area when the Clyde Precinct Structure Plan is adopted.



17 June 2014ITEM 1

Conclusion

Oroya Grove is a gravel road that no longer meets the requirements to service the expanding Clyde Primary school. Like most state primary schools, the school experiences significant traffic problems at school drop off and pick up time. Clyde primary school is in a worseposition because the local road network is still gravel.

The need to upgrade Oroya Grove to support the development has been recognised in the draft Clyde DCP. If the draft DCP is adopted, the funds to construct Oroya Grove will not be collected for 5-10 years. Given the demand to improve the road for the expanding primary school is immediate, if the Draft Clyde DCP is finalised with Oroya Grove funded, then Council could reprioritise the unsealed roads program to bring the construction of Oroya Grove forward. The unsealed roads program will be reimbursed when the DCP funds are eventually collected.

In the interim, Council officers will consult with the school about providing some short term traffic management options in place.

VicRoads will also need to consider improvements to the intersection of Clyde-Five Ways Road and Oroya Grove to meet the greater demands for turning at the intersection and reduce the safety risks.



Recommendation

1. That Council review the unsealed roads program to prioritise the construction of Oroya Grove, if the adopted Clyde DCP has allowed for the funding of the construction of Oroya Grove.

2. That the proposed “drive in - drive out” type drop off pick up zone in Oroya Grove near the school’s pedestrian access gate be introduced, following final agreement from the school’s representatives.

3. That Council write to VicRoads seeking that VicRoads review the operation of the intersection of Clyde-Five Ways Road and Oroya Grove taking into account the increasing student numbers at Clyde Primary School and the forecast development of the area when the Clyde Precinct Structure Plan is adopted.



17 June 2014ITEM 1

ATTACHMENT A

Proposed Modifications to Parking Restrictions outside Clyde Primary Schoolin Oroya Grove, Clyde


Prop

osed

Wor

ks: M

odifi

catio

ns to

par

king

rest

rictio

ns

N

Loca

tion:

Oro

ya G

rove

, Cly

de, o

utsi

de C

lyde

PS

5 5

P ON

LY

P ON

LY

P ANG

LE

S1

S1

S2

S2

S3

S3

Exis

ting

Park

ing

Res

tric

tion

Sign

s Ex

istin

g B

us S

top

N N

Loca

tion:

Oro

ya G

rove

, Cly

de, o

utsi

de C

lyde

PS

Prop

osed

Wor

ks: M

odifi

catio

ns to

par

king

rest

rictio

ns to

pro

vide

par

alle

l par

king

zon

e

S2

S4

S5

S3

S1

S2

Prop

osed

rem

oval

of a

ngle

par

king

spa

ces

dire

ctly

out

side

sch

ool

and

repl

ace

with

par

alle

l par

king

“dr

op-o

ff / p

ick-

up”

zone

bet

wee

n bu

s st

op a

nd d

isab

led

park

ing

spac

e. T

his

will

mea

n re

mov

ing

12

angl

e pa

rkin

g sp

aces

to a

ccom

mod

ate

6 pa

ralle

l par

king

spa

ces.

N

ote

the

need

for a

No

Stop

ping

zon

e (4

m w

idth

) to

prov

ide

a bu

ffer a

t the

tran

sitio

n fr

om p

aral

lel t

o an

gle

park

ing

and

sign

age

to fo

rmal

ise

shar

ed p

arki

ng w

ithin

the

bus

zone

.

Exis

ting

Bus

Sto

p

S1

S5

S3

5 PA

RA

LLEL

S4 P O

NLY

P ANG

LE

P ON

LY

ALL

O

THER

TI

MES

P ANG

LE

5

PAR

ALL

EL

ALL

O

THER

TI

MES

5

PAR

ALL

EL

5 PA

RA

LLEL

AN

GLE

AN

GLE


17 June 2014ITEM 1

ATTACHMENT B

Proposed Cross Section of Oroya Grove within Draft Clyde DCP


GREENVALE CENTRAL PRECINCT STRUCTURE PLAN

77CLYDE CREEK PRECINCT STRUCTURE PLAN


17 June 2014ITEM 2

SHARED COST FENCING POLICYDavid Richardson Council Plan Reference: 4.3

Purpose of Report: Council to consider revising the Fencing to Reserves Policy to align with Council's legal obligations and the beneficiary pays.

Background

The City of Casey has a “Fencing to Reserves Policy”. The policy establishes when Council will contribute toward the cost of the repair or replacement of a boundary fence abutting a reserve or property owned by Council. The policy is being reviewed to consider aligning the policy with Council’s legal obligations and the user pays principles.

Under the current policy Council has agreed to contribute to half cost fencing for the following properties:

council residencescouncil depotsinfant welfare and pre-school centresplaygroundsmunicipal reserves including recreation reserves, drainage reserves, walkways, etc.municipal car parkstree reserve or plantation abutting a road where a footpath, shared path or bicycle path constructed of gravel, asphalt or concrete exists within the reserve.

Under the current policy Council does not contribute to the fencing or cost of fencing of any:

tree reserve or plantation abutting a road without a footpath, shared path or bicycle path constructed of gravel, asphalt or concreteroad or “right-of-way”.

Council’s Legal Obligations

Council is meeting its obligations under the Fences Act 1968. Legal advice received in 1998 indicated under the Act, Council is only obligated to pay where council is an “occupier” of the land. Where Council is not an occupier there are no obligations on Council to contribute to the cost of the fence.

The advice on Council occupation was as follows:

Roads – there is doubt whether any roads would be occupied by Council unless barriers have been installed on them and they are being otherwise used or occupied (as opposed to being available for public use and similar purposes).

Council owned land (including reserves) which is actually occupied by Council such as Council offices, depots and other Council buildings – Council should contribute towards the cost of construction dividing fences in accordance with Section 4 (1) (b) of the Fences Act, namely in such proportion as are agreed upon.



17 June 2014ITEM 2

In the case of reserves which are not occupied by Council (which we imagine would include reserves which have play equipment, seating or other amenities used by the public) – Council is not occupying the reserve and therefore should not have to contribute towards the cost of any dividing fences.

Under the current policy Council is exceeding the requirements of the Fences Act 1968. The policy commits Council to contribute to fencing costs where there is no regulatory obligation. Council does not have to provide half costs for the following areas under the Act, where the Council policy commits a contribution:

playgroundsmunicipal reserves including recreation reserves, drainage reserves, walkways, etc.municipal car parkstree reserve or plantation abutting a road where a footpath, shared path or bicycle path constructed of gravel, asphalt or concrete exists within the reserve.

Council as a “good neighbour” has agreed to contribute to the cost of the fencing to the dot points above where there is no legal obligation. Councils contribution is an ex gratia payment to the property owners.

Fencing Needs

Council’s reserves are typically open to the public. Council does not require the reserve to be fenced to prevent public access. The private property owners however, require boundary fences for privacy and to prevent public access onto their property. Therefore the boundary fence around reserves is primarily for the benefit of the property owner. Council does not want to restrict public access through fencing of a reserve. Council only controls access through the installation of a post and chain or rail barriers to prevent illegal vehicle access. Public accessibility is the primary function of a reserve and encouraged.

Hence under the current Fencing to Reserves policy, Council is assisting in the costs for fencing around reserves that primarily benefit the property owners and provides no broader community benefit and hence there is no legal obligation. The property owner should pay the full cost as they are the primary beneficiary for the fence.

Proposed Policy

The ‘Fencing to Reserves Policy’ has been changed to the proposed ‘Shared Cost Fencing Policy’ to reflect Council only contributing to fencing costs where Council is legally obligated and requires the fence to control public access. The property owners abutting reserves would pay the full costs for the boundary fence as the primary beneficiaries of the fence. There is limited broader community benefit provided by a boundary fence on a reserve with private properties. Refer to Attachment A for a copy of the revised policy showing the changes.

Council will make an ongoing savings of approximately $100,000 annually in reduced operating costs with the changed policy. The draft advertised budget for 14/15 financial year has already reflected the proposed savings with the proposed change in the Fencing to Reserves policy.



17 June 2014ITEM 2

Policy Change Implementation

Unfortunately there is a general belief that there are always two owners who are legally compelled to contribute to boundary fences. The interpretation of “occupier” rather than landowner can be confusing. This confusion leads to a belief from landowners that Council should contribute to the cost. Council’s current policy has partially reinforced this belief through contributions to fencing when not legally required to. The neighbouring municipalities to the City of Casey also have very similar practices to Casey’s current policy.

Hence as Council changes the Fencing to Reserves policy there will be some reaction from the property owners expecting Council to contribute to the cost of the boundary fence because Council owns the reserve. The reaction will be stronger where a neighbour may have received a past contribution under the current policy or the property owner may already have received advice that Council will contribute, if the policy was not to change.

The impacts to the policy change is limited to property owners abutting Council reserves, hence the communication of the change to the policy will be targeted. The following will be undertaken to communicate the changed policy:

The brochure on shared cost fencing will be revised and available publicly.The information on the website will be revised to reflect the new policy.There will be a mail out to the fencing contractors of Council’s changed policy.



Conclusion

Council is only obligated to pay for shared cost fencing where council is an “occupier” of the land. Council is not an “occupier” of the land where there is general public access, such as reserves. The boundary fences along the reserve primarily benefits the property owner by providing privacy and restricting public access from the reserve.

Council’s current “Fencing to Reserves Policy” provides for Council to contribute to the costs for shared cost fencing on reserves where there is limited broader community benefit and no legal obligation to contribute costs. The proposal is to change the ‘Fencing to Reserves Policy” to “Shared Cost Fencing Policy” to reflect Council’s minimum legal obligations.

Recommendation



17 June 2014ITEM 2

ATTACHMENT A

Shared Cost Fencing Policy


Fencing to ReservesShared CostFencing Policy

Fencing to Reserves Shared Cost Fencing Policy (DRAFT) Page 2 of 5

Document Control

Council policy documents change from time to time and it is recommended that you consult the electronic reference copy at www.casey.vic.gov.au/policiesstrategies to ensure that you have the current version. Alternatively you may contact Customer Service on 9705 5200.

Responsible Department – Engineering & Asset Management

Draft as at 2 June 2014.

Electronic reference library DRAFT

Preamble

In accordance with a resolution of Council on 21 June 2005 to include definitions of Council, Councillors and Council officers in all Council policy documents, the following definitions are provided:

Council – means Casey City Council, being a body corporate constituted as a municipal Council under the Local Government Act 1989

Councillors – means the individuals holding the office of a member of Casey City Council

Council officers – means the Chief Executive Officer and staff of Council appointed by the Chief Executive Officer.


1. Purpose

This policy establishes when Council will share in the cost of constructing or replacing the dividing fencing between private land and a reserve or a property occupied by the Council.

2. Scope

The policy applies to owners of private land abutting a reserve or a property occupied by the Council who are seeking a contribution from Council towards the cost of constructing or replacing the dividing fencing.

3. Context

The Fences Act 1968 requires “occupiers of adjoining land not divided by a fence sufficient for the purposes of both occupiers” to “construct, or join in or contribute to the construction of, a dividing fence sufficient for the purposes of both occupiers between the adjoining lands.”

Council is the occupier of land where public access is controlled. This includes land used for:

Council offices and customer service centresCouncil-owned residential propertiesCouncil works depotsPre-schools and maternal and child health centres

Council is not the occupier of land that is open to the public at all times. Council is therefore not required to contribute to the dividing fencing between private property and an open public reserve. This includes:

Drainage reservesMunicipal and recreational reservesMunicipal car parksPlaygroundsRoads and right-of-waysTree and plantation reservesWalkways

Council is not required to contribute in these cases because the fencing overwhelmingly benefits the private land owner by providing privacy and preventing public access to the private property.

While Council is not required to contribute in these cases, this policy establishes that Council will contribute to the property categories listed below.

4. Policy

4.1 Shared Cost Fencing

Council will contribute to the cost of fencing abutting the following:

Council residencesCouncil depotsInfant welfare and pre-school centresPlaygrounds


Municipal and recreational reservesDrainage reservesMunicipal car parksTree and plantation reserves abutting a road where a footpath, shared path or bicycle path constructed of gravel, asphalt or concrete existing within the reserve.

Council will not contribute to the cost of fencing abutting the following:

Tree and plantation reserves abutting a road where a footpath, shared path or bicycle path constructed of gravel, asphalt or concrete does not exist within the reserve.Roads and Right-of-Ways

The classification of the Council land will be determined from the plan of subdivision to the satisfaction of the Manager Engineering & Asset Management

In accordance with the Fences Act 1968, Council will contribute half the reasonable cost of constructing, repairing or replacing the fencing abutting a property occupied by Council.

Council will not contribute to the cost of constructing, repairing or replacing the fencing abutting an open public reserve.

4.2 Maximum Contribution

Council will share half the cost of eligible fencing up to a maximum rate determined annually by the Manager Engineering & Asset Management.

The maximum rate will be based on the reasonable cost of constructing a 1.65 metre high timber paling fence. An allowance will be included for the removal and disposal of an existing timber paling fence.

4.2 Use of Alternate Fencing Materials

Council Officers will consider requests to use alternate fencing materials such as pre-painted steel posts and sheeting on a case-by-case basis.

The private land owner will need to cover the additional cost of using an alternate fencing material where Council Officers deem that a standard timber paling fencing is adequate for Council’s needs.

5. Administrative updates

It is recognised that, from time to time, circumstances may change leading to the need for minor administrative changes to this document. Where an update does not materially alter this document, such a change may be made administratively. Examples include a change to the name of a Council department, a change to the name of a Federal or State Government department, and a minor update to legislation which does not have a material impact. However, any change or update which materially alters this document must be by resolution of Council.

6. Review

The next biennial review of this document is scheduled for completion by 30 June 2016.


17 June 2014ITEM 2

ATTACHMENT

Shared Cost Fencing Policy

Council Meeting

Shared CostFencing Policy

Shared Cost Fencing Policy (DRAFT) Page 2 of 5

Document Control


Responsible Department – Engineering & Asset Management

Electronic reference library DRAFT

Preamble




Council officers – means the Chief Executive Officer and staff of Council appointed by theChief Executive Officer.


1. Purpose

This policy establishes when Council will share in the cost of constructing or replacingthe dividing fencing between private land and a property occupied by the Council.

2. Scope

The policy applies to owners of private land abutting a property occupied by theCouncil who are seeking a contribution from Council towards the cost of constructing orreplacing the dividing fencing.

3. Context

The Fences Act 1968 requires “occupiers of adjoining land not divided by a fencesufficient for the purposes of both occupiers” to “construct, or join in or contribute to theconstruction of, a dividing fence sufficient for the purposes of both occupiers betweenthe adjoining lands.”

Council is the occupier of land where public access is controlled. This includes landused for:

Council offices and customer service centresCouncil-owned residential propertiesCouncil works depotsPre-schools and maternal and child health centres

Council is not the occupier of land that is open to the public at all times. Council is therefore not required to contribute to the dividing fencing between private property and an open public reserve. This includes:

Drainage reservesMunicipal and recreational reservesMunicipal car parksPlaygroundsRoads and right-of-waysTree and plantation reservesWalkways

Council is not required to contribute in these cases because the fencing overwhelmingly benefits the private land owner by providing privacy and preventing public access to the private property.

4. Policy

4.1 Shared Cost Fencing

In accordance with the Fences Act 1968, Council will contribute half the reasonable cost of constructing, repairing or replacing the fencing abutting a property occupied by Council.

Council will not contribute to the cost of constructing, repairing or replacing the fencing abutting an open public reserve.


4.2 Use of Alternate Fencing Materials

Council Officers will consider requests to use alternate fencing materials such as pre-painted steel posts and sheeting on a case-by-case basis.

The private land owner will need to cover the additional cost of using an alternate fencing material where Council Officers deem that a standard timber paling fencing is adequate for Council’s needs.


It is recognised that, from time to time, circumstances may change leading to the needfor minor administrative changes to this document. Where an update does notmaterially alter this document, such a change may be made administratively.Examples include a change to the name of a Council department, a change to thename of a Federal or State Government department, and a minor update to legislationwhich does not have a material impact. However, any change or update whichmaterially alters this document must be by resolution of Council.

6. Review

The next biennial review of this document is scheduled for completion by


17 June 2014ITEM 3

SPECIAL CHARGE SCHEME - MARKET LANE, NARRE WARREN SOUTHEdrington

David Richardson Council Plan Reference: 4.1

Purpose of Report: o hear from submitters and consider the submissions received for the proposed Special Charge Scheme to construct Market Lane before considering whether to declare the scheme.

Background

At its Meeting on 18 February 2014, Council, in adopting Building and Managing Casey’s Assets, Item 1, resolved as follows:

1. That Council resolves to give notice of its intention to declare a specialcharge pursuant to Section 163 of the Local Government Act 1989, fordefraying expenses incurred for the design and construction of MarketLane, Narre Warren South.

2. That Notices be served on each person liable under the Scheme and that aPublic Notice be published in a newspaper generally circulated in the areapursuant to Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989.

3. That Council resolves to hear and consider any submissions lodged inresponse to the notification of Council’s intention to declare the SpecialCharge, if required, at a Special Council Meeting.

Refer to Attachment A for a copy of the report considered by Council on 18 February 2014 for the Notice to Intention to Declare a Special Charge Scheme.

Proposed Special Charge Scheme

The proposed Special Charge Scheme was initiated by Council following the tabling of a joint letter at the Council meeting on 4 December 2012. A subsequent public meeting with land owners was held on 13 February 2013 to discuss the process for Council to deliver a project of this nature and provide an indication of project costs and timelines for completion.

The Special Charge Scheme was developed according to Council’s policy relating to unsealed roads with broader community benefit. Casey’s Special Charge Scheme Policy states:

Local Residential Street Schemes

These schemes include all works, materials, charges, overheads and coststo build the street including project management, design, trafficmanagement, the road pavement works, nature strip works, driveway,drainage works*, kerb and channel, footpaths, street furniture, landscapingservices, lighting, intersection works etc..



17 June 2014ITEM 3

These schemes enhance the property access and amenity. Property owners fund the full costs. Support from the majority of contributing property owners is required before the scheme can proceed.

* Note that where the abutting properties are serviced by an existing undergrounddrainage system any new drainage works for the construction of the street will beincluded in the scheme.

Market Lane is classified as a Local Road and in accordance with Council’s Special Charge Scheme Policy, the construction of this road has been nominated due to the improvements to property access and amenity which will be realised through these works. These primary benefits are realised only by the abutting property owners and as a result of no wider community benefit being present, the Policy attributes the full cost (100%) to the property owners.

A Locality Plan showing the area of the scheme has been included as Attachment B.

Calling for Submissions

The statutory procedure commenced with a report presented to Council on 18 February 2014 at which it was resolved to give notice of its intention to declare a Special Charge pursuant to Section 163 of the Local Government Act 1989.

A notice of intention to declare a Special Charge was sent to all owners involved in the Scheme on Wednesday, 6 March 2014 and subsequently advertised in the Berwick and Cranbourne News weekly newspapers. The submission period closed on 7 April 2014.

Summary of Submissions

There were notices served for this scheme.

At the end of the submission period on 7 April 2014, Council received writtensubmissions from properties within the scheme.

None of these submitters have requested to appear before the Committee in person to support their submission.

One of the submissions had 26 signatures representing 24 properties objecting to the costs of the scheme. The petition was not however a majority objection to the scheme.

A copy of each submission is distributed to Councillors separately to comply with privacy requirements. (Attachment C).



17 June 2014ITEM 3

Submissions

Summary of Issues in SubmissionsSubmission CommentScheme ProcessIt feels as if we have no choice because of what your rules are in regards to schemes.

Council has followed their adopted Scheme procedure, which includes a public meeting and survey of all contributing property owners. All property owners have also had the opportunity to make written or verbal submissions to Council as per requirements of Local Government Act, 1989.

The original estimated cost for Gwenda Court residents was $13,367 and this has now increased to $15,308 – this is not the amount that we were asked to vote on. The original estimate for this project was $634,000 and now it has increased to $726,000 – how could this occur?

Preliminary estimates (only) were available at time of survey. A detailed design process has been undertaken since which has allowed a more accurate assessment of project requirements and costs to be made. This has resulted in some increase to estimates and therefore contribution amounts. A tender and construction process will be undertaken before final costs can be attributed to property owners, should the scheme proceed.

Local Road Traffic ConditionsOnce sealed, the road will no longer be a dead end street in the future.

Council has no intention at all to open Market Lane to through traffic. The termination of Market Lane was to ensure traffic from the higher density urban area did not enter the road, the area has reached full development and the surrounding road network is adequate to meet current and future traffic requirements. Market Lane is officially closed on Council’s Road Register and it is intended to only ever function as a local street.

We believe that there is benefit to all in sealing Market Lane due to the reduction in dust, mud, road noise, cleaning of houses/cars, less grading of road, use of dust suppressant and continued application of crushed rock.

The sealing of Market Lane and associated works will improve the access and amenity for property owners on Market Lane and Gwenda Court through a safer, all weather road surface, improved drainage and improved living environment.

Cost of Scheme We are pensioners and live frugally with the small amount we receive from the aged pension (fixed income) and now we have to worry about paying off another debt if the scheme is declared.I am a single mother and $20,000 is a large amount of money to stop my car getting dirty. When we bought the house, we were told Council would pay for the road.

All contributing property owners will be given the option to pay their apportioned cost off as a lump sum or via 60 quarterly instalments over 15 years (with interest applied – under review). Council also offer a Hardship Policy to assist those owners who are concerned about the cost applied to their property.

There should be an incentive (discount offered) for residents who pay in full and on time (rather than instalments).

Council do not offer incentives for early, full payment of contribution amounts as this is deemed unequitable for those property owners who are not in a position (financially) to take advantage of such an arrangement. Further, this proposal would create a deficit in actual scheme costs which need to be recovered.



17 June 2014ITEM 3

Submission Comment

Cost of Scheme contWhy isn’t City of Casey contributing financially to this scheme?

Under the current Special Charge Scheme Policy, Council do not contribute to roads such as Market Lane as the sealing will provide no benefit, other than to those property owners who gain access to their properties from the road.

Rural SettingOne of the major factors why we bought our house was the ‘rural’ feel and ambience. All of the residents bought their homes with full knowledge of Market Lane’s ‘unmade status’

The road design proposed aligns with Council’s Standard Drawing S-111 Low Speed Rural Road and generally incorporates a 6.0 metre wide asphalt seal and upgrading (retention) of the existing open earthen drains along each side of the road.

Apportionment of CostsWhy should Gwenda Court residents have to pay the full amenity benefit – they have already paid significantly more for their properties because of the infrastructure already constructed on Gwenda Court?Previous scheme proposals for Market Lane were based on (individual) amenity and access benefit amounts - Market Lane residents paid both and Gwenda Court amenity only. Why are Market Lane residents now all paying the same (access + amenity benefit amounts) and Gwenda Court (50% access + 100% amenity benefit amounts)?

The majority of property owners present at the public meeting, indicated that they preferred for all properties on Market Lane to pay the same amount (contribution) for the scheme. Following this, 0.5 ratio of access was attributed to corner properties and Gwenda Court properties to recognise their previous contributions towards infrastructure and current access conditions.

Bass Coast Council charges residents an amount which is proportional to the frontage to the road, why not adopt this model?

Every Municipality forms their own policies for the delivery of missing infrastructure under Special Charge Schemes.

Cost Estimate QueriesCouncil or Power Company should pay for the proposed lighting upgrade ($35,000 allowed for in estimate – item 17).The existing lighting is adequate – it was upgraded 10 years ago and surely is still adequate.

The lighting requires upgrade at three Locations – Greaves Road intersection, Gwenda Court intersection and termination of Market Lane to meet current lighting standards. It is normal practice to upgrade the public lighting to meet Australian Standards when unsealed roads are being constructed to their ultimate state.

Traffic Management of $20,000 is considered excessive (estimate item 1.1).

This is an estimated allowance to cover costs associated with traffic management throughout the construction process (up to 14 weeks). It allows for ensuring property owners and visitors to the street can access properties safely including appropriate management of pedestrians and vehicles at the busy Greaves Road intersection when under construction. Actual costs will be confirmed following the tendering of the works.



17 June 2014ITEM 3

Submission Comment

Cost Estimate Queries contReplacement of existing footpath is not required –it is only 5 years old (estimate item 3.1)?

A 50 metre section of existing concrete footpath needs to be replaced to enable underground drainage to be constructed, improving on the current inadequate open drain through this section which has resulted in recent flooding of properties on the other side of Market Lane. The realignment of the footpath will also assist the access into number 8 Market Lane and improved flood protection. Vehicles would ‘bottom out’ crossing the required kerb if the current footpath alignment / levels were retained.

Why do we require piped drainage between Chainages 210 and 275?

There is inadequate space to construct an appropriate open drain between the edge of the road and existing footpath. The proposed underground pipes will move stormwater more efficiently in proximity to properties on the other side of the Market Lane which have experienced flooding in recent years.

Kerb & Channel is excessive and unnecessary (estimate item 6.1)?

As Market Lane is being upgraded to its ultimate state, the intersection also needs to be completed to this standard to improve safety and delineation of traffic at this location. Formalisation of intersections is achieved through improvements to the efficiency of drainage, linemarking, signage and public lighting. Due to width restrictions between the edge of the road and footpath, the existing open drainage system is inadequate and has been replaced with kerb & channel including pram crossings for pedestrian access across the intersection.This is also the case between chainages 210 and 270. A small section of kerb is also to be replaced at the intersection of Gwenda Court to allow matching of levels with the new seal onMarket Lane. At the termination of Market Lane, a turning area has been formalised and kerbing proposed to improve drainage and ensure the asphalt does not experience edge breakage as service vehicles complete turning movements to return up Market Lane.

Preparation of Nature Strips is excessive ($10,500) – we object to any gum trees proposed for planting alongside the road (estimate item 18.3)?

During construction of this nature, verges often require re-levelling with topsoil and grass seeding. This provisional item (may not be fully expended) allows for nature strips on both sides of the road) over a length of approximately 660 metres) to be re-established following road and drainage works. No gum trees are proposed for placement under this scheme.

Contingency Sum (10% = $59,753), if cost over-runs do not occur, this amount should be deducted from the scheme, reducing each contributor’s costs (estimate item 19)?

The contingency sum is only used if approved by the superintendent and covers any unforeseen costs. If expenditure of this item is not required, the cost savings will be passed onto the contributing property owners in full.



17 June 2014ITEM 3

Submission Comment

Cost Estimate Queries contScheme Administration Costs ($68,538) – what does this figure consist of (estimate item 20).

This item covers the real costs associated with the planning, development and administration of the scheme. It includes survey, design, geotechnical investigation, service locating & proving, tendering, legal costs, supervision of construction and other items which are unavoidable to successfully deliver a project of this nature.

Removal and replacement of existing driveway crossovers – why is this item necessary (various estimate items)?

Often existing crossovers into properties require reconstruction to allow levels to match with the new road levels. It is standard practice on all City of Casey Schemes to supply each property with an asphalted crossover as part of the project to ensure access to properties is improved and no loose material is carried onto the road from unsealed (crushed rock) crossovers.

Scheme Procedure

Council has completed the community consultation process, prepared the relevant design and apportionment documentation and served notice of its intention to declare a Special Charge for this scheme.

The next step requires Council to consider all submissions and either:

Proceed without modifications – should Council decide to proceed without modifications, Council would declare and levy the Special Charge and send out to all owners a Notice of Levy.

Abandon the declaration.

Amend the apportionment, legal advice advises that Council is required to recommence the procedure under the Local Government Act 1989.

Following the consideration of any submissions, Council may resolve to declare and levy the Special Charge. A Notice of Levy will be sent to all owners liable to pay the charge. The owners may then apply to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) for a review of Council’s decision to levy the Special Charge, within 30 days from receipt of the Notice.

Conclusion

There were thirty-seven notices served with ten submissions received. In response to the submissions received on the scheme, it is considered that the submissions do not warrant the scheme to be modified, as the submissions in general queried the cost of the scheme, and are not an objection to the implementation of the scheme. The design has given consideration to deliver the scheme at the lowest cost possible, while providing functionality and ensuring the safety of the road users. Therefore it is suggested that the scheme proceed without modification and that the Special Charge be declared and levied.



17 June 2014ITEM 3



Recommendation

That Council having considered the submissions made to it in accordance with Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 following Council’s resolution on 18 February 2014 of its intention to declare a Special Charge for the construction of Market Lane, Narre Warren South now resolves:

a) That the Special Charge be confirmed.

b) To declare and levy the Special Charge.

c) That persons levied with the Special Charge may opt to pay in sixty (60) quarterly instalments together with interest thereon at the rate specified by Council.

d) That the Manager Property, Rates and Valuations be directed and authorised to demand payment to recover the Special Charge.

e) That the notice levying the Special Charge be given to all persons liable to pay it in accordance with Section 163 of the Local Government Act 1989.



17 June 2014ITEM 3

ATTACHMENT A

Copy of Previous ReportBuilding and Managing Casey’s Assets – Item 1 – 18 February 2014

This attachment will be circulated separately.



17 June 2014ITEM 3

ATTACHMENT B

Locality Plan & Included Properties within Proposed Special Charge Scheme Extents



17 June 2014ITEM 3

ATTACHMENT C

Submissions

This attachment will be circulated .



17 June 2014ITEM 4

ISOLATED LOCAL TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT (LTM) TREATMENT SITESPaul Hamilton Council Plan Reference: 4.1

Purpose of Report: To report to Council on investigations into isolated LTM treatments at various locations.

Executive Summary

Officers have found that there is often a strong community demand for traffic calming measures to be installed associated with a specific section or location of a road. This is typically associated with either ongoing speed concerns or loss of control incidents occurring at these locations but which may not be reflective of the road as a whole.

Often these locations could be improved through the installation of additional treatments to reduce the spacing between existing devices, the installation of one or two treatments near a particular pedestrian generator or to reduce speeds in a location recording continuing loss of control incidents.

This report details the design and consultation process for isolated LTM devices to be implemented at various locations.

The design and consultation process has shown that there is community support for these projects and issues raised by the community have been considered in the design of the project.

Public Transport Victoria and appropriate Emergency Service organisations have been consulted as part of this proposal and no objections were received from these organisations.

It is estimated that these projects will cost $105,000 and the officers recommend that the projects be referred to the Capital Works Program (CWP) for delivery under the LTM Program. The projects would be considered to be a priority for early delivery in the LTM Program and is anticipated to be delivered in the 2014/15 financial year subject to Council adopting the current draft budget.

Background

A report was presented at the Council meeting on 7 November 2013 discussing Council’s LTM Program and in considering this report Council resolved in part:

8. That streets listed for treatments at isolated locations (Attachment B) progress to the functional layout and consultation stage for further investigation into the installation of isolated traffic calming measure.



17 June 2014ITEM 4

The list of isolated locations for a treatment is;

Street Name Suburb

Hinrichsen Drive (on the approach to Keppel Drive intersection) Hallam

Baringa Park Drive (on the approach to the Strathaird Drive intersection)

Narre Warren South

Cherryhills Drive (in the vicinity of the Brookland Greens reserve) Cranbourne

Chirnside Road (On the approach to the Chirnside Road/ Strathaven Drive intersection) Berwick

Lawless Drive (on the approach to the Bianco Court intersection) Cranbourne North

During the detailed design stage, there is a requirement to submit to Council a report recommending whether a proposed LTM scheme should be referred to the CWP.

This report will detail investigations into the design and consultation for the installation of physical traffic calming devices at the listed locations.

A locality plan of all the locations is included as Attachment A.

Project Description

A plan showing all the treatments is included as Attachment B.

Hinrichsen Drive (on the approach to Keppel Drive intersection), Hallam

Hinrichsen Drive operates as a collector road that is approximately 2km in length with a sealed pavement and a default speed limit of 50km/h. The road services the local subdivision and some through ‘rat run’ traffic avoiding the Princes Highway/Hallam Road intersection.

The roundabout at Hinrichsen Drive and Keppel Drive has a history of property damage incidences caused by south bound traffic on Hinrichsen Drive turning right onto Keppel Drive at a higher speed and losing control.

Baringa Park Drive (on the approach to the Strathaird Drive intersection), Narre Warren South

Baringa Park Drive operates as a collector road that is approximately 1km in length with a sealed pavement and a default speed limit of 50km/h. The road services the local subdivision and some ‘rat run’ traffic avoiding the traffic lights on the surrounding road network.

The roundabout at Baringa Park Drive and Strathaird Drive has a history of property damage incidences caused by west bound traffic on Baringa Park Drive entering the roundabout at a high speed and losing control.



17 June 2014ITEM 4

Cherryhills Drive (in the vicinity of the Brookland Greens Reserve), Cranbourne

At its meeting on 2 April 2013 Council, in considering an Urgent Business Item 1, moved by Cr Ablett regarding a traffic incident in Cherryhills Drive, Cranbourne resolved:

That in recognition of ongoing community concern about speeding vehicles together with a recent traffic incident involving a car losing control and colliding with a parked vehicle; officers undertake a further review of the traffic conditions in Cherryhills Drive (in the vicinity of Brookland Greens Reserve) with a view to identifying any measures that could be implemented to reduce the incident of speeding vehicles.

Cherryhills Drive operates as a local collector road that is approximately 1.5km in length with a sealed pavement and a default speed limit of 50km/h. The road services the local subdivision.

The bend in Cherryhills Drive in the vicinity of the Brookland Greens Reserve has a history of property damage incidences caused by traffic entering the bend at higher speeds and losing control.

Chirnside Road (On the approach to the Chirnside Road/ Strathavan Drive intersection), Berwick

Chirnside Drive operates as a collector road that is approximately 1km in length with a sealed pavement and a default speed limit of 50km/h. The road services the local subdivision.

The bend in Chirnside Road in the vicinity of Strathavan Drive has a history of property damage incidences caused by traffic entering the bend at higher speeds and losing control.

Lawless Drive (on the approach to the Bianco Court intersection), Cranbourne North

At its meeting on 20 August 2013 Council, in considering an Urgent Business Item 3, moved by Cr Stapledon regarding road safety in Lawless Drive, Cranbourne North resolved:

1. That Council investigate hoon related behaviour conducted on Lawless Drive (between Huon Park Road & Waverley Park Drive), Cranbourne North with a view to installing traffic calming treatments to minimise the illegal hooning and speeding and to minimise the number of accidents involving cars and houses along this stretch of road.

2. That Council liaise with Victoria Police to help address this issue.

Lawless Drive operates as a local collector road that is approximately 1.5km in length with a sealed pavement and a default speed limit of 50km/hr. The road services the local subdivision.



17 June 2014ITEM 4

The bend in Lawless Drive between Huon Park Road and Waverley Park Drive has a history of property damage incidences caused by traffic entering the bend at higher speeds and losing control.

Victoria Police are aware of the hooning issues and enforcement is being carried out as resource permits.

Community Consultation

The community consultation included a survey of all property owners and residents in the area directly affected by the installation of the isolated treatments to gauge the level of community support.

The survey was sent on 10 February 2014 and included a functional design of the proposed treatments and a covering letter to property owners and residents, requesting them to complete the survey and return it to Council in a reply paid envelope. The emergency service organisations and Public Transport Victoria were also consulted. It was noted that the plans could also be viewed online at the Councils website.

In addition to the letter sent to all the effected properties, a public notice was published in a local newspaper discussing the proposed isolated LTM treatments and offering residents the opportunity to discuss the scheme with Council officers.

No correspondence was received in regards to this public notice.The following Tables summarise the feedback from the resident surveys.

Table 1: Survey Summary - Community Response for Hinrichsen Drive LTM treatment (on the approach to Keppel Drive intersection), Hallam

Proposal Agree Disagree Response RateDo you agree with the proposed isolated treatment for Hinrichsen Drive?

5 (100%) 0 (0%) 5 of 11 (45%)

Table 2: Survey Summary - Community Response for Baringa Park Drive LTM treatment (on the approach to the Strathaird Drive intersection), Narre Warren South

Proposal Agree Disagree Response RateDo you agree with the proposed isolated treatment for Baringa Park Drive?

3 (100%) 0 (0%) 3 of 7 (43%)

Table 3: Survey Summary - Community Response for Cherryhills Drive (in the vicinity of the Brookland Greens Skate Park), Cranbourne

Proposal Agree Disagree Response RateDo you agree with the proposed isolated treatment for Cherryhills Drive?

6 (75%) 2 (25%) 8 of 25 (32%)



17 June 2014ITEM 4

Table 4: Survey Summary - Community Response for Chirnside Road (On the approach to the Chirnside Road/Strathaven Drive intersection), Berwick

Proposal Agree Disagree Response RateDo you agree with the proposed isolated treatment for Chirnside Road?

12 (100%) 0 (0%) 12 of 26 (46%)

Table 5: Survey Summary - Community Response for Lawless Drive (on the approach to the Bianco Court intersection), Cranbourne North

Proposal Agree Disagree Response RateDo you agree with the proposed isolated treatment for Lawless Drive?

10 (71%) 4 (29%) 14 of 21 (67%)

A discussion of all the issues raised during the consultation period has been documented in the feedback and officer responses summary table provided in Attachment C.

Outcomes of the community consultation would indicate support for the proposed schemes to proceed.

Service Authority Consultation

Council officers consulted with Public Transport Victoria, Ambulance Victoria, Victoria Police and the CFA regarding this proposal.

There were no objections from the emergency service organisations or Public Transport Victoria.

Design and Budgeting

It is estimated that these projects will cost $105,000. A detailed design has been completed for the proposal and the project is ready for tendering and construction subject to adoption by Council and programming of funding through the CWP.

The project would be considered to be a priority for early delivery in the LTM program and is anticipated to be delivered in the 2014-15 financial year subject to Council adopting the current draft budget.





17 June 2014ITEM 4

Conclusion

A detailed design and consultation process has been undertaken for the installation of isolated traffic calming treatments in Hinrichsen Drive, Hallam, Baringa Park Drive, Narre Warren South, Cherryhills Drive, Cranbourne, Chirnside Road, Berwick and Lawless Drive,Cranbourne North together with associated lighting, line marking and signage.

The consultation process with the community has shown that there is community support for this project and emergency service organisations and Public Transport Victoria have no objection to the proposal.

It is estimated that this project will cost $105,000 and the officer’s recommendation is that the projects be referred to the CWP for delivery under the LTM Program.

Recommendation

1. That the isolated traffic treatments in Hinrichsen Drive, Hallam, Baringa Park Drive, Narre Warren South, Cherryhills Drive, Cranbourne, Chirnside Road, Berwick, Lawless Drive, Cranbourne North as detailed in this report be referred to the Capital Works Program through the Local Traffic Management Program budget allocations.

2. That the residents in the subject area of proposed treatments for isolated traffic treatments in Hinrichsen Drive, Hallam, Baringa Park Drive, Narre Warren South, Cherryhills Drive, Cranbourne, Chirnside Road, Berwick, Lawless Drive,Cranbourne North, be advised of Council’s decision.



17 June 2014ITEM 4

ATTACHMENT A

Locality Plans


Available as a separate file


17 June 2014ITEM 4

ATTACHMENT B

Proposed Treatments




17 June 2014ITEM 4

ATTACHMENT C

Survey SummaryOfficer Responses to Issues Raised by Objectors to the Scheme




17 June 2014ITEM 5

LOCAL TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SCHEME (LTM) - GLENEAGLES DRIVE AND REEMA BOULEVARD, ENDEAVOUR HILLS Four Oaks


Purpose of Report: To report to Council on investigations into an LTM Scheme in Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard, Endeavour Hills.

Executive Summary

This report details the design and consultation process for a (LTM) Scheme to be implemented in Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard, Endeavour Hills.

The design and consultation process has shown that there is community support for this project and issues raised by the community have been considered in the design of the project.

Public Transport Victoria and appropriate Emergency Service organisations have been consulted as part of this proposal and no objections were received from these organisations.

It is estimated that this project will cost $175,000 and the officers recommend that the project be referred to the Capital Works Program (CWP) for delivery under the LTM Program. The project would be considered to be a priority for early delivery in the LTM Program and is anticipated to be delivered in the 2014/15 financial year subject to Council adopting the current draft budget.

Background


5. That Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard, Endeavour Hills progresses to the functional layout and consultation stage of the Local Traffic Management Program process for further investigation into the installation of traffic calming measures.


This report will detail investigations into the design and consultation for the installation of physical traffic calming devices in Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard, Endeavour Hills.

A locality plan is included as Attachment A.

Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard

Gleneagles Drive operates as a collector road with a speed limit of 50km/h except for a 400m section outside the Mossgiel Park Primary School which is a permanent 40km/h zone. There have been three injury collisions in the last five year period.



17 June 2014ITEM 5

Reema Boulevard operates as a collector road with two school frontages being Maranatha Christian School and Gleneagles Secondary School with a speed limit of 40km/h for most of the road excluding a 400m section at the Gleneagles Drive end which is 50km/h.There have been three injury collisions and one serious injury collision in Reema Boulevard in the last five year period.

To improve road safety in this area and to reinforce the local road speed environment it is proposed to install a total of fourteen flat top humps in Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard.

Flat top humps and road cushions encourage lower speeds through vehicles slowing to traverse the treatment. Flat top humps generally appear to have greater community acceptance than road cushions, however they require more clear space between driveways. On the other hand, road cushions tend to be more effective than the flat top humps as a speed deterrent, particularly on bus routes due to flat top humps requiring flatter ramps to accommodate bus movements.

Design investigations have confirmed that it is feasible to position flat top humps in Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard without compromising on the driveway access.

A plan showing the treatments is included as Attachment B.


The community consultation included a general survey of all property owners and residents in the subject area to gauge the level of community support for a traffic management scheme.

The area identified for consultation was quite broad due to the length of both roads and the number of streets accessed from these routes. Residents in the areas were sent a letter and survey on 10 February 2014 and were referred to the City of Casey website to view the functional design of the proposed treatments.

The property owners and residents who were directly affected by the proposed LTM Scheme were at the same time sent a more specific letter including a survey form and details including a functional design of the proposed treatments.

The general community and the property owners/residents directly impacted by the scheme were requested to complete the survey and return it to Council in a reply paid envelope.

The emergency service organisations and Public Transport Victoria were also consulted. It was noted that the plans could also be viewed online at the Councils website.

In addition to the letter sent to all the properties, a public notice was published in a local newspaper discussing the proposed LTM Scheme and offering residents the opportunity to discuss the scheme with Council officers.

No correspondence was received in regards to this public notice.



17 June 2014ITEM 5

Of the 2528 surveys sent out during consultation, 362 were returned to Council. Of those 362 responses 217 supported the proposal. Table 1 below summarises the feedback from the first resident survey.

Table 1: Survey Summary - Community Responses

Proposal Agree Disagree Response Rate

Do you agree with the proposed LTM scheme for Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard?

217 (60%) 145 (40%) 362 of 2528 (14%)

As there were some residents directly affected by the treatments that did not provide any feedback on the proposed LTM Scheme a second letter was sent out to these residents. This letter was sent on the 20 March 2014 and was similar to the first letter including a survey form and highlighting that these residents are directly affected by the treatments and their feedback is valuable.

Nine further responses were received with eight being for the proposed scheme and one against the proposed scheme.


Outcomes of the community consultation would indicate support for the proposed scheme to proceed.

It is noted that the Gleneagles Primary School and Maranatha Christian School both contacted Council to voice their concern about the loss of parking that would be causedoutside the schools with the installation of the kerb outstands. This feedback has led to the alteration of the original treatment design for all the Reema Boulevard treatments.

In order to maintain consistency throughout both Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard and ensure there is no loss of parking, all the treatments will be flat top humps across the entire width of the street, including the bike lane and parking lane. This will allow cars to park on the treatment and bikes will be able to negotiate the 1:20 slope of the flat top humps.


Council officers consulted with Public Transport Victoria, Ambulance Victoria, Victoria Police and the CFA regarding this proposal.

There were no objections from the emergency service organisations or Public Transport Victoria.


It is estimated that this project will cost $175,000. A detailed design has been completed for the proposal and the project is ready for tendering and construction subject to adoption by Council and programming of funding through the CWP.



17 June 2014ITEM 5




Conclusion

A detailed design and consultation process has been undertaken for the installation of a traffic management scheme in Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard, being fourteen flat top humps together with associated lighting, line marking and signage.

The consultation process with the community has shown that there is community support for this project. The emergency service organisations and Public Transport Victoria have no objection to the proposal.

It is estimated that this project will cost $175,000 and the officer’s recommendation is that the project be referred to the CWP for delivery under the LTM Program.

Recommendation

1. That the Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard Local Traffic Management Scheme as detailed in this report be referred to the Capital Works Program through the Local Traffic Management Program budget allocations.

2. That the residents in the subject area of proposed treatments for Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard be advised of Council’s decision.



17 June 2014ITEM 5

ATTACHMENT A

Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard, Endeavour HillsLocality Plan


ATTACHMENT A

Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard, Endeavour HillsLocality Plan


17 June 2014ITEM 5

ATTACHMENT B

Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard, Endeavour HillsProposed Treatments


ATTACHMENT B


17 June 2014ITEM 5

ATTACHMENT C



ATTACHMENT C


Issues Raised Officer Response1 Issues raised from a property close

to treatment location 10:

Concerned about the treatment causing a traffic jam.

Flat top humps are typical treatments that have been used elsewhere in the municipality and the treatments are not expected to cause traffic congestion issues.

2 Issues raised from a property close to treatment location 9:

Concerned about the noise generated by traffic negotiating the flat top hump

Property Devaluation

It is acknowledged that the installation of flat top humps will create additional noise; however it is considered they will provide a greater benefit to road safety within this road.

This is a subjective assessment.3 Issues raised from a property close

to treatment location 6:

Concerned about the noise generated by traffic negotiating the flat top hump

Will not slow down traffic

It will increase “hooning” with the revving of vehicles to get over the speed humps

Refer to comments – No.2

Flat top humps are typical treatments that have been used elsewhere in the municipality and post construction surveys have confirmed that they are effective in slowing the speed profile of the street.

Treatments are not designed to target “hooning” behaviour. This can only be targeted through enforcement and education.

Poor driving habits occur irrespective of a street having traffic calming devices or not.

4 Has there been research into the effectiveness of these devices


5 The criteria used to establish locations

Treatments are aimed to be sighted at approximately 100-150m to have the greatest impact on the speed of traffic in the street. However depending on site constraints such as restricted sightlines or driveway impacts, this distance can be longer.

ATTACHMENT C

Survey SummaryOfficer Responses to Issues Raised by Objectors to the Scheme Cont.

Issues Raised Officer Response6 Has research been done into the

effect of these devices on emergency vehicle response times.

The emergency operators (CFA, Ambulance Victoria and Police) are consulted as part of the consultation process and no objection is raised to the installation of treatments.

7 What is the number of accidents involving elderly people at these calming devices

Speed humps are devices which accord to appropriate traffic engineering guidelines and are widely used by Casey and other Melbourne Metropolitan Councils.

8 Has it actually slowed the “hoon” element


9 Why is Council proposing another 14 traffic calming devices when there are already several in this short section of road

Council’s LTM Program has identified that this area requires further traffic calming treatments to manage the speeds within this estate and the project has general community support.

Traffic surveys in Reema Boulevard and Gleneagles Drive have confirmed the 85th

percentile speeds to be significantly higher than the posted speed limit.

The proposed treatments are spaced at regular intervals in order to provide the most appropriate speed profile along the streets and 14 humps are deemed essential to achieve this speed profile.

There have been 3 reported injury collisions in Gleneagles Drive and 4 reported injury collisions in Reema Boulevard in the 5 year period from 2009-2013.

10 Maintenance of Heatherton Road landscaping

Beyond the scope of the project.

11 They are a total nuisance and a waste of our good money. People who will speed go over slowly then accelerate after each hump making noise worse - They are not the answer!

Refer to comments – No.2 & 3

12 Spend money on side streets The LTM Program funding is specifically for the installation of traffic calming devices on streets with speeding issues.

13 14 speed humps is too excessive. 7 speed humps would be better.


ATTACHMENT C


Issues Raised Officer Response14 The kerb outstands can cause a lot of

damage to wheels if you hit one in the dark - can buckle wheel - happened to me on the one in Gleneagles Drive - cost me over $200 to fix - will council pay for damage caused to cars by these "kerb outstands"?? In the dark they are easy to drive over. The humps are a nuisance. You can still drive at 70km p/h over them - the faster you go the less impact on car so why install them at all - they don’t slow cars down.


15 I feel this would be overkill for this area. Current roundabouts are sufficient and money could be better spent on other projects.


16 Please give us Gleneagles some more buses. Connecting to Stud Road and Ferntree Gully. Thank you.

Public Transport Victoria decide the bus routes and stop locations within Victoria, this is not under the responsibility of Council.

17 As a bike rider it is more dangerous to negotiate the outstands as put us in path of cars. Also have more near misses from cars coming out of side roads not giving way even when traffic calming devices are there or not. Does nothing to prevent accidents, maybe a better police presence is needed. As see people all the time, breaking laws, running red lights etc.

The kerb outstands have been removed from the final design due to feedback from the community to better accommodate bike movements and prevent a loss of parking. The flat top humps will continue across the entire road width including the bike lane. With a 1:20 ramp bikes can go over the hump causing less inconvenience than the kerb outstands.

18 May be different for the area you are targeting now, but similar works on Kennington Drive did nothing to improve traffic or stop hooning, but if anything, make traffic sluggish, congest "T" type areas. The road looks ugly, the islands and humps are ridiculously tight etc. Much better spending would have been done on improving lighting bus stops, road trees.


ATTACHMENT C


Issues Raised Officer Response19 I would like to see street lighting

install ASAP. I have two girls and they are always afraid of using public transport and also I am. It's always pitch dark at night where the bus shelter is behind my house 45 Chantell Avenue. Thank you.

The LTM Program funding is specifically for the installation of traffic calming devices. There will be some lighting upgrades at the treatments for safety however any further lighting upgrades are not within the scope of the project.

20 I strongly object, especially on Gleneagles Drive. Don't think there is a need. Road initially designed as a 'drive'. Shameful what's been done on Kennington Park Drive. Money better spent elsewhere e.g. keeping teens entertained.

Noted

21 Please no, no, no! It's already 50 and 40km/h, any slower we are better off walking. Also other streets have already been ruined by the introduction of such things and we have lost a number of wide nice streets. Can we keep the others as they are.


22 Fixing roads, addressing water seepage through broken underground pipes and finishing road gutters should be a priority.


23 Speed humps will do little to stop speeding drivers and serve as more of an irritation to local residents.


24 Humps and kerb outstands not only wreck the roads but also cause more accidents. Aren't there enough roundabouts in Gleneagles Drive already?

Refer to comments – No. 7 & 9

25 Car fumes and noise pollution not good for one’s health. Apart from slowing cars down.


The level of carbon emission caused by acceleration/deceleration near these treatments is not expected to significantly change as a result of installation of traffic calming measures

26 I agree with the is above proposal and it'll be appreciated if you would fix the traffic management treatments on Girvan Circuit too, because there are some "p" plates always flying with big noise in go to 100km/hour. Cheers.


ATTACHMENT C


Issues Raised Officer Response27 No Reema Blvd is a safe and wide

road and people already do the speed limit.


28 Slow response emergency vehicles cause damage to cars. Increased noise not enough street lighting.

Refer to comments – No.2, 6,7 & 19

29 This road was built with a vision for growing community. You can't stop few idiots breaking the law, and most likely they even don't live locally. By installing humps you will penalise whole lot of law abiding citizens. I would suggest better supervision of school time traffic, otherwise leave it as it is now. My suggestion is for 40km speed limit to be reserved for school time traffic only.

Existing speed zones are in line with the VicRoads traffic guidelines.


30 I believe this kind of roadworks is a colossal waste of money which can be used for other essential purposes.

Noted

31 1. They spoil the streetscape. They are an eyesore. 2. Noisy, particularly at night as cars thud over the hump. 3. A very poor solution. Why not CCTV at the roundabouts?


The installation of speed cameras and enforcement of traffic speeds is the responsibility of the Victoria Police.

32 Also should be done on Hanna Drive. Hanna Drive does not meet the minimum intervention level for the installation of traffic calming devices at this time. The street will continue to be monitored.

33 Driveways too narrow and would not be safe for people or car to have to drive over the islands.

Turning templates have been undertaken for all the driveways impacted by the treatments to ensure the turning movements of the vehicle will not be impacted.

34 These roads are already 40 and 50 zone. 14 flat top humps will make the speed to 20 oms. We need more travelling time and fuel for this. Strongly disagree.


35 This type of infrastructure increases the need for road maintenance, poses an OHS risk to bus and garbage truck drivers with not added amenity or beauty it is nanny state behaviour 13 cities and maintain more bus shelters!!! Or parks or raise pedestrian overpasses.

Not within the scope of the project.

ATTACHMENT C


Issues Raised Officer Response36 I don't think it is warranted. I have

never seen or heard of a casualty in Gleneagles or so I think it will cause frustration and road rage!


37 No more speed humps or traffic islands. There are too many humps islands etc. it is hard enough to get anywhere without these diversions who pays for the suggested upgrades and wear and tear in our cars.

Refer to comments – No. 7 & 9

38 Particularly to slow down traffic outside Maranatha Christian school since request for school crossing has been denied.

This site has been investigated for the possible installation of a school crossing recently but did not meet the warrants in line with the VicRoads guidelines for the installation of a school crossing.

39 On the condition that all the speed limits in the area to be set at AT LEAST 50km/h if they stay at 40km/hno need for humps.

The speed limits are set in line with the VicRoads guidelines. Council does not have the delegation to make changes to the speed limit. The speed limits on Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard will remain the same.

40 We are for safety. It's true that we've heard hoons driving fast on Reema Blvd a few times, a few months ago, but there weren't any other incidents since then. Speed humps are definitely not necessary. They are annoying to the speed abiding citizens. Probably, if anything needed it would be kerb outstands/islands.

Flat top humps are deemed to be the most appropriate treatment for Gleneagles Drive and Reema Boulevard.


41 Waste of tax payer’s money. The LTM program is a rolling program which has funds allocated out of Council’s 5 year Capital Works Program.

42 According my knowledge it is calm and drivers are respecting for the traffic rules.


43 Yes only if there are chicanes installed, as on Kennington Park Drive.


44 Concerned that this proposal will result in increase in our rates observed buses trying to get around current roundabouts?? Negotiating associated kerb outstands.

The LTM Program is an annual program which receives funding each year.

The bus companies have been consulted as a part of the project and no objections have been raised.

ATTACHMENT C


Issues Raised Officer Response45 I drive down both these roads at least

twice a day. I find that drivers generally adhere to speed limits. This makes the measures unnecessary. Based on my experience with other such traffic obstacles in local streets, I find them to be dangerous: - they damage cars; they are difficult to see at night (signage and lighting is mostly inadequate leading to drivers striking the obstacles); they lead to driver confusion; they lead to excessive fuel usage and a resultant unnecessary increase in carbon emissions; they slow down emergency response vehicles (this area takes in 4 schools, 1 aged care facility and 1 facility for disabled people; the grassland and parkland beyond these streets is a potential fire risk).

Refer to comments – No.6,7,9,19 & 25

46 Concerned about noise from trucks and buses bouncing over humps. Traffic islands need to be heightened to prevent vehicles from driving over said islands. Stop signs on side streets leading into main access roads intersection of Shetland Avenue and Gleneagles Drive (Reema Boulevard) needs assessment.


These are standard roundabout intersections where it is clear that the minor road traffic has to give way to the major road traffic. If drivers are going through these intersections without stopping it is deliberate driver behaviour. A stop or give way sign at these locations would add minimal value and would be unlikely to influence the driver behaviour.

47 Put two lanes at Heatherton Road round-about!!! Money better spent. No speed humps. "We" live here, "we" shouldn't have to suffer. Put police there. Let them do their job.

The intersection is on a Declared Arterial Road and comes under the responsibility of VicRoads.

Council has requested enforcement by the Victorian Police on both Reema Boulevard and Gleneagles drive previously; however it is up to the police as to where and when they undertake enforcement.

48 Makes it very hard for the residents that live in that area to be travelling over them all the time. And noise -hoons will use Renee Avenue more. As a resident in Renee Avenue don’t want them in our street.


Renee Avenue does not qualify for treatments but will continue to be assessed in future for any transference issues that may occur do to the installation of the treatments in Reema Boulevard.

ATTACHMENT C


Issues Raised Officer Response49 This is already a '40 kph' school zone.

Better have police car patrol the area at night, especially on weekends.


50 I'm concerned traffic will detour down Chantell Ave, which already has enough close calls with traffic going downhill too fast and often on the wrong side of the road.

Chantell Avenue does not qualify for treatments but will continue to be assessed in future for any transference issues that may occur do to the installation of the treatments in Reema Boulevard.

51 Definitely no. Nobody speeds the traffic is too conjunctive. Besides I have a bad back and those humps kill me!


52 Having lived through height traffic times, and now much lower there is no need. We are concerned that people slow up TOO much causing frustration and anger. DO NOT DO ANYTHING. 20 year residents


53 I would prefer chicanes like on Kennington Drive


54 Would like something on Shetland Street to stop hoons

Shetland Street does not qualify for treatments but will continue to be assessed in future.

55 Visually unappealing, difficult for vans to unnecessary navigate. Noisy


56 Yes but also Showjump Crescentneeds speed humps to slow the traffic. Many hoons use this Cres also.

Showjump Crescent does not qualify for treatments but will continue to be assessed in future.

57 Think about your position of speed restriction in relation to bus stops if they're too close to corners and intersection causes the traffic to stop or jam up.

Public Transport Victoria was consulted and has no objection to the treatment type and location.

58 Would further restrict access for local residents and emergency vehicles



17 June 2014ITEM 6

LOCAL TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT (LTM) SCHEME - NARRE WARREN SOUTH AREA WIDE Springfield


Purpose of Report: To advise Council on investigations into an area with LTM Scheme in the Narre Warren South sub area.

Executive Summary

The design and consultation process has shown that in general the community is split 50/50 for this project. The proposal has received a high response rate and a detailed analysis of the feedback received has confirmed that the majority of objections were from the properties not impacted by the speeding traffic and the objections were mainly due to the inconvenience caused by the proposed treatments.

The feedback received from those whose properties are located on the streets where the treatments are proposed highlighted a majority support for the project with the exception of Robinswood Parade residents.

It is recommended that a decision regarding implementation of the treatments in Robinswood Parade be deferred until post construction of the Narre Warren South sub area LTM scheme, at which time traffic conditions and community views in relation to Robinswood Parade would be reassessed.

Based on the feedback received from the community, the officers have included three new treatments on The Avenue and Hickory Drive which was a common request from local residents.

Strong objections were received from the property owner adjacent to the location of treatment No.9. As there is a need for a treatment at this mid-block location on The Esplanade between Glasscocks Road and the intersection with Beauford Avenue, to alleviate speeds and act as a safety control measure, the officers recommend that the treatment remains at this preferred location.

Public Transport Victoria and the appropriate Emergency Service organisations have been consulted as part of this proposal and no objections were received from these organisations.

It is estimated that this project will cost $195,000 and the officers recommend that the project be referred to the Capital Works Program (CWP) for delivery under the LTM Program. The project would be considered to be a priority for early delivery in the LTM Program and isanticipated to be delivered in the 2014/15 financial year subject to Council adopting the current draft budget.

Background


7. That Narre Warren South, sub area scheme progresses to the functional layout and consultation stage of the Local Traffic Management Program process for further investigation into the installation of traffic calmingmeasures.



17 June 2014ITEM 6


This report will detail investigations into the design and consultation for the installation of physical traffic calming devices in the Narre Warren South sub area.

A locality plan is included as Attachment A.

Narre Warren South Sub Area

Berwick Springs Promenade operates as a collector road and is the main thoroughfare between Glasscocks Road and Greaves Road and is assessed as a high priority for treatment in the LTM Program. The 85th percentile speed of Berwick Springs Promenade is 60km/h in a 50km/h speed zone. There have been motor vehicle incidents causing three injury collisions in the past five year period.

The officers had identified that treating Berwick Springs Promenade in isolation would create transference issues to alternative routes in the estate and additional eight (8) roads in the area, with traffic distribution function were considered for treatments.

The additional streets which were considered and consulted for treatments as part of this area wide LTM scheme are The Promenade (Littlecroft Avenue to The Boulevard), The Boulevard, Robinswood Parade (The Promenade to Berwick Springs Promenade), The Esplanade (Berwick Springs Promenade to #19), Ardblair Terrace, Southern Boulevard (Delhuntly Rise to The Boulevard), The Avenue and Hickory Drive.

This proposal is consistent with the area wide scheme, implemented in Hillsmeade Estate, Narre Warren South, which is located to the west of the subject site.

The Hillsmeade estate has Narre Warren Cranbourne Road on the west, Galloway Drive/Delhuntly Rise on the north, Southern Boulevard/Littlecroft Avenue/The Promenade on the east and Glasscocks Road to the south. There are currently sixteen (16) sets of road cushions in this estate, which were installed as part of the 2012-13 LTM program.

Post construction surveys have confirmed the effectiveness of these treatments and the area wide scheme proposed around Berwick Springs Promenade is an extension of the scheme already implemented in Hillsmeade estate.

Over the past years, officers have received a number of requests from the residents in The Boulevard and The Promenade, for traffic calming treatments in their streets. In general, the streets identified to be treated as part of this area wide scheme have a history of motor vehicle incidents involving ongoing property damage incidents.

To improve road safety and to reinforce the local road speed environment it is proposed to install speed humps at 22 locations in the Narre Warren South area wide LTM project.

The treatments are a combination of flat top humps and road cushions. Flat top humps generally have a greater community acceptance than road cushions; however they require more clear space between driveways. On the other hand, road cushions tend to be more effective than flat top humps requiring flatter ramps to accommodate bus movements.



17 June 2014ITEM 6

Design investigations have confirmed that it is feasible to position flat top humps in Berwick Springs Promenade and The Esplanade without compromising on the driveway access. All other locations are proposed to have road cushions due to insufficient clear space between driveways.

A plan showing the treatments is included as Attachment B.


The community consultation included a general survey of all property owners and residents in the subject area to gauge the level of community support for a traffic management scheme.

The survey was sent on 17 February 2014. Given that 2,329 survey forms were to be sent out it was determined that only those properties which are directly impacted by the proposed treatments would be issued with a copy of the functional design plans of the proposed treatments plus the survey form and a covering letter. All other properties within the consultation area received the survey form and covering letter informing them that a copy of the design plans was available to view on Council’s website.

Public Transport Victoria and the emergency service organisations were also consulted. It was noted that the plans could also be viewed online at the Councils website.

In addition to the letter sent to all the properties, a public notice was published in a local newspaper discussing the proposed LTM Scheme and offering residents the opportunity to discuss the scheme with Council officers. No correspondence was received in regards to this public notice.

Of the 2329 surveys sent out, 514 complete forms were returned to Council. Of those 514 responses 257 supported the proposal and 257 did not support the proposal.

The proposal has received a high response rate which confirms a high level of interest from the community.

A detailed analysis of the feedback received has confirmed that the majority of objections received were from the properties not impacted by the speeding traffic and their objections were mainly owing to the inconvenience caused by the proposed treatments

Table 1 below summarises the feedback from the resident survey.

Table 1: Survey Summary - Community Responses

Proposal Agree Disagree Response RateDo you agree with the proposed LTM treatments in the Narre Warren South sub area?

257 (50%) 257 (50%) 514 of 2329 (22%)

As there were some residents directly affected by the treatments that did not provide any feedback on the proposed LTM Scheme a second letter was sent out to these residents. This letter was sent on 1 April 2014 and was similar to the first letter including a copy of the proposed plans and a survey form and highlighting that these residents are directly affected by the treatments and their feedback is valuable. A further 11 responses were received which are included in the responses shown in Table 1.



17 June 2014ITEM 6


Though the outcomes of the consultation in general would indicate that the community is split 50/50 for the proposed scheme to proceed, analysis of the feedback received from those whose properties are located on the streets where the treatments are proposed highlighted majority support for the project with the exception of Robinswood Parade residents.

Table 2 summarises the feedback from the streets where treatments are proposed.

Table 2: Survey Summary - Responses from affected streets

Location Agree with proposed treatments

Disagree with proposed treatments

Berwick Springs Promenade 69% 31%The Esplanade 55% 45%Ardblair Terrace 62% 38%The Boulevard 84% 16%The Promenade 63% 37%Robinswood Parade 31% 69%Hickory Drive 50% 50%The Avenue 63% 37%

Note: Hickory Drive scheme has no objections from the properties directly abutting the treatment.

Due to the lack of support for the proposed three treatments on Robinswood Parade it is recommended to defer the installation of these treatments at this time and reassess the traffic conditions and community views, post construction of the Narre Warren South sub area LTM scheme.

During the community consultation stage it was noted that there was a number of requests for The Avenue and Hickory Drive to also be included in the area wide scheme.

Investigations highlighted that these roads would benefit by being included in the scheme due to having vehicle speeds higher than desirable, as well as potentially becoming an alternative route for through traffic in the estate looking to avoid travelling over speed humps. Subsequently three locations were identified for the installation of speed humps on The Avenue and Hickory Drive.

Although some residents disagreed with the proposed treatments, no objections were received from the consultation that took place with the properties directly impacted by these additional treatments. The proposed scheme now involves the installation of three new treatments in The Avenue and Hickory Drive.

Therefore the total number of locations to be treated in the area wide scheme remains at 22.



17 June 2014ITEM 6

It is noted that strong objections to the proposed scheme and the location of treatment no.9 was received from the adjacent property owner. There is a need for a treatment at this mid-block location on The Esplanade between Glasscocks Road and the intersection with Beauford Avenue otherwise a long section of road would remain untreated. A treatment is essential at this location to address the potential high speeds at mid-block as well as to act as a road safety control.

The property owner submitted a four page letter with their main objections being that:

My wife and I already bear more than our fair share of burdens for the sake of the general communityI have health concerns for my wifeSpeed humps are not effectiveIneffective location of speed hump at location 9

Officers responses to the concerns raised are included in Attachment C item 6.


Council officers consulted with Public transport Victoria, Ambulance Victoria, Victoria Police and the CFA regarding this proposal.

There were no objections from the emergency service organisations.


It is estimated that this project will cost $195,000. A detailed design has been completed for the proposal and the project is ready for tendering and construction subject to adoption by Council and programming of funding through the CWP.




Conclusion

A detailed design and consultation process has been undertaken for the installation of a traffic management scheme in the Narre Warren South Sub Area, being 22 speed humps together with associated lighting, line marking and signage.

Though the consultation process has shown that overall the community is split 50/50 for this project, analysis of the feedback confirms that there is majority support from the properties that are located on the streets where treatments are proposed, with the exception of Robinswood Parade.



17 June 2014ITEM 6

It is to be noted that the proposal has received a high response rate which highlights a high level of interest from the community. The majority of objections were from the properties not impacted by the speeding traffic and their objections were mainly due to the inconvenience caused by the number of treatments being installed as part of the area wide scheme.

Public Transport Victoria and emergency service organisations have no objection to the proposal.

Amendments to the proposed locations for treatment have been made following the feedback received during the community consultation; being the deferral of the installation of the threeproposed treatments on Robinswood Parade and the inclusion of three treatments on The Avenue and Hickory Drive.

It is recommended that a decision regarding implementation of the treatments in Robinswood Parade be deferred until post construction of the Narre Warren South sub area LTM scheme, at which time traffic conditions and community views in relation to Robinswood Parade would be reassessed.

Strong objections were received from the property owner adjacent to location of treatment No.9. However, the officers recommend retaining treatment no.9 as there is a need for a treatment at this mid-block location on The Esplanade between Glasscocks Road and the intersection with Beauford Avenue, to act as a road safety control and achieve the required speed profile for the street.

It is estimated that this project will cost $195,000 and the officer’s recommendation is that the project be referred to the CWP for delivery under the LTM Program.

Recommendation

1. That the Narre Warren South area wide Local Treatment Management scheme with the exception of treatments in Robinswood Parade, as detailed in this report be referred to the Capital Works Program through the Local Traffic Management Program budget allocations.

2. That the Robinswood Parade Local Traffic Management scheme as detailed in this report be deferred and the traffic conditions and community views be reassessed after the implementation of the Narre Warren South area wide Local Traffic Management scheme and these findings be presented to Council.

3. That the residents in the subject area of proposed treatments for the Narre Warren South area wide scheme be advised of Council’s decision.



17 June 2014ITEM 6

ATTACHMENT ALocality Plan


ATTACHMENT A

Locality Plan

Treatments 6, 7 and 8 to be deferred

3 additional treatments


17 June 2014ITEM 6

ATTACHMENT BProposed Treatments


ATTACHMENT B Proposed Treatments


Note, treatment locations 6, 7 and 8 to be deferred due to insufficient support from Robinswood Parade residents.


17 June 2014ITEM 6

ATTACHMENT CSurvey Summary

Officer Responses to Issues Raised by Objectors to the Scheme



Officer Responses to Issues Raised by Objectors to the SchemeItem No. Issues Raised Officer Response

1 Issues raised from a property adjacent to treatment location 3:

Don’t want speed hump near my house.

The proposal is an area wide scheme with treatments installed at regular intervals. There is a need to provide a treatment at this location.

2 Issues raised from properties adjacent to treatment location 4:

Don’t want a speed hump outside my front bedroom.

Concerned with increased noise levels.

Impact on emergency services.

Speed cameras are a better option.



There has been ongoing consultation with the emergency services and there have been no objections to the proposed treatments.

The installation of speed cameras is the responsibility of the Victoria Police.


Relocate speed hump away from my driveway.

This will not help the bigger problem of burnouts at roundabouts, racing and dragging. Motor bikes, loud cars and trucks.

Will inconvenience the majority of law abiding local residents and on the bus route.

The proposal is an area wide scheme withtreatments installed at regular intervals. It is considered that there is a need to provide a treatment at this location.

Poor driving habits occur irrespective of a street having traffic calming devices or not. The treatments are not expected to curb a hooning issue which is an enforcement and education matter.

An assessment of these roads in Council’s LTM Program identified that the 85th percentile speeds is greater than the 50km/h speed zone and there is an accident history which resulted in these roads having a high ranking for traffic calming devices.Public Transport Victoria has been consulted regarding the proposals and they have no objections to the scheme.


Officer Responses to Issues Raised by Objectors to the SchemeItem No. Issues Raised Officer Response

3Cont.

Issues raised from properties adjacent to treatment location 6:

Don’t need any more treatments, already have enough with buses till midnight, trucks, cars etc.

Don’t’ want it outside my house.

It will cause damage to vehicles.

Refer to previous comments.


They are standard industry approved treatmentsused to slow down traffic and should not cause damage if negotiated appropriately.

Notwithstanding the above comments it is proposed to defer the installation of this treatment given the lack of support by local residents in this street.


Don’t want it outside my house.

Too many speed humps in area.

Will cause stress on cars.

The area seems quite peaceful; maybe the money could be used in a more needy endeavour.

The proposal is an area wide scheme with treatments installed at regular intervals. It is considered that there is a need to provide a treatment at this location.

An assessment of these roads in Council’s LTM Program identified that the 85th percentile speeds is greater than the 50km/h speed zone and there is anaccident history which resulted in these roads having a high ranking for traffic calming devices.

They are standard industry approved treatments used to slow down traffic and should not cause damage if negotiated appropriately.

Refer to above comments.




Item No. Issues Raised Officer Response


Already enough speed humps in the area.

Don’t want it near my house; too noisy.

An assessment of these roads in Council’s LTM Program identified that the 85th percentile speeds is greater than the 50km/h speed zone and there is an accident history which resulted in these roads having a high ranking for traffic calming devices.

The proposal is an area wide scheme with treatments installed at regular intervals. It is considered that there is a need to provide a treatment at this location.It is acknowledged that the installation of flat top humps will create additional noise; however it is considered they will provide a greater benefit to road safety within this road.



4 page letter submitted – summary:

We are faced with more than our fair share of burdens to bear for the sake of the community;we have an existing very large and bright street light placed directly opposite our house; we have existing partially blocked views due to a large NBN equipment cabinet being placed directly opposite our house; our parkland views from the front of our house will be destroyed and we cannot erect front walls or fences due to strict Estate Design Guidelines.

Health concerns for my wife who is a shift worker and asthmatic and will often sleep with the upstairs window or balcony door open for fresh air.


The proposed treatments are considered to be the most appropriate for this area wide scheme and can be delivered within current budget constraints.






6Cont.

Issues raised from properties adjacent to treatment location 9:

Speed humps are not effective in slowing down speeding drivers; this will only attract trouble, destroy the scenery, pollute the environment with noise and tyre smoke and annoy regular road users.

Having to negotiate multiple speed humps on a regular basis will have a significant destructive impact on our vehicles.

This proposed location of the speed hump will do nothing to prevent the existing behaviour of speeding on this section of The Esplanade. The speed hump should be located closer to Glasscocks Road as the offending vehicles only accelerate out of the estate.

Refer to above comments

Refer to above comments

There is a need to provide a treatment at this mid-block location between Glasscocks Rd and Beauford Avenue.

Locating a treatment elsewhere on this section of The Esplanade would result in a greater distance between treatments and correspondingly higher vehicle speeds.


The installation of speed humps is awaste of money.

This will severely impact car suspensions.

They look awful and they will ruin my new car.

An assessment of these roads in Council’s LTM Program identified that the 85th percentile speeds is greater than the 50km/h speed zone and there is anaccident history which resulted in these roads having a high ranking for traffic calming devices.


Refer to above comments.


Don’t’ want speed hump in front of my house, especially sign posts on our nature strip plus noise concerns.

The proposal is an area wide scheme with treatments installed at regular intervals. There is a need to provide a treatment and associated signage at this location.





A speed hump outside my house will create a noise hazard plus the increased lighting will be diagonal to my bedroom and affect my sleep.

Speed Cameras are more economical and an effective deterrent.

Strongly oppose as directly outside our bedrooms and they will make excessive noise.

It is acknowledged that the installation of speed humps will create additional noise; however it is considered they will provide a greater benefit to road safety within this road.It is acknowledged that the installation of speed humps requires an upgrade to the existing lighting to ensure the treatments are clearly visible to the oncoming traffic at night in line with the standards.

The installation of speed cameras is the responsibility of the Victoria Police.



These are needed in the area though don’t want one directly outside our house as the noise will keep us awake due to having our bedroom at front of house.

We fear that regular thumps as traffic crosses the speed hump will be consistently invasive and distressing especially at night.

The street light outside our bedroom has caused problems since we first moved here. The proposed increase in brightness can only add to that.

We value the cottage garden effect we have been able to establish over the years. To think of a yellow and black sign on our nature strip adds to the distress. We recognise the nature strip is not ours but what is on it affects the value and appearance of our property.

.


It is acknowledged that the installation of flat top humps will create additional noise; however it is considered they will provide a greater benefit to road safety within this road.It is acknowledged that the installation of speedhumps requires an upgrade to the existing lighting to ensure the treatments are clearly visible to the oncoming traffic at night in line with the standards.

There is a need to provide associated signage for the treatments.Property devaluation is a subjective matter. These treatments will slow down the traffic which will create a safer environment for the residents within the estate.





Littlecroft Avenue is a prime example of how hoons treat speed humps; sit on top and then burn rubber taking off and do burn outs in between.This will create a lot more noise and only hinders those who do the speed limit; more police presence is required.

Poor driving habits occur irrespective of a street having traffic calming devices or not. The treatments are not expected to curb a hooning issue which is an enforcement and education matter.Traffic surveys highlight that the majority of vehicles are travelling at speeds higher than the default 50km/h speed limit.The enforcement of traffic speeds is the responsibility of Victoria Police.Council does not have the power to enforce speed limits.


To noisy especially at night and will create increased pollution outside my house.

I don’t want a speed hump in front of my house. It will create more traffic noise; already have noisy buses passing my house.

It is acknowledged that the installation of speedhumps will create additional noise; however it is considered they will provide a greater benefit to road safety within this road.They are standard industry approved treatments used to slow down traffic and should not cause increased pollution if negotiated appropriately.


13 Not required in Ardblair Terrace An assessment of this road in Council’s LTM Program identified that the 85th percentile speed is 59km/h in the 50km/h speed zone. There is support from the residents in this street for the scheme.

14 Won’t make any difference to traffic though will cause major problems and inconvenience residents who will travel over them every day.

They are standard industry approved treatments used to slow down traffic and should not cause damage if negotiated appropriately.The proposed treatments are spaced at regular intervals to manage overall speeds through the street and are not expected to cause any significant delays or congestion.

15 The money is better spent on reducing traffic on main roads around Clyde Rd and Greaves Rd.

Beyond the scope of this project.




16 Concerns regarding noise from cars going over the speed humps in the evening and night.

It is acknowledged that the installation of speedhumps will create additional noise; however it is considered they will provide a greater benefit to road safety within this area.

17 No more speed humps; majority of speeders are motor cycles who will go through gap between the humps.

An assessment of these roads in Council’s LTM Program identified that the 85th percentile speeds is greater than the 50km/h speed zone and there is an accident history which resulted in these roads having a high ranking for traffic calming devices.

18 We need more 50km/h speed signs. VicRoads do not typically approve the installation of 50km/h speed signs where the default urban speed limit applies.

19 Emergency Services do not like them. There has been ongoing consultation with the emergency services and there have been no objections to the proposed treatments.

20 They will destroy the aesthetic view of the roadway.


21 Current roundabouts slow traffic well enough


22 You penalise the many to govern the few; they only slow down drivers who obey the limits.


23 The majority of residents use the roads responsibly; putting in more speed humps will be awful.


24 Prefer traffic islands instead of speed humps.

Traffic islands need to cater for long vehicles such as waste collection vehicles and buses which meana wider swept path is required through the treatment and this often decreases the treatments effectiveness in slowing down the vehicular traffic. Intersection treatments also cause significant parking loss and impact on existing street trees.

25 Concerned regarding wear and tear on vehicles; environmental impact of acceleration and deceleration.


26 Speed humps ruin the suspension on cars.


27 We have never encountered any problems on the roads.





28 I would rather deal with the occasional speeding car than see the aesthetics of the area totally destroyed by the irresponsible behaviour of a few.


29 I detest the existing humps in Robinswood Parade; tyre marks around them all.

Poor driving habits occur irrespective of a street having traffic calming devices or not. The treatments are not expected to curb a hooning issue which is an enforcement and education matter.

30 We have major problems in this area with hoons; provide more police in the area to catch them.

The enforcement of traffic speeds is the responsibility of Victoria Police.Council does not have the power to enforce speed limits.

31 Do not ruin our lovely entrance; there must be another way to stop the speedsters.

The proposed treatments are considered to be the most appropriate for this area wide scheme and can be delivered within current budget constraints.

32 Use the money to complete Glasscocks Rd to Narre Warren –Cranbourne Rd.

Beyond the scope of this project.

33 Install speed cameras. The installation of speed cameras is the responsibility of the Victoria Police.

34 The existing speed humps on Robinswood Parade has caused severe damage to my car tyres.


35 Berwick Springs Promenade is a major road and should not have speed humps; several roundabouts already control the flow of traffic.

An assessment of this road in Council’s LTM Program identified that the 85th percentile speed is 60km/h in the 50km/h speed zone and has recent accident history. There is support from the residents in this street for the scheme.

36 Invest the money in dangerous, chaotic intersections and not speed humps as I feel that they are a waste of tax payer’s money.


37 We have stopped using the roads with speed humps; I have never seen speeding cars in The Esplanade.

An assessment of this road in Council’s LTM Program identified that the 85th percentile speed is 58km/h in the 50km/h speed zone and has recent accident history. There is support from the residents in this street for the scheme.

38 Excessive speed isn’t much of a problem along The Esplanade or Berwick Springs Promenade; improving parking would be a better use of money.

Refer to comments – No.35 and No.37

39 Hoons don’t slow down for them. Poor driving habits occur irrespective of a street having traffic calming devices or not. The treatments are not expected to curb a hooning issue which is an enforcement and education matter.

40 More traffic will use The Avenue and Heritage Drive to avoid the speed humps.

Speed humps are now proposed to be installed inThe Avenue and Heritage Drive to deter displacement of traffic.


17 June 2014ITEM 7

TRAFFIC CONCERNS - HINRICHSEN DRIVE, HALLAM River GumPaul Hamilton Council Plan Reference: 4.1

Purpose of Report: To report to Council on investigations into the traffic concerns in Hinrichsen Drive, Hallam.

Executive Summary

Council received a petition signed by 100 signatories highlighting the community concern over traffic concerns in Hinrichsen Drive, Hallam. Hinrichsen Drive has been used as a ‘rat run’ route for a number of years by traffic attempting to avoid the congested Princes Highway/Hallam Road signalised intersection.

Council has a Local Traffic Management (LTM) Program that provides annual funding for the installation of traffic calming devices in roads throughout the municipality. A report on the LTM Program and review of candidate locations for traffic calming measures was considered by Council at its meeting on 7 November 2013. The report identified that Hinrichsen Drive has met the minimum cut off score where traffic conditions would warrant consideration of treatments through the LTM Program, however, there were a number of other locations considered to be a higher priority for investigation and preparation of LTM schemes at this time.

As part of the 2013 LTM program review, the officers have identified one section of Hinrichsen Drive (near Keppel Drive) where there is an emerging loss of control trend resulting in property damage. The officers are now investigating a treatment (speed hump) in this location and have already commenced community consultation and design work. The outcome of the design investigations and the feedback received from the community will be tabled at Council for consideration in the near future.

In the meantime, the officers have included Hinrichsen Drive as a site in the Speed Awareness Mobile (SAM) Trailer Program.

Background

At its meeting on 15 April 2014 Council, in considering a petition signed by 100 signatories regarding the installation of traffic calming devices in Hinrichsen Drive resolved:

1. That Council accepts the petition.

2. That the head petitioner be notified of the outcome.

3. That a report come back to Council by the end of June 2014.

Wording of the petition is as follows;

This petition draws to the attention of the City of Casey the urgent need for traffic calming measures in Hinrichsen Drive Hallam. The petitioners seek that the City of Casey supports this proposal to ensure the protection of motorists and pedestrians by slowing down traffic and installing the most appropriate traffic calming measures as a matter of urgency.



17 June 2014ITEM 7

This report will detail the investigations into the installation of traffic calming measures in Hinrichsen Drive.

A locality plan is shown in Attachment A.

Hinrichsen Drive Traffic Conditions

Hinrichsen Drive operates as a collector road that is approximately 2km in length with a sealed pavement and a default speed limit of 50km/h. The road services the local subdivision and experiences some ‘rat run’ traffic avoiding the Princes Highway/Hallam Road intersection with traffic volumes typical for a road of this nature.

The road has a curvilinear alignment with one existing roundabout and parking lanes along the length of Hinrichsen Drive that assist with the traffic management.

Survey Results

Traffic surveys have been regularly undertaken in Hinrichsen Drive over a number of years with survey data dating back to 2001. As part of the most recent 2013 LTM review, updated survey data was collected in Hinrichsen Drive in August 2013. The survey data is summarised in the table below and the survey locations shown in the locality plans as Attachment A.

Location Daily Traffic Volume 85th Percentile Speed (km/h)

Outside 41 Hinrichsen Drive 2478 56.5

Outside 110 Hinrichsen Drive 2013 58.7

It is noted that the survey results for Hinrichsen Drive show that vehicle speeds are higher than desirable though the traffic volumes are acceptable for a road of this nature.

Accident History

The accident history as assessed in the Local Traffic Management (LTM) program considers all reported injury collision accidents along the road as recorded in the VicRoads Crashstats database.

There has been one reported serious injury collision and one other injury collision in Hinrichsen Drive in the most recent five-year period (2009-2013) for which crash data is available.

LTM Assessment

Council adopted a process for prioritising streets for LTM works in 2001 which is subject to an annual review and has undergone a number of refinements over time.

Council’s Local Traffic Management (LTM) Program provides annual funding for the installation of traffic calming devices in roads throughout the municipality. The LTM Program assesses and prioritises roads on the need for traffic calming measures based on traffic speeds, traffic volumes and casualty accidents, as well as considering factors such as road geometry and proximity to schools, shops and playgrounds.



17 June 2014ITEM 7

A report on the LTM Program and review of candidate locations for traffic calming measures was considered by Council at its meeting on 7 November 2013. The report identified 24 streets including Hinrichsen Drive that met the minimum cut off score where traffic conditions would warrant consideration of treatments through the LTM Program. The report advised that there were a number of other locations considered to be a higher priority for investigation and preparation of LTM schemes at this time.

Notwithstanding this the officers have identified one section of Hinrichsen Drive where there is an emerging loss of control trend resulting in property damage. The officers are investigating a treatment in this location and have already commenced community consultation and design work. The proposal is to install a speed hump treatment on the northern approach to the intersection of Hinrichsen Drive/Keppel Drive. The outcome of the design investigations and the feedback received from the community will be tabled at Council for consideration in the near future.

In the meantime, Hinrichsen Drive has been included in Council’s SAM Trailer Program to reinforce to motorists their speeds in relation to the speed limit.

Hinrichsen Drive will be reassessed in the annual review of the LTM Program which will be undertaken later this year.



Conclusion

Traffic surveys conducted in Hinrichsen Drive have identified that speeds in the street are higher than desirable, though the traffic volumes are acceptable for a road of this nature.

Hinrichsen Drive is listed in Council’s LTM program with the traffic conditions meeting the minimum intervention level to warrant the installation of traffic calming devices. However other locations show as a higher priority for treatment in the short term, as detailed in the LTM annual report to Council on 7 November 2013.

The officers have identified one section of Hinrichsen Drive (near Keppel Drive) where there is an emerging loss of control trend resulting in property damage. The officers are considering a treatment in this location and have already commenced community consultation and design work. The proposal is to install a speed hump treatment on the northern approach to the intersection of Hinrichsen Drive/Keppel Drive. A report will be presented to Council regarding this scheme in the near future.

The officers have also included Hinrichsen Drive as a site in the SAM Trailer Program and will continue to monitor the operation of Hinrichsen Drive.

Hinrichsen Drive will be reassessed in the annual review of the LTM Program which will be undertaken later this year.



17 June 2014ITEM 7

Recommendation

1. That Council notes that Hinrichsen Drive is listed under the Local Traffic Management Program and the traffic conditions in Hinrichsen Drive are monitored as part of the Local Traffic Management Program annual review process.

2. That Council notes that officers are investigating a proposal to install a speed hump treatment on the northern approach to the intersection of Hinrichsen Drive/Keppel Drive.

3. That Council notes the officers’ actions to include Hinrichsen Drive in the SAM Trailer Program.

4. That the head petition be notified of the outcome.



17 June 2014ITEM 7

ATTACHMENT A

Hinrichsen Drive, HallamLocality Plan


ATTACHMENT AHinrichsen Drive, Hallam

Locality Plan

Location of traffic counter 2013 (#41)

Location of traffic counter 2013 (#110)

Proposed Location of Treatment (Speed Hump)


17 June 2014ITEM 8

PLAY AND OPEN SPACE AMENITIES IN DOVETON River GumRichard Amon Council Plan Reference: 4.1

Purpose of Report: To outline the play and open space opportunities in the Doveton area

Background

At its meeting on 4 March 2014 Council, in considering a petition of 120 signatures on play and open space amenities in Doveton, resolved:

1. That Council receive the petition.

2. That Council thank the head petitioner and notify them of the outcome.

3. That Council officers investigate opportunities for improved play and open space amenities in the Doveton area.

4. That a report be presented to Council on the result of the investigation by May 2014.

The petition outlined a desire for improvements in parks and playground facilities for children and families in the Doveton area and noted a lack of adventure parks and modern playgrounds for all age groups. Skating was also mentioned as a desired use for parks.

Subsequently, a brief holding report was presented to Council at its meeting 20 May 2014 at which Council resolved:

That officers report back to Council in June 2014 on the outcomes of its assessment into play opportunities in the Doveton area.

Existing Open Space Opportunities

The 2011 Census population data for the Doveton and Eumemmerring area noted that there were 10,246 residents with some modest growth forecast to occur resulting in an expected population of 11,160 residents by 2014. The Doveton / Eumemmerring area is older in age compared with the City of Casey as a whole with a higher proportion of older adults and a lower proportion of young and school aged children.

Local residents indicated through the consultation phase of the Draft Open Space Strategy that they have an expectation for local trails and playgrounds in the area. Dandenong Creek Trail and Eumemmerring Park were the two most utilised open spaces.

Doveton includes a variety of open spaces and built recreation facilities that provide opportunities for local residents to socialise and participate in physical activity. These include the Olive Road Netball Complex, several outdoor recreation reserves, key trails including the Dandenong Creek Trail and Eumemmerring Creek trails (which provide key trail connections to neighbouring suburbs and beyond as part of the Melbourne Metropolitan Trail Network), Doveton Pool in the Park and Myuna Farm which are significant and unique community assets for local residents.



17 June 2014ITEM 8

Doveton also includes 15 community playgrounds which all serve a local catchment as well as other recreation facilities within the local open space network. These include a skate facility, BMX track and outdoor exercise equipment at Waratah South Reserve; other BMX tracks at Kevin Adlard Reserve and Kanooka Grove and community gardens at Eumemmerring food garden and Myuna Farm.

In recent years, Council installed a local playground at the Linden Place shops and also upgraded the following playgrounds in the area:

Liquidamber playground in Liquidamber Street; Ray Giles playground in Crimson Drive; Kingfisher playground in Kingfisher Drive; andRobinson Reserve playground in Frawley Road.

The Doveton / Eumemmerring area is likely to change in composition over the next 10 – 20 years with the likely future sale of three surplus school sites as determined by the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. Should these sites be developed to accommodate residential housing Council would advocate for open space to be provided as part of the development process that would provide opportunities for improved play and open space amenities.

Future Open Space Development Opportunities

There are a number of plans and strategies that have either been adopted or are in progress that impact on Doveton’s open space network and recreation facilities. These include:

The State Government’s Sale of Doveton’s Surplus School Sites

and Council’s

Draft Open Space Strategy Draft Leisure Facilities and Development Plan Draft Autumn Place Master Plan Draft Myuna Farm Master Plan Doveton Pool in the Park feasibility assessment (in progress)Draft Doveton / Eumemmerring Community Facilities Investment StrategyPaths and Trails StrategyPlayground Strategy and Draft Playground Action PlanSkate Strategy

These strategies outline a number of improvements proposed for Doveton’s open space network and playground facilities over time, including:

Council’s Playground Action Plan recommends for each of Doveton’s playgrounds to be upgraded in future. However, the timing of this is in the mid to long term due to other priority playground upgrade projects. Council officers will consider opportunities to diversify the design of playgrounds as part of these upgrades to provide greater variety and interest in the play experience.



17 June 2014ITEM 8

There is one existing satellite level skate facility in Doveton at Waratah South Reserve which services the local catchment and is supported by larger skate facilities throughout the City.Dandenong Creek Trail and Eumemmerring Park (which includes the trail) were identified in Council’s Draft Open Space Strategy as the two most popular open space assets for the area. Council will continue to investigate and advocate for connections from these trails to connect local residents with neighbouring suburbs and community assets.As part of the future implementation of Council’s Draft Open Space Strategy officers will investigate opportunities to enhance local parks across the City with additional seating, paths, kick-about-spaces and landscaping to enhance their appeal.Council will advocate for parks, reserves and trails to be provided as part of the likely open space contributions resulting from the future development of surplus school sites in the Doveton area.The Autumn Place Master Plan recommends the future enhancement of a local town park including an interactive playground and improved amenities in the shopping strip to support its role as a local focal point for the community.Council’s Draft Myuna Farm Master Plan recommends for a substantial enhancement of the farm playground to enhance the appeal of the site.Council officers are continuing to investigate potential future upgrade opportunities(including the potential to add to the passive open space opportunities) for the Doveton Pool in the Park site with a view of broadening its usage profile and contributing to the viability of the facility and extending its usage throughout the year.Council’s Draft Leisure Facilities and Development Plan recommends for future upgrades to occur to Waratah South Reserve, Olive Road Netball Complex and Robinson Reserve to cater for growing participation numbers and provide pathways for these sports.Council’s Draft Doveton / Eumemmerring Community Facilities Investment Strategy is looking to identify potential opportunities and investment strategies to revitalise existing assets in the area.Council’s draft 5 Year Capital Works Program also includes $59,000 for landscape and development works to be undertaken at Rowan Park (2014/15) and $57,500 at Eumemmerring Creek parklands (2015/16). Officers will consider the opportunities to enhance the play value in these open spaces as part of the undertaking of these works.

Next Steps

Officers will continue to implement open space projects in the Doveton/Eumemmerring area as guided by existing plans and strategies (as detailed above). It should be noted that there are a number of plans/strategies across Council which are currently at various stages of completion and at appropriate times will be available for community consideration and comment before being presented to Council for adoption. The input of the community is an important step in this process. Officers can liaise further with the head petitioner and other interested residents to assist with this process.



17 June 2014ITEM 8

This report has provided a consolidated outline of the proposed future projects which may impact on the parks and open space across the Doveton and Eumemmerring area. This information will be the basis for further discussions with the head petitioner and interested residents. Officers will also consider other ideas and feedback from this group as part of these discussions and consider opportunities to link these in with Council’s existing planned projects.

Officers can then report back at the conclusion of the strategies that are currently in progress with a coordinated approach for broader precinct based open space opportunities in the Doveton / Eumemmerring area that considers the direction provided in these strategic documents and further feedback from residents.



Conclusion

The Doveton and Eumemmerring area includes a number of open space assets, including parks, outdoor pool, Myuna Farm, sporting reserves, indoor sports centres, play, BMX and skate facilities and more which provide a range of benefits for the community. The area has two major trail connections including the Dandenong Creek and Eumemmerring Creek trails which link to neighbouring suburbs and key destinations.

Officers will continue to implement open space projects in the Doveton/Eumemmerring area as guided by existing plans and strategies (as detailed in this report). There a number of plans across Council which are currently being developed and will be available for community consideration and comment before being presented to Council for adoption. Officers can liaise further with the head petitioner and other interested residents to assist with this process.

Officers can then report back at the conclusion of strategies currently in progress with a coordinated approach for broader precinct based open space opportunities in the Doveton / Eumemmerring area.

Recommendation

1. That officers continue to implement open space projects as part of endorsed plans and strategies.

2. That officers liaise with the head petitioner and report back at the conclusion of current plans and strategies which are being developed to advise on a coordinated approach for broader precinct based open space opportunities in the Doveton / Eumemmerring area.

3. That the head petitioner be notified of Council’s decision.


ACHIEVINGBEST PRACTICE IN GOVERNANCE AT

CASEY


17 June 2014ITEM 1

ADVISORY COMMITTEE POLICYFrances Dodd Council Plan Reference: 5.6

Purpose of Report: To update the Advisory Committee policy

Background

The Local Government Act provides for councils to establish advisory committees which advise and do not have powers. Council has a number of advisory committees and as their purposes can vary widely, it has been beneficial to have a policy which provides for basic strategic and operational guidelines.

The policy was last amended in 2012 and requires updating.

Discussion

The Advisory Committee policy has been reviewed. Consistency between various terms of reference of committees will be improved by addressing areas such as term of membership; community representation; diversity of membership; nomination process for community members; voting; role of Chairperson; quorum and role and membership of sub committees and working groups.

Accordingly, it is suggested that the Advisory Committee policy be amended and extended to provide a consistent guide for Council officers in supporting Advisory Committees. The draft policy addresses areas which have been of concern to Council and officers. The policy also requires that all terms of reference incorporate reference to the policy and that a copy of the policy be given to all advisory committee members.

The amended Advisory Committee policy will enable a consistent approach to the management of advisory committees and a clearly defined process for appointment of community representatives to the committees and their sub-committees.

The current policy with Track Changes is attached as Attachment A and the draft policy is attached as Attachment B



Conclusion

The amended Advisory Committee policy will enable a consistent approach to the management of advisory committees and a clearly defined process for appointment of community representatives to the committees and their sub-committees.

Recommendation

That the attached draft Advisory Committee policy (Attachment B) be adopted by Council



17 June 2014ITEM 1

ATTACHMENT A

Advisory Committee Policy – Track Changes


Advisory CommitteePolicy

Advisory Committee Policy (Draft as at 7 May 2014) Page 2 of 9

Document Control


Responsible Department – Governance

Draft as at 7 May 2014

Electronic reference library - DRAFT

Preamble





Advisory Committee Policy


Document Control





Preamble






1. Purpose

This policy guides the establishment, operations, review and disbanding of Advisory Committees.

2. Scope

All Advisory Committees established by Council are covered by this policy with the exception of the Audit and Ethics Committee which is regulated by section 139 of theLocal Government Act 1989 (The Act).

3. Context

The establishment of an Advisory Committee is dealt with under sections 3(1) and 86 of the Act. The State Ombudsman’s March 2008 Conflict of interest in local governmentreport reinforced the need for guidelines to ensure probity in such aspects of a Council’s operations.

Advisory Committees are one of a number of ways of consulting and communicating with the community. Such a committee may be established to provide strategic level input into a broad area of Council’s operations, such as Access and Inclusion. An Advisory Committee may also be appropriate in the case of a specific time-limited project, such as a review of a Local Law.

In line with the definition of Advisory Committees in Section 3 of the Act, Advisory Committees advise Council. They are not responsible for expenditure and cannot direct Council officers. Where Advisory Committee recommendations are beyond the delegated power of Council officers, recommended actions, along with the minutes of the meeting are submitted to Council for final decision.

An Advisory Committee with one or more Councillors present (whether members of the Committee or not), becomes an Assembly of Councillors, in accordance with Section 76AA of the Act. Section 80A of the Act is also relevant in regard to Assembly of Councillors

4. Policy

4.1 Rationale for Advisory CommitteesAdvisory Committees are one of a number of ways of consulting and communicating with the community. Such a committee may be established to provide strategic level input into a broad area of Council’s operations, such as Access and Inclusion. An Advisory Committee may also be appropriate in the case of a specific time-limited project, such as a review of a Local Law.

In line with the definition of Advisory Committees in Section 3 of the Act, Advisory Committees advise Council. They are not responsible for expenditure and cannot direct Council officers. Where Advisory Committee recommendations are beyond the delegated power of Council officers, recommended actions, along with the minutes of the meeting are submitted to Council for final decision.4.2 Establishment4.1 General Advisory Committees

An Advisory Committee shall be established by resolution of Council.

Prior to the establishment of an Advisory Committee, Council shall consider a report covering the following issues:

Why Is an Advisory Committee is appropriate?


What are tThe terms of reference of the proposed Advisory Committee?

What is an aAppropriate membership, including length of tenure?

When will tThe likely time for the Committee cease to exist or be the subject of a review?

4.2.24.2 Award Specific Panels

Council will from time to time appoint members toof award and grant selectionpanels. The Chief Executive Officer is delegated to form such panels as required. Such panels are Advisory Committees.

4.3 4.2.3 When is an Advisory Committee appropriate?

An Advisory Committee is appropriate where it can be used to gain strategic level input from a broad cross section of the community, or who are often missed in other communication processes or (b) from individuals with specialist expertise.

An Advisory Committee is not appropriate where the subject matter is operational or there are more effective and inclusive ways of gaining representative community input from and communicating with relevant members of the community.

4.4 4.2.4 Terms of Reference

The role of the proposed Advisory Committee, including the limits to its power, shall be clearly defined in terms of reference for Council adoption.

As Advisory Committees advise Council, they do not have any power to expend funds. They are also unable to direct Council officers.

The terms of reference of an advisory committee should be consistent with and refer to this policy. A copy of this policy and the terms of reference should be provided to all new members of an advisory committee

4.5 4.2.5 What is the appropriate mMembership and voting rights of the proposed Advisory Committee, including length of tenure?

The membership of an Advisory Committee will vary depending upon its specific role.

All members, both Councillors and community members, shall be appointed or replaced by resolution of Council. Councillors shall generally be appointed for one-year at the annual Special Council meeting, which elects the Mayor. Community members shall be appointed in accordance with clause 4.6.

Community members shall form a majority of members on the committee. A term of membership for community members is generally two years, unless the committee has been established for a lesser time. Membership renewal is encouraged where there are more community applicants than vacancies available to ensure continued diversity of representation on Advisory Committees.

All members have one vote each, with the Chairperson able to exercise a second (casting) vote in the event of an equality of votes.


A quorum of members is not less than fifty percent of the number of members of the Committee who are entitled to vote.

Councillors who are not members may attend as observers but are not entitled to vote.

4.6 Community member selection process

Community representatives shall be selected through a nomination process,advertised in local . When vacancies arise, an advertisement will be placed in local newspapers and on Council’s website. An assessment panel made up of at least a minimum of one of the delegated Councillors and two community members of the Committee , supported by Council officers, will be convened towill recommend on the selection of representatives to fill vacancies. Recommendations regarding the filling of vacancies will be submitted in a report by Council officers to a Closed Council Meeting for determination.

4.32 Operations

An Advisory Committee is likely to have its own specific needs and these will be reflected in its terms of reference. However, the following provides guidance.

4.7 4.3.1 Chairperson

The position of Chairperson shall generally be filled by a Councillor.

4.8 4.3.2 Administration and reporting of Recommendations to Council

a) Council officers play a vital role in supporting and informing an Advisory Committee. The Chief Executive Officer is responsible for the appointment of a relevant Council Officer(s) to undertake administrative tasks of the Committee and to attend all meetings. Council Officers will report the Committee’s recommendations to the earliest practicable meeting of Council, along with officer’s comments where necessary and appropriate. The reporting to Council of minutes or notes of an Advisory Committee’s meetings will observe requirements relating to Assembly of Councillors.

b) Council Officers are not members of Advisory Committees and do not have a vote.

4.24.9 4.3.3 Volunteers

a) Advisory Committee members other than Councillors are volunteers. Following appointment by resolution of Council they must sign a declaration that they will abide by any guidelines approved by the Chief Executive Officer to cover the conduct of volunteers, including the avoidance of conflicts of interest, and undertake training and skills development as required. Council’s Code of Conduct for volunteers must also be complied with. A copy of the Code must be provided to all new members.

b) Whilst the primary role of an Advisory Committee is to provide strategic level input to Council, individual members may also assist as volunteers with the implementation of Council programs under the direction of a Council staff member.

4.34.10 4.3.4 Decision making


Consensus decision making is preferred. However, all members are entitled to vote and a matter may be voted upon at the discretion of the Chairperson, who shall have a casting vote in the event of a deadlockan equality of votes.

4.4 4.3.5 Vacancies

Advisory Committee vacancies shall be filled by resolution of Council or by the Chief Executive Officer in the case of award and grants selection panels.

4.54.11 4.3.6 Sub Committees and working groups

Sub Committees and working groups may be formed if allowed for in the Advisory Committee’s terms of reference. Membership of sub committees and working groups is limited to members of the relevant advisory committee. In forming such groups, it is important to ensure that they do not become involved in operational issues.

4.64.12 4.3.7 Non members

Non members may be invited to attend an Advisory Committee to present or provide specialist advice. However, they must not be involved in the decision making process.4.7

4.84.13 4.3.8 Conflicts of Interest

Prior to consideration of an item in which a member may have a conflict of interest (ie, including a potential financial, material, or other gain or loss or close association or interest related to the Advisory Committee’s consideration of the matter), this interest must be declared to the Chairperson. The member must leave the room and remain outside until conclusion of discussion on the item.

4.94.14 4.3.9 Publicity

Committee members, with the exception of the Chairperson, must not make any public comment about the Advisory Committee.

4.104.15Confidentiality

Information discussed, received, used or created by the Committee is confidential. It may be designated as confidential in accordance with Section 77of the Act.

4.16 a) Non-Disclosure

A Committee member must not disclose, discuss or make public confidential information, unless authorised by the officer supporting the Committee.

Members must sign and abide by a ‘Confidentiality Protocol’ before attending their first Committee meeting.

4.17 b) Restriction of Use

A Committee member must not photocopy or in any way record, retain, or reproduce confidential information.


17 June 2014ITEM 1

ATTACHMENT B

Draft Advisory Committee Policy


Advisory Committee Policy

ABPGC - Item 1 - Attachment B.docx Page 2 of 8

Document Control





Preamble






1. Purpose

This policy guides the establishment, operations, review and disbanding of Advisory Committees.

2. Scope

All Advisory Committees established by Council are covered by this policy with the exception of the Audit and Ethics Committee which is regulated by section 139 of theLocal Government Act 1989 (The Act).

3. Context

The establishment of an Advisory Committee is dealt with under sections 3(1) and 86 of the Act.

Advisory Committees are one of a number of ways of consulting and communicating with the community. Such a committee may be established to provide strategic level input into a broad area of Council’s operations, such as Access and Inclusion. An Advisory Committee may also be appropriate in the case of a specific time-limited project, such as a review of a Local Law.

In line with the definition of Advisory Committees in Section 3 of the Act, Advisory Committees advise Council. They are not responsible for expenditure and cannot direct Council officers. Where Advisory Committee recommendations are beyond the delegated power of Council officers, recommended actions, along with the minutes of the meeting are submitted to Council for final decision.

4. Policy

4.1 General Advisory CommitteesAn Advisory Committee shall be established by resolution of Council.

Prior to the establishment of an Advisory Committee, Council shall consider a report covering the following issues:

Why an Advisory Committee is appropriate

The terms of reference of the proposed Advisory Committee

Appropriate membership, including length of tenure

The likely time for the Committee to exist or be the subject of a review

4.2 Award Specific Panels

Council will from time to time appoint members to award and grant selectionpanels. Such panels are Advisory Committees.

4.3 When is an Advisory Committee appropriate?

An Advisory Committee is appropriate where it can be used to gain strategic level input from a broad cross section of the community, or from individuals with specialist expertise.

An Advisory Committee is not appropriate where the subject matter is operational or there are more effective and inclusive ways of gaining representative community input from and communicating with relevant members of the community.


4.4 Terms of Reference

The role of the proposed Advisory Committee, including the limits to its power, shall be clearly defined in terms of reference for Council adoption.

As Advisory Committees advise Council, they do not have any power to expend funds. They are also unable to direct Council officers.

The terms of reference of an advisory committee should be consistent with and refer to this policy. A copy of this policy and the terms of reference should be provided to all new members of an advisory committee

4.5 Membership and voting rights

The membership of an Advisory Committee will vary depending upon its specific role.

All members, both Councillors and community members, shall be appointed or replaced by resolution of Council. Councillors shall generally be appointed for one-year at the annual Special Council meeting, which elects the Mayor. Community members shall be appointed in accordance with clause 4.6.

Community members shall form a majority of members on the committee. A term of membership for community members is generally two years, unless the committee has been established for a lesser time. Membership renewal is encouraged where there are more community applicants than vacancies available to ensure continued diversity of representation on Advisory Committees. All members have one vote each, with the Chairperson able to exercise a second (casting) vote in the event of an equality of votes.

A quorum of members is not less than fifty percent of the number of members of the Committee who are entitled to vote.

Councillors who are not members may attend as observers but are not entitled to vote.

4.6 Community member selection process

Community representatives shall be selected through a nomination process,advertised in local newspapers and on Council’s website. An assessment panel of at least one delegated Councillor and two community members of the Committee will recommend on the selection of representatives to fill vacancies. Recommendations regarding the filling of vacancies will be submitted in a report by Council officers to a Closed Council Meeting for determination.

4.7 Chairperson

The position of Chairperson shall generally be filled by a Councillor.

4.8 Administration and reporting of Recommendations to Council

Council officers play a vital role in supporting and informing an Advisory Committee. The Chief Executive Officer is responsible for the appointment of a relevant Council Officer(s) to undertake administrative tasks of the Committee and to attend all meetings. Council Officers will report the Committee’s


recommendations to the earliest practicable meeting of Council, along with officer’s comments where necessary and appropriate. The reporting to Council of minutes or notes of an Advisory Committee’s meetings will observe requirements relating to Assembly of Councillors.

Council Officers are not members of Advisory Committees and do not have a vote.

4.9 Volunteers

Advisory Committee members other than Councillors are volunteers. Following appointment by resolution of Council they must sign a declaration that they will abide by any guidelines approved by the Chief Executive Officer to cover the conduct of volunteers, including the avoidance of conflicts of interest, and undertake training and skills development as required. Council’s Code of Conduct for volunteers must also be complied with. A copy of the Code must be provided to all new members.

Whilst the primary role of an Advisory Committee is to provide strategic level input to Council, individual members may also assist as volunteers with the implementation of Council programs under the direction of a Council staff member.

4.10 Decision making

Consensus decision making is preferred. However, all members are entitled to vote and a matter may be voted upon at the discretion of the Chairperson, who shall have a casting vote in the event of an equality of votes.

4.11 Sub Committees and working groups

Sub Committees and working groups may be formed if allowed for in the Advisory Committee’s terms of reference. Membership of sub comittees and working groups is limited to members of the relevant advisory committee. In forming such groups, it is important to ensure that they do not become involved in operational issues.

4.12 Non members

Non members may be invited to attend an Advisory Committee to present or provide specialist advice. However, they must not be involved in the decision making process.

4.13 Conflicts of Interest

Prior to consideration of an item in which a member may have a conflict of interest (ie, including a potential financial, material, or other gain or loss or close association or interest related to the Advisory Committee’s consideration of the matter), this interest must be declared to the Chairperson. The member must leave the room and remain outside until conclusion of discussion on the item.

4.14 Publicity

Committee members, with the exception of the Chairperson, must not make any public comment about the Advisory Committee.


4.15 Confidentiality

Information discussed, received, used or created by the Committee is confidential. It may be designated as confidential in accordance with Section 77of the Act.

4.16 Non-Disclosure

A Committee member must not disclose, discuss or make public confidential information, unless authorised by the officer supporting the Committee.

Members must sign and abide by a ‘Confidentiality Protocol’ before attending their first Committee meeting.

4.17 Restriction of Use

A Committee member must not photocopy or in any way record, retain, or reproduce confidential information.

A Committee member must not permit any person who is not a member of the Committee to view, read, photocopy, make notes of or in any way record confidential information.

4.18 Breach of Confidentiality

The City of Casey, by resolution of Council, may terminate a Committee member’s term for breaching the confidentiality rules.

4.19 Assembly of Councillors

An Advisory Committee with one or more Councillors present (whether members of the Committee or not), becomes an Assembly of Councillors, in accordance with Section 3(1) of the Act. The minutes or notes of the meeting must be reported to the next practicable meeting of Council.

Conflicts of Interest must be declared by Councillors. In the event of a declaration of a Conflict of Interest, the declaration, the time of the Councillor leaving the meeting room and the time of their return must be recorded in the minutes or notes of the meeting.

4.20 Review of Advisory Committees

All advisory committees should be formed for a specific period and/or function. Scheduled reviews are vital to ensure that an Advisory Committee is delivering value to the community.

Advisory Committees shall be reviewed every three years.

If an Advisory Committee is unable to form a quorum for three successive meetings then a review should be undertaken in accordance with clause 4.21.

Council may, by resolution, at any time call for a review of an Advisory Committee.


4.21 Reporting the Results of a Review

The results of a review shall be reported to Closed Council prior to the Committee’s third anniversary of operation, or earlier if specified in the terms of reference or if a quorum is unable to be formed. The report shall consider:

the Committee’s achievements,

whether there is a demonstrated need for the Committee to continue; and

any other relevant matter.

4.22 Disbanding

An Advisory Committee ceases to exist at the conclusion of the period specified in its terms of reference unless Council resolves that it continue. Council may also disband a Committee following a review or at any other time.


It is recognised that, from time to time, circumstances may change leading to the need for minor administrative changes to this document. Where an update does not materially alter this document, such a change may be made administratively. Examples include a change to the name of a Council department, a change to the name of a Federal or State Government department, and a minor update to legislation which does not have a material impact. However, any change or update which materially alters this document must be by resolution of Council.

6. Review

The next biennial review of this document is scheduled for completion by 30 April 2016.

7. Breaches

Breaches will be dealt with under the provisions of the following:

Code of Conduct for Volunteers

Councillor Code of Conduct

Section 77 of the Local Government Act 1989

Section 76BA of the Local Government Act 1989

Section 76D(2)(b) of the Local Government Act 1989

CONSIDERATION OFREPORTS OFCOMMITTEES

C o n s i d e r a t i o n o f R e p o r t s o f C o m m i t t e e s

COMMITTEE MEETING DATE OF COMMITTEE MEETING

Assembly of Councillors As listed

General Purposes Committee 10 June 2014

RECO

RD O

F AS

SEM

BLIE

S O

F CO

UN

CILL

ORS

ASSE

MBL

Y DE

TAIL

S CO

UN

CILL

OR

ATTE

NDE

ES

OFF

ICER

AT

TEN

DEES

O

THER

S PR

ESEN

T M

ATTE

RS C

ON

SIDE

RED

CON

FLIC

T O

F IN

TERE

ST

DISC

LOSU

RES

3/06

/201

4 Pr

e Co

unci

l Cr

Aziz

Cr

Cre

stan

i Cr

Kap

lon

Cr M

orla

nd

Cr R

owe

Cr S

tapl

edon

Cr

Ber

kelm

ans

Cr S

erey

Mik

e Ty

ler

Ray

Butle

r Pe

ter F

itche

tt

Greg

Woo

d Sh

eena

Fro

st

Roby

n Bo

rley

Mic

hael

Jans

en

Fran

Dod

d Pa

ul H

amilt

on

Pete

r Gill

iero

n

Nil

Offi

cers

Rep

orts

Pe

titio

ns a

nd Jo

int L

ette

rs

Not

ices

of M

otio

n U

rgen

t Bus

ines

s Su

spen

sion

of Lo

cal L

aw

Nil

10/0

6/20

14

Brie

fing

Cr A

blet

t Cr

Aziz

Cr

Cre

stan

i Cr

Mor

land

Cr

Sta

pled

on

Cr S

erey

Mik

e Ty

ler

Pete

r Fitc

hett

So

phia

Pet

rov

Greg

Woo

d Sh

eena

Fro

st

Roby

n Bo

rley

Fran

Dod

d Ca

rolin

e Be

ll Gl

enn

Bank

s Sm

ith

Cole

tte

McM

ahon

Ho

lly d

e Kr

etse

r

Nil

Com

mun

ity E

vent

Sig

nage

Po

licy

Nil

Record of Meeting and Recommendations

of the General Purposes Committee Meeting

held in the Council Chamber,Magid Drive, Narre Warren

Tuesday, 10 June 2014Commencing at 7.00 p.m.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. ApologiesCr BerkelmansCr KaplonCr RosarioCr RoweCr Smith

2. Declaration by Councillors of any Conflict of Interest or Personal Interests pursuant to Sections 79 and 79B of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) in any items on the Notice Paper. (Note that Section 79(2)(a)(i) of the Act requires Councillors to disclose the nature of a Conflict of Interest or a Personal Interest immediately before the relevant consideration or discussion). Section 79B also requires that the Councillor declaring a Personal Interest must seek consent from the Committee to be exempt from voting on the item.

Nil

3. Consideration of Officers’ Reports

Service’s for Casey’s CommunityDeveloping Casey’s Economy

Record of Meeting and Recommendations of the City of CaseyGeneral Purposes Committee Meeting held in the Council Chamber, Magid Drive,

Narre Warren, on Tuesday 10 June 2014 commencing at 7.00 p.m.The General Purposes Committee is an Advisory Committee

Councillors Present:

Cr Susan Serey - Chairperson

Mayor, Cr Geoff Ablett Cr Rosalie CrestaniDeputy Mayor, Cr Amanda Stapledon Cr Mick MorlandCr Sam Aziz

In Attendance:

Mike Tyler Chief Executive OfficerSophia Petrov Director Community DevelopmentGreg Wood Director Community ServicesSheena Frost Acting Director Corporate ServicesPeter Fitchett Director Planning & Development ServicesCaroline Bell Manager Community SafetyFran Dodd Acting Manager GovernanceColette McMahon Manager Youth & Family ServicesEmma Wilkinson Team Leader Community InclusionAnna Moore Team Leader Economic DevelopmentGlenn Wilson Civic Centre CoordinatorRobyn Borley Councillor Support OfficerHolly de Kretser Governance Support Officer

General Purposes Page 9 Page 1


Narre Warren, on Tuesday 10 June 2014 commencing at 7.00 p.m.

STATEMENT OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The Chairperson read the Statement of Acknowledgement.

SECTION 1 APOLOGIES:

At Council Meeting 6 May 2014 Cr Kaplon and Cr Smith were granted a Leave of Absence.

COUNCILLORS ABLETT/STAPLEDON

Carried

COUNCILLOR CRESTANI/MORLAND

Carried

SECTION 2DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTERESTS OR PERSONAL INTERESTS:

Nil

At 7.02 p.m. Cr Stapledon left the Chamber and returned at 7.03 p.m.




SECTION 3OFFICERS’ REPORTS:

ITEM 1PACER UNIT PRESENTATION

Purpose of Report: To inform Councillors of the work and achievements of the Police Ambulance and Critical Early Response (PACER) Unit

Mick Rogers from Monash Health and Senior Sergeant Graeme Stanley from Victoria Police presented to the Committee and answered questions.

COUNCILLORS ABLETT/STAPLEDON:

Carried

Recommendation 1COUNCILLORS ABLETT/STAPLEDON: That the PACER team be thanked for their presentation.

Carried





ITEM 2PACER UNIT PRESENTATION

Purpose of Report: For Insight Education Centre for the Blind and Vision Impaired to present in response to Notice of Motion No. 2823

A 7.25 p.m. Cr Morland left the Chamber and returned at 7.26 p.m.

Mr Alan Lachman and Dr Maree Matthews from the Insight Education Centre for the Blind and Vision Impaired presented to the Committee and answered questions.

COUNCILLORS STAPLEDON/CRESTANI:

That an extension of five minutes be granted.

Carried

Recommendation 1COUNCILLORS STAPLEDON/ABLETT:That Mr Alan Lachman and Dr Maree Matthews be thanked for their presentation.

Carried





ITEM 3AUSNAC APPRENTICESHIPS

Purpose of Report: For AusNac Apprenticeships to Present to the Committee

Joseph Morris from AusNaC Apprenticeships presented to the Committee and answered questions.

Recommendation 1COUNCILLORS ABLETT/STAPLEDON:1. That Council thank AusNAC Apprenticeships for their presentation.

2. That Council’s Human Resources department liaise with Mr Joseph Morris from AusNAC to investigate opportunities for further apprenticeships to be developed with the City of Casey.

Carried

ITEM 4BUZZ AROUND BERWICK

Purpose of Report: For Buzz Around Berwick to present to the General Purposes Committee

Jasmin Hewson from Buzz Around Berwick presented to the Committee and answered questions.

Recommendation 1COUNCILLORS ABLETT?STAPLEDON:1. That Council thank Buzz Around Berwick for their presentation.

2. That officers meet with Jasmin Hewson from theBuzz Around Berwick.com to see what possibilities are available to assist the City of Casey Council to advertise and promote local businesses and services.

Carried

CLOSE OF MEETING

Meeting closed at 8.16 p.m.

HD


PETITIONS

&

JOINT LETTERS

NOTICES OF MOTION

Notices of Motion 17 June 2014

Notice of Motion No. 2838Angel Light Link Presentation to GP CommitteeCr Crestani Council Plan Reference: 5.1

I hereby give notice that at the Council Meeting on 17 June 2014 I intend to move a motion as follows:

That Angel Light Link, care support service for young women in Casey, be invited to present at the next available General Purposes Committee.

Notice of Motion No. 2839Heritage Park, Selandra RiseCr Ablett Council Plan Reference: 4.1

I hereby give notice that at the Council Meeting on 17 June 2014 I intend to move a motion as follows:

1. That Officers investigate a price for a "Child Proof Safety Fence" to be erectedaround the playground area and up to the footpath on the half of the Park sitewhere small children run and play.

2. That a report comes back to the next Council meeting including the design and cost of the "safety fence" to be constructed.


REPORTS

BY

COUNCIL

DELEGATES

Name of Organisation Next meeting Delegate/s Alternate Delegate/s

Access and Inclusion Advisory Committee Wed 13 August2014

Cr Rafal KaplonCr Rosalie Crestani

Nil

Akoonah Park Committee of Management TBA Cr Mick Morland

Ageing Positively Advisory Group Fri 27 June 2014 Cr Mick Morland Cr Louise Berkelmans

Arts and Cultural Advisory Committee Mon 11 August 2014

Cr Wayne Smith Cr Louise Berkelmans

Audit & Ethics Committee Thurs 26 August 2014

Mayor of the DayCr Gary Rowe

Cardinia Tourism Advisory Committee TBA Cr Mick Morland

Casey Australia Day Awards Selection Advisory Committee

TBA Mayor of the Day Cr Mick Morland

Casey-Cardinia Library Corporation Wed 25 June 2014 Cr Wayne Smith Cr Susan Serey

Cr Damien Rosario

Casey Cardinia Local History Reference Group

TBA Cr Mick Morland Cr Amanda Stapledon

Casey Economic Development Partnership

TBA Cr Sam AzizCr Rafal Kaplon

Cr Damien Rosario

Casey Equestrian Reference Committee Tuesday 26 August 2014

Cr Geoff AblettCr Amanda Stapledon

Cr Susan Serey

Casey Fields Steering Committee Mon 18 August2014

Mayor of the DayCr Susan SereyCr Amanda StapledonCr Gary Rowe

Cr Damien Rosario

Casey Multifaith Network Thurs 21 July 2014 Cr Geoff AblettCr Amanda Stapledon

Cr Susan Serey

Casey Radio Wed 2 July 2014 Cr SmithCr Stapledon

Casey Volunteer Awards Advisory Committee

TBA Cr Rosalie Crestani Cr Susan Serey

Conservation Advisory Committee Wed 2 July 2014 Cr Damien RosarioCr Mick MorlandCr Rosalie CrestaniCr Rafal Kaplon

Nil

Cranbourne Community Plan Advisory Committee

TBA Cr Amanda StapledonCr Gary Rowe

Cr Geoff Ablett

Cranbourne Community Theatre Management Committee

TBA Cr Amanda Stapledon Cr Wayne Smith

Cranbourne GP Run Advisory Committee TBA Cr Wayne SmithCr Gary RoweCr Amanda Stapledon

Name of Organisation Next meeting Delegate/s Alternate Delegate/s

Doveton Eumemmerring Township Association

TBA Cr Damien Rosario Cr Wayne Smith

Hampton Park Town Centre Structure Plan Steering Committee

TBA Cr Damien RosarioCr Wayne Smith

Inter Council Aboriginal Consultative Committee

TBA Cr Rosalie Crestani Cr Damien Rosario

John Pandazopoulos Hall Committee of Management

TBA Cr Damien Rosario

MAV Arts and Culture Committee TBA Cr Wayne Smith

MAV Environment Committee TBA Cr Mick Morland

Mayoral Charity Account Special Committee

TBA Mayor of the DayCr Amanda Stapledon

Mayoral Charity Concert Advisory Committee

TBA Cr Louise BerkelmansCr Wayne SmithCr Amanda Stapledon

Metropolitan Local Governments Waste Forum

TBA Cr Amanda Stapledon Cr Mick Morland

Metropolitan Transport Forum TBA Cr Amanda Stapledon Cr Susan Serey

Mornington Peninsula and Western Port Biosphere Reserve Foundation Board

Thurs 17 July 2014 Cr Mick Morland Nicola Ward

Municipal Association of Victoria TBA Cr Mick Morland Cr Damien Rosario

Victorian Local Governance Association No formal meetings that delegates attend.

Cr Susan Serey Cr Amanda Stapledon

VLGA Timor-Leste Working Group TBA Cr Wayne Smith Cr Susan Serey

Any Councillors authorised by Council to attend conferences or meetings.

URGENT BUSINESS

to be the city of choice to live, work and raise a family. · councillor damien rosario councillor...

Documents