Council Minutes - Section B: Reports - 9 June 2015

Contents | Previous Page: Section A - Procedural Matters | Next Page: Section C - Urgent Business

Reports tabled at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on Tuesday date held at City Hall, Little Malop Street in Geelong.


  1. Amendment C265 Flood Overlays in Portarlington East, Corio, Newcomb and Whittington – Consideration of Panel Report and Adoption

  2. Northern ARC Health and Wellbeing Hub Master Plan

  3. G21 and AFL Barwon Regional Strategy

  4. City Plan 2013-2017 Progress Report to March 2015

  5. Financial Management Report – March 2015

  6. Re-appointment of External Representative on the Audit Advisory Committee

  7. Updated Privacy Policy and Management Procedure

  8. Road Naming – Unnamed Walkway, Portarlington

  9. Road Naming – Unnamed Laneway, Geelong

  10. Road Renaming – Kristy Place to Hopper Place, Wandana Heights

  11. Chief Executive Officer Recruitment


Cr Heagney declared an Indirect Interest by Close Association in Amendment C265 Flood Overlays in Portarlington East Corio, Newcomb and Whittington – Consideration of Panel Report and Adoption in that her parents-in-law own property adjacent to the flood overlay area and left the meeting room at 7:10pm prior to discussion.


1. Amendment C265 Flood Overlays in Portarlington East, Corio, Newcomb and Whittington – Consideration of Panel Report and Adoption

Portfolio:

Planning – Cr Heagney

Source:

Planning and Tourism

General Manager:

Peter Bettess

Index Reference:

Amendment C265


Purpose

To adopt a Planning Scheme Amendment to apply the Special Building Overlay to land potentially subject to inundation.


Summary

Cr Ellis moved, Cr Harwood seconded -

That Council:

  1. adopt Amendment C265 in the form as outlined in Appendices 1 and 2 to this report; and

  2. submit the adopted Amendment together with the prescribed information to the Minister for Planning requesting approval.

Carried


Background

Amendment C265 seeks to apply the Special Building Overlay (SBO) to land subject to overland flow in three separate catchments within the City. The areas affected by the Amendment are the Portarlington East drainage area, the Newcomb – Whittington drainage area and the Kosciusko Avenue drainage area.

Maps showing each of the localities are included as Appendix 2 to this report.

The Amendment was exhibited for a one month period between 7 June 2012 and 9 July 2012. Twenty five (25) submissions were received in response, which included 3 from government departments/statutory authorities, which supported or did not object to the Amendment.

Council considered the submissions under delegation and resolved to refer the exhibited Amendment and all submissions to an Independent Planning Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning.


Discussion

A two-person Panel consisting of Alison Glynn, Chair, and Catherine Wilson, Member, conducted a public hearing of the submissions in Geelong on 17 April, 2013. Council provided a detailed presentation to the Panel and 3 submitters made verbal presentations. Expert evidence from Dr Mark Jempson, an engineer from BMT WBM, was called by Council in support of its submission.

A list of submitters is included as Appendix 3 to this report.

The Panel report for Council’s consideration was received on 22 May 2013, a full copy of which is available on the City website.

The Panel has assessed the Amendment in considerable detail, including the planning policy context, the strategic and technical basis for the Amendment, site specific issues and the points of submission put to it during the Hearing and as contained in the submissions.

Panel Conclusions and Recommendations

Having considered the State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks, the purpose of the SBO, the decision guidelines of the relevant Clauses of the Scheme and the submissions of the parties, the Panel has recommended that the Amendment be supported for the reasons set out in its report.

Based on the reasons set out in its Report, the Panel recommends:

Amendment C265 to the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme should be adopted as exhibited.

Further consideration of the issues raised in Question Time by Mr Poehland

Questions by and on behalf of Mr Poehland at the Council meetings on 9 July 2013 and 12 November 2013 resulted in further specific investigations being undertaken in relation to his property. Following the Council’s deferral of a decision on this Amendment, the Ward Councillor, Cr Ellis and the General Manager, Planning and Tourism, Peter Bettess have met with Mr and Mrs Poehland and inspected their property. The Council has surveyed the property, re-run the flood model with the specific survey data for the property and assessed the house, as constructed, against the designated flood level. A letter has been sent to Mr and Mrs Poehland confirming that the floor level of their house is above the flood level and that if it was being constructed today the floor level would meet the requirements for a building permit to be issued. The Special Building Overlay proposed in Amendment C265 still needs to apply to the property to advise future owners of the requirement for any new dwelling or alterations to have a floor level above the flood level.


Environmental Implications

The application of the SBO will have no adverse environmental implications.

As the application of this overlay will facilitate the regulation of development on the affected land, it will provide a mechanism to ensure that such development does not generate adverse off–site environmental impacts as a result of changing the direction or extent of passage of water during flood events.


Financial Implications

The application of the SBO will have no adverse financial implications for Council. While the Amendment will generate additional planning permit applications, these will be at least partially off-set by a corresponding decrease in applications under the Building Act for the specification of minimum floor heights.

The likely increase in the number of permit applications is not likely to be of a significant magnitude, relative to the total resources of Council’s Statutory Planning unit.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The Amendment is considered to be consistent with State and Local planning policies as set out in the Explanatory Report which forms part of the Amendment documentation.

The application of flood mapping consistent with the adopted flood and drainage studies will limit the potential for affected property owners to seek redress against Council, in the event that their property is adversely affected by flooding or inundation.


Alignment to City Plan

This Amendment supports the Sustainable Built and Natural Environment strategic direction of City Plan by recognising the environmental constraints on future built form. Drainage and flood management strategies are specifically referred to in City Plan as assisting in delivering Sustainable and Natural Environment priorities.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No Council Officers have any direct or indirect interest, in accordance with section 80(c) of the Local Government Act, to which this report relates.


Risk Assessment

There are no risks to Council associated with the application of the SBO, as proposed.

Until such time as the extent of the mapped flood areas are identified in the Planning Scheme there is a risk that prospective purchasers of land may not be aware of the potential flood issues. The application of the SBO to affected land will significantly reduce this risk.


Social Considerations

The Amendment is expected to result in net community benefit, in that extension of the accurate identification of land affected by flooding through the application of the SBO will reduce community exposure to damage and loss of property due to flooding.


Human Rights Charter

The Amendment does not impact on any basic human rights, freedoms and responsibilities as set out in the Charter. The process of exhibition of the Amendment provided for submissions by the public and the consideration of those submissions by an independent planning panel appointed by the Minister for Planning, in accordance with planning legislation. This report recommends that the Amendment be adopted in a manner consistent with the recommendations of the Planning Panel.


Consultation and Communication

Amendment C265 has been through a formal exhibition process with consideration of submissions by Council and review by an Independent Panel.

All submitters have been advised of the timing of Council’s consideration of this report and will be advised of the final decision of the Minister.


Appendix 1 Instruction Sheet

Planning and Environment Act 1987

GREATER GEELONG PLANNING SCHEME
AMENDMENT C265

The planning authority for this amendment is the City of Greater Geelong.

The Greater Geelong Planning Scheme is amended as follows:

Planning Scheme Maps

The Planning Scheme Maps are amended by a total of 6 attached maps:

Overlay Maps

  1. Planning Scheme Maps Nos. 26SBO, 55SBO and 56SBO are amended in the manner shown on the attached three (3) maps marked “Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, Amendment C265”.

  2. Following Planning Scheme Map No 43SLO insert a new Planning Scheme Map No 43SBO, in the manner shown on the attached map marked “Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, Amendment C265”.

  3. Following Planning Scheme Map No 44DDO insert a new Planning Scheme Map No 44SBO, in the manner shown on the attached map marked “Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, Amendment C265”.

  4. Following Planning Scheme Map No 51DDO14 insert a new Planning Scheme Map No 51SBO, in the manner shown on the attached map marked “Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, Amendment C265”.

Planning Scheme Ordinance

  1. The Planning Scheme Ordinance is amended as follows:

  2. In General Provisions – Clause 61.03, replace the schedule with a new schedule in the form of the attached document.

End of document


Appendix 2 SBO Maps

Kosciusko Ave Drainage Scheme SBO

Kosciusko Ave Drainage Scheme SBO - Map No 26SBO

Portarlington East Drainage Scheme SBO

Portarlington East Drainage Scheme SBO - Map No 43SBO


Portarlington East Drainage Scheme SBO - Map No 44SBO

Newcomb – Whittington Drainage Scheme SBO

Newcomb – Whittington Drainage Scheme SBO - Map No 51SBO

Newcomb – Whittington Drainage Scheme SBO - Map No 55SBO

Newcomb – Whittington Drainage Scheme SBO - Map No 56SBO

Appendix 3 List of Submitters

List of Submitters

[Back to Top]

Cr Heagney re-entered the meeting room at 7:12pm


2. Northern ARC Health and Wellbeing Hub Master Plan

Portfolio:

Sport and Recreation - Cr Irvine

Source:

Projects, Recreation and Central Geelong - Leisure Services

Acting General Manager:

Jenny McMahon

Index Reference:

Project: Northern ARC (Gateway) Project


Purpose

The purpose of this report is to present the Northern ARC (Arts, Recreation and Community) Health and Wellbeing Hub Master Plan (Northern ARC Master Plan) for Council endorsement, and to inform Council of current long-term land lease negotiations with the Department of Health for a medical facility to be developed within the Northern ARC Health and Wellbeing Hub.


Summary

Cr Fisher moved, Cr Irvine seconded -

That Council:

  1. endorse the Northern ARC Master Plan; and

  2. note the commencement of detailed Feasibility Assessment and Business Case; and

  3. commence the statutory procedures under section 190 of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) for the Proposed Lease and that public notice of and the right of a person under section 223 of the Act to make a submission in relation to the Proposed Lease be given in the Geelong Advertiser and The Independent; and

    1. the Submissions Hearing Panel be appointed to hear and report to Council on any submissions in relation to the Proposed Lease; and

    2. if no submissions are received, Council will enter into the Proposed Lease and the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to execute the Proposed Lease.

Carried.


Background

The Northern ARC site is located on the corner of Melbourne Road and Cox Road and is a highly visible location in Norlane. This site was identified as a key development opportunity in the Corio-Norlane Structure Plan (2012) and currently provides the services of Waterworld Leisure Centre, Centenary Hall and Corio Library within the precinct.

These facilities will require substantial asset renewal/replacement funding over the next 15 years to remain fit for purpose. The Master Plan reviews the development of these current services and has also considered the inclusion of health, arts and culture infrastructure.

The Northern ARC Master Plan is an initiative jointly funded by State Government and the City of Greater Geelong.

The final Northern ARC Master Plan is a visionary plan to guide renewal of the precinct facilities over the next 5 – 15 years to create a vibrant community hub that promotes strong connectivity, integration and is an iconic destination for leisure, recreation, cultural and community wellbeing activities.

The facilities on the Northern ARC site have played an important role for the northern Geelong community over the past 40 – 50 years. It is a highly utilised destination that currently services over 500,000 visits each year. With renewal and regeneration of the facilities visitations are expected to double, reaching in excess of 1,000,000 visits annually once the site is fully developed.

In the development of the Northern ARC Master Plan there has been significant community and stakeholder consultation. Findings from the consultation activities support full redevelopment of the site in a staged approach and has also indentified the size and location of facilities. Current and future community needs have been considered to ensure the development considers a long term view.

Industry information from other similar developments has been used to assist in design and a number of design principles have been developed by the project consultants.

A medical facility has been included within the Master Plan. Facility location, site integration, building footprint and car parking capacity have all been tested and confirmed that the full mix of facilities can work to deliver a vibrant, connected and innovative Health and Wellbeing Hub.


Discussion

In the development of the Northern ARC Master Plan the following key design principles and drivers were adopted:

Key Design Principles

  1. Create a hub of activity for locals and visitors that will engage with, and reach out to the surrounding local community and the wider region. It will reinforce the site as a local landmark destination and a ‘beacon’ for civic pride and use.

  2. Co-locate and integrate activities and uses within the site across the areas of arts, culture, recreation, community and health, with opportunities for interaction between all of the users.

  3. Incorporate the key public plaza space at the centre of the ‘hub’, accessible and visible from Melbourne Road and Cox Road and with direct access to the reception of the main facilities. Provide flexible and adaptive internal and external public spaces that are multi-purpose and provide for events or activities of varying scales.

  4. A precinct which is a natural meeting and gathering place. It encourages formal and casual public engagement and association and provides a well-used and well-loved destination for all ages. Equitable and universal access for all ages and backgrounds.

  5. Easy, safe and enjoyable ways to get around the precinct on foot, drawing people into and through the precinct. Creating a permeable, safe, inviting and easily accessible hub for all people at all hours.

  6. Engaging community buildings, public realm open space and landscape to exhibit best-practice, high quality design, which is flexible, adaptive and represents a ‘sense of place’ for the community.

  7. A sustainable plan for the future, in environmental, cultural, economic and social terms. A hub of activity which is staged, funded and delivered in a manageable, sustainable and considered way over time.

  8. Access to and from the site, ensuring the site is safe, efficient and inviting. Linking of public transport, connecting with walking and cycling paths providing assessable and universal access to all facilities and services. Car parking provision to meet the increased demands and support business viability and future growth

Using these design principles, the main components of the Master Plan and relationships for Northern ARC were identified as follows:

Key Components and Relationships

Delivery and Staging

The Northern ARC Master Plan has been created to directly respond to the detailed delivery constraints and parameters of all the separate (but interlinked) components of the site. The staging and delivery has been directly incorporated into the final Master Plan design, to ensure that the considerations of financing, demolition, partial site development, temporary works, car park staging and full site development staging are included.

As a result, the Northern ARC Master Plan can be implemented in discrete steps or stages, to enable the project to be agile and flexible depending on available funding commitments from the three levels of government. The staging and delivery also importantly allows individual facilities and services to continue to operate for the local community across the lifetime of the Master Plan.

Stage 1 - Barwon Health North

The State Government recently announced a medical facility would be built in the northern suburbs of Geelong. This $33 million medical facility will be funded as a State Government project with construction planned for early 2016.

The Department of Health has formally declared their interest for the medical facility to be located within the Northern ARC site. The Master Plan process has tested various scenarios/logistical issues and confirmed the medical facility can be co-located and a staged construction approach is achievable.

However, this first stage of the Barwon Health North medical facility construction will have an impact on the operation of some of the current services on the site and will force early closure and/or relocation of Create, Waterworld’s waterslides and part of the outdoor area.

Negotiations for a long term land-lease of 50 years are currently under way for the proposed medical facility site (Proposed Lease) and this Report recommends that Council commence the statutory advertising process for the Proposed Lease with Barwon Health.

The Department of Health are still finalising the scope of the Barwon Health North medical facility but have indicated it will provide following services:

The Northern ARC Master Plan has a long term vision of integration of the medical facility with the leisure centre once it has been redeveloped, providing a connected and holistic health and wellbeing hub for residents in the northern suburbs.

Next Stage - Detailed Feasibility Assessment and Business Case

The next stage of precinct planning has been partly funded for 2015/16 with $250,000 allocated to the project which will encompass detailed feasibility assessment of each facility and development of a robust business case to attract the significant funding required for the project, from both State and Federal Governments.


Environmental Implications

The Northern ARC Master Plan has a key design principle of delivering “a sustainable plan for the future, in environmental, cultural, economic and social terms. A hub of activity that can be staged, funded and delivered in a manageable, sustainable and considered way over time.”

The high level costing includes an Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) allowance of 2.5% of total construction costs. Sustainable design elements and budget modelling will be further considered during the future planning and design stages.


Financial Implications

The proposed funding model for this bold and highly significant project for the northern suburbs is a three way funding partnership between the City of Greater Geelong Council and State and Federal Government. Based on the high level cost estimates, up to $25-30 million is needed from each partner over the next 5 - 15 years to deliver all elements of the Master Plan.

The next stage of planning will commence with the development of an Investment Logic Map (ILM) to clearly define the logic that underpins the investment. The ILM will represent the ‘agreed investment story’ which will inform the business case for the project.

The Northern ARC project is currently unfunded within Councils 10 year capital expenditure and affordability plan. There is an allocation of $2.75 million over the next 3 years to upgrade the gymnasium and fitness program rooms at Waterworld.

Funds could be leveraged through the Barwon Health Proposed Lease. Negotiations with the Department of Health have included a significant upfront capital contribution could be negotiated to secure the site. It is important that any up front payments are allocated as income for the ongoing Northern ARC planning and design stages as outlined in this Report.

A high level cost estimate for the Northern ARC facilities, is as follows:

Facility Building Costs

Cost estimate

Funding position

New Waterworld

$39M

$2.75M committed

New Library

$6M

 

New Community Hall

$4.2M

 

External works

$14.6M

 

Nett Construction costs

$63.8M

 

ESD provision/design and construct contingency

$8.9M

 

Detailed design/Consultants/FFE

$8M

 

Total project costs – Current rates

$80.7M

 

Note: Costs are high level estimates only, based on the Master Plan design response.
These assumptions will be challenged and tested in more depth during the next stage of planning and design. Based on current construction and project consulting rates.

It is important to note the loss of activities, including the waterslides and outdoor toddlers pool on the Waterworld site, due to the construction of the medical facility in 2016. The projection on waterslide revenue is $20,000 per annum, however this would be offset by the cost savings through reduced staff wages and operating costs/maintenance.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

Council endorsement of this Report will enable the statutory advertising process for the Proposed Lease to commence. A submissions review panel will need to be appointed in the event of any public submissions received.

The land will need to be re-zoned for medical facility use from the current recreational use.


Alignment to City Plan

The development of the Northern ARC Master Plan is in line with the City Plan strategies of Healthy Environments and Connected, Creative and Strong Communities.

The medical facility in the northern suburbs has support from G21 and the Barwon Health Service Plan.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No Council officers involved in the preparation of this report are known to have a direct or indirect interest in matters to which this report relates.


Risk Assessment

Risk of information received by media before decisions are finalised.

Impact on existing services during construction phase will be significant without strong governance principles established for the precinct.


Social Considerations

A medical facility in the northern suburbs of Geelong has significant social and health benefits as detailed in the Barwon Health Service Plan.

The Barwon Health North medical facility would also impact on the Waterworld outdoor area including removal of the existing waterslides until the Waterworld centre is redeveloped.


Human Rights Charter

The development of Barwon Health North medical facility in the northern suburbs of Geelong recognises the Human Rights Charter with the inherent value of each person regardless of where they live, background or what they think or believe.


Consultation and Communication

The Northern ARC Master Plan has included considerable community engagement opportunities. This includes development of a Northern ARC website, Waterworld user survey, community survey, Corio Village Listening Post, stakeholder scenario workshops and individual stakeholder meetings.

The medical facility in the northern suburbs has been widely communicated to the community via local media, Barwon Health and the State Government.


[Back to Top]

3. G21 and AFL Barwon Regional Strategy

Portfolio:

Sport and Recreation - Cr Irvine

Source:

Projects, Recreation and Central Geelong - Sport and Recreation

Acting General Manager:

Jenny McMahon

Index Reference:

Project: G21 and AFL Barwon Regional Strategy

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to present the G21 and AFL Barwon Regional Strategy for Council endorsement. (Strategy document previously supplied with Briefing papers).


Summary

Cr Irvine moved, Cr Harwood seconded -

That Council endorse the G21 and AFL Barwon Regional Strategy.

Cr Fisher left the meeting room at 7:30pm for the evening.

Carried.


Background

The G21 Region has a strong history of participation in football and netball, currently boasting 4 senior leagues including:

All up there are 50 clubs, 380+ football teams, 340+ netball teams totalling 18,000+ registered participants across the region. The region also provides participation opportunities for 2,500 Auskick participants and 5 youth girls’ football teams.

The AFL Barwon Commission was established to guide the ongoing growth and development of football and netball within the region. The commission is one of 13 regional commissions established by AFL Victoria, which are ultimately responsible for the promotion, growth and sustainability of community football within regional Victoria.

To provide a clear plan for the development of football and netball participation, a partnership between the five local government authorities in the G21 Region, AFL Barwon, AFL Victoria, Netball Victoria and other key stakeholders was established.

The G21 and AFL Barwon Regional Strategy was initiated in late 2013. The regional approach to guide the future planning and development of football and netball is the first of its kind in the state and is strongly supported by all project partners.

The strategy builds on the AFL Barwon Strategic Plan 2014-2018, AFL Victoria Growing the Heartland Football Facilities Development Strategy 2014-2020, Netball Victoria Strategic Plan 2014-2018 and other strategic documents relevant to AFL football and netball.

AFL Victoria’s Heartland Strategy (2014-2020) estimates the economic impact of football and netball participation is $2.4 billion per annum across Victoria. In comparison, in research collated by Ernst and Young and the Victorian Major Events Company in 2020 suggests that, major events deliver a combined economic impact to the State of approximately only $1.4 billion per annum. This Indicates the significant impact sport (in particular football) has on local communities and the economy.


Discussion

The G21 and AFL Barwon Regional Strategy provides the strategic framework to support the future development, governance and growth of football and club based netball throughout the G21 Region for the next 10 years. The strategy represents the alignment of objectives across all stakeholders and ensures recommendations are driven by sport and government in partnership. The strategy provides regional directions and recommendations, as well as prioritising actions to be delivered by AFL Barwon, AFL Victoria, Netball Victoria and each municipality.

An Issues and Opportunities Paper was developed to collate all information relevant to the development of the G21 and AFL Barwon Regional Strategy. The Issues and Opportunities Paper was built on a comprehensive consultation program, including surveys of football/netball clubs and schools, facility audits, workshops and targeted discussions with all project partners.

The Issues and Opportunities Paper identified three key themes:

  1. Sport Development: Supporting player participation in all forms of football and netball is central to the success of this regional strategy. Support structures, such as clubs and facilities, will need to adapt to meet changes in and capitalise on sports development initiatives beyond traditional participation and talent pathways.

  2. Club Development: AFL Barwon supports 50 clubs and over 700 teams between netball and football across the region. There is significant diversity in club structure, governance processes and programs. Increased support and improved strategic planning will enable clubs to continue to grow, maximise sports development opportunities and invest in facility upgrades and renewal which is fit for purpose.

  3. Infrastructure Improvement: Investment in facilities across the region to ensure current facilities meet AFL Victoria and Netball Victoria minimum requirements and adequately accommodate anticipated participation growth and diversity of participants is essential. Providing appropriate facilities is a key action in driving increased participation in football and netball.

The development of the Issues and Opportunities Paper provided the foundation for the development of the G21 and AFL Barwon Regional Strategy.

The Regional Strategy recommends a vision and a strategic framework for the development of football and club based netball over the next 10 years.

The proposed vision is:

“To work together to grow and prosper community football and netball”

The vision highlights the need for all stakeholders to work in partnership to develop football and netball in the G21 region.

The strategic framework is divided into six priorities:

The implementation of the G21 and Barwon Regional Strategy is reliant on a partnership approach between all stakeholders. The commitment to implementing the recommendations of the plan by sport and government is vital in ensuring the long term sustainability of football and netball in the G21 region.


Environmental Implications

There are no direct environmental implications arising from this report.


Financial Implications

There are no immediate financial implications arising from the report. Funding for the implementation of the G21 and AFL Barwon Regional Strategy will be sought through a range of funding opportunities and Council’s existing budgetary process.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

There are no immediate financial implications arising from the report. Funding for the implementation of the G21 and AFL Barwon Regional Strategy will be sought through a range of funding opportunities and Council’s existing budgetary process.


Alignment to City Plan

The report is aligned to the Community Well-Being objective of City Plan. The provision of sport and recreation facilities promotes healthy lifestyle through physical activity.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No Council officers involved in the preparation of this report are known to have a direct or indirect interest in matters to which this report relates.


Risk Assessment

There are no notable risks associated with this report.


Social Considerations

Football provides many benefits including bringing communities together, reducing social isolation, increasing community pride, developing social capital and improving physical and mental health. This strategy provides clear direction for all stakeholders to ensure football and netball continue to grow across the region.


Human Rights Charter

This report has no impact on compliance with the Human Rights Charter.


Consultation and Communication

The development of the strategy has been a collaborative effort of a number of partner organisations including AFL Victoria, AFL Barwon, Netball Victoria and five G21 local government authorities.

Two project reference groups (sport and government) were developed to provide technical advice and input from a local perspective. Project stakeholders including clubs, schools and regional contacts were consulted in the analysis and scoping stage of developing the Issues and Opportunities paper.

Consultation activities including workshops with the project reference groups, targeted discussions with local government authorities, surveys of clubs and schools, and facility audits were undertaken in the development of the Regional Strategy.

The draft strategy was publically exhibited across the five participating LGA’s for a period of six weeks. A further two week exhibition was afforded to all clubs with AFL Barwon following the public exhibition period. Sixteen submissions were received during this period with only minor changes made to the draft strategy as a result of the feedback received.


[Back to Top]

Cr Heagney declared an Indirect Financial Interest in the Geelong Saleyards Feasibility Study in that her family sells sheep at the Geelong Saleyards and left the meeting room at 7:40pm prior to discussion.


4. City Plan 2013-2017 Progress Report to March 2015

Portfolio:

Rural Communities - Cr Ansett

Source

City Services - Engineering Services

General Manager:

William Tieppo

Index Reference

Service Infrastructure Management - Saleyards


Purpose

The purpose of this report is to note the recommendations within the 2014 Geelong Saleyards Feasibility Study.


Summary

Cr Farrell moved, Cr Irvine seconded -

That the report be deferred.

Lost.

Cr S Kontelj moved, Cr E Kontelj seconded -

That Council:

  1. seek opportunities for savings in operation of the saleyards;

  2. actively identify potential uses of existing land and facilities outside normal saleyards operations;

  3. work with neighbouring Councils to identify and develop a suitable regional solution with the view to initiating a future staged withdrawal from saleyards operation.


Carried.


Background

The saleyards located in Weddell Road North Geelong have been in operation in some form since 1869. Since that time the area surrounding the saleyards has become significantly more urbanized by both residential and industrial developments.

A number of studies of the Saleyards have been conducted over the past 20 years including:

A number of common themes have emerged when considering all of the above reports which include:

A rolling program of improvements have been undertaken, however, a fire destroyed the recently renovated main office building at the saleyards in 2013.

As part of the Financial Sustainability Review conducted in 2013/14, the Geelong Saleyards was identified as one of the services that required further investigation.

It was decided a final report looking at the “highest and best use” be commissioned. This report was also to include an extensive consultation strategy allowing Council to consider the key relevant and appropriate options for the future.


Discussion

Analysis of the operational and financial performance of the Geelong Saleyards has resulted in the following key findings:

Despite significant investment in the Saleyards site, operational losses have continued to occur. Investment has generally centred around ensuring OH&S compliance and restoring the heritage fabric of the buildings and the pens.

Overall Victorian trends suggest that it is unlikely that the Saleyards would be able to improve its financial performance under current conditions (s4.6, p28-29 of report).

The Saleyards industry is declining overall, as alternative selling methods replace part of the traditional auction market.

As part of the analysis and review, a detailed consultation program was undertaken to ensure maximum feedback from the local industry. It confirmed that the industry was in decline and that only more regionalised saleyards, where economies of scale could have an impact, could cover the costs of regulation compliance and compete with alternative methods of selling. It was noted that the Saleyards perform an important social function, however, the number of users has been in decline. The loss of the Main Office Building has reduced the opportunities for social interaction at the site. It was often stated that the Saleyards were nearing the end of their economic life.

Based on consultation, research findings and previous reports, the following options were identified (s6.4, p41-44 of report):

  1. Business as usual – No change to current operational model.

  2. Revise cost structure – Includes review lease arrangements, minor fee increase and possible staff reductions.

  3. Reinvestment – Upgrade the current facilities would cost in the order of $2-3 million with no guarantee of increased throughput.

  4. Relocation – Seeking an alternative site and continue to operate the facility to improve accessibility and reduce impacts on adjacent land. Costs would be prohibitive and heritage value would be lost.

  5. Reduce scale or adapt to focus on niche stock – Allows reuse or sale of portion of saleyard land however loss of core income would likely result in an unsustainable operation.

  6. Divest operations – Council retain ownership of land but operation managed by private business. Consultation suggests that very little interest from private sector due to financial risks and would require Council reinvestment.

  7. Facilitate a transition to a regional saleyards – A realistic timeframe of 3-5 years is expected should a regional facility be developed. Council would need to monitor and engage with proposals for the development of a regional saleyards. This would allow a transition period for all stakeholders to adjust to alternate arrangements.

  8. Closure – Would impact heritage value of site and would require land capability assessment to be conducted.

The recommended approach by the feasibility study in regard to the future of the Saleyards is to transition to a regional saleyards facility. Once the transition process is underway, a revised cost structure should be adopted to provide a moderate cost saving to Council. It is envisaged that the transition period would be in the order of about five years. The recommended approach is favoured based on the following:

It should be noted that even though there has been significant discussion about the establishment of a regional saleyards facility, this has been going on for at least ten years and there is no surety that it will eventuate. Further consideration could be given to possible funding contribution by Council to help facilitate such an outcome. The G21 Region Growth Plan identifies Colac as a potential location for a regional site.

If no regional option is available, Council should still consider a staged closure of the facility, but at the same time engage with producers and end users to facilitate an improved direct selling process.

Consideration would also be required to decide what should happen to the land. The northern portion is zoned Industrial 1 (IN1Z) and the southern portion zoned for Public Park and Recreation (PPRZ). The site is also subject to a Heritage Overlay (HO), a design and development overlay (DDO20) and a small portion of the land is subject to a Special Building Overlay (SBO). Further investigation would be required to determine if Council wants to sell the land, develop the land or use for an alternative purpose. A Land Capability Assessment should be undertaken to determine the best use of the land.


Environmental Implications

Council currently has a trade waste agreement with Barwon Water to discharge liquid waste into the sewerage system. This is not the preferred method of livestock effluent management. Significant investment, in the order of $1 Million, would be required to bring this system to a standard supported by Barwon Water.

A stormwater harvesting facility has been recently installed on the Saleyards land. This facility currently supports saleyards operation by providing reused water from upstream catchments. This facility provides water for other Council functions external to the site.

EPA has previously recommended that the Saleyards and residences should not co-exist within 500 metres of each other. At present, this distance is 50 metres.

Should the facility be decommissioned, the land would need to be tested for contaminants prior to establishing other uses.


Financial Implications

In the 2012/13 financial year the saleyards site generated a net financial loss of $183k.

In the 2013/14 financial year the saleyards site generated a net financial loss of $194k.

Adopting a recommendation to transition to a regional facility or a stage closure of the saleyards site would ultimately save the above costs to Council.

Council has also been paid out by its insurer in relation to the main office building fire. The cost to re-establish the main office building is in the order of $500k.

The option to reinvest in the site would cost approximately $2-3 million.

The option to relocate would require securing a new site and replacing infrastructure and plant and would be cost prohibitive.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

Council currently has two lease agreements in place that would need to be addressed should the site significantly change from it’s current situation. The site provides some land to Target to allow parking for some of their staff under a lease arrangement. Additionally, a lease exists with a private agricultural business and preliminary discussions with the business owner indicate a preference by the business to extend and even expand the lease arrangements.

The southern portion of the saleyards site is Crown Land zoned Public Park and Recreation Zone (PPRZ).


Alignment to City Plan

This report aligns to City Plan through the strategic direction of ‘How We Do Business’. The Geelong Saleyards Feasibility Study reviews how the service meets the requirements of a growing population through responsible and sustainable financial management. As part of the Financial Sustainability Review, the service provision of the Geelong saleyards was highlighted as a service that required this review.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No council officer involved in this report has a direct or indirect conflict of interest.


Risk Assessment

Significant capital expenditure has been allocated to the site to reduce the risk of safety issues for the staff, users and public. With the ageing infrastructure, it is expected continuous funding will be required to mitigate such risks.

Location of the site in an urban setting presents some level of risk to the general public. Although considered low risk, recent events involving an escaped cow have highlighted the preferred location for such a facility should be in a rural setting.

While Council continues to manage the Geelong Saleyards facility, it exposes itself to a reputation related risk based on animal welfare concerns. History has shown that animals under the control of their owners or agents that have welfare concerns can lead to Council’s reputation being eroded.


Social Considerations

The saleyards act partly as a social club, providing a valued meeting place and opportunity to socialise and discuss regional and personal issues. The loss of the market office building has resulted in the loss of a community meeting place that was becoming more frequently used in recent years. Users of the site have a sense of ownership of the site due to the longevity of use, informal nature of the sales and the ‘public’ nature of the site.

It should be noted with the loss of the market office building along with the reduced throughput, the social nature of the site has recently been in decline.


Human Rights Charter

There are no human rights charter issues resulting from the recommendation in this report.


Consultation and Communication

The groups consulted with during the development of this report are:


[Back to Top]

Cr Heagney re-entered the meeting room at 7:55pm


5. Financial Management Report – March 2015

Portfolio:

Finance - Cr Lyons (Mayor), Cr Farrell, Cr E Kontelj

Source:

Strategy and Performance - Financial Services

General Manager:

Dean Frost

Index Reference:

Financial Management \ Financial Reporting 2014-2015


Purpose

The Quarterly Financial Report for the period ending 31 March 2015 is prepared as a requirement of Section 138 of the Local Government Act 1989.


Summary

Cr Farrell moved, Cr Kontelj seconded -

That the Quarterly Financial Management Report to 31 March be noted by Council.

Carried.


Background

The report is prepared as a requirement of Section 138 of the Local Government Act 1989 which requires that at least every three months a statement be presented to Council comparing the budget with the actual revenue and expense for the financial year-to-date.


Discussion

Operating

The March Management reports are provided in the following table to report year-to-date performance and full-year projection performance versus budget.

Summary

 

YTD
Actual
$M

YTD Am. Bgt
$M

YTD Var
Fav/(UnFav)
$M

FY Proj
$M

FY
Am. Bgt
$M

FY Var
Fav/(UnFav)
$M

Recurrent Surplus/(Deficit)

9.16

(5.66)

14.82

(6.41)

(6.87)

0.46

Non-Recurrent Surplus/(Deficit)

44.64

43.84

0.80

71.42

74.15

(2.73)

Net Surplus/(Deficit)

53.80

38.18

15.62

65.01

67.28

(2.27)

Capital Expenditure

75.65

95.36

19.71

147.40

146.26

(1.14)

Closing Net Cash Positive/(Neg)

106.10

82.27

23.83

 

58.86

 


The Adopted Budget was amended by Council on 26 August 2014 to include Carryover Capital and discretionary projects, plus other Capital and recurrent amendments.

The impact on the Recurrent Expenditure Budget is ($7.06M), consisting of carryover discretionary projects funded in 2013-2014, plus other budget amendments.

The impact on Non Recurrent income was $0.73M for carryover of capital income from 2013-2014 projects, plus other budget amendments.

The amended capital expenditure budget included an additional $42.85M to complete 2013-2014 Projects, including Corio Landfill Rehabilitation, Geelong Library and Heritage Centre, Grovedale Integrated Children’s Centre, Leopold Community Hub and Barwon Heads Early Learning Centre.

Other budget amendments (increase in Vic Roads Black Spot funding) increased total budget by $1.06M.

1. Recurrent Variance Commentary

 

YTD
Actual
$M

YTD Am. Bgt
$M

YTD Var
Fav/(UnFav)
$M

FY Proj
$M

FY
Am. Bgt
$M

FY Var
Fav/(UnFav)
$M

Recurrent Income

220.69

219.11

1.58

292.70

292.32

0.38

Recurrent Expenditure

211.53

224.77

13.24

299.11

299.19

0.08

Recurrent Surplus/(Deficit)

9.16

(5.66)

14.82

(6.41)

(6.87)

0.46

YTD Variance - $14.82M Favourable


The following major variances to budget contributed to this result:

Recurrent Income

 

$M

General Rates and Charges – Favourable rates generation and supplementary rates YTD, partly offset by objections in full year.

0.14

Government Grants

Main favourable variances consist of:

  • State Recurrent $861K favourable (Aged and Disability Services $926K (HACC Services) and Family Services ($64K) unfavourable.

  • State – Specific Purpose $483k favourable (mainly unbudgeted grants in Family Services $175k, Community Development $249k, Planning Strategy $80k)

  • Federal Child Care Assistance $378K favourable (Integrated Children’s Centres - offset by unfavourable Program Fees).

  • Federal Other ($175K) unfavourable – Grants Commission.

1.63

User Charges

Main unfavourable variances consist of:

  • Activities and Program Fees ($2,413K) unfavourable - Centre Based Long Day Care and Integrated Children’s Centres $771K, Leisure Services $1,256K (Leisurelink $645K, Waterworld $317K and Splashdown $178K), Care Services $443K.

  • Waste Disposal – Commercial ($312K) unfavourable (Drysdale Landfill $270K and North Geelong Transfer Station $196K, offset by favourable Commercial Collection $153K).

(2.61)

Other Fees and Charges

Favourable mainly due to :

  • Misc Approvals and Permits $193K favourable (Building and Planning Permits).

  • Planning Permit Applications $118K favourable.

  • Offset by Fines and Costs ($150K) unfavourable.

0.08

Sundry Income

Favourable due to unbudgeted receipt of:

  • Community Education project funding $343K to Waste Services (offsetting expenditure to be incurred during the year)

  • Compensation from Developers for land and easements $445K.

  • Employee Vehicle Contributions $833K.

1.71

Interest on Investments

Higher than budgeted cash balances.

0.63

Recurrent Income Sub-total

$1.58M


Recurrent Expenditure

 

$M

Employee Related Expenditure – Favourable salary costs $2,833K mainly relating to unfilled vacancies and favourable workcare costs $159K.

Partially offset by unfavourable supplementary labour costs ($1,748K) (see external services).

2.99

General Works:

Materials $191K favourable with the main variances being Ground Maintenance Materials $101K (phasing only) and Consumable Materials $89k (Mosquito Control)

Plant / Equip / Vehicle Costs $543K favourable with the main variances being Fuels, Oils and Greases $244K (lower fuel price) and phasing variances in External Plant and Equipment Hire $187K and Repairs and Maintenance $83K.

External Services is $5,476K favourable mainly due to:

  • Contractors $5,245K favourable - Phasing variances in Discretionary Projects $3,819K and in Recurrent Projects $1,426K.

  • Insurance Premium $336K favourable – Full year savings $342K.

  • Contributions $624K favourable – Phasing variances in Events Services $409K and Community Development $145K.

  • Waste Disposal and Recycling $329K favourable - Green Waste Service $333K (low cost on farm option)

  • Other favourable phasing variances in Fire Services Levy $277K, Rental Expense $167K, Events and Functions $145k and Insurance Claims $104K.

  • Levies and Contributions ($210K) unfavourable – Drysdale Landfill $294K (EPA levy unfavourable).

  • Supplementary Labour ($1,748K) unfavourable – mainly, Fleet ($234K), Operations ($477K), Waste Services ($344K) and Parks ($297K).

6.21

Administration costs $808K favourable mainly due to:

  • Interest Paid $704K favourable – Savings due to deferment of budgeted loans.

  • Computer Software ($423K) unfavourable – Information Services $427K mainly due to transfer from capital of Microsoft Enterprise license costs $223K. Balance phasing only.

  • Other phasing variances $542K favourable – mainly in Postage, Printing, Photocopier Costs, Staff Amenities and Debt Collection.

0.81

Professional Services costs $1,150K favourable mainly due to:

  • Consultants $1,215K favourable – Phasing variances mainly in Central Geelong Task Force $475K, Planning Strategy $249K, Planning and Tourism Admin $180K and Enterprise Geelong $183K.

  • Legal Expenses ($71K) unfavourable.

1.15

Utility costs are $1,191K favourable mainly due to Electricity $924K (removal of Carbon Tax approximately $375K and balance is phasing), plus Gas $103K, Water $106K and Communications costs $64K (all phasing only).

1.19

Depreciation costs $1,085K favourable.

1.09

Gain/(Loss) on Sale of Plant and Equipment ($196K) unfavourable.

(0.20)

Recurrent Expenditure Sub-total

$13.24M



Full Year Recurrent Projection – $0.46M favourable to Amended Budget

The main projection changes are favourable / (unfavourable)

$M

User Charges Income – Leisure Services Aquatic Centres

(1.50)

Transfer from Capital – IT/AV Equipment for GLHC

(0.75)

Parking Infringements Income

Waste Disposal Income

Building Maintenance

Diversion Waste to Wyndham – add’l cost

Doubtful Debts

(0.50)

(0.46)

(0.46)

(0.35)

(0.33)

Grants Commission decrease

Computer Software Costs – Microsoft costs trf’d from Capital

Depreciation

(0.23)

(0.22)

1.09

Interest Payment Savings – deferment of loans

Interest Income

Electricity savings – Carbon Tax removal

Compensation from Developers

Building and Planning Permit Income

Salaries / Supp Labour

0.97

0.85

0.50

0.44

0.35

0.35

Insurance Premium Savings

0.34

Workcover Premium savings

Fuel Savings

Other

0.30

0.29

(0.22)

Total Favourable Variances

$0.46



2. Non Recurrent Variance Commentary

 

YTD
Actual
$M

YTD Am. Bgt*
$M

YTD Var
Fav/(UnFav)
$M

FY Proj
$M

FY
Am. Bgt*
$M

FY Var
Fav/(UnFav)
$M

Non-Recurrent Surplus/(Deficit)

44.64

43.84

0.80

71.42

74.15

(2.73)

YTD Variance – $0.80M favourable



 

$

Capital Grants and Income ($786K) unfavourable.

0.79

Recognition of Infrastructure $624K favourable.

0.62

Developer Contributions $354K favourable.

0.35

Gain/(Loss) on Sale of Property ($1,766K) unfavourable – budgeted sales not proceeding or deferred. Projected to be ($2,570K) unfavourable full year.

(1.77)

Loss on Disposal of Infrastructure $1,042K favourable.

1.04

Prior Year Adjustments ($235K) unfavourable.

(0.23)



3. Capital Expenditure Variance Commentary

 

YTD
Actual
$M

YTD Projection
$M

YTD Var
Fav/(UnFav)
$M

FY Proj
$M

FY
Am. Bgt*
$M

FY Var
Fav/(UnFav)
$M

Capital Expenditure

75.65

95.36

19.71

147.40

146.26

(1.14)

YTD Variance – $19.71M favourable


The capital program is $19.71M underspent compared to Projection year to date, with project behind budget schedule as follows:

 

 

$M

Geelong Library and Heritage Centre

1.66

Central Road Drainage

1.63

Light Fleet Replacement

1.13

Heavy and Dedicated Fleet

1.01

Myers St Unifying Streetscape Works

0.92

Armstrong Creek West Precinct – Baanip Blvd/ NS Connector

0.85

Central Geelong Advancement Fund

0.75

Drysdale Landfill Cell 6

0.59

PABX/Telephony System Replacement

0.50

Lees Bridge Replacement

0.50

Light and Decorate – Catenary Lighting

0.43

Other

9.74

 

 

$19.71



4. Cash and Investments

 

YTD
Actual
$M

YTD Am. Bgt*
$M

YTD Var
Fav/(UnFav)
$M

FY Proj
$M

FY
Am. Bgt*
$M

FY Var
Fav/(UnFav)
$M

Closing Net Cash Positive/(Neg)

106.10

82.27

23.83

 

58.86

 

YTD Variance – $23.83 favourable


The month end cash and investments balance was $106.10M. This was $23.83M favourable to budget, mainly due to favourable recurrent variance $14.8M and underspend on Capital $19.7M, offset by deferred loans ($14.9M).

Council has future commitments for $24.6M, which are fully cashed back:

Long Service Leave

$18.7M

Statutory Reserves

$ 1.4M

Refundable Deposits

$ 2.1M

Income in Advance

$ 1.4M

Asset Development

$ 1.0M

Total

$24.6M


The Landfill Provision balance is currently $18.9M.

The full year projected cash result will be influenced by the higher than Budgeted Capital Projects and Discretionary Projects carryover, the favourable recurrent result, the deferring of loans and principle repayments, offset by the unfavourable Non Recurrent result impacted by lower than expected Property sales.


Environmental Implications

There are no environmental implications arising from this report.


Financial Implications

As detailed in the attached report.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The report is provided in accordance with requirements under the Local Government Act 1989.


Alignment to City Plan

This report contributes to responsible and sustainable financial management as aligned in Council’s City Plan objective on How We Do Business.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

Council staff preparing this report have no direct or indirect interest.


Risk Assessment

There are no risk implications arising from this report.


Social Considerations

There are no social implications arising from this report.


Human Rights Charter

There are no known positive or negative effects.


Consultation and Communication

The attached report is provided for information and public record and is available from the Council Governance or Financial Reporting units.


[Back to Top]

6. Re-appointment of External Representative on the Audit Advisory Committee

Portfolio:

Governance- Cr Lyons (Mayor)

Source:

Internal Audit and Ombudsman’s Office

Chief Executive Officer:

Gillian Miles

Index Reference:

Audit- CG - Internal


Purpose

To re-appoint Ms Linda MacRae to the Audit Advisory Committee for a further one year.


Summary

Cr Farrell moved, Cr Heagney seconded -

That Council approve the re-appointment of Ms Linda MacRae to the Audit Advisory Committee for a further one year term as from 1 July 2015.

Carried.


Background

The Council has an Audit Advisory Committee (AAC) which operates under the Terms of Reference (Charter) which were reviewed and approved by Council in September 2013. Membership of the Committee consists of up to six members, being three Councillors and three external independent persons.

Ms Linda MacRae was first elected to the AAC in May 2006, due to a resignation from a committee member. Ms MacRae was appointed to the chair of the Audit Advisory Committee in February 2011 due to the retirement and resignation of the long serving chairman in Michael Dowling on the 22 November 2010.


Discussion

It is recommended that Council approves the re-appointment of Ms Linda MacRae, current chairperson and Committee member for a further one year term as from 1 July 2015.

Ms MacRae has been a well respected member and chairperson of the Audit Advisory Committee, however she has indicated that it is appropriate that she step aside given that her tenure will have reached ten years.

However, given the resignation of the Chief Executive Officer, it is considered prudent to maintain the status quo with regards to the Audit Advisory Committee to provide stability in this important function.

This re-appointment recommendation provides that external membership have been staggered to provide some continuity of members in future years.


Environmental Implications

There are no environmental implications related to this recommended resolution.


Financial Implications

External members receive $1,562.50 per meeting (ex GST).

Current approved budget.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The Local Government Act (1989) requires that Council establishes an Audit Committee.


Alignment to City Plan

How we do business


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No officer involved in the preparation of this report has declared a direct or indirect interest.


Risk Assessment

Ms MacRae will have served on the committee since 2006, and has completed three consecutive terms on the Audit Advisory Committee.


Social Considerations

There are no social implications related to the recommended resolution.


Human Rights Charter

There is no direct or indirect impact to Human Rights as a part of this report


Consultation and Communication

The audit committee will be advised of the Council resolution.


[Back to Top]

7. Updated Privacy Policy and Management Procedure

Portfolio:

Governance - Cr Lyons (Mayor)

Source:

Strategy and Performance - Administration and Governance

Act/General Manager:

Dean Frost

Index Reference:

Council Reports 2015


Purpose

To update the Information Privacy Policy and also the Information Privacy Management Procedure. An independent Health Records Policy has also been created, rather than include reference to Council’s Health Records obligations within the Information Privacy Policy.


Summary

Cr Heagney moved, Cr E Kontelj seconded -

That Council endorses the updated Information Privacy Policy, along with the updated Information Privacy Management Procedure and the new Health Records Policy

Carried.


Background

This report updates Council’s Information Privacy Policy and Procedure to ensure compliance with the Privacy and Data Protection Act 2014. The report also includes a new Health Records Policy.


Discussion

The Privacy and Data Protection Act 2014 makes no change to the Information Privacy Principles. However, three flexibility mechanisms are included, which permit departures from the Information Privacy Principles where there is a substantial countervailing public interest. These mechanisms are unlikely to be used by Council.

The Privacy and Data Protection Commissioner has the power to carry out compliance investigations and issue compliance notices. The Commissioner may also audit records of personal information that are maintained by an organisation in order to ensure the records are maintained in accordance with the Information Privacy Principles.

A review of Council’s use, collection and storage of personal information is currently underway, with the aim of ensuring compliance and also a consistent approach across the organisation.


Environmental Implications

There are no environmental implications associated with the contents of this report.


Financial Implications

There are no specific financial implications associated with updating the Privacy Policy and the Privacy Management Procedure. Nor are there any financial implications associated with the introduction of a new Health Records Policy.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The Privacy Policy and Procedure have been updated to ensure compliance with the new Privacy and Data Protection Act 2014.


Alignment to City Plan

In accordance with our strategic objective ‘How We Do Business’, Council has in place a Privacy Policy and also a Privacy Procedure, which require updating due to a change in legislation.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No officer involved in the preparation of this report has a direct or indirect interest in the information provided.


Risk Assessment

Updating the current Privacy Policy and Procedure ensures compliance with new legislation and therefore minimises any associated risks.


Social Considerations

There are no social considerations associated with the information contained in this report.


Human Rights Charter

The right to privacy is the subject of this report, which is adequately addressed in the updated Policies and Procedure.


Consultation and Communication

The updated Privacy Policy and new Health Records Policy will be available on Council’s website, or upon request. The updated Privacy Management Procedure will be available to staff via Cityweb.


[Back to Top]

8. Road Naming – Unnamed Walkway, Portarlington

Portfolio:

Governance - Cr Lyons (Mayor)

Source:

Strategy and Performance- Financial Services

General Manager:

Dean Frost

Index Reference:

Subject/Financial Management - Reporting
Subject/Roads, Footpaths and Streets


Purpose

To seek approval to name an unnamed walkway in Portarlington to Graham Walk, Portarlington.


Summary

Cr Ellis moved, Cr Harwood seconded -

That Council approve the naming of the unnamed walkway situated between 60 and 62 Newcomb Street, Portarlington to “Graham Walk”, Portarlington.

Carried.


Background

Council is the responsible authority for naming and renaming roadways / walkways under the Local Government Act 1989.

A request has been received from Mrs Freeman requesting to name an unnamed walkway near the newsagency, in honour of her late grandfather, Mr Graham. The Graham family are pioneers who settled in the Bellarine district in the 1850’s and there is currently no recognition of this family in Portarlington.

Letters have been sent to all adjoining property owners and residents advising them of Council’s proposal to name the unnamed walkway to “Graham Walk”, Portarlington.


Discussion

It is proposed to name the unnamed walkway situated between 60 and 62 Newcomb Street, Portarlington as “Graham Walk”, Portarlington.

Mr Graham was a descendant of the pioneers who settled in the Bellarine district in the 1850’s. Mr Graham was the local newsagent for Portarlington from 1902–1957 with the newsagency still operating in close proximity to this unnamed walkway.

He also made significant contributions to the sporting areas of Portarlington and was a foundation member of the Portarlington Bowls Club. He was elected to the Bellarine Shire Council in 1927 and represented the Paywit Riding for 23 years.

The proposed naming was advertised in the Independent newspaper on 6 March 2015 and the Geelong Advertiser newspaper on 7 March 2015. Eleven submissions in favour of this proposal have been received.


Environmental Implications

There are no environmental issues arising from this report.


Financial Implications

The approximate cost to Council is $650. This includes advertising, notification to authorities and street signage.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The Local Government Act 1989, the Geographic Place Names Act 1998 and the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010 have been followed and met.


Alignment to City Plan

This proposal aligns to City Plan with the encouragement of Community Wellbeing.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

There is no Council Officer direct or indirect interest involved in this report.


Risk Assessment

If an emergency situation occurred, Councils proposal to name this walkway could minimise the risk of failure in being able to located the situation in a timely manner.


Social Considerations

The naming of this walkway will allow for easy identification for the public and emergency services.


Human Rights Charter

It is the right of every person to be able to identify their location in order to reduce confusion or delay of emergency services.


Consultation and Communication

Correspondence has been sent to all adjoining property owners and residents advising the proposed naming and inviting submissions.

The proposal was advertised in the Independent newspaper on 6 March 2015 and the Geelong Advertiser newspaper on 7 March 2015.

The proposal was published on Council’s Geelong Australia website for 30 days as per the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010.

Eleven submissions were received. All submissions were in favour of this naming.

Subject to Council and the Registrar of Geographic Names approval, the relevant authorities and abutting owners will be notified of the official registration of this naming.


Attachment A

Road Naming - Unnamed Walkway, Portarlington

Unnamed Walkway, Portarlington

[Back to Top]

9. Road Naming – Unnamed Laneway, Geelong

Portfolio:

Governance - Cr Lyons (Mayor)

Source:

Strategy and Performance- Financial Services

General Manager:

Dean Frost

Index Reference:

Subject/Financial Management - Reporting
Subject/Roads, Footpaths and Streets


Purpose

To seek approval to name an unnamed laneway in Geelong to Stony Pier Lane, Geelong.


Summary

Cr Ellis moved, Cr Harwood seconded -

That Council approve the naming of the unnamed laneway in Geelong to “Stony Pier Lane”, Geelong.

Carried.


Background

Council is the responsible authority for naming and renaming roadways under the Local Government Act 1989.

A request has been received from Council’s Local Laws Department to name the unnamed laneway located beside the Royal Geelong Yacht Club. The laneway to be named is the access point to the Stony Pier.

Letters have been sent to the adjoining property owner advising them of Council’s proposal to name the unnamed laneway to “Stony Pier Lane”, Geelong.


Discussion

It is proposed to name the unnamed laneway situated beside the Royal Geelong Yacht Club as “Stony Pier Lane”, Geelong.

This laneway leads to the Stony Pier which is a Council asset.

The proposed naming was advertised in the Independent newspaper on 13 March 2015 and the Geelong Advertiser newspaper on 14 March 2015. Two submissions in favour of this proposal have been received.


Environmental Implications

There are no environmental issues arising from this report.


Financial Implications

The approximate cost to Council is $400. This includes advertising, notification to authorities and street signage.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The Local Government Act 1989, the Geographic Place Names Act 1998 and the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010 have been followed and met.


Alignment to City Plan

This proposal aligns to City Plan with the encouragement of Community Wellbeing.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

There is no Council Officer direct or indirect interest involved in this report.


Risk Assessment

If an emergency situation occurred, Councils proposal to name this laneway could minimise the risk of failure in being able to located the situation in a timely manner.


Social Considerations

The naming of this laneway will allow for easy identification for the public and emergency services.


Human Rights Charter

It is the right of every person to be able to identify their location in order to reduce confusion or delay of emergency services.


Consultation and Communication

Correspondence has been sent to the adjoining property owner advising the proposed naming and inviting submissions.

The proposal was advertised in the Independent newspaper on 13 March 2015 and the Geelong Advertiser newspaper on 14 March 2015.

The proposal was published on Council’s Geelong Australia website for 30 days as per the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010.

Two submissions were received. Both submissions were in favour of this naming.

Subject to Council and the Registrar of Geographic Names approval, the relevant authorities and abutting owners will be notified of the official registration of this naming.


Attachment A

Road naming - unnamed laneway, Geelong

Road naming - unnamed laneway, Geelong

[Back to Top]

10. Road Renaming – Kristy Place to Hopper Place, Wandana Heights

Portfolio:

Governance - Cr Lyons (Mayor)

Source:

Strategy and Performance- Financial Services

General Manager:

Dean Frost

Index Reference:

Subject/Financial Management - Reporting
Subject/Roads, Footpaths and Streets


Purpose

To seek approval to rename Kristy Place, Wandana Heights to Hopper Place, Wandana Heights.


Summary

Cr Ellis moved, Cr Harwood seconded -

That Council approve the renaming of Kristy Place, Wandana Heights to “Hopper Place”, Wandana Heights.


Background

Council is the responsible authority for naming and renaming roadways under the Local Government Act 1989.

Correspondence has been received from a resident in Christie Court, Wandana Heights. The resident has advised of confusion due to two names sounding the same within Wandana Heights - Christie Court and Kristy Place.

Kristy Place has been selected to be renamed for the following reasons:

  1. Kristy Place was created after Christie Court.

  2. Kristy Place has less affected property owners.

Hopper Place has been chosen as the new name in honour of Mr Ian Hopper.

Letters have been sent to all adjoining property owners and residents (5 owners and 1 resident) advising them of Council’s proposal to rename Kristy Place to “Hopper Place”, Wandana Heights.


Discussion

It is proposed to rename Kristy Place, Wandana Heights to “Hopper Place”, Wandana Heights.

Mr Hopper served as a Councillor and Mayor with The City of South Barwon. He was involved in a number of community engagements with a particular focus on Local Government and tourism in the Geelong region. Mr Hopper was also a member and President of the Rotary Club of Highton and was awarded a Paul Harris Fellow for his community activities. Mr Hopper passed away in 2009 aged 72.

The proposed naming was advertised in the Independent newspaper on 13 March 2015 and the Geelong Advertiser newspaper on 14 March 2015. Eight submissions in favour and one submission against this proposal have been received.


Environmental Implications

There are no environmental issues arising from this report.


Financial Implications

The approximate cost to Council is $400. This includes advertising, notification to authorities and street signage.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The Local Government Act 1989, the Geographic Place Names Act 1998 and the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010 have been followed and met.


Alignment to City Plan

This proposal aligns to City Plan with the encouragement of Community Wellbeing.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

There is no Council Officer direct or indirect interest involved in this report.


Risk Assessment

If an emergency situation occurred, Councils proposal to rename this roadway would minimise the risk of failure in being able to locate the situation in a timely manner.


Social Considerations

The renaming of this roadway will allow for easy identification for the public and emergency services.


Human Rights Charter

It is the right of every resident and property owner for their property to have a unique address in order to receive services and reduce confusion or delay of emergency services.


Consultation and Communication

Correspondence has been sent to all adjoining property owners and residents advising the proposed renaming and inviting submissions.

The proposal was advertised in the Independent newspaper on 13 March 2015 and the Geelong Advertiser newspaper on 14 March 2015.

The proposal was published on Council’s Geelong Australia website for 30 days as per the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010.

Eight submissions in favour and one submission against were received. The submission against this proposal was based on the name “Hopper” and has been responded to.

Subject to Council and the Registrar of Geographic Names approval, the relevant authorities and abutting owners will be notified of the official registration of this naming.


Attachment A

Road Renaming – Kristy Place to Hopper Place, Wandana Heights

Road Renaming – Kristy Place to Hopper Place, Wandana Heights

[Back to Top]

11. Chief Executive Officer Recruitment

Portfolio:

Governance, Cr Lyons (Mayor)

Source:

Strategy and Performance - Organisation Development

General Manager:

Dean Frost

Index Reference:

Subject: Committee CEO Recruitment


Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek the formation of a Special Committee of Council for the purposes of recruitment for the Chief Executive Officer position.

For Council to endorse the engagement of a suitable recruitment consultant to provide quotations for role profiling, search and selection services.

Summary

Cr Heagney moved, Cr Harwood seconded -

That in exercise of the powers conferred by sections 86 and 87 of the Local Government Act 1989 ("the Act"), Council resolves that:

  1. a special committee entitled “Selection Committee - Chief Executive Officer Recruitment” be established.

  2. that Cr Lyons (Mayor), Cr Heagney (Deputy Mayor), Cr Fisher, Cr Richards and Cr E Kontelj, be appointed to the selection committee recruitment.

  3. that Mr Justin Giddings be appointed as the independent chair of the Selection Committee – CEO Recruitment.

  4. that Mr Mike Hirst be appointed as the independent representative.

  5. the purposes of the Committee are those set out in the Terms of Reference (Appendix 1).

  6. the Committee be delegated the powers, duties and functions set out in the attached Instrument of Delegation (Appendix 2)

  7. that the Manager, Organisation Development source appropriate recruitment consultancy firms for the purposes of providing quotes to render services in relation to the recruitment of the Chief Executive Officer.

Carried.


Background

A recruitment process for a new Chief Executive Officer must be initiated following the resignation of the current incumbent, Dr Gillian Miles.

This report addresses the establishment of a committee to manage the recruitment and recommendation of an Executive Recruitment Consultant to assist Council.


Discussion

It is proposed that a Special Committee, the Selection Committee - Chief Executive Officer Recruitment, be established pursuant to section 86 of the Local Government Act 1989 to oversee the recruitment process to fill the vacancy.

The Committee will be provided with delegated powers (refer Appendix 2) to undertake the initial process and provide a short list of candidates for Council to consider. The appointment and the relevant terms and conditions of the CEO’s contract shall be made by Council.

Having regard to the previous CEO recruitment process, it is recommended that the Committee comprise of an Independent Chair, the Mayor and Deputy, 3 other Councillors and an Independent representative.

The Committee will operate in accordance with the Terms of Reference for the Selection Committee - Chief Executive Recruitment as attached in Appendix 1. The Committee will report back to the Council at appropriate intervals during the recruitment process to advise the Council on progress. The role of the Committee is:


Environmental Implications

There are no environmental implications associated with this report.


Financial Implications

Anticipated costs for the recruitment process including consultancy, advertising and other costs are estimated to be in the order of $40,000 to $60,000. These costs will be reported as projection changes in 2015-2016 financial management reports.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

There are some specific requirements in the Local Government Act relative to the appointment of a Chief Executive Officer.

While the appointment is to be made by the Council, a Committee may be appointed in accordance with section 86 and 87 of the Local Government Act 1989 with delegated powers to undertake designated steps in the recruitment process.


Alignment to City Plan

The Manager Organisation Development, and the selected Recruitment Consultant, will ensure the recruitment brief reflects the strategic initiatives of the City Plan.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

There is no officer direct or indirect conflict of interest.


Risk Assessment

A professional approach to the recruitment will minimise risk. It is important that attendance at meetings of the Committee be consistent. Unless committee members can attend all interviews they should not participate in interviews at all.


Social Considerations

There are no known social considerations.


Human Rights Charter

Human Rights Charter has been considered and no impacts have been identified.


Consultation and Communication

At the appropriate time the vacancy will be publicly advertised. It is imperative that information regarding candidates remain strictly confidential throughout the process.


[Back to Top]

Contents | Previous Page: Section A - Procedural Matters | Next Page: Section C - Urgent Business