Council Minutes - Section B: Reports - 27 September 2016

Contents | Previous Page: Section A - Procedural Matters | Next Page: Section C - Assembly of Councillors

Reports tabled at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on Tuesday date held at the Council Conference and Reception Centre in City Hall, 57 Little Malop Street, Geelong.


  1. Saleyards

  2. Amendment C328 (Part 1) – Barwon Water Surplus Property – Adoption

  3. Amendment C345 – 530 Bacchus Marsh Road, Lara – Adoption of Amendment

  4. Amendment C348 1-5 Ballarat Road, North Geelong – Adoption of Amendment

  5. Amendment C321 & Permit 1234/2014 Geelong Road, Portarlington – Consideration of Panel Report

  6. Amendment C346 Ocean Grove Structure Plan & Urban Design Framework – Consideration of Panel Report and Adoption of Amendment

  7. Ocean Grove Significant Tree Project

  8. Proposed Planning Scheme Amendment to Apply a Public Acquisition Overlay on Land at 661-669 Barwon Heads Road and 619-639, 641-655 and 657-669 Boundary Road, Charlemont (Confidential)

  9. Proposed Planning Scheme Amendment to Apply a Public Acquisition Overlay on Land at 1-87 Groves Road, Armstrong Creek and 109-215 Sparrovale Road, Charlemont

  10. Development Contribution Plans – Annual Report 2015-16

  11. Section 173 Agreement – Anco Seed and Turf P/L and City of Greater Geelong

  12. Draft Greenhouse Strategy

  13. Community Grants Program 2015/2016 – Summary of Allocations – 1 January to 30 June 2016

  14. Renewal of Wicket Maintenance and Development Agreement Between the City of Greater Geelong and the Geelong Cricket Association

  15. Delegations and Authorisation from Council to Chief Executive Officer and Staff

  16. Sale and Purchase of Land – Use of Chief Executive Officer Delegation

  17. Tender and Award of: Hendy Street Children and Family Centre

  18. Tender and Award of: Barwon Heads Main Drainage Outfall, Ozone Road, Barwon Heads

  19. Tender and Award of: Elcho Channel Main Drainage Infrastructure, Lara

  20. Tender and Award of: Portarlington North East Group of Roads, Portarlington

  21. Road Renaming – North/South Section Benita Place, Leopold

  22. Thompson Road, North Geelong – Proposed Footpath Construction SRC350 – Intention to Declare


1. Saleyards

(previously agenda item 11)

Source:

City Services - Engineering Services

Acting General Manager:

Vicki Shelton

Index Reference:

Saleyards


Purpose

To consider the future of the Geelong Saleyards site at Weddell Road North Geelong.


Summary

K Alexander moved, L Gardner seconded -

That Council:

  1. reiterates the resolution of the previous Council, to pursue a staged withdrawal of operations at the Geelong Saleyards;

  2. notes the extensive consultation undertaken by Council Officers, which included producers, agents, regional saleyard operators and officers of the Surf Coast Shire, Borough of Queenscliffe, Golden Plains Shire and Colac Otway Shire;

  3. notes that it was unforeseen that the Saleyards would close due to safety concerns before a transition plan was developed for staged withdrawal;

  4. requests Officers to undertake additional consultation for further consideration at the 22 November 2016 Council meeting.

Carried.


Background

A number of reports and audits have been conducted since 1998 into the operations of the Geelong Saleyards. In 2014 an external consultant was engaged to conduct a thorough investigation including extensive consultation. In their report the consultant’s recommended approach in regard to the future of the saleyards is to “facilitate a transition to a regional saleyards facility.

This will require a step by step approach and various actions in order to generate a successful outcome for Council, users and agents”.

A report to Council on 9 June 2015 the following recommendations were adopted;

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.

Actions Undertaken:

Council has replaced the coin operated truck wash system with an electronic key fob system which is administrated by Avdata. This system contributes between $4000 and $7500 in income per month which is up from the previous $1200 per month.


Discussion

Economic Issues

The number of stock being sold at the Geelong Saleyards has been declining over the past 10 years. In 2005 18,675 head of cattle were sold compared to 8839 in the 2015/16 financial year. The number of sheep sold in 2012 was 65,383 down to 45,092 in the 2015/16 financial year. Figure 1 shows the throughput figures for the 2015/2016 financial year.

Figure 1

Total cows and total sheep numbers on specific sales dates from 13/07/2015 to 16/05/2016

An analysis of the throughput figures indicates that a large proportion of the sales at the Geelong saleyards are in small lots. As is evident in figure 2 below 78% of transactions of the stock sold comes from the immediate area but this only equates to 41% of the total head of stock. Alternatively 21% of the transactions come from the Colac Otway and Wyndham Shire areas but they contribute 58% of the total head of stock sold.

Figure 2

Stock transactions

Figure 3 shows the break down of sales from within the City of Greater Geelong and the immediate neighbouring Council areas. 26% of all transactions are coming from the Surf Coast Shire area which equates to 15% of all stock sold. In contrast 14% of total transactions come from the Bellarine Peninsula which equates to 5% of total head sold at our saleyards. By this we see that a significant proportion of stock is bought and sold from outside of the City of Greater Geelong.

Figure 3

Sales breakdowns

Figure 4 demonstrates how the cattle throughput numbers from the 2015/2016 financial year compare to nearby saleyards. As is evident in the graph the numbers at Geelong are significantly lower than other saleyards.

Figure 4

2015-2016 cattle throughput numbers

The decline in throughput is not unique to Geelong, with the Victorian average showing a cattle throughput decrease of -11.37% per annum over the past 10 years and a decrease in sheep throughput of -7.36% per annum over the past 4 years. However, the Geelong throughput decline is even greater than the Victorian average for both cattle and sheep. Overall Victorian trends suggest that it is unlikely that the Saleyards would be able to increase throughput or significantly improve financial performance under current conditions. The Saleyards industry is declining overall, as alternative selling methods replace part of the traditional auction market.

The saleyards are performing poorly financially. The saleyards accounts have recorded a loss in each of the past eight financial years with a loss of $245,380 for the 2015/2016 financial year, $206,532 for the 2014/2015 financial year and $194,458 for the 2013/2014 financial year. The long term income trend has been declining, generally in line with a reduction in throughput. Expenditure has remained relatively consistent over time.

Since 2007/08 Council has invested over $1.7 million to subsidise the operation of the Saleyards including capital improvements. In addition to the significant operating losses, significant capital investment has been made over the past 7 years to improve the facilities and buildings at the site. Despite this investment, the facility still requires significant investment to improve the overall standard and safety of facilities for employees and users.

At present a number of sheep ramps have been fenced off as they were deemed unsafe for use. It has been estimated that repairs to the associated retaining wall and the sheep loading ramps will be well over $100,000. The sheep yards also have access issues with users often having to climb over fences due to the lack of access gates.

In the cattle yards significant improvements have been made to the footing by concreting the yards last year. The yards themselves however are 150 years old and are getting to the point where they cannot be repaired, they will need to be replaced. There are issues with deterioration of the rails and the upright poles. There are also concerns about access and egress at the yards with many areas being impossible for someone to climb up and over if needed in an emergency.

It has just been announced that as of January 2017 all sheep will now need to be tagged and scanned like the cattle. This will require a new facility to be built for the scanning of sheep. Our scanning operator believes that the costs to establish new infrastructure could be up to $50,000.

It has been suggested that the current saleyards site could be sold and a new facility be build elsewhere close to Geelong. The cost to build a new facility that would need to meet all the guidelines for the operation of saleyards, including roofing, soft floor, waste management to name just a few would be prohibitive especially given the low throughput numbers over many years at Geelong.

A subsidy program for 2 years has been suggested for consideration to acknowledge the increase in transport costs should the Geelong Saleyards be closed. Stock agents have suggested $1 per sheep and $10 per cow sold from the City of Greater Geelong area could be applied. In the 2015/16 financial year 45,092 sheep and 8,839 cows were sold through the Geelong Saleyards. Based on these figures the cost to offer a subsidy for one year would be $133,482.

Safety Issues

Engineer and construction reports and quotes

Structural Engineer report – July 2016

Elevated Cattle Yard Platforms

“The elevated platforms to the cattle yards were installed approximately 10-15 years ago. They are a steel structure with handrails angled outwards. The platforms typically attach to the top of the timber posts to the pens below. The timber posts are in very poor condition where visible and likely to be worse below the concrete level where no ventilation is present. Another consideration is the likelihood that the columns will be impacted by an animal in one of the pens. If an animal runs into one of the columns, this has the potential to cause a column to break.

There is a high risk that failure of one of the timber posts will cause associated failure of the elevated platforms to the cattle yards.”

It is the engineer’s belief that the risk of failure is not acceptable and the elevated steel platforms to the cattle yards should no longer be in use.

Temporary propping could be used to improve stability or the walkway platforms. This would involve diagonal props from the top of all the cantilever columns to ground. This would need to be done to all of the columns if the platforms are to be used.


Pedestrian Walkway Platforms

“The pedestrian walkway platforms are slightly elevated and are made up of timber planks. The top of the timber planks has been covered with a timber board. This is somewhat visible from underneath the walkway, but the top has been covered with asphalt. It is likely there is also decay to the top of the planks as no ventilation is provided due to the boarding and asphalt surfacing”.

Sheep Pen Elevated Platforms

“The elevated auction platforms for the sheep pens are a steel structure similar to the cattle yards. The northern most platform is in good condition and appears in working order with low risk of failure”.

“The remainder of the platforms are similar to the cattle yards in that they rely on either the decaying timber posts or the un-galvanised steel rail section. Both of these elements are likely to be in very poor condition just below the ground level where the highest amount of corrosion or decay occurs. The risk of failure of the elevated platforms supported by the decaying timber or corroding steel rails is high”.

The engineer’s report recommends that these platforms should not be used for sales.

Options

  1. Full structural repair to the overhead walkways in the cattle pens, the sheep pens and the pedestrian walkways. The estimated cost for full structural repairs is $226,000 (include GST). This will take 3 months to complete.

  2. Repair to one of the overhead walkways in the cattle pens, one walkway in the sheep pens and the pedestrian walkways. The estimated cost for a partial repair is approximately $40,000. This work will take 3 months to complete and will allow partial reopening of the saleyards for a temporary period.

  3. Full permanent closure of the Geelong Saleyards.

It is to be noted that if the costs to do the rectification works at the saleyards exceed $200,000 the City of Greater Geelong Procurement Policy states that a tender process must be undertaken. The will see the process take up to 6 months to complete. Therefore the saleyards would not be operational until March 2017.

If the rectification works are to be completed to ensure the overhead walkways can be used again there will be some other associated works that will also need to be completed for the saleyards to continue to operate for a longer period of time. These include improvement of the staff and public amenities as well as some additional maintenance and structural works. Please refer to Table 1.

Activity

Estimated Cost

Structural repairs to overhead walkways to cattle pens, sheep pens and pedestrian walkways

$226,000.00

Restoration works on the sheep ramps that are currently closed

$100,000.00

Amenities such as staff room, toilets, canteen and meeting rooms to be reinstated

$500,000.00

New facilities required to administer the change to scanning sheep to be implemented 1st January 2017

$50,000.00

Replacement of rails on all external fencing of the yards to reduce the risk of stock being able to get loose on the road.

$40,000.00

Total Estimate Cost

$916,000.00



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 coexist 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 2015/2016 financial year the saleyards site generated a net financial loss of $245,380.

The option to do full rectification works on the overhead walkways in the Cattle and Sheep pens and reinstatement of amenities would cost approximately $916,000

The option to do only rectification works to one of the overhead walkways in the Cattle and one in Sheep pens with no improvements to amenities would cost approximately $40,000. However this does not address all the concerns so would still be considered a temporary solution.

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

Council has been paid out by its insurer in relation to the main office building fire. Money from the insurance would be used to retain staff and rebuild community facilities if the Saleyard are to be retained.

A subsidy program for 2 years has been suggested for consideration to acknowledge the increase in transport costs should the Geelong Saleyards be closed. Based on the throughput figures from 2015/16 the cost to offer a subsidy for one year would be $133,482. It is to be noted that this figure does include people live outside the City of Greater Geelong.

If we were to work on the percentages of the sales as per Figure 3 earlier in this report, 34% of the total sales at Geelong come from within the City of Greater Geelong. If this is the case 34% of the $133,482 estimated as the required amount to pay a subsidy would be $45,384.

It has just been announced that as of January 2017 all sheep will now need to be tagged and scanned like the cattle. This will require a new facility to be built for the scanning of sheep. Our scanning operator believes that the costs to establish new infrastructure could be up to $50,000

It is to be noted that if works are completed which allows the resumption of sales of livestock at the Geelong Saleyards there will be additional associated costs that will need to be met as per Table 1 on page 8.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

Council currently has lease agreements in place that would need to be addressed should the site significantly change from its current situation.

The site provides some land to Target to allow parking for some of their staff under a lease arrangement. It is to be noted that Target is likely to vacate their site within the next few years.

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 Feasibility Study into the Geelong Saleyards and all subsequent studies reviewed how the service meets the requirements of a growing population through responsible and sustainable financial management as well as ensuring safety to City of Greater Geelong staff and members of the public.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

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


Risk Assessment

A decision was made before the 8th of August sale to temporarily close the Geelong Saleyards to sheep and cattle sales due to safety concerns as outlined earlier. Without rectification works to the overhead walkways in the sheep and cattle pens there is no option to safely sell livestock at the Geelong Saleyards.


Social Considerations

The saleyards act partly as a social club for members of the rural communities, providing a valued meeting place and opportunity to socialise.

With reduced numbers of stock coming through the sales and many farmers not attending to view the sale of their stock there has been an obvious decrease in numbers attending the fortnightly sales. This together with the loss of the market office building has seen the social nature of the site has recently decline.


Human Rights Charter

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


Consultation and Communication

As part of our consultation process to determine the feasibility of the saleyards we have spoken to all the users and stakeholders.

Survey

Recently 1500 surveys were sent out to local producers with the cooperation of HF Richardson and Charles Stewart stock agents.

A total of 463 surveys were returned which is a 30% return rate. 86% of responders reported that they currently sell stock at the Geelong Saleyards with 42.5% advising that over the past 2 years they had sold 1-3 times per year. 58.7% of those selling at the Geelong Saleyards are selling sheep and 69.3% selling cattle.

When asked if they sold stock at other saleyards 42.7% responded yes and 57.3 responded No. Of those who indicated they sell at other saleyards 68% were selling at Ballarat and 55.7% at Colac. 47.9% of responders reported that they transport their own stock with 52.1% using a transporter. When asked about their future usage of the saleyards 79.1% indicated their usage would remain the same and only 14.4% thought their usage would increase.



[Back to List]

2. Amendment C328 (Part 1) – Barwon Water Surplus Property – Adoption

(previously agenda item 1)

Source:

Planning and Development – Strategic Implementation

General Manager:

Peter Bettess

Index Reference:

Application: Amendment C328 (Part 1)
Application: Planning Permit 959/2015


Purpose

This report considers submissions on Amendment C328 (Part 1) and on Planning Permit 959/2015, relating to the subdivision of Barwon Water land at 600 and 602 Anakie Road, Lovely Banks. This report recommends adoption of this part of the Amendment and support for the granting of the Planning Permit.


Summary

P Dorling moved, L Gardner seconded -

That Council:

  1. Adopts Amendment C328 (Part 1) in the form outlined in Appendix 4 of this report;

  2. Recommends to the Minister for Planning that Planning Permit 959/2015 be granted pursuant to Section 96G of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (the Planning Permit is in Appendix 6 of this report);

  3. Submits the adopted Amendment with the prescribed information to the Minister for Planning requesting approval; and

  4. Notes that a separate report will be prepared and submitted to Council to consider the Panel Report on Amendment C328 (Part 2) for 38-42 Mainsail Drive St Leonards, when the Panel Report is received.

Carried.


Background

In July 2015 Council received a Planning Scheme Amendment request from SMEC Urban and St Quentin Consulting Pty Ltd, acting on behalf of Barwon Water, to rezone four sites to facilitate their disposal. This is part of a wider property realisation program Barwon Water is carrying out for its surplus land.

Amendment C328 was prepared and rezones:

The Amendment also:

Pursuant to Section 96A of the Act, a draft Planning Permit (959/2015) for subdivision of 600 and 602 Anakie Road, Lovely Banks was exhibited concurrently with the Amendment. The draft Permit is to re-subdivide existing lots to create one rural living lot, already used for rural residential purposes, and a Barwon Water reserve.

In addition, the Amendment proposed zone and overlay changes to 38-42 Mainsail Drive, St Leonards and an adjacent Reserve. Planning Permit 762/205, proposing subdivision of 38-42 Mainsail Drive, was also exhibited concurrently with the Amendment.

On 11 January 2016, Council’s delegate resolved to support the preparation and exhibition of Amendment C328 and the associated planning permits.

Amendment C328 was placed on public exhibition between 10 March and 11 April 2016. Notices were placed in local newspapers and the Government Gazette and letters sent to adjoining landowners, government authorities and service authorities.

Eight submissions were received during exhibition. Of these, five objected to the Amendment, while three only made comment. The five objecting submissions all related to the proposed rezoning and subdivision of 38-42 Mainsail Drive, St Leonards.

Barwon Water requested that Amendment C328 be split into two parts, with the site at 38-42 Mainsail Drive to be processed separately. This was supported. Amendment C328 (Part 1) comprises the Staughton Vale, Anakie and Lovely Banks sites, while Part 2 comprises 38-42 Mainsail Drive, St Leonards.

On 29 June 2016 Council, under delegated authority, referred submissions on 38-42 Mainsail Drive, to be known as Amendment C328 (Part 2) to a Panel. The Panel Hearing is to take place on 11 August 2016. Once the Panel Report is received, a report will be prepared and submitted to Council to consider this report.


Discussion

Subject land

45 Staughton Vale Road is an 8.678 ha lot, created by a recent consolidation of Barwon Water lots that also created a 4620 m2 Reserve for Barwon Water purposes. The lot is around 3 km north of the Anakie townsite (location plan is at Appendix 1). It contains two decommissioned water reservoirs and a dwelling previously used as a caretaker’s dwelling. The majority of the lot is cleared.

2395 Ballan Road is a 5.14 ha property around 2 km north of the Anakie townsite (location plan is at Appendix 2). The lot contains a building constructed but never used for water treatment purposes. The majority of the lot is leased and farmed in conjunction with adjacent land. Environmental Significance Overlay ESO 4 (Grasslands within the Werribee Plains Hinterland) applies to the land and is unchanged by the Amendment.

600 and 602 Anakie Road, Lovely Banks is a 13.543 property, comprising three lots on two Titles (location plan is at Appendix 3). The site contains three water reservoirs and a settling pond, various ancillary buildings and a former caretaker’s dwelling. The dwelling and its driveway are divided from the balance of the site by a security fence and separately rented for residential use. Environmental Significance Overlay ESO 4 (Grasslands within the Werribee Plains Hinterland) applies to a portion of the site and is unchanged by the Amendment.

The Amendment proposes to zone a 1.133 ha portion of the site, including the former caretaker’s dwelling, Rural Living Zone. Planning Permit 959/2015 proposes to create it as a separate lot.

Proposals

The land being rezoned in each of the three sites is surplus to Barwon Water requirements. The proposed rezonings are to the logical underlying zoning of the land in each case – Farming Zone in Staughton Vale and Anakie; and Rural Living Zone in Lovely Banks.

Private land adjacent to 45 Staughton Vale Road is subject of Significant Landscape Overlay SLO 5 (Edges of the Brisbane Ranges and Anakie). 45 Staughton Vale Road has similar landscape characteristics and, for consistency, this Amendment applies SLO 5 to the site.

Before exhibition, vehicular access to 2395 Ballan Road was identified as inadequate as there was no deceleration lane and insufficient space for a rigid truck to prop between Ballan Road and the gate in the security fence. Barwon Water has now adequately addressed this by indenting the entry gate to the site.

Heritage Overlay 1721 (Barwon Water Lovely Banks Basin) applies to all of 600 Anakie Road. This Amendment deletes the Overlay from the 1.133 ha portion of the site being rezoned to Rural Living Zone and created as a separate lot by the Planning Permit. The City’s Heritage Advisor supported this proposal.

The proposed 1.133 ha lot, while irregular in shape, excludes all areas required for Barwon Water operations and all fabric of heritage significance. The plan of subdivision for the Planning Permit is at Appendix 5. The exhibited Planning Permit is at
Appendix 6.

Submissions

A summary of the submissions that related to any of the three sites in Part 1 of the Amendment is at Appendix 7.

A submission from the Anakie & District Community Group Inc notes that an approximately 1000 m2 portion of 45 Staughton Vale Road, directly adjacent to the Anakie Hall, has been used by the hall management committee for car parking for hall users since a lease agreement between the Shire of Corio and Barwon Water’s predecessor. A gas tank is also located on this land. The submission notes that the portion of the land is vital to provide safe parking for the use of the Anakie Hall.

Discussion with the submitter confirmed that the submission constitutes comment only and not an objection to the Amendment.

It is clear from investigation that ongoing use of the portion of 45 Staughton Vale Road for car parking and a gas tank is required to enable ongoing practical use of the Anakie Hall.

A lease agreement existed between the former Shire of Corio and the then Geelong Waterworks and Sewerage Trust, but has now been terminated. The City’s Property & Procurement Department has been in discussion with Barwon Water regarding the potential long term lease or purchase of the portion of land. At the time of writing, investigation of this matter is ongoing.

Should the City decide to purchase the subject portion of 45 Staughton Vale Road, a boundary rationalisation with the adjoining Anakie Hall site will be required. The rezoning of 45 Staughton Vale Road from Public Use Zone to Farming Zone will not preclude such boundary rationalisation as the Anakie Hall site (55 Staughton Vale Road) is also within the Farming Zone.

Conclusion

As no objections have been raised with respect to the three sites in Part 1 of the Amendment, these components of the Amendment should be adopted as exhibited and Planning Permit 959/2015 granted.


Environmental Implications

No adverse environmental consequences have been identified with respect to these proposals.


Financial Implications

It is not anticipated that these proposals will result in any financial implications for Council.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The Amendment is consistent with State Planning Policy in:

The amendment is consistent with the Local Planning Policy Framework in:


Alignment to City Plan

The Amendment is consistent with City Plan’s Growing our Economy priority as it provides additional Farming zoned and facilitates it being made available for purchase.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

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


Risk Assessment

There are no notable risks associated with implementing the recommendation contained in this report.


Social Considerations

The Amendment will have minimal social impacts. The Amendment will not preclude the boundary realignment and purchase of a small portion of 45 Staughton Vale Road, should this be necessary for ongoing practical use of the Anakie Hall by the community.


Human Rights Charter

The Amendment will not impact on any basic rights, freedoms and responsibilities as set out in the Charter. Planning legislation ensures an open community consultation process occurs, enabling people to freely express their views and if necessary obtain a fair hearing before an Independent Panel. Submitters had that opportunity in this case.


Consultation and Communication

The Amendment has been exhibited in accordance with the provisions of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to provide for full public comment.


Appendix 1 Location Plan – 45 Staughton Vale Road, Staughton Vale

Appendix 1 Location Plan – 45 Staughton Vale Road, Staughton Vale

Appendix 2 Location Plan – 2395 Ballan Road, Anakie

Appendix 2 Location Plan – 2395 Ballan Road, Anakie

Appendix 3 Location Plan – 600 and 602 Anakie Road, Lovely Banks

Appendix 3 Location Plan – 600 and 602 Anakie Road, Lovely Banks

Appendix 4 Amendment for adoption

Planning and Environment Act 1987

GREATER GEELONG PLANNING SCHEME

AMENDMENT C328 (PART 1)

INSTRUCTION SHEET

The planning authority for this amendment is Greater Geelong Planning Scheme

The Greater Geelong Planning Scheme is amended as follows:


Planning Scheme Maps

The Planning Scheme Maps are amended by a total of 4 attached maps.


Zoning Maps

  1. Amend Planning Scheme Map Nos. 5 and 25 in the manner shown on the 2 attached maps marked “Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, Amendment C328”.


Overlay Maps

  1. Amend Planning Scheme Map Nos. 5slo and 25ho in the manner shown on the 2 attached maps marked “Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, Amendment C328”.


Planning Scheme Ordinance

The Planning Scheme Ordinance is amended as follows:

.
  1. In Overlays – Clause 43.01, replace the Schedule with a new Schedule in the form of the attached document.

End of document


FZ - Farm Zone - Amendment C328 - Part of Planning Scheme Map 5
SLO5 - Significant Landscape Overlay - Schedule 5 - Amendment C328 - Part of Planning Scheme Map 5SLO
RLZ - Rural Living Zone - Amendment C328 - Part of Planning Scheme Map 25
D-HO1721 - Area to be deleted from a Heritage Overlay (HO1721) - Amendment C328 - Part of Planning Scheme Map 25HO
Schedule to the Heritage Overlay - Page 1 of 180
Schedule to the Heritage Overlay - Page 5 of 180

Appendix 5 Plan of subdivision – 600 and 602 Anakie Road

Appendix 5 Plan of subdivision – 600 and 602 Anakie Road

Appendix 6 Planning Permit 959/2015 – 600 and 602 Anakie Road, Lovely Banks

Appendix 6 Planning Permit 959/2015 – 600 and 602 Anakie Road, Lovely Banks - Page 1 of 3
Appendix 6 Planning Permit 959/2015 – 600 and 602 Anakie Road, Lovely Banks - Page 2 of 3
Appendix 6 Planning Permit 959/2015 – 600 and 602 Anakie Road, Lovely Banks - Page 3 of 3

Appendix 7

Summary of Submissions for Amendment C328 (Part 1)

No

Name

Address

Type

Summary of Submission

Officer Response

1

Anakie & District Community Group Inc.

Ballan Road, Anakie

Comment

Land on 45 Staughton Vale Road, Staughton Vale, attached to Anakie Hall, has been used by the hall management committee since agreement of a lease agreement with the Shire of Corio and Geelong Water Works and Sewerage Trust to provide car parking for hall users [attached plan shows an 87.8 m x 11.3 m area of 45 Staughton Vale Road, abutting 55 Staughton Vale Road, site of Anakie Hall].

In 1983 the Shire of Corio placed a large gas tank on this area. Later, the City of Greater Geelong placed a bitumen surface to the car park.

The building and land is leased from the City of Greater Geelong by a committee of management of Anakie Hall, under management of Anakie & District Community Group Inc.

The car park area under question is vital for users of Anakie Hall as without it there is limited car parking availability on-site. Roadside parking is too dangerous due to narrow verges.

 

Discussion with the submitter has confirmed that this submission constitutes comment only and not an objection to the Amendment.

A lease agreement existed between the former Shire of Corio and the then Geelong Waterworks and Sewerage Trust regarding the use of a portion of 45 Staughton Vale Road; this lease has now been terminated.

It is clear that the ongoing use of that land for car parking and a gas tank is required to enable ongoing practical use of the Anakie Hall.

The City’s Property & Procurement Department has been in discussion with Barwon Water regarding the potential long term lease or purchase of the portion of land. At the time of writing, investigation of this matter is ongoing.

Should the City decide to purchase the subject portion of 45 Staughton Vale Road, a boundary rationalisation with the adjoining Anakie Hall site will be required. The rezoning of 45 Staughton Vale Road from Public Use Zone to Farming Zone will not preclude such boundary rationalisation as the Anakie Hall site (55 Staughton Vale Road) is also within the Farming Zone.

2

AusNet Services

Southbank Boulevard, Southbank

Comment

None of the Amendment sites are in the vicinity of high voltage electricity assets. No submission is required from AusNet Transmission Group.

Noted.

3

 

Barwon Water

PO Box 659, Geelong

Support Barwon Water responded to this Amendment and Planning Permit application in September 2015. Barwon Water’s comments are unchanged.

Support this Amendment proceeding.

All permit conditions requested by Barwon Water in its correspondence of 17 September 2015 have been incorporated in the exhibited draft Planning Permits 762/2015 and 959/2015.

Noted.



[Back to List]

3. Amendment C345 – 530 Bacchus Marsh Road, Lara – Adoption of Amendment

(previously agenda item 2)

Source:

Planning & Development - Strategic Implementation

General Manager:

Peter Bettess

Index Reference:

Application: Amendment C345


Purpose

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider Amendment C345 for adoption and referral to the Minister for Planning for approval.


Summary

P Dorling moved, L Gardner seconded –

That Council:

  1. adopts Amendment C345 (Appendix 4 of this report); and

  2. submits the adopted Amendment and the prescribed information to the Minister for Planning requesting approval.

Carried.


Background

Amendment C345 resulted from the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) recommending to Council it amend the Planning Scheme to apply an Environmental Audit Overlay (EAO) to 530 Bacchus Marsh Road, Lara. A copy of the EPA’s letter is Appendix 1. The EPA advises it has issued an Official Warning to the owners of the property for their failure to clean up contamination resulting from its previous use as a truck repair business.

It believes that, whilst some attempts have been made to clean up the pollution, the likelihood is that legacy pollution of the soil and potentially the groundwater would remain.

The subject land has an area of 2.82 ha and is currently occupied by a detached house and various outbuildings as shown in the aerial photograph at Appendix 2. Visual evidence of the previous use also exists.

The land falls within a Rural Living zone as shown in Appendix 3.

The EPA’s concern is that the contamination issues need to be adequately addressed in the event the site is developed for a sensitive use in the future.

In the Rural Living zone, there are a number of discretionary sensitive uses for which a permit could be sought in the future e.g dwellings, education centre, childcare, hospital.

Application of an Environmental Audit Overlay to the land in the Planning Scheme would mean that before any new sensitive use could commence or any buildings or works in association with a sensitive use commences either:


Discussion

Amendment C345 was exhibited between 16 June 2016 and 18 July 2016. The owner of the subject land and the EPA received direct notification of the Amendment. The Council sought and received exemption from the Minister for Planning from other notification requirements (other than specified Ministers and the Gazette Notice) pursuant to Section 20 (2) of the Act because no other owners or authorities are affected by the Amendment.

The only submission received as a result of the exhibition of the Amendment was from the EPA which supports the Amendment. As no objecting submissions were received the Amendment can now proceed for adoption.

This Amendment is supported as the most prudent course of action to alert any future owners about the potential contamination issue. It would be most unfortunate if the subject land was offered for sale and a new owner decided to construct a dwelling on the land without even being aware of the potential contamination issue.

The general area is expected to see very considerable urban growth both in the short term (Lara West) and potentially in the longer term if the development at Lovely Banks proceeds.

Application of the EAO will result in no immediate imposition on the existing owners and will only trigger the need for a planning permit for any proposed sensitive use as described in the previous section of this report. Appendix 4 is a copy of the Amendment recommended for adoption.


Environmental Implications

The Amendment will produce a positive environmental outcome in that any residual contamination from the previous industrial use will need to be adequately addressed and if necessary remedial action taken prior to the land being used for a sensitive use.


Financial Implications

The proposal has no financial implication for Council other than the costs associated with the processing of this Amendment.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The Amendment is consistent with Clause 13.03-1 Use of contaminated and potentially contaminated land and Clause 21.02 CoGG Sustainable Growth Framework which refers to restoring Geelong’s natural systems and the need to “dispose of waste responsibly”. It is also consistent with the purpose of the Environmental Audit Overlay at Clause 45.03 of the Planning Scheme.


Alignment to City Plan

The Amendment supports the overall thrust of the Sustainable Built and Natural Environment strategic direction of City Plan.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

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


Risk Assessment

There are no risks to Council associated with this Amendment. Failure to act on the EPA recommendation could expose Council and a future owner to legal and cost implications if the land is developed for a sensitive use without contamination issues being addressed.


Social Considerations

The Amendment has no social implications.


Human Rights Charter

The Amendment will not impact on basic human rights, freedoms and responsibilities as set out in the Charter.


Consultation and Communication

The owners of the land affected by the Amendment have been made aware of the EPA recommendations. A copy of Council’s Delegated Authority Report and Amendment notification including a copy of all Amendment documents were sent to them.

The owners have not made a submission about the Amendment.


Appendix 1 – EPA Letter

Appendix 1 – EPA Letter - Page 1 of 2
Appendix 1 – EPA Letter - Page 2 of 2

Appendix 2 – Aerial Image

Appendix 2 – Aerial Image

Appendix 3 – Zoning Map

Appendix 2 – Aerial Image

Appendix 4 – Amendment for Adoption

Planning and Environment Act 1987

GREATER GEELONG PLANNING SCHEME

AMENDMENT C328345

INSTRUCTION SHEET

The planning authority for this amendment is Greater Geelong City Council.

The Greater Geelong Planning Scheme is amended as follows:


Planning Scheme Maps

The Planning Scheme Maps are amended by a total of one attached map sheet.


Overlay Maps

  1. Amend Planning Scheme Map No 18 EAO in the manner shown on the one attached map marked Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, Amendment C345.

  2. Insert Planning Scheme Map No 17 EAO in the manner shown on the one attached map marked Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, Amendment C345.


Planning Scheme Ordinance

The Planning Scheme Ordinance is amended as follows:

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

End of document


Amendment C345 - EAO - Environmental Audit Overlay - Part of Planning Scheme Maps 17EAO and 18EAO
 

SCHEDULE TO CLAUSE 61.03

17/03/2016

Maps comprising part of this scheme:

  • 1, 1VPO, 1SLO, 1WMO

  • 2, 2ESO, 2VPO, 2SLO, 2HO, 2WMO

  • 3, 3ESO, 3VPO, 3HO, 3LSIO-FO, 3PAO

  • 4, 4ESO, 4HO, 4PAO

  • 5, 5ESO, 5VPO, 5SLO, 5HO, 5WMO

  • 6, 6ESO, 6VPO, 6SLO, 6HO, 6LSIO-FO

  • 7, 7ESO, 7VPO, 7SLO, 7HO, 7LSIO-FO, 7PAO, 7WMO

  • 8, 8ESO, 8SLO, 8HO, 8LSIO-FO, 8PAO, 8WMO

  • 9, 9ESO, 9HO, 9LSIO-FO

  • 10, 10ESO, 10HO, 10LSIO-FO

  • 11, 11ESO, 11LSIO-FO, 11DCPO

  • 12, 12ESO, 12SLO, 12LSIO-FO, 12VPO, 12WMO, 12DCPO, 12DPO

  • 13, 13ESO, 13SLO, 13HO, 13VPO, 13WMO, 13PAO

  • 14, 14ESO, 14VPO, 14LSIO-FO, 14PAO

  • 15, 15ESO, 15PAO, 15VPO, 15HO, 15LSIO-FO

  • 16, 16ESO, 16LSIO-FO

  • 17, 17ESO, 17HO, 17DDO, 17VPO, 17DCPO. 17EAO

  • 18, 18ESO, 18DDO, 18DPO, 18LSIO-FO, 18PAO, 18EAO, 18SBO, 18DCPO

  • 19, 19ESO, 19VPO, 19HO, 19LSIO-FO, 19DDO

  • 20, 20ESO, 20VPO, 20DPO, 20LSIO-FO, 20DDO, 20PAO

  • 21, 21ESO, 21DPO, 21DDO, 21LSIO-FO

  • 22, 22ESO, 22PAO, 22LSIO-FO

  • 23, 23ESO, 23LSIO-FO

  • 24, 24ESO, 24HO, 24LSIO-FO

  • 25, 25ESO, 25DPO, 25LSIO-FO, 25PAO, 25EAO, 25HO, 25DDO14, 25DDO, 25SBO

  • 26, 26ESO, 26HO, 26SBO, 26PAO, 26EAO, 26DDO, 26RO, 26DPO

  • 27, 27ESO, 27VPO, 27HO, 27LSIO-FO, 27EAO

  • 28, 28ESO, 28DPO, 28DDO

  • 29, 29ESO, 29DPO, 29DDO, 29LSIO-FO

  • 30

  • 31, 31ESO, 31HO, 31DPO, 31LSIO-FO, 31PAO, 31EAO

  • 32, 32ESO, 32HO, 32DDO14, 32SBO

  • 33, 33HO, 33DDO14, 33DPO, 33DDO, 33SBO, 33EAO

  • 34, 34ESO, 34HO, 34DDO

  • 35, 35DDO

  • 36, 36ESO, 36HO, 36DPO, 36LSIO-FO, 36EAO, 36DDO14, 36SBO

  • 37, 37HO, 37DDO, 37EAO, 37DDO14, 37DPO, 37LSIO-FO, 37SBO

  • 38, 38HO, 38EAO, 38DDO, 38SBO

  • 39

  • 40, 40ESO, 40HO, 40DDO

  • 41, 41HO, 41DDO14, 41SLO

  • 42, 42ESO, 42HO, 42PAO, 42DDO14, 42DDO, 42SLO

  • 43, 43ESO, 43VPO, 43HO, 43DDO14, 43DPO, 43DDO, 43SLO, 43SBO

  • 44, 44VPO, 44HO, 44DDO14, 44DDO, 44SBO

  • 45, 45HO

  • 46, 46LSIO-FO, 46HO

  • 47, 47SLO, 47HO, 47DDO, 47LSIO-FO, 47EAO, 47DDO14, 47DPO, 47RXO

  • 48, 48HO, 48DDO, 48DPO, 48LSIO-FO, 48EAO, 48DDO14

  • 49, 49SLO, 49HO, 49DDO, 49LSIO-FO, 49PAO, 49DDO14, 49EAO, 49RXO, 49SBO

  • 50, 50HO, 50DDO,50EAO, 50LSIO-FO, 50SBO

  • 51, 51ESO, 51HO, 51DDO, 51SBO

  • 52, 52HO, 52LSIO-FO, 52DDO14, 52DDO, 52DPO

  • 53, 53ESO, 53HO, 53LSIO-FO, 53PAO, 53DDO14, 53DDO

  • 54, 54ESO, 54HO, 54LSIO-FO, 54PAO, 54DDO, 54EAO

  • 55, 55HO, 55LSIO-FO, 55DDO, 55SBO

  • 56, 56ESO, 56HO, 56DDO, 56LSIO-FO, 56SBO

  • 57, 57VPO, 57HO, 57DPO, 57DDO14, 57DDO

  • 58, 58VPO, 58HO, 58DDO

  • 59, 59VPO, 59HO, 59PAO, 59DDO14, 59DDO, 59DPO, 59DCPO

  • 60, 60HO, 60PAO, 60DDO14, 60SLO

  • 61, 61VPO, 61SLO

  • 62, 62ESO, 62VPO, 62HO, 62DDO14, 62DDO, 62DPO, 62SLO

  • 63, 63DDO

  • 64, 64VPO, 64SLO, 64PAO

  • 65, 65VPO, 65SLO, 65HO, 65DDO, 65DPO, 65PAO, 65DDO14, 65ESO, 65DCPO

  • 66, 66VPO, 66HO, 66DPO, 66LSIO-FO, 66PAO, 66DDO14, 66ESO, 66DDO, 66DCPO, 66PO

  • 67, 67VPO, 67HO, 67LSIO-FO, 67PAO, 67ESO, 67SBO, 67DDO, 67DCPO

  • 68, 68ESO, 68HO, 68LSIO-FO, 68SLO

  • 69, 69ESO, 69HO, 69LSIO-FO, 69DDO14, 69DPO, 69SLO

  • 70, 70VPO, 70HO, 70LSIO-FO, 70PAO, 70SLO

  • 71, 71ESO, 71VPO, 71HO, 71PAO, 71DPO, 71SLO

  • 72, 72ESO, 72VPO, 72HO, 72SLO

  • 73, 73ESO, 73VPO, 73SLO

  • 74, 74ESO, 74DDO14, 74SLO

  • 75, 75VPO

  • 76, 76VPO, 76PAO

  • 77, 77VPO, 77HO, 77LSIO-FO, 77ESO, 77DCPO

  • 78, 78ESO, 78VPO, 78LSIO-FO, 78PAO, 78HO, 78DCPO

  • 79, 79ESO, 79VPO, 79LSIO-FO, 79PAO, 79HO, 79SLO

  • 80, 80ESO, 80LSIO-FO, 80SBO, 80PAO, 80HO, 80SLO

  • 81, 81ESO, 81VPO, 81SLO, 81HO, 81DDO, 81LSIO-FO, 81SBO, 81PAO, 81DDO14, 81WMO

  • 82, 82ESO, 82VPO, 82SLO, 82HO, 82DDO, 82DPO, 82LSIO-FO, 82PAO 82DDO14, 82WMO

  • 83, 83ESO, 83VPO, 83HO, 83DDO, 83LSIO-FO, 83PAO, 83DDO14, 83WMO, 83DPO, 83SLO

  • 84, 84ESO, 84VPO, 84SLO

  • 85, 85ESO, 85WMO, 85DDO

  • 86, 86ESO, 86HO, 86LSIO-FO, 86WMO, 86DDO

  • 87, 87ESO, 87HO, 87SLO, 87SBO

  • 88, 88ESO, 88HO, 88LSIO-FO, 88DDO, 88SBO

  • 89, 89ESO, 89DDO14, 89WMO, 89SLO, 89DPO



[Back to List]

4. Amendment C348 1-5 Ballarat Road, North Geelong – Adoption of Amendment

Source:

Planning & Development - Strategic Implementation

General Manager:

Peter Bettess

Index Reference:

Application C348


Purpose

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider Amendment C348 for adoption and referral to the Minister for Planning for approval.


Summary

P Dorling moved, L Gardner seconded –

That Council:

  1. adopts Amendment C348 (Appendix 5 of this report); and

  2. submits the adopted Amendment and the prescribed information to the Minister for Planning requesting approval.

Carried.


Background

Amendment C348 resulted from an application made by Planning and Property Partners on behalf of Links Investco No 1 P/L to rezone part of land situated at 1 – 5 Ballarat Road North Geelong from SUZ3 to GRZ1. It also sought to both apply an EAO and remove DPO9 from the land being rezoned.

The subject land is lot S31 on Plan of Subdivision 647500V as shown on the title at Appendix 1 with an area of 6277 sq metres.

The subject land falls within 2 zones, GRZ1 and SUZ3 which were applied in Amendment C110 gazetted on 1 March 2007 as part of the redevelopment of the former Geelong Golf Course. This Amendment provided for residential subdivision and a redeveloped 9 hole golf course which is now substantially completed. The existing zoning plan is at Appendix 2.

The subject land is affected by 4 overlays as follows:

Appendix 3 shows existing Overlays.

The subject land is currently vacant although is substantially sealed and used for car parking in association with the 9 hole golf course. Its eastern boundary adjoins a table tennis centre owned by the Geelong Table Tennis Association and a detached house at 7 Par Court. Land to the north, identified as a 5ha lot A on P.S.647500V (see Appendix 1) is vacant and is subject to a planning permit 362/2011 for lawn bowling club facilities etc.

A fresh permit application 276/2016 by the lawn bowling club has recently been submitted to Council and is currently under consideration. The new application proposes substantial modifications to the previously issued permit.

Appendix 4 is an aerial photo of the subject land and the surrounding area.

It is intended to develop the subject land for a multi-storey aged care facility which will be the subject of a future planning permit application. However the applicant’s consultant has been advised by the Statutory Planning Dept that any such use of the land which will need to obtain access to Ballarat Road from the existing access point falling within the SUZ9 portion of the site would be prohibited by the planning scheme. This part of the site could also provide access to a basement car park and also have some ground level parking in association with the aged car facility.

VicRoads has advised that it would not support any change to the location of the existing access point to Ballarat Road, removing the option of relocating the access into the GRZ1 portion of the site.

The rezoning as proposed by this Amendment will align the zone and title boundaries of the subject land and enable development to proceed in accordance with the GRZ1 provisions, which would otherwise be prohibited for the reasons set out above.

The Overlay changes being proposed are consequential to the zone change as follows:

The existing access to Ballarat Road on the subject land, which will be shared with the adjoining lawn bowling club and golf clubhouse, is already protected by way of a carriageway easement (E46) shown on the title in Appendix 1.


Discussion

The Council sought and received exemption from the Minister for Planning pursuant to Section 20 (2) of the Act for newspaper notification because of the minor nature of this Amendment.

Direct notification was given to owners of adjoining properties (i.e. table tennis centre, owner of 7 Par Court, the lawn bowling club), VicRoads & CCMA.

Amendment C348 was exhibited between 16 June 2016 and 18 July 2016. Two submissions where received as follows:

VicRoads

No Objection

CCMA

No objection to the Amendment. Notes that the subject land is affected by the 1% floodplain. Any future development proposal of the site will require referral to CCMA to ensure stormwater issues are adequately resolved.


As no submissions have been received which raise any issues of objection to this Amendment it can proceed for adoption.

This Amendment is supported because it will facilitate the long intended development of the subject land in accordance with the residential zone provisions.

Appendix 5 is a copy of the amendment recommendation for adoption.


Environmental Implications

This Amendment will have no environmental implications.


Financial Implications

The proposal has no financial implications for Council.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

This Amendment was prepared essentially because development of the existing GRZ1 portion of the subject land would be prohibited using the only permissible access to Ballarat Road which falls within the SUZ. The Amendment is consistent with the broad theme of State and Council planning policies which encourage urban consolidation and housing diversity in established urban areas


Alignment to City Plan

The Amendment supports the overall thrust of Growing our Economy and Sustainable Built and Natural Environment Strategic directions in that it facilitates the development of land already substantially zoned for residential uses.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

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


Risk Assessment

There are no risks to Council in aligning zone and title boundaries as being proposed by this Amendment.


Social Considerations

The facilitation of an aged care facility on the subject land (which will require a separate planning permit) provides for a positive social outcome.


Human Rights Charter

The Amendment will not impact on any basic human rights, freedoms and responsibilities as set out in the charter.


Consultation and Communication

All affected properties were directly notified at the time of exhibition of this Amendment.


Appendix 1 Extract of Title

Appendix 1 Extract of Title

Appendix 2 – Existing Zoning

Appendix 2 – Existing Zoning

Appendix 3 – Existing Overlays

Appendix 3 – Existing Overlays

Appendix 4 – Aerial Photo

Appendix 4 – Aerial Photo

Appendix 5 – Amendment Recommended for Adoption

Planning and Environment Act 1987

GREATER GEELONG PLANNING SCHEME

AMENDMENT C348

INSTRUCTION SHEET

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

The Greater Geelong Planning Scheme is amended as follows:


Planning Scheme Maps

The Planning Scheme Maps are amended by a total of 4 attached maps sheets:


Zoning Maps

  1. Amend Planning Scheme Map No. 37 in the manner shown on the 1 attached map marked Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, Amendment C348.


Overlay Maps

  1. Amend Planning Scheme Map No. 37DPO in the manner shown on the 1 attached map marked Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, Amendment C348.

  2. Amend Planning Scheme Map No 37LSIO in the manner shown on the 1 attached map marked Greater Geelong Planning Scheme Amendment C348.

  3. Amend Planning Scheme Map No. 37EAO in the manner shown on the 1 attached map marked Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, Amendment C348.

End of document


GRZ1 - General Residential Zone - Schedule 1 - Amendment C348 - Part of Planning Scheme Map 37
D-DPO9 - Area to be delted from a Development Plan Overlay (DPO9) - Amendment C348 - Part of Planning Scheme Map 37DPO
D-DPO9 - Area to be delted from a Development Plan Overlay (DPO9) - Amendment C348 - Part of Planning Scheme Map 37DPO
D-LSIO - Area to be deleted from a Land Subject to Inundation Overlay - Amendment C348 - Part of Planning Scheme Map 37LSIO
EAO - Environmental Audit Overlay - Amendment C348 - Part of Planning Scheme Map 37

[Back to List]

5. Amendment C321 & Permit 1234/2014 Geelong Road, Portarlington – Consideration of Panel Report

(previously agenda item 4)

Source:

Planning & Development - Strategic Implementation

General Manager:

Peter Bettess

Index Reference:

Application: Amendment C321
Application: Permit Application 1234/2014


Purpose

The purpose of this report is two fold:

  1. consider the Amendment C321 and Planning Permit 1234/2014 Independent Panel Report and a recommendation that the Amendment be abandoned; and

  2. make consequential changes to the 2016 Portarlington Structure Plan.


Summary

L Gardner moved, P Dorling seconded -

That Council resolves to:

  1. abandon Amendment C321 as outlined in this report;

  2. abandon Planning Permit Application 1234/2014 as the ‘Accommodation’ use is prohibited in the Commercial 2 Zone; and

  3. readopt the 2016 Portarlington Structure Plan dated ‘September 2016’ as outlined in this report.

Carried.


Background

On 25 September 2014 a request from St Quentin Consulting for a concurrent Planning Scheme Amendment and Permit Application under Section 96A of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 was received by Council. The request was made on behalf of the proponent, Grabble Pty Ltd, owner of the land at 30 and 32 Geelong Road, Portarlington.

The applicant was subsequently revised to Batman Management Group Pty Ltd and the owner has further acquired 34 Geelong Road, Portarlington.

It is proposed to rezone the land at 30, 32, 34, 36-38, 40 and 42 Geelong Road, Portarlington, from the Commercial 2 Zone to the Mixed Use Zone, apply the Environmental Audit Overlay to all the land being rezoned, and amend the map at Clause 21.14-5 of the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme.

The draft Permit applies to 30 and 32 Geelong Road for development of a four storey, 55 dwelling apartment building with 569m² of commercial floor space and 57 basement car spaces. It is intended that the apartments will be made available for either short-term accommodation (through a serviced model) or for longer term occupancy by owners. The development would also include public access from Geelong Road to the Portarlington Recreation Reserve.

An aerial map of the Amendment land is shown at Appendix 1 and a current zoning map is shown at Appendix 2. The aerial map shows the location of the proposed development (Permit 1234/2014) within the established commercial precinct.

The proposed (abandoned) rezoning map and development plan are shown at Appendix 3 and 4, respectively.

As a result of a 7 week exhibition period closing on 8 February 2016, 35 submissions were received; 27 objecting. Key issues arising from the submissions included: tourism benefits; opposition to the rezoning; character, height and amenity negative impacts; traffic concerns, impacts on views; and the devaluation of properties.

Under delegation Council then resolved on 22 April 2016 to refer the submissions to an Independent Planning Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning. The Panel Hearing was held on 15, 16 and 17 June 2016.


Discussion

A two person Panel conducted the hearing. Hearing party attendees were Greater Geelong Council officers, Spiire representing the proponent, Kings Lawyers representing the neighbouring landowner at 28 Geelong Road (and calling planning evidence), two local residents, the PBDA and Committee for Bellarine.

The Panel provided its report to Council on 20 July 2016. A copy of the Panel Report’s Executive Summary is in Appendix 5.

Amendment C321

The Panel accepted much of the ‘high level’ strategic support and other benefits of the proposal, such as:

However, the Panel ultimately recommended that the Amendment be abandoned for the following reasons:

Officers principally relied on the higher level strategic planning support to justify the Amendment. It was submitted that the development would be a good outcome for Portarlington, the Northern Bellarine and the Geelong Region. Officers argued that Portarlington needs to consolidate, diversify and play to its competitive strengths.

The Panel was presented with the January 2016 Greater Geelong and The Bellarine Tourism Development Plan. The Tourism Development Plan is the most relevant guiding document to direct and prioritise tourism-related infrastructure in the region. The Plan confirms a need on the Northern Bellarine for the type of self-contained accommodation facility proposed and that the facility should be located in Portarlington.

Officers maintain that the precinct presents as an urban renewal site and redevelopment opportunity within the Portarlington Settlement Boundary.

While it is disappointing that the Panel placed greater weight on the local policy context, it is accepted that flaws in the proposal cannot be remedied within the confines of Amendment C321.

It is therefore accepted that the Mixed Use Zone is not sufficiently justified. This though does not change the fact that the precinct is in need of renewal and residential uses should be able to form part of that renewal. The precinct offers opportunities for but not limited to: self-contained quality short term accommodation; medium density housing; retirement living; and food and drink premises.

These types of uses (all permit required) can be accommodated in the General Residential Zone.

Officers accept that future redevelopment of the precinct should include investigation into height controls and other design features. The Panel has suggested a Design and Development Overlay that guides height, graduation of built form that could increase towards the middle of the site, use of materials, view sharing and access to the Portarlington Recreation Reserve and from Geelong Road.

Draft Planning Permit 1234/2014

As the Panel concluded that it could not support the Amendment, the draft Planning Permit 1234/2014 also could not be supported as the Commercial 2 Zone prohibits ‘accommodation’ uses.

The Panel however provided the following findings:

At the hearing Council supported the built form because it represented an appealing, attractive new development of high architectural quality. The retail outlets were considered to provide excellent street activation including activation of the proposed public access through to the Portarlington Recreation Reserve.

Higher built form elements should not be automatically discounted. However the Panel has highlighted a number of design flaws that led it to conclude the building was an overdevelopment. This conclusion is accepted noting that the proponent was encouraged to redesign the building, access and parking once the land at 34 Geelong Road was acquired.

Portarlington Structure Plan

The Panel says its recommendation to abandon the Amendment should require a revisiting of the adopted, but yet to be implemented, Portarlington Structure Plan 2016 along with a more holistic review of the Amendment land and what controls should apply.

Officers have supported this approach by delaying exhibition of Amendment C352 – which seeks to implement the key planning elements of the Adopted May 2016 Portarlington Structure Plan. Consequential changes to the May version (affecting the Amendment land only) are outlined in this section.

Given that it is recommended that the Amendment be abandoned, it is important that the Structure Plan articulates the preferred future planning direction for the precinct. Retaining the 2007 Structure Plan direction to: ‘retain the Business 4 Zone’, limits redevelopment potential.

The Panel acknowledged that the role of the Amendment land has changed from an aquaculture focus and concluded the introduction of residential uses is consistent with the surrounding underlying land use. The Panel says future consideration should be given to the General Residential Zone.

Recognising that the precinct provides redevelopment opportunities, any future rezoning request should take into consideration housing and tourism strategies, design and built form, access and parking, impacts on the Town Centre and potentially contaminated land.

Council however should be mindful of the impact to the existing uses in the precinct, primarily the auto-marine repairs business. This business would become a non-conforming use in the General Residential Zone with existing use rights (i.e. a legal right to continue). This is not an uncommon scenario for land in transition and consultation with landowners and business owners should form part of a future developer-driven planning scheme amendment request.

Until such a request is received (and the precinct rezoned) the existing Commercial 2 Zone allows a number of ‘as-of-right’ uses such as Supermarket, Trade supplies, Restricted retail premises, and Office. Only a permit for buildings and works would be required. Other uses such as Industry, Warehouse and Shop are permit required uses. Given the history and current condition of the precinct new investment in these sectors is considered unlikely.

It is noted that the underutilised Industrial 1 zoned land on Tower Road in Portarlington is able to accommodate commercial and industrial uses. Land has also recently been rezoned to the Commercial 2 Zone on Murradoc Road in nearby Drysdale.

As addressed above, the Structure Plan should provide guidance on height and other design features relevant to the precinct. Any proposed ‘sensitive use’, such as a residential use, will require assessment of potentially contaminated land.

The Portarlington Structure Plan Map (May 2016) is shown in Appendix 6 and the new Map (September 2016) is shown in Appendix 7.

In summary, it is recommended that the following changes are made to the May 2016 version:

  1. Re-title the document as ‘Portarlington Structure Plan, Adopted September 2016’.

  2. Remove reference on the Structure Plan Map to ‘Rezone to Mixed Use Zone’.

  3. Retain reference on the Structure Plan Map identifying the Amendment land as a ‘Development Opportunity’.

  4. Provide commentary in the body of the Structure Plan to inform Council consideration of any future planning permit and/or rezoning application for the precinct. The Structure Plan shall address (but not be limited to):


Environmental Implications

There are no environmental implications as a result of abandoning the Amendment.


Financial Implications

No impact to budget.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

Abandoning the Amendment requires consequential changes to the Portarlington Structure Plan. The commercial precinct will continue to be recognised as a redevelopment opportunity in the Structure Plan.


Alignment to City Plan

Abandoning the Amendment and Permit will prevent proposed new investment in Portarlington. This will impact on ‘Growing the economy’ as construction jobs, jobs associated with the future on-site business opportunities, and regional tourism benefits of providing quality short-term accommodation are lost.

The recommended changes to the adopted Portarlington Structure Plan are intended to facilitate redevelopment of the precinct.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No officers involved in this report have any direct or indirect interest in accordance with Sec 80(c) of the Local Government Act.


Risk Assessment

There are no notable risks associated with implementing the recommendations contained in this report


Social Considerations

Abandoning the Amendment will maintain the status quo. Any future redevelopment opportunities associated with rezoning the precinct to a residential zone are likely to improve the amenity of the area.


Human Rights Charter

The Amendment will not impact on any basic rights, freedoms and responsibilities as set out in the Charter. Planning legislation ensures an open community consultation process occurs, enabling people to freely express their views and if necessary obtain a fair hearing before an Independent Panel.


Consultation and Communication

Council officers have notified the Amendment landowners and submitters of the Panel Report release. Landowners and submitters will be notified of the final decision of Council.


Appendix 1 - Aerial Map

Appendix 1 - Aerial Map

Appendix 2 - Existing Zoning Map

Appendix 2 - Existing Zoning Map

Appendix 3 - Abandoned Rezoning Map

Appendix 3 - Abandoned Rezoning Map

Appendix 4 - Abandoned Permit 1234/2016 Street Elevation Plans

Appendix 4 - Abandoned Permit 1234/2016 Street Elevation Plans

Appendix 5 - Panel Report Executive Summary

Appendix 5 - Panel Report Executive Summary - Page 1 of 3
Appendix 5 - Panel Report Executive Summary - Page 2 of 3
Appendix 5 - Panel Report Executive Summary - Page 3 of 3

Appendix 6 - Superseded Portarlington Structure Plan Map (May 2016)

Appendix 6 - Superseded Portarlington Structure Plan Map (May 2016)

Appendix 7 - New Portarlington Structure Plan Map (September 2016)

Appendix 7 - New Portarlington Structure Plan Map (September 2016)

[Back to List]

6. Amendment C346 Ocean Grove Structure Plan & Urban Design Framework – Consideration of Panel Report and Adoption of Amendment

(previously agenda item 5)

Source:

Planning & Development – Strategic Implementation

General Manager:

Peter Bettess

Index Reference:

Application: Amendment C346


Purpose

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider the Independent Panel report into Amendment C346 and to adopt the Amendment.


Summary

L Gardner moved, P Dorling seconded -

That Council:

  1. adopts Amendment C346 (Appendix 7 of this report);

  2. submits the adopted Amendment and prescribed information to the Minister for Planning requesting approval; and

  3. adopts the Ocean Grove Structure Plan 2015 (amended September 2016).

Carried.


Background

Amendment C346 seeks to implement the findings of the following Council adopted documents into the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme:

The Amendment will:

Ocean Grove Structure Plan Review 2015

At its meeting on 8 December 2015 the Council considered a detailed report on the findings of the review of the 2007 Structure Plan (amended 2008) and

The draft Structure Plan built on the township vision originally developed as part of the Bellarine Strategic Plan 2006 – 2016 and updated the earlier Plan with changes to the State and Local Planning Policy Framework as well as Council studies. It contains key directions about urban growth, settlement and housing, infrastructure, natural environment, economic development and employment and rural areas.

Given Ocean Grove’s role as an urban growth location, it is under pressure to accommodate further urban development. Analysis of lot supply data for the municipality, the Bellarine and the town revealed that there are sufficient residential land stocks to meet the forecast population growth over the short to medium term. Consequently, from a land supply perspective the new Structure Plan did not need to consider additional growth areas.

Key changes in the new Structure Plan included the deletion of the indicative long-term settlement boundary from the Structure Plan map including the wording “protect long-term growth option” that affects land outside the existing settlement boundary west of Grubb Road; the realignment of the eastern settlement boundary along Banks Road and the proposed implementation and review of planning controls to guide future land use and development, particularly for commercial areas and older parts of the town.

The Structure Plan review commenced in late 2014. Informal stakeholder consultation was undertaken in May 2015 as part of the review process which received a high level of interest and engagement.

The Council report of 8 December 2015 discussed in considerable detail the issues raised during the consultation process and planning considerations resulting in the recommendations of the new Structure Plan.

A copy of the existing 2007 Structure Plan map (which is currently at Clause 21.14 of the Planning Scheme) is in Appendix 1. The proposed new Structure Plan map as exhibited in Amendment C346 is Appendix 2.

Ocean Grove Town Centre Urban Design Framework 2014

At its meeting on 24 June 2014 the Council considered a detailed report on the preparation of the UDF including consideration of the submissions which were made as part of the extensive informal public consultation process. As a result Council:

The development of the UDF was underpinned by the input Council received from residents, businesses, community associations, sporting clubs, schools and government agencies through an Enquiry by Design (EbD) workshop. The two day workshop was held in May 2013 and the preferred future outcomes identified at the workshop were encapsulated in the UDF.

The UDF seeks to guide future growth and development, built form outcomes, streetscapes, traffic and pedestrian movements, carparking and land use as well as providing a framework for Council investment in the town centre over the next 10 years. It provides a vision for how the centre should develop, provides design principles and recommends improvements to existing infrastructure and functionality of the town. The UDF will also assist in the assessment of future development proposals.

The UDF was placed on informal consultation for an eight week period from 5 February until 31 March 2014. A community information session was attended by 70 people. A total of 104 submissions were received.

The key concerns raised in the submissions where the need for pedestrian and cycle infrastructure improvements, the impact of building heights on coastal character, the need for a civic hall, development within and around the Ocean Grove Park, the preferred arterial road route and provision of future car parking areas.

The Council report considered these submissions which resulted in changes being made to the final UDF prior to its adoption.

A copy of the UDF Plan 2014 is Appendix 3.


Discussion

Amendment C346 was exhibited between 4 February 2016 and 4 March 2016. As a result, 42 submissions were received of which 10 supported, 11 provided comments and 21 objected.

The key themes/issues raised in the submissions were:

The Delegated Authority report dated 22 March 2016 both summarises all of the submissions and provides a detailed officer response to all of the issues raised. This report is available on Council’s website (under the C346 webpage).

All submissions where considered under delegated authority and referred to an Independent Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning.

The appointed 2 person panel held a Directions Hearing on 5 April 2016 and a 5 day Panel Hearing in Geelong on 2 – 5 May and 13 May 2016.

The Panel has now presented its report to Council for its consideration and has recommended that Amendment C346 be adopted as exhibited subject to a number of changes. Appendix 4 is the Executive Summary of the Panel report which outlines the issues considered by Panel and contains the consolidated panel recommendations that is: recommended changes to the exhibited amendment documentation).

A full copy of the Panel’s Report has been placed on Council’s website (under the C346 webpage). The following sections of this report make reference to page numbers in the Panel report where specific issues have been addressed.

By far the major issue raised in the submissions and addressed by the Panel relates to the future long-term urban growth boundary for Ocean Grove as proposed in the 2015 Structure Plan.

In particular the Panel has addressed the issues of whether the 2015 Structure Plan provides appropriate strategic justification for the deletion of the long-term settlement boundary and the new policy emphasis on the landscape values west of Grubb Road and whether (future) potential areas for residential growth should be (now) evaluated.

Section 2 of the Panel report (page 10 onwards) addresses the settlement boundary issue in considerable detail. It assesses the policy and strategic context for such changes, addresses broad hectare land requirements, questions whether long-term growth areas need to be evaluated now and comments on specific submissions relating to future potential growth areas.

Council officers support the overall thrust of the Panel’s conclusions which, briefly summarised, are:

What has become increasingly clear as a result of preparation of the new Ocean Grove Structure Plan, the submissions received and the subsequent Panel hearing is the need to undertake a wider and detailed review of planning for the whole Bellarine Peninsula. The current policy of directing the majority of growth to 3 growth areas (Leopold, Drysdale/Clifton Springs and Ocean Grove) originated from work undertaken during the 1980s by the Geelong Regional Commission culminating in the Geelong Regional Development Strategy 1988. Since that time there has been extensive residential development in each of these towns. Reviews of both the Drysdale/Clifton Springs and Leopold Structure Plans, scheduled within the next 1 – 2 years, will certainly give rise to similar issues such as further loss of attractive rural farming landscapes and impacts on conservation and environmental values which contribute strongly to the unique character of the Bellarine Peninsula. At the same time the need to provide opportunities for outward growth at each of these locations needs to be re-evaluated.

The Bellarine Peninsula Localised Planning Statement September 2015 which now forms part of the State Planning Policy Framework of the Planning Scheme recognises these values and demonstrates the importance of the Bellarine Peninsula from a State perspective.

Prior to the next review of the Ocean Grove Structure Plan as recommended by the Panel (and prior to reviewing the Leopold and Drysdale/Clifton Springs Structure Plans), Council officers intend to seek funding in the next financial year to undertake a wider municipal settlement strategy. Among other things, a key aim of the settlement strategy would be to provide greater clarity and certainty on the future direction of the municipality’s settlements. Importantly, the role and function of the townships on the Bellarine will be an important consideration. An essential aspect of the study will be the need to ensure strong public communication and participation.

Detailed response to Panel’s recommendations

Whilst the overall thrust of the Panel’s recommendation as summarised above are supported, it is necessary to provide a detailed response to each of the Panel’s recommendations. The consolidated panel recommendations in the Executive Summary (Appendix 4) represent the Panel’s findings and proposed changes to the exhibited amendment documents contained throughout the panel report.

Appendix 5 sets out the Panel’s recommendations, the Council officer responses and reasons where, in a small number of occasions, the Panel’s recommended wording changes are either not supported or require modification.

It should be noted that other than the long-term boundary issue, all other issues which were subject to submissions and Panel recommendations (UDF, DDO’s 39 & 40, traffic and other planning issues) were generally quite minor in nature and for the most part resolved. These items are all addressed in Appendix 5.

Ocean Grove Structure Plan

As a result of the consideration of submissions to Amendment C346 and the recommendations contained in the Panel’s report, a number of changes have been made to the adopted 2015 Structure Plan as outlined in this report and Appendix 5.

It is therefore necessary for Council to adopt a new Structure Plan which will be named Ocean Grove Structure Plan 2015 (amended September 2016). A copy of the proposed amended Structure Plan has been placed on Council’s website (under the C346 webpage). The revised Structure Plan Map is in Appendix 6.

Amendment Recommended for adoption

Appendix 7 is the updated Amendment C346 documentation being recommended for adoption resulting from consideration of submissions and recommendations contained in the Panel’s report.

In very brief summary, changes have been made to the exhibited Clause 21.14, the Ocean Grove Structure Plan map at Clause 21.14-7 and Schedule 39 to the Design and Development Overlay, all as described in Appendix 5 of this report. In addition a revised Clause 21.06 has been introduced into the amendment as recommended by the Panel but with different wording to that recommended. The changes made to the exhibited documents are shown in the track-changes format in Appendix 7.


Environmental Implications

Environmental implications where considered as part of the Structure Plan review. Key environmental features within and around the town have been reviewed and considered in terms of future land use and development and associated impacts. Further investigation work is also supported by the Structure Plan including assessing vegetation in older parts of the town that contribute to the overall landscape and neighbourhood character. The current growth direction of the town focuses on the north-east growth area. The 1993 and 2007 Structure Plans directed growth away from the environmentally sensitive areas such as the coastline, Barwon Estuary and Lake Victoria environs, also the Ocean Grove Nature Reserve. The new Structure Plan continues to support this key land use direction.

The Town Centre UDF project does not have direct environmental impacts. It encourages pedestrian connectivity to the centre and higher density sustainable built form for new development.


Financial Implications

Adoption and approval of Amendment C346 will have no significant financial implications for Council. Implementation of the UDF projects will be subject to future Council budget consideration as described in the 24 June 2014 Council Report.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

Amendment C346 has been prepared having regard to existing relevant State, regional and local planning policies as described in some detail in the Explanatory Report accompanying the exhibited amendment.

The existing Clause 21.14 of the Planning Scheme acknowledges the need for additional planning work to be undertaken for the town centre in the form of an UDF.

The Independent Panel has considered in detail all relevant aspects of State, regional and local planning policies in providing its recommendations to Council. .


Alignment to City Plan

Both the Structure Plan and the UDF, the subject of Amendment C346, align with the directions of the Sustainable, Built and Natural Environment and Growing our Economy strategic directions in City Plan.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No Council officers involved in the preparation of this Amendment, the development of the new Structure Plan and UDF and the preparation of this report 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 associated with processing a Planning Scheme Amendment as recommended by this report.


Social Considerations

A whole range of social considerations have been taken into account in the preparation of the Structure Plan including community needs for housing, employment and provision of a range of commercial and community services.

The UDF includes proposals that will deliver significant long term social benefits to the Ocean Grove community. These include better use of existing commercial land, increased diversity of housing types, improved streetscapes, better pedestrian connections between the town’s key assets – the beach, the Town Centre and the park, slower traffic speeds and better pedestrian safety and amenity throughout the Town Centre. The UDF will create a new town square to become a focus for social interaction within the Terrace.


Human Rights Charter

The Amendment will not impact on any basic rights, freedoms and responsibilities as set out in the Charter. Both the Structure Plan and UDF have been subject to extensive community consultation as part of their preparation.


Consultation and Communication

Amendment C346 has been exhibited in accordance with the provisions of the Planning and Environment Act and all persons who lodged a submission had an opportunity to be heard before an Independent Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning. This report has also outlined the extensive informal consultation processes undertaken in the preparation of both the Structure Plan and the UDF.

Appendix 1 - Existing 2007 Structure Plan Map (Clause 21.14 of the Scheme)

Appendix 1 - Existing 2007 Structure Plan Map (Clause 21.14 of the Scheme)

Appendix 2 - New 2015 Structure Plan Map
(version exhibited as part of C346)

Appendix 2 - New 2015 Structure Plan Map(version exhibited as part of C346)

Appendix 3 – Exhibited UDF Plan

Map 1: Framework Plan

Appendix 3 – Exhibited UDF Plan

Appendix 4 – C346 Panel Report Executive Summary

Appendix 4 – C346 Panel Report Executive Summary - Page 1 of 62
Appendix 4 – C346 Panel Report Executive Summary - Page 2 of 62
Appendix 4 – C346 Panel Report Executive Summary - Page 3 of 62
Appendix 4 – C346 Panel Report Executive Summary - Page 4 of 62


Appendix 5 – Council officer response to Panel Recommendations

The Panel has recommended that Amendment C346 be adopted as exhibited subject to changes which are detailed in 5 separate points which will be individually addressed.

Long Term Boundary issue

The Panel recommends that the following changes be made to the exhibited amendment:-

  1. Preserve the potential of the land to the north, north-west and east of Ocean Grove for urban development in the long term and include a commitment in the planning scheme to establish an enduring settlement boundary for Ocean Grove by changing clause 21.06 and 21.14 as follows:

    1. At clause 21.06-6 Further Work add:

    2. At clause 21.14-2 under Ocean Grove add:

    3. At clause 21.14 Further Work add:

Officer Response:

Council officers support the overall thrust of the Panel’s recommendations on the long term boundary and future growth of Ocean Grove.

This is consistent with Council’s submission to the Panel where officers agreed to undertake further detailed strategic assessment of the areas to the north, north-west and east of Ocean Grove as possible future growth options so that an enduring settlement boundary can be established.

Council officers don’t support recommendations 1 a) and b) or the first dot point of c) in the form proposed by the Panel. Council officers believe the assessment of growth for Ocean Grove needs to be undertaken within the framework of an overall municipal-wide settlement strategy as described in the Council Report.

In Clause 21.06-6 Further work, rather than make reference to potential growth areas at Ocean Grove, it is proposed to refer to the preparation of a new municipal-wide settlement strategy. It is more appropriate to refer to the specific potential Ocean Grove growth areas in Clause 21.14 (as proposed by the Panel).

In Clause 21-14-2 the Panel recommended dot point b) referring to “Avoid development…” is not supported because it may well apply an unnecessary freeze on development of these areas for some years pending completion of Council’s planning work. Inclusion of reference to the need to assess these specific areas is more appropriately located in Clause 21.14 under the “Further Work” heading.

The Panel’s recommendation of a time commitment for Council to undertake a review of Ocean Grove’s long term growth options (both infill and settlement expansion) is supported. Rather than 2020 as recommended by the Panel, 2021 provides a more manageable timeframe particularly in light of the need to prepare a municipal settlement strategy beforehand. There is more than ample existing zoned residential land to ensure no interruption to residential lot supply requirements by extending the date to 2021.

All of the Panel’s other recommended wording changes to Clause 21.14 are supported.

See Appendix 6 for a revised Structure Plan Map and Appendix 7 for a complete set of changes to Clause 21.14 with changes proposed in response to the Panel Recommendations highlighted in yellow.

The Panel has recommended 3 changes to the exhibited Ocean Grove Structure Plan map, as follows:

  1. At Clause 21.14 on the Ocean Grove Structure Plan:

Officer Response:

The first two dot point recommendations are not supported. The exhibited map already contains a graphic with the wording “Retain as rural break” applying to all of the area stretching from Wallington Road to Banks Road to the north and north west of the town. This does not need to be changed; any reference to Bellarine Peninsula interface implies the prospect of urban expansion which is an issue to be addressed in the next Structure Plan review.

Inclusion of the wording “Protect long-term growth potential” on the map is considered unnecessary because the commitment to review these areas will be contained in the revised Clause 21.14 as indicated above. Bubble diagrams or arrows on maps pointing to general areas creates confusion and can raise unintended expectations among landowners (as demonstrated by such designations on the 2007 Structure Plan map).

The other change to the Structure Plan map relating to the boundary at Banks Rd and referred to in the third dot point above is supported.

Ocean Grove Structure Plan 2015 document.

The Panel has recommended changes be made to the 2015 Structure Plan document as follows:

  1. Update the 2015 Structure Plan reference document to ensure consistency with changes recommended by the Panel.

Officer Response:

This recommendation is supported.

It is important to ensure that the Structure Plan document, as a reference document in the Planning Scheme, is consistent with the proposed changes to the text of Clause 21.14 as outlined above.

It also became apparent and acknowledged by Council during the course of the panel hearing that the forecasts of future land requirements for residential development in the Structure Plan were too conservative. These figures in the Structure Plan have been updated in accordance with the evidence presented by Council at the Panel hearing.

Since adoption of the 2015 Structure Plan considerable progress has been made and agreements reached with the owners and developers of the new Grubb Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre (NAC) regarding urban design objectives and overall site layout in accordance with the Grubb Road Activity Centre Framework Plan 2015. The Structure Plan document needs to be updated to also reflect these changes. Council officers indicated to the developer (Lascorp) prior to the panel hearing that these changes would be made.

Ocean Grove Town Centre Urban Design Framework (UDF)

The Panel has made the following recommendations referring to the UDF and the proposed DDO40 which is intended to give effect to the recommendations of the UDF

  1. Reinforce the importance of view sharing between properties by:

    1. Considering extension of Significant Landscape Overlay Schedule 7 to include the properties on the south side of The Terrace via proposed Amendment C300; or

    2. Adding a design and built form guideline to Design and Development Overlay Schedule 40 to address the issue of view sharing.

Officer Response:

Council officers do not support these recommendations.

The proposed urban design guidelines and building height provisions in DDO40 were widely canvassed and accepted by property owners and the wider community during the preparation of the UDF. This has been reflected in the fact that only one submission was received about the proposed maximum 13.5 metres height level and the only submitter to the hearing regarding the UDF expressed concern about view sharing arrangements within the town centre and adjoining Residential Growth Zone.

Part 3 of the Panel report (pages 45 – 48) addresses the UDF. In summary, the Panel has found “that the heights proposed by the Urban Design Framework are well founded” and that “the proposed planning framework should reinforce the importance of view sharing between properties”.

The concerns raised by the submitter about view sharing arrangements in the adjoining Dare Street RGZ are already addressed by the current application of SLO7 to the Dare St properties and the proposed retention of view sharing objectives through the application of DDO14 as part of the Ocean Grove Significant Tree Study currently underway. It is expected an Amendment to give effect to this change will be exhibited in late 2016.

Application of SLO7 to the commercially zoned areas along The Terrace is not supported because:

The Panel’s alternative options to reinforce view-sharing arrangements to apply to the town centre are not supported and no change to the exhibited DDO40 is proposed.

Alternative arterial road

The Panel has made the following recommendation regarding designating The Terrace as the long-term arterial route through the town.

  1. Change the annotation on Map 1 of Design and Development Overlay Schedule 40 from ‘preferred long term arterial route’ to ‘potential long term arterial route’.

Officer Response:

Council officers accept this recommendation.

This issue has been addressed on page 17 of the Delegated Authority Report dated 22 March 2016 and the Panel report on pages 47 – 48. No submitters appeared before the Panel about this issue.

The prospect of changing the arterial road from The Parade to The Terrace has been raised in both the 1993 and 2007 Structure Plans.

No objection is seen to the slight change in emphasis from the use of the word “preferred” to “potential” in the map forming part of DDO40. The Structure Plan Map and wording in Clause 21.14 should be similarly modified for the sake of consistency.

Design and Development Overlay 39 – Grubb Road NAC

The Panel has made the following recommendations regarding the proposed DDO39 to apply to the new Grubb Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre & adjoining Commercial 2 zone:

  1. Adopt the revised changes to Design and Development Overlay Schedule 39 as agreed by Lascorp and Council (Hearing document 14), subject to the following:

    1. Under Built Form and Scale section replace:

    2. Under Vehicle Access and Movement:

Officer Response:

Council officers accept these recommendations.

This issue has been addressed on page 15 of the Delegated Authority report and pages 49 – 51 of the Panel report.

Prior to the hearing, the Council and Lascorp (shopping centre developer) reached agreement on the provisions of a revised DDO39 and Lascorp withdrew their request to be heard by the Panel. Shell Road Developments were also satisfied with the changes.

The Panel agreed that the DDO39 should be retained to provide urban design guidance for further stages of the shopping centre and adjoining C2 zone.

The Panel’s recommended changes in point a) above have the effect of strengthening the urban design principles applying to future development applications and are supported. Recommendation b) above is a VicRoads’ requirement and also supported.

Other issues

The Panel Report has, as required, addressed issues raised in other submissions referred to the Panel but where submitters chose not to appear before the Panel. These issues include:

These issues are dealt with on pages 17 - 19 of the Delegated Authority report and pages 51 - 57 of the Panel report.

In summary the Panel has been satisfied with Council’s response to the issues raised and has not as a result recommended any changes be made to the exhibited Amendment C346 documentation.


Appendix 6 – Revised Structure Plan Map

Appendix 6 – Revised Structure Plan Map

Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption

Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Instruction Sheet
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - D-DDO - Area to be deleted from a Design amd Development Overlay - Part of Map 81DDO
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - D-DDO40 - Design amd Development Overlay - Part of Map 81DDO
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - D-DDO20 and DDO39 - Design amd Development Overlay - Schedules 20 and 39 - Part of Map 82DDO
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Design amd Development Overlay - Schedule 39 - Page 1 of 3
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Design amd Development Overlay - Schedule 39 - Page 2 of 3
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Design amd Development Overlay - Schedule 39 - Page 3 of 3
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Design amd Development Overlay - Schedule 40 - Page 1 of 8
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Design amd Development Overlay - Schedule 40 - Page 2 of 8
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Design amd Development Overlay - Schedule 40 - Page 3 of 8
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Design amd Development Overlay - Schedule 40 - Page 4 of 8
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Design amd Development Overlay - Schedule 40 - Page 5 of 8
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Design amd Development Overlay - Schedule 40 - Page 6 of 8

GREATER GEELONG PLANNING SCHEME

Map 1: Framework Plan

Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Design amd Development Overlay - Schedule 40 - Page 7 of 8

GREATER GEELONG PLANNING SCHEME

Map 2: Building height and setback

Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Design amd Development Overlay - Schedule 40 - Page 8 of 8
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.06 - Page 1 of 7
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.06 - Page 2 of 7
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.06 - Page 3 of 7
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.06 - Page 4 of 7

Pages 5-7 of Clause 21.06 not included in this report

Clause 21.14 for Adoption (Post Panel changes highlighted in yellow)

Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.14 - Page 1 of 18
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.14 - Page 2 of 18
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.14 - Page 3 of 18
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.14 - Page 4 of 18
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.14 - Page 5 of 18
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.14 - Page 6 of 18
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.14 - Page 7 of 18
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.14 - Page 8 of 18
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.14 - Page 9 of 18
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.14 - Page 10 of 18
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.14 - Page 11 of 18
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.14 - Page 12 of 18
Appendix 7 – Amendment for Adoption - Municipal Strategic Statement Clause 21.14 - Page 13 of 18

Pages 14-18 of Clause 21.14 not included in this report


[Back to List]

7. Ocean Grove Significant Tree Project

Source:

Planning & Development - Planning Strategy

General Manager:

Peter Bettess

Index Reference:

PRJ-16-2993


Purpose

This report recommends that Council adopts the findings and recommendations of the ‘Ocean Grove Significant Tree Project, Final Report 2016’ and to give them statutory effect by including them in the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme via a planning scheme amendment.


Summary

P Dorling moved, L Gardner seconded -

That Council:

  1. adopts the Ocean Grove Significant Tree Project, Final Report 2016;

  2. requests the Minister for Planning authorise the preparation of an amendment as detailed in this report; and

  3. requests the Minister for Planning exercise powers under Section 20(4) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 by applying an interim Significant Landscape Overlay Schedule 15 to the identified precinct while the formal Planning Scheme Amendment is prepared and considered.

Carried.


Background

The Ocean Grove Significant Vegetation Project aims to identify and protect, through planning controls, the unique coastal/bush landscape character within the well established areas of the township of Ocean Grove.

This project was identified in the previous and current Ocean Grove Structure Plan 2015 which identified the following further work:

To help inform the project vegetation consultants, Okologie, were engaged mid 2015 to undertake vegetation surveys on public and private land and to make recommendations around vegetation protection. Two areas were identified for investigation; the current extent of the SLO7 or hillside area and the area in the north east part of old Ocean Grove known in the project as the Significant Tree Area (STA).

Along with vegetation surveys a detailed background report was prepared to help inform the draft planning controls. The background material now forms part of the ‘Ocean Grove Significant Tree Project – Final Report 2016’ which is provided as an attachment to this report.

The background report identified 3 key precincts each with proposed customised planning controls:

As part of the public consultation a project brochure and precinct flyers were prepared detailing the proposed controls. The flyer was sent out to property owners as part of the informal public notification phase. Copies of the brochure and flyers are provided in the Final Report (Attachment 1).

Informal public consultation on the draft background report and planning controls occurred April - May 2016. A total of 26 submissions were received:


Discussion

The ‘Ocean Grove Significant Tree Project – Final Report 2016’ is provided as an attachment to this report. The Report outlines in detail the public consultation activities, summary of submissions and an officer response to submissions.

The key concerns with the draft controls were:

The supporting submissions made the following points:

In response to submissions a number of changes were made to the draft controls including:

The final planning scheme recommendations are summarised below with copies of the proposed ordinance schedules provided in Appendix 1 and summary maps, including the current and proposed zones and overlays provided in Appendix 2:

Ordinance:

  1. MSS (Cl. 21.14-2) Strategies: Add point to strategy under Ocean Grove

  2. Add a new Schedule 3 to the GRZ (Cl. 32.08)

  3. Add a new Schedule 4 to the NRZ (Cl. 32.09)

  4. Revise wording of Schedule 7 to the SLO (Cl. 42.03)

Maps:

  1. Rezone Significant Tree Area from GRZ2 to (new) NRZ 4

  2. Rezone Hillside Precinct* from GRZ2 and RGZ3 to (new) GRZ 3

  3. Delete DDO14 (except small pocket south of Blackwell Street) and SLO7 from the Significant Tree Area and replace them with (new) SLO15

  4. Change a portion of the Hillside Precinct* from SLO7 to DDO14 (RGZ3 / Increased

  5. Housing Diversity Area)

  6. Rezone Hillside Precinct west of Field Street from RGZ3 to (new) GRZ3

(* Hillside Precinct incorporates the previous Coastal Fringe Precinct)

Other matters considered as part of the project:

Clause 52.48 Bushfire Protection – Vegetation Clearance Exemptions

Council considered a Report and wrote to the Minister for Planning in early 2016 to request the Minister investigate the blanket application of this provision as it is seeing vegetation removed in urban areas with no identified fire threat.

The Minster advised in writing in June 2016 that DELWP (the department) is currently investigating a proposed update to the clause based on a more risk based approach and the matter will be considered ‘in due course’.

Tree Planting Guidelines

Council is looking to provide guidelines for applicants to assist them with vegetation and landscaping plans. This will be provided as information only and will not form part of the planning scheme. See Attachment 2 for a copy of the draft guidelines.

Planning Scheme Amendment

Copies of the proposed planning controls are provided in the Final Report which will form the basis of the formal planning scheme amendment. They are also provided as an appendix to this report.

Interim Controls

It is recommended Council apply for interim controls for the Significant Landscape Overlay Schedule 15 while the amendment is being considered. This will help ensure development that does not meet the proposed landscape objectives is not approved in the period between adoption and consideration of the amendment. Without interim controls there could be a loss of vegetation and development that does not support the landscape objectives detrimentally impacting upon the existing and preferred neighbourhood character.

It is not proposed the revised Significant Landscape Overlay 7 is applied as an interim control as this would create major administrative issues given there will be a existing and proposed control and given the boundary adjustments proposed for SLO7. The existing control will be in place throughout the amendment process.

Interim controls are routinely applied where heritage overlays are proposed and there have been instances where Councils have applied them to vegetation such as Banyule and the implementation of their Strategy for Substantial trees in Banyule’s Garden Court and Garden Suburban Neighbourhoods 2013 (the Strategy for Substantial Trees).

Transitional Arrangements

It is recommended transitional arrangements form part of the proposed overlays so applicants who have made applications under the current planning regime are not unfairly affected.


Environmental Implications

The project has positive environmental implications including the retention of existing vegetation and promoting new vegetation leading to improved biodiversity, storm water management, habitat and urban heat impact outcomes.


Financial Implications

There will be no significant financial implications on Council as part of the future planning scheme amendment process or final Ministerial approval of the controls . All future statutory processes will be covered by respective departmental budgets.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The Project has considered the relevant State and local planning considerations. To give proposed controls statutory weight, a planning scheme amendment will be initiated to implement them in the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme.


Alignment to City Plan

This report aligns with the directions of the Sustainable and Built Environments theme in City Plan.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No Council officers involved in the development of the Ocean Grove Significant Tree Project and preparation of the report have a direct or indirect interest in the issue, in accordance with Section 80(c) of the Local Government Act, to which this report relates.


Risk Assessment

There is a risk that there will be continued loss of the vegetated landscape character without the introduction of the proposed planning controls.


Social Considerations

The planning scheme amendment process affords landowners and residents a formal opportunity to participate.


Human Rights Charter

We have taken into consideration the human rights relative to the subject matter of this report, including rate-payers property rights and the right to a fair hearing.


Consultation and Communication

In addition to the informal community consultation, the planning scheme amendment process will include a statutory consultation period (minimum 30 days). Where submissions cannot be resolved, an Independent Panel will be requested.

Appendix 1 – Proposed Zone and Overlay Schedules

SCHEDULE 3 TO CLAUSE 32.08 GENERAL RESIDENTIAL ZONE

Shown on the planning scheme map as GRZ3


OCEAN GROVE HILLSIDE AREA

1.0

Permit requirement for the construction or extension of one dwelling on a lot

 

Is a permit required to construct or extend one dwelling on a lot of between 300 square metres and 500 square metres?

 

None specified

2.0

Requirements of Clause 54 and Clause 55

 

 

Standard

Requirement

 

Minimum street setback

A3 and B6

None specified

 

Site coverage

A5 and B8

50%

 

Permeability

A6 and B9

None specified

 

Landscaping

B13

At least 30% of the site is available for landscaping.

Two canopy trees (indigenous and/or Australian native) per site.

 

Side and rear setbacks

A10 and B17

None specified

 

Walls on boundaries

A11 and B18

None specified

 

 

Private open space

 

A17

An area of 60 square metres, with one part of the private open space to consist of secluded private open space at the side or rear of the dwelling or residential building with minimum area of 40 square metres, a minimum dimension of 5 metres and convenient access from a living room. It cannot include a balcony or roof top terrace.

B28

An area of 60 square metres, with one part of the private open space to consist of secluded private open space at the side or rear of the dwelling or residential building with minimum area of 40 square metres, a minimum dimension of 5 metres and convenient access from a living room. It cannot include a balcony or roof top terrace.

 

Front fence height

A20 and B32

None specified.

3.0

Maximum building height requirement for a dwelling or residential building

 

A building used as a dwelling or residential building must not exceed a height of 9 metres. unless the slope of the natural ground level at any cross section wider than 8 metres of the site of the building is 2.5 degrees or more, in which case it must not exceed a height of 10 metres.

4.0

Application requirements

 

When any of the lots being created are less than 500 square metres, a subdivision application must be accompanied by a development application or approved planning permit plans for the site for the construction of the dwellings.

5.0

Decision guidelines

 
  • Whether the landscaping requirement can be met by including existing trees that are considered worthy of retention.

  • Whether the development provides for adequate landscaping opportunities.

  • Whether a subdivision proposal has sufficient land area and minimum dimensions to be in keeping with the surrounding subdivision and development patterns.



SCHEDULE 4 TO CLAUSE 32.09 NEIGHBOURHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONE

Shown on the planning scheme map as NRZ4


OCEAN GROVE SIGNIFICANT TREE AREA

1.0

Minimum subdivision area

 

None specified.

2.0

Permit requirement for the construction or extension of one dwelling on a lot

 

 

Requirement

 

Permit requirement for the construction or extension of one dwelling on a lot

None specified.

 

Permit requirement to construct or extend a front fence within 3 metres of a street on a lot

None specified.

3.0

Requirements of Clause 54 and Clause 55

 

 

Standard

Requirement

 

Minimum street setback

A3 and B6

None specified

 

Site coverage

A5 and B8

40%

 

Permeability

A6 and B9

None specified

 

Landscaping

B13

At least 40% of the site is available for landscaping.

Two canopy trees (indigenous and/or Australian native) per site.

 

Side and rear setbacks

A10 and B17

None specified

 

Walls on boundaries A11 and B18 None specified

 

 

 

Private open space

A17 and B28

An area of 60 square metres, with one part of the private open space to consist of secluded private open space at the side or rear of the dwelling or residential building with a minimum area of 40 square metres, a minimum dimension of 5 metres and convenient access from a living room

 

Front fence height

A20 and B32

None specified

4.0

Number of dwellings on a lot

 

None specified.

5.0

Maximum building height requirement for a dwelling or residential building

 

A building used as a dwelling or a residential building must not exceed a height of 9 metres.

6.0

Application requirements

 

Subdivision
When any of the lots being created are less than 500 square metres, a subdivision application must be accompanied by a development application or approved planning permit plans for the construction of the dwellings.

7.0

Decision guidelines

 

  • Whether the landscaping requirement can be met by including existing trees that are considered worthy of retention.

  • Whether new lots and developments are of a spacious nature and allow for a design that is respectful of neighbourhood character.

  • Whether the development provides for adequate landscaping opportunities.

  • Whether a subdivision proposal has sufficient land area and minimum dimensions to be in keeping with the surrounding subdivision and development patterns.

 

SCHEDULE 7 TO THE SIGNIFICANT LANDSCAPE OVERLAY

Shown on the planning scheme map as SLO7

OCEAN GROVE HILLSIDE AREA

1.0 Statement of nature and key elements of landscape

Ocean Grove is a growing coastal township located on a hillside extending to a popular ocean surf beach. Areas of public and private land within established Ocean Grove supports a mix of remnant coastal and grassy woodland vegetation, indigenous and planted Australian natives which contribute to the unique coastal and vegetated character of the township.

The area also supports the threatened Bellarine Yellow Gum Eucalyptus leucoxylon subsp. bellarinensis which is endemic to the area. The retention of these trees is important for the ongoing survival of the species. The incremental loss of vegetation and the impact of not providing adequate space for the re-establishment of vegetation around buildings are having a major impact on the landscape character of the area.

The preferred character for this area includes achieving a balance between landscape and built form where buildings sit within a landscaped setting. Vegetation, in particular trees are required to soften the impact of buildings in the environment. There are examples of development where this balance has not been achieved and buildings dominate the site and streetscape. While these developments form part of the character of the area they do not represent the preferred character.

The retention of and ability to plant screening vegetation along boundaries and fronting the street and building height and bulk that does not dominate the streetscape, neighbouring properties and long distance views are all important landscape elements.

The hillside topography has encouraged development that seeks to maximise views. Part of the landscape character of Ocean Grove that is valued by the local community is the ability to view the ocean and/or the Barwon River from numerous points in public areas and from private dwellings. Respect for the sharing of views, rather than necessarily the retention of all existing views, is therefore an important characteristic of this coastal town.

Significant trees are defined as an indigenous and Australian native trees 3 or more metres in height.

2.0 Landscape character objective to be achieved

3.0 Permit requirement

Buildings and Works

A permit is not required to construct a building or construct or carry out works provided all of the following requirements are met:

Vegetation Removal

A permit is required to remove, destroy or lop vegetation. This does not apply to:

4.0 Application Requirements

An application must be accompanied by the following information, these requirements may be waived or reduced if the information is not relevant to the assessment of an application:

A Design Response which shows the development in relation to:

Building and Works

A schedule of construction materials, external finishes and colours (incorporating samples).

View Sharing

A view impact analysis should be submitted when the proposed development is over 7.5 meters in height and is likely to impact on views to significant landscape features. The view impact analysis should demonstrate how the design objectives to achieve a reasonable sharing of views have been met, having regard to topography, siting, height and visual bulk.

Landscaping

An application for buildings and works, or to remove, destroy or lop vegetation must be accompanied by a landscaping plan prepared by a suitably qualified person and should incorporate at least 2 canopy trees per site and the use of local indigenous or Australian native species.

Buildings and works occurring within the drip line of a significant tree on the subject land or adjoining site requires a report from a suitably qualified arborist that shows how the tree will be managed during construction.

Vegetation Removal

An application to remove, destroy or lop a significant tree must be accompanied by the following information.

A report from a suitably qualified arborist (level 5 or equivalent) that:

5.0 Transitional Arrangement

The requirements of this overlay do not apply to any planning permit application received by the responsible authority before the approval date of the amendment that introduced this schedule to Clause 43.02 into the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme.

6.0 Decision guidelines

Before deciding on an application the responsible authority must consider:

SCHEDULE 15 TO THE SIGNIFICANT LANDSCAPE OVERLAY

Shown on the planning scheme map as SLO15


OCEAN GROVE SIGNIFICANT TREE RESIDENTIAL AREA

1.0 Statement of nature and key elements of landscape

This precinct within Ocean Grove is distinctive due to the high number of significant canopy trees (indigenous and Australian native) located on both public and private land. These trees are a dominant feature of the neighbourhood with buildings nestled within spacious bush garden settings.

Dwellings in the area generally sit below the tree canopy and are characterised by low density and scale, detached housing surrounded by generous areas of open space capable of accommodating significant and multiple canopy trees.

Vegetation includes the threatened Bellarine Yellow Gum Eucalyptus leucoxylon subsp. bellarinensis which are endemic to the area. The residential streetscape and private gardens within the precinct support a large component of the remnant Bellarine Yellow-gum population. The retention of these trees is important for the ongoing survival of the species.

The incremental loss of significant Australian native and indigenous canopy trees has the potential to change the character of the area over time. The retention of and ability to establish new canopy trees will help integrate and reduce the impact of new development on neighbourhood character.

Managing development, tree protection and management together with new and replacement tree planting on public and private property will help safeguard the unique landscape character of the area.

Significant trees are defined as an indigenous tree 3 or more metres in height and an Australian native tree 5 or more metres in height.

2.0 Landscape character objective to be achieved

3.0 Permit requirement

Buildings and works

A permit is not required to construct a building or construct or carry out works provided all of the following requirements are met:

Vegetation Removal

Exotic vegetation

4.0 Application Requirements

An application must be accompanied by the following information, these requirements may be waived or reduced if the information is not relevant to the assessment of an application:

Landscaping

Vegetation Removal

An application to remove, destroy or lop a significant tree must be accompanied by the following information:

5.0 Transitional Arrangement

The requirements of this overlay do not apply to any planning permit application received by the responsible authority before the approval date of the amendment that introduced this schedule to Clause 43.02 into the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme.

6.0 Decision guidelines

Before deciding on an application the responsible authority must consider:


Appendix 2 – Summary Planning Control Maps

Existing Zones

Existing zones - significant trees

Proposed Zones

Proposed zones - significant trees

Existing Overlays

Existing overlays - significant trees

Proposed Overlays

Proposed overlays - significant trees

[Back to List]

8. Proposed Planning Scheme Amendment to Apply a Public Acquisition Overlay on Land at 661-669 Barwon Heads Road and 619-639, 641-655 and 657-669 Boundary Road, Charlemont

(previously agenda item 7)

Source:

Planning & Development - Urban Growth

General Manager:

Peter Bettess

Index Reference:

Armstrong Creek Project - Development Contributions Plan - Armstrong Creek - Horseshoe Bend


Purpose

This report seeks approval for the preparation and exhibition of a Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO) to facilitate the acquisition of land for the purposes of drainage at
661-669 Barwon Heads Road and 619-639, 641-655 and 657-669 Boundary Road, Charlemont. The land is required for the construction and commissioning of the end-of-line storm water infrastructure nominated in the Horseshoe Bend Precinct Storm Water Management Strategy.


Summary

P Dorling moved, L Gardner seconded -

That Council resolve to:

  1. seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare Amendment C360 to the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme;

  2. prepare and exhibit the amendment in accordance with the requirements nominated in the Planning & Environment Act 1987.

Carried.


Background

The establishment of the Sparrovale Wetlands is critical to the continued development of the land within the Horseshoe Bend Precinct Structure Plan (HBPSP) area. Equally important is the establishment of drainage infrastructure to convey storm water from the Horseshoe Bend Precinct into the Sparrovale Wetlands (refer Appendix 3). It is the securing of land for this conveyance that forms the basis of the proposed application of a PAO on the land parcels that are the subject of this report.


Discussion

The Horseshoe Bend Precinct Structure Plan was incorporated into the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme in November 2014. Since that time, three (3) Planning Permits have been issued in the PSP area representing approval of 3,102 residential lots and the setting aside of land for future retail, education and community purposes.

Significant civil works are currently being undertaken to support the residential development of the Horseshoe Bend Precinct Structure Plan area, however, in accordance with the approved Storm Water Management Strategy (SWMS) development of the precinct is limited to 25 per cent of the total net developable area without the acquisition and commissioning of the land parcels that make up the future Sparrovale Wetlands.

The Horseshoe Bend Precinct Development Contributions Plan (HBDCP) also nominates a trigger for the purchase and commissioning of the Sparrovale Wetlands: The upgrade of culverts under Barwon Heads Road (being the outlet from Barwon Heads Road south retarding basin) or at the discretion of the Responsible Authority. The requirement for the upgrade of the culverts is very likely to occur prior to the construction of 25 per cent of the developable land, given a planning permit has been granted for the land on which the construction of the Barwon Heads Road retarding basin is required.

Council has proposed, in a separate Planning Scheme Amendment, the application of a Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO) on the two (2) land parcels that will become the Sparrovale Wetlands.

The proposal of a PAO over the areas required for drainage on the east side of Barwon Heads Road is critical to the establishment of the drainage infrastructure required for conveyance of water into the Sparrovale Wetlands.


Environmental Implications

The establishment of an effective storm water management system in accordance with the Horseshoe Bend Storm Water Management Strategy will provide significant positive environmental outcomes including the protection of habitat.


Financial Implications

Funding for the purchase of the land for drainage has been nominated in the incorporated Horseshoe Bend Development Contributions Plan (HBDCP).

Future budget proposal.

It is envisaged that a future proposal for budget will be requested to fund the timely delivery of the drainage infrastructure over the next three years.

As noted above, the costs for land acquisition for these drainage projects are included in the Horseshoe Bend DCP. As a result, there is an opportunity to offset the purchase costs against funds collected as future development occurs.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The planning scheme amendment to incorporate the Public Acquisition Overlay on properties is in accordance with the intent for the land as nominated in both the Horseshoe Bend Precinct Structure Plan and Horseshoe Bend Development Contributions Plan.

The Horseshoe Bend PSP and DCP are incorporated documents in the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme and have been prepared in accordance with the Planning & Environment Act 1987, including direct notification to relevant property owners. Council is required to deliver each of the items nominated in the DCP and PSP to facilitate the orderly development of the Horseshoe Bend PSP area.

The amendment is also considered to meet the relevant requirements of both State Government and Council.


Alignment to City Plan

The Armstrong Creek Urban Growth area is one of Council’s priority projects in the City Plan.

The application of a Public Acquisition Overlay to both the Sparrovale Wetlands and the land required to convey storm water flows will ensure that the continuing needs of the growing community will be met in a timely manner.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

In accordance with Section 80C of the Local Government Act no Council officers involved in this report have a direct or indirect interest.


Risk Assessment

In the absence of the Sparrovale wetlands development of the Horseshoe Bend Precinct Structure Plan area is limited to 25 per cent of the nominated net developable area and is triggered when the culverts are upgraded under Barwon Heads Road. Should the wetlands not be in public ownership at the time that the 25 per cent threshold is reached, or the culverts are upgraded, development within the Horseshoe Bend Precinct will be required to cease. This represents a potentially significant cost to developers and a dramatic reduction in the availability of residential house lots available for purchase. Ultimately, the situation will also result in a lag in the development of key infrastructure to serve the existing residents of the Horseshoe Bend precinct.

When the Sparrovale Wetlands are secured there remains a requirement for drainage infrastructure to feed storm water from the Horseshoe Bend Precinct area into the wetland area. As a result, both the acquisition of the two land parcels that will become the Sparrovale Wetlands and the land for conveyance of flows from the west side of Barwon Heads Road are inseparable. Should the Sparrovale Wetlands be acquired and the land for conveyance of flows not be acquired the risks highlighted above will remain.

That being said, the primary risk, of not securing the drainage infrastructure to convey flows in to the Sparrovale Wetlands, is in development occurring in the upper catchment (which is where the permitted development is currently being constructed) and resulting in adverse flooding impact through these properties beyond what is currently being experienced.


Social Considerations

The Horseshoe Bend Precinct Structure Plan is a considered and well planned approach to the development of additional residential communities within the Armstrong Creek Urban Growth Area. The intent of the HBPSP and the HBDCP is to ensure that the infrastructure required to service the community meets their needs and expectations and is provided in a timely manner.


Human Rights Charter

Council officers have taken into consideration the Human Rights Charter relative to the application of the Public Acquisition Overlay. This includes ‘ratepayers property rights’ and a ‘right to a fair hearing’.


Consultation and Communication

Should Council resolve to seek authorisation to prepare the amendment, consultation and communication with land holders will be in accordance with the requirements nominated in the Planning & Environment Act 1987.


[Back to List]

9. Proposed Planning Scheme Amendment to Apply a Public Acquisition Overlay on Land at 1-87 Groves Road, Armstrong Creek and 109-215 Sparrovale Road, Charlemont

(previously agenda item 8)

Source:

Planning & Development - Urban Growth

General Manager:

Peter Bettess

Index Reference:

Armstrong Creek Project - Development Contributions Plan - Armstrong Creek - Horseshoe Bend


Purpose

This report seeks approval for the preparation and exhibition of a Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO) to facilitate the acquisition of land at 1-87 Groves Road, Armstrong Creek and part of the land at 109-215 Sparrovale Road, Charlemont. The land is required for the construction and commissioning of the end-of-line wetlands nominated in the Horseshoe Bend Precinct Storm Water Management Strategy.


Summary

P Dorling moved, L Gardner seconded -

That Council resolve to:

  1. requests that the Minister for Planning act as the Planning Authority for Amendment C357 and approve the amendment;

  2. in the event that the Minister for Planning does not support the above option, seek Authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit Amendment C357 to the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme.

Carried.


Background

The Horseshoe Bend Precinct Structure Plan (HBPSP) was incorporated into the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme in November 2014. Since that time, three (3) Planning Permits have been issued in the PSP area representing approval of 3,102 residential lots and the setting aside of land for future retail, education and community purposes.

Significant civil works are currently being undertaken to support the residential development of the Horseshoe Bend Precinct Structure Plan area, however, in accordance with the approved Storm Water Management Strategy (SWMS) development of the precinct is limited to 25 per cent of the total net developable area without the acquisition and commissioning of the land parcels that make up the future Sparrovale Wetlands.

The Horseshoe Bend Precinct Development Contributions Plan (HBDCP) also nominates a trigger for the purchase and commissioning of the Sparrovale Wetlands, being the upgrade of culverts under Barwon Heads Road (being the outlet from Barwon Heads Road south retarding basin) or at the discretion of the Responsible Authority. The requirement for the upgrade of the culverts is very likely to occur prior to the construction of 25 per cent of the developable land, given a planning permit has been granted for the land on which the construction of the Barwon Heads Road retarding basin is required.

In 2015, negotiations to purchase both properties have been unsuccessful in the securing of the land required for the Sparrovale Wetlands.

As a result, Council officers recommend that a Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO) be applied to the necessary land area (see Appendix 2) to assist in facilitating the timely acquisition of these properties and allow access and construction of the wetland prior to:


Discussion

Amendment C259 – Horseshoe Bend Precinct

Preparation of the Horseshoe Bend PSP, DCP and Native Vegetation Precinct Plan (NVPP) commenced in 2012 and was approved and gazetted in 2014. As with other precincts a key focus when developing the PSP was the development of a strategy for the management of storm water.

The Storm Water Management Strategy (SWMS) for Horseshoe Bend noted that the bulk of existing pre-development run off from the area that defines the Horseshoe Bend Precinct runs easterly across Barwon Heads Road into the Sparrovale Farm then on to the Barwon River. In addition to storm water from the west, Sparrovale Farm and Cold Winds are also subject to inundation from the Barwon River during major flood events.

The following extract is taken from Page 3 of the Horseshoe Bend SWMS:

It is clear from Figures 2-4 inclusive that Sparrovale Farm is and has historically been subject to extensive inundation from both its local catchment and the Barwon River.

Development of the HBP lands will further increase volumes and frequency of surface runoff discharging to the farm area which is of critical concerns [sic.] for the affected landowners.

Acknowledgement of the poor outcomes for both Cold Winds and Sparrovale from both the Barwon River and the Horseshoe Bend Precinct resulted in their inclusion in the Horseshoe Bend DCP to fund the purchase of both properties with the aim of rehabilitating them into a high quality wetland to receive urban runoff.

During the preparation, exhibition and incorporation of the Horseshoe Bend PSP, DCP and NVPP at least one development company were negotiating with the land owners regarding forward funding the purchase of both Sparrovale and Cold Winds. Council officers were also actively attempting to mediate the purchase of the land for the Sparrovale Wetlands. These attempts were unsuccessful.

Funding for land acquisition

In the 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 budgets, Council approved funds for the purchase of both Sparrovale (in part) and Cold Winds. Council officers have been liaising with the land owners and their legal representatives regarding a negotiated purchase of both properties on agreed terms. To date, no such agreement has been reached resulting in the need to provide certainty via a compulsory acquisition process.

The application of a Public Acquisition Overlay (PAO) will provide the mechanism to acquire the two parcels within a timeframe that allows for the establishment of the Sparrovale Wetlands and facilitate continued development within the precinct.

Minister for Planning as the Planning Authority

As noted above, the Horseshoe Bend PSP, DCP and NVPP were incorporated into the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme in November 2014.

The amendment was formally exhibited between the 5th December 2013 and the 27th January 2014 with a total of 42 submissions received. No submissions were received objecting to the purchase of the two land parcels for the establishment of the Sparrovale Wetlands.

A Panel Hearing was conducted on the 10th, 11th, 12th and 18th June 2014 in an attempt to resolve outstanding issues in the submissions. The Panel Report was issued on 29th July 2014.

The Panel accepted the Horseshoe Bend Precinct Storm Water Management Strategy and the proposal to purchase the two properties for the Sparrovale Wetlands.

The lack of an objection to the purchase of both properties and the rigour applied to the development, exhibition and notice, Panel Hearing and ultimately the Gazettal of the Horseshoe Bend PSP, DCP and NVPP, has led to the request that the Minister for Planning expedite the application of the PAO by consenting to being the Planning Authority for the amendment.

Planning Scheme Provisions

The Explanatory Report, Instruction Sheet and relevant Planning Provisions that Council officers have prepared in support of the amendment are attached at
Appendix 3.


Environmental Implications

The establishment of the Sparrovale Wetlands will provide significant positive environmental outcomes including the potential to divert storm water volumes from Hospital Swamps and the subsequent protection of several habitat zones surrounding the Hospital Swamps.

In addition, the amendment will address the potential environmental implications of the continued development of the Armstrong Creek Urban Growth Area through the protection of the Ramsar listed Lake Connewarre Wetland Complex.


Financial Implications

Funding for the purchase of both land parcels has been nominated in the incorporated Horseshoe Bend Development Contributions Plan.

Current approved budget.

The Horseshoe Bend DCP attributes values to the land acquisition required for the Sparrovale Wetlands. In accordance with the administration requirements of the DCP, revaluations are undertaken annually and the costs apportioned across the developable area of the Horseshoe Bend precinct.

As a result of the inclusion of these costs in the Horseshoe Bend DCP, there is an opportunity to offset the purchase of both properties with funds collected as development occurs.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The planning scheme amendment to incorporate the Public Acquisition Overlay on both properties is in accordance with the intent for the land as nominated in both the Horseshoe Bend Precinct Structure Plan and Horseshoe Bend Development Contributions Plan.

The Horseshoe Bend PSP and DCP are incorporated documents in the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme and have been prepared in accordance with the Planning & Environment Act 1987, including direct notification to relevant property owners. Council is required to deliver each of the items nominated in the DCP and PSP to facilitate the orderly development of the Horseshoe Bend PSP area.

The amendment is also considered to meet the relevant requirements of both State Government and Council.


Alignment to City Plan

The Armstrong Creek Urban Growth area is one of Council’s priority projects in the City Plan.

The application of a Public Acquisition Overlay to the Sparrovale Wetlands will ensure that the continuing needs of the growing community will be met in a timely manner.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

In accordance with Section 80C of the Local Government Act no Council officers involved in this report have a direct or indirect interest.


Risk Assessment

In the absence of the Sparrovale wetlands development of the Horseshoe Bend Precinct Structure Plan area is limited to 25 per cent of the nominated net developable area or triggered when the culverts are upgraded under Barwon Heads Road. Should the wetlands not be in public ownership at the time that the 25 per cent threshold is reached, or the culverts are upgraded, development within the Horseshoe Bend Precinct will be required to cease. This represents a potentially significant cost to developers and a dramatic reduction in the availability of residential house lots available for purchase. Ultimately, the situation will also result in a lag in the development of key infrastructure to serve the existing residents of the Horseshoe Bend precinct.


Social Considerations

The Horseshoe Bend Precinct Structure Plan is a considered and well planned approach to the development of additional residential communities within the Armstrong Creek Urban Growth Area. The intent of the HBPSP and the HBDCP is to ensure that the infrastructure required to service the community meets their needs and expectations and is provided in a timely manner.

The establishment of the Sparrovale Wetlands will also bring a significant area of passive environmental recreation for residents and will assist in the timely provision of serviced land for residential development.


Human Rights Charter

Council officers have taken into consideration the Human Rights Charter relative to the application of the Public Acquisition Overlay. This includes ‘ratepayers property rights’ and a ‘right to a fair hearing’.


Consultation and Communication

Council officers will write to the land owners seeking support for a fast-track planning scheme amendment process via the Minister for Planning.

Should the Minister for Planning decline to become the Planning Authority for the amendment, Council will seek Authorisation to exhibit the amendment. Consultation and communication with land holders will be in accordance with the requirements nominated in the Planning & Environment Act 1987.


[Back to List]

10. Development Contribution Plans - annual Report 2015-16

(previously agenda item 9)

Source:

Planning & Development

General Manager:

Peter Bettess

Index Reference:

Development Contribution Plans - Governance


Purpose

As part of Council’s Development Contribution Governance Framework an annual report is to be presented to Council and the Audit Advisory Committee reporting on the income, expenditure and general performance of Development Contribution Plans over the past 12 months.


Summary

L Gardner moved, P Dorling seconded -

That Council notes the 12 month report on Development Contribution Plans and the current funding gap of approximately $25.2M over the next 15-20 years (not including additional costs directly or indirectly linked to urban growth management).

Carried.


Background

Geelong is experiencing significant urban growth across the municipality and with this growth comes the need for delivering key infrastructure to service these new communities.

One of the key funding avenues to deliver this infrastructure is the use of development contributions, or more formally, the use of a Development Contribution Plan (DCP).

A DCP is an incorporated document within the planning scheme that allows Council to levy a charge upon a specific area/precinct of development in order to facilitate the delivery of future projects specifically required to service this area/precinct (e.g. traffic lights, recreation reserves, community centres, etc).

Council’s DCPs require the delivery of approximately $492M in essential projects to service urban growth, with the current performance of these DCPs reflecting a remaining liability of approximately $450.3M and remaining income of approximately $425.1M expected over the next 15-20 years. This represents a current funding gap of approximately $25.2M.

Over the past six years the City of Greater Geelong has been implementing a detailed governance framework for the administration of DCPs. The framework is aimed at ensuring all DCPs are managed and administered in a strategic, consistent, accountable and transparent manner (Refer Appendix 1 – CoGG DCP Governance Framework).

A recognised component of the governance framework was the need to provide an annual report to Council detailing the performance of Council’s DCPs over the past financial year.

The report is aimed at summarising the following key features:

These themes are consistent with the recommendations made by the Standard Development Contribution Advisory Committee responsible for recommending reforms within the State Government’s new development contributions system. This new system is planned for implementation in late 2016.

The above themes are also consistent with the draft template provided by State Government relating to the proposed annual reporting requirements set out under recent changes to the Planning and Environmental Act (Part 3B, Section 46QD). Noting this reporting obligation and templates are yet to be formalised.

The indexation for DCP projects saw increases of 1.44% for buildings construction and 0.37% for roads and bridge construction (based on the adopted ABS Produce Price Index), while average land increases were 10.2% during 2015/16.

The indexation performance of Council’s DCP Levies Appendix 4 – Development Contribution Plan Levies – Indexation Trends (4 years) shows the average annual increase of between 0.18% and 1.55% per annum for Council’s DCP Levies. A key factor in this variation is based on DCP levies being indexed via three separate indices for land, civil works and building projects.


Discussion

DCP INCOME RECEIVED

Council currently has three DCPs generating income from either the Development Infrastructure Levy (DIL) or the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL, $900 / dwelling), or both (refer Appendix 2 – DCP Summary Report).

The total cash income received across these three DCPs (Armstrong Creek East and West and Jetty Road) was $1.89M ($1.02M for DIL and $0.87M for CIL). However during the year a developer within the Curlewis Growth Area completed the final stage of their development and due to their work-in-kind credits being in excess of their overall liability they were entitled to a refund of these credits. This refunded was acknowledge at the start of their development due to a significant DCP road project being delivered through the middle of their development. The refund amount was $705,558.

The result was a net income position of $1.18M during 2015/16 ($0.31M for DIL and $0.87M for CIL).

The total income received for all three DCPs since their approval is $4.08M.

DCP WORKS IN KIND PROJECTS (EXCLUDING LAND)

Works in kind projects are those projects delivered by developers in exchange for a credit against their developments DCP liability.

A total of six (6) works in kind projects were delivered either in full or in part during 2015-16; one being within the Jetty Road Growth Area (foreshore improvement works) and five being within the Armstrong Creek West Precinct (intersection, shared paths and drainage works).

The credited value of these DCP projects was $3.12M. For a detailed breakdown refer Appendix 2 – DCP Summary Report.

DCP PROJECTS DELIVERED BY COUNCIL

Council progressed the delivery of one DCP project during 2015/16, being a signalised intersection for the North South Collector Road (Part A) and Geelong Portarlington Road, relating only to minor survey costs completed during the year.

The credited value of these DCP projects was $300. For a detailed breakdown refer Appendix 2 – DCP Summary Report.

DCP FUNDED LAND

During 2015/16 six land projects were undertaken within Council’s DCP areas (refer Appendix 2 – DCP Summary Report), four being delivered by Council and two being works-in-kind projects by developers.

Two of these projects were land provided to Council as works-in-kind for drainage projects within the Armstrong Creek West Precinct (credited at $0.14M).

The Council projects involved early legal and administration costs associated with land acquisition projects, including three in the Horseshoe Bend Precinct (drainage land) and one within the Curlewis Growth Area (north-south connector road).

DCP FUNDING GAPS

A critical component of managing Council’s DCPs is a clear understanding of the funding gap associated with delivering Council’s legal obligations under the DCPs.

Council DCPs require the delivery of approximately $492M in essential projects to service urban growth. The current performance of these DCPs reflects a remaining liability of approximately $450.3M with remaining income of approximately $425.1M expected over the next 15 - 20 years.

Council’s total funding gap across all DCPs is $25.2M (as at 30 June 2016).

For a detailed breakdown of Council’s current liabilities and gap funding refer Appendix 3 - Development Contribution Plans - Whole of Life Remaining Liability, Income and Funding Gap.

The above funding gaps don’t include additional costs associated with:

DCP GROWTH AREAS – DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY

Another important aspect of DCP management is understanding the development activity that supports the generation of income for the DCPs and also triggers the need for DCP projects that service these new communities.

Appendix 5 – Armstrong Creek Annual Dwelling Activity by Suburb (compared to forecast) illustrates the development activity within the City’s major growth area, Armstrong Creek. The table highlights the need for strong financial planning and early infrastructure investment to ensure Council delivers DCP projects as required under the DCP (e.g. facilities like community and recreation facilities, purchasing land to facilitate other projects and in some case drainage projects required to unlock / service fragmented development fronts).

The table in Appendix 5 shows the Armstrong Creek growth area (ie: the two active suburbs of Armstrong Creek and Mt Duneed) are delivering dwellings at 60% above that forecast for the 2011/12 to 2015/16 period (i.e.: projected dwellings of 1,469 versus actual dwellings of 2.349). This is a total of 880 additional dwellings delivered over the five year period.

The Jetty Road growth area has seen strong subdivision activity during 2015/16 with double the previous years’ lot production (noting the annual projection for the growth area in approximately 100 lots per annum). The Lara West Growth Area has only recently commence development via the Manzeene Village estate.

GENERAL DCP PROGRESS REPORT

Curlewis Growth Area (Jetty Road DCP)

The Curlewis Growth Area (also known as the Jetty Road Growth Area) is significantly advanced with 820 lots delivered, the Curlewis Parks (north) estate now complete and another four estates well advanced.

Council is undertaking land acquisition for the north-south connector road which will be a crucial link from Portarlington Road into this new community and continued to progress works for the Griggs Creek Rehabilitation and Revegetation project.

Council has received Community Infrastructure Levies for 218 lots during 2014/15 (with 97 being received in 2014/15).

Armstrong Creek East Precinct

The Armstrong Creek East Precinct’s main estate, Warralily is progressing development on two fronts on Barwon Heads Rd and Surf Coast Hwy.

Warralily are continuing to provide the Armstrong Creek Drainage and Waterway Improvement works between Barwon Heads Road and Surf Coast Highway to offset their DCP liabilities (an award winning project recognised by Stormwater Victoria). Horizon Cove and Armstrong Waters, are also progressing development to the west of Barwon Heads Road. The Precinct’s neighbourhood activity centre, Warralily Village, has also commenced development facilitating the delivery of key community, education, recreation and retail facilities.

Council has received Community Infrastructure Levies for 450 lots during 2014/15 (with 406 being received in 2013-14)

Armstrong Creek North East Industrial Precinct

The Armstrong Creek North East Industrial Precinct Development Contribution Plan was approved in 2010. Development is yet to commence in this precinct.

Armstrong Creek West Precinct

The Armstrong Creek West Precinct’s main development Armstrong Mt Duneed estate has continued development west of Surf Coast Highway. As part of offsetting its DCP liabilities it has constructed the intersection at Surf Coast Highway and Burvilles Road and a shared path along Sovereign Drive. The developer is also continuing to provide the Armstrong Creek waterway improvement and drainage works between Surf Coast Highway and Sovereign Drive.

As part of the Armstrong Creek West DCP, Council has completed construction of the intersection at Baanip Boulevard and Sovereign Drive.

Council has received Community Infrastructure Levies for 296 lots during 2014/15 (with 224 being received in 2013-14).

Lara West Growth Area

Amendment C285 - Lara West Growth Area DCP was approved by the Minister for Planning on 17 July 2014. The first estate, Manzeene Village, has commenced development during 2015/16 with the first lots scheduled for delivering in late 2016.

Armstrong Creek Town Centre Precinct

Amendment C267 Armstrong Creek Town Centre Development Contributions Plan was approved by the Minister for Planning on 23 October 2014.

The DCP includes eight intersections, shared paths, drainage works and contribution towards the construction of a Regional Library. Development is expected to commence in 2016-17 financial year.

Horseshoe Bend Precinct

Amendment C259 Armstrong Creek Horseshoe Bend Development Contribution Plan was approved by the Minister for Planning on 27 November 2014. The Horseshoe Bend DCP includes active open space, intersections, drainage works and community centres.

During 2015/16 development commenced for three estates, Charlemont Rise, Ashbury and Watermark, with the first lots scheduled for delivering in late 2016.


Environmental Implications

There are no significant environmental impacts as a result of the management and administration of Council DCP system.


Financial Implications

One of the main features of the development contributions system is to ensure that new development funds essential infrastructure required to service these new communities.

The system is also setup to ensure these new development don’t create an unfair burden on the existing community. Therefore it is important to recognise the $25.2M funding gap in DCP projects and ensure these funds are included in Council long-term financial plan and various funding strategies are put in place to secure these funds when required with minimal impact to the existing community.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The report has been prepared to reflect Council’s obligations under the Victorian Local Government Act (1989) and Planning and Environment Act (1987).


Alignment to City Plan

The report supports the How We Do Business strategic direction of City Plan, in particular the priority of ‘responsible and sustainable financial management.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

There is no direct or indirect officer conflict.


Risk Assessment

As part of the DCP Governance Framework a detailed risk assessment has been undertaken to assist in the management of development contribution within Council. Key risks have been elevated to Council’s corporate risk register, while lower risks have been included as part of the DCP administration processes / procedures.

Some of these major corporate risks include failure to delivery infrastructure projects; over expenditure on DCP projects; and early claims for land purchase / compensation.


Social Considerations

There are no significant social impacts as a result of the management and administration of Council DCP system.


Human Rights Charter

Council officers have taken into consideration the Human Rights Charter relative to the subject matter of this report.


Consultation and Communication

A summary of the report has been included in the draft City of Greater Geelong

2015-16 Annual Report.

APPENDIX 1

CITY OF GREATER GEELONG

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTION GOVERANCE FRAMEWORK

Flowchart showing the Development Contribution Governance Framework

Appendix 2

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS PLANS – SUMMARY REPORT

As at 30 June 2016

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTION PLANS

Income
2015-16
$

Total
Project Value
$

Value
Completed
2015-16
$

Percentage of Project Completed
2015-16

Total Percentage of Project Completed

JETTY ROAD GROWTH AREA

Development Infrastructure Levy collected
Community Infrastructure Levy collected

-655,894*
196,200

 

 

 

 

Projects Delivered by Developers
Items
OS004 Foreshore Reserve - Improvements

 

1,987,845

397,569

20.0%

20.0%

Projects Delivered by Council
Items
R002 North South Connector Road – Part A - Land

 

366,055

36,312

9.9%

10.0%

R003 Intersection - North South Connector Road (Part A) / Portarlington Road - Construction

 

1,740,546

300

0.0%

1.0%

ARMSTRONG CREEK EAST PRECINCT

Development Infrastructure Levy collected

973,876

 

 

 

 

Community Infrastructure Levy collected

405,000

 

 

 

 

Projects Delivered by Developers
Nil
Projects Delivered by Council
Nil

 


-


-


-


-

ARMSTRONG CREEK WEST PRECINCT

Development Infrastructure Levy collected
Community Infrastructure Levy collected

3,698
266,400

 

 

 

 

Projects Delivered by Developers
Items
DI_TR_2 Shared Path Network - Within Road Reserve -973m of 2.5m path
DI_LA_7 Drainage Works - Wetland/retarding basins (property 6) - Land
DI_LA_8 Drainage Works - Wetland/retarding basins (property 7) - Land
DI_DR_7 Drainage Works - Wetland retarding Basins (WLRB1) - construction
DI_DR_9 Drainage Works - Wetland retarding Basins (WLRB3) - construction
DI_DR_15 Drainage Works - Wetland retarding Basins (SB2) - construction
DI_RO_2 Intersection - GRR- 4C & North South Connector Road ( Baanip Blvd & Sovereign Dr)

Projects Delivered by Council
Nil

 

2,028,086
48,750
91,840
3,345,553
2,240,293
1,616,653
1,787,171

85,585
23,010
91,840
129,138
547,343
1,584,320
375,243

4.2%
47.2%
100.0%
3.9%
24.0%
98.0%
20.0%

13.4%
47.2%
100.0%
3.9%
100.0%
98.0%
100.0%

ARMSTRONG CREEK HORSESHOE BEND PRECINCT

Development Infrastructure Levy collected
Community Infrastructure Levy collected

-
-

 

 

 

 

Projects Delivered by Developers
Nil

Projects Delivered by Council
Item:
DI_LA_22 Sparrovale Wetlands Acquisition 752,500 6,530 0.9% 0.9%
DI_LA_23 Sparrovale Wetlands Acquisition 1,729,000 4,268 0.2% 0.2%
DI_LA_14 Sediment Basin 1,569,000 1,250 0.1% 0.1%









752,500
1,729,000
1,569,000





6,530
4,268
1,250





0.9%
0.2%
0.1%





0.9%
0.2%
0.1%

TOTAL

1,189,280

19,303,292

3,282,709

 

 

* This negative income includes $49,663 in cash and a repayment of $705,558 for reimbursement of additional credits due to works-in-kind.


Appendix 3

Development Contribution Plans - Whole of Life Remaining Liability, Income and Funding Gap

As at 30 June 2016

Development Contribution Plans

Current Remaining Liability

Remaining Income

Funding Gap*

% of Liability the Gap Represent

Jetty Road Urban Growth Area

22,610,635

16,322,911

6,287,725

27.8%

Armstrong Creek North East Industrial Precinct

13,684,704

13,684,704

-

0.0%

Armstrong Creek East Precinct

106,979,230

103,032,677

3,946,552

3.7%

Armstrong Creek West Precinct

94,806,606

89,468,228

5,338,377

5.6%

Lara West Urban Growth Area

43,826,696

40,105,767

3,720,928

8.5%

Armstrong Creek Town Centre Precinct

24,018,432

22,309,620

1,708,812

7.1%

Armstrong Creek Horseshoe Bend Precinct

144,328,103

140,150,982

4,177,121

2.9%

TOTAL

450,254,406

425,074,890

25,179,516

5.6%

* Gap funding includes Community Infrastructure Levy shortfall (impacted by non-indexed $900/dwelling), CoGG contribution and DET contribution


Development Contribution Plans - Whole of Life Actual Income and Works

As at 30 June 2016

Development Contribution Plan

Current Income
$

Current Projects Complete
$
(Works in Kinds & CoGG)

% Total DCP Projects Completed

Jetty Road Urban Growth Area

1,302,384

5,786,355

20%

Armstrong Creek North East Industrial Precinct

-

-

0%

Armstrong Creek East Precinct

1,807,758

22,868,362

18%

Armstrong Creek West Precinct

968,929

13,992,173

13%

Lara West Urban Growth Area

-

1,911

0%

Armstrong Creek Town Centre Precinct

-

-

0%

Armstrong Creek Horseshoe Bend Precinct

-

-

0%

TOTAL

4,079,071 

42,648,802 

9% 



Appendix 4

Development Contribution Plan Levies – Indexation Trends (3 years)

Development Infrastructure Levy

 Development Contributions Plan

2014-15
($ / ha)

2015-16
($ / ha)

2016-17
($ / ha)

Average Annual Increase

Jetty Road Urban Growth Area (residential)

88,038

90,399

92,137

1.55%

Armstrong Creek North East Industrial Precinct (industrial)

97,186

97,406

97,699

0.18%

Armstrong Creek East Precinct (residential)

242,152

246,613

249,683

1.04%

Armstrong Creek West Precinct (residential)

258,493

262,798

265,960

0.96%

Armstrong Creek Town Centre (Precinct 5 – Mixed Use Residential)

261,635

258,895

272,367

1.37%

Armstrong Creek Horseshoe Bend (residential)

281,488

284,902

290,703

1.09%

Lara West Urban Growth Area (residential – Charge Area A)

129,561

132,482

134,015

1.15%

 

 

 

 

 



Appendix 5

Armstrong Creek Annual Dwelling Activity by Suburb (Compared to Forecast)

As at 30 June 2016

Suburb

Projected or Actual Dwellings #

Dwellings per Year

11/12

12/13

13/14

14/15

15/16

TOTALS 

Armstrong Creek

Projected

40

180

345

346

350

1,261

 

Actual

128

325

449

406

450

1,758

Mount Duneed

Projected

1

1

0

106

100

208

 

Actual

0

0

71

224

296

591

TOTALS

Projected

41

181

345

452

450

1,469

 

Actual

128

325

520

630

746

2,349

Difference

 

87

144

175

178

296

880

Cumulative Difference

 

87

231

406

584

880

-

Percentage Increase

 

212%

80%

51%

39%

65%

60%

# Based on City of Greater Geelong Population Forecast (forecast.id) and actual figures based on annual collection of community infrastructure levy ($900 / dwelling)

Note – Development has only recently commence in the suburb of Charlemont, and yet to commence in Marshall.


[Back to List]

11. Section 173 Agreement - Anco Seed and Turf P/L and City of Greater Geelong

(previously agenda item 10)

Source:

Planning & Development – Strategic Implementation

General Manager:

Peter Bettess

Index Reference:

Application: Amendment RL121


Purpose

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider the operation of an existing S173 Agreement and determine whether it should be ended.

Summary

L Gardner moved, P Dorling seconded -

That Council advises ANCO Seed and Turf P/L that it proposes to initiate steps to end the Section 173 Agreement forming part of the approval of Amendment RL121 applying to land at the south-west corner of Balcombe and Windsor Roads, Newtown.

Carried.


Background

Amendment RL121 which was approved in 1998 with an accompanying Section 173 Agreement provided for the development by Anco Seed & Turf P/L (ANCO) of 9 residential lots and a boathouse/restaurant on the south west corner of Balcombe & Winsor Road, Newtown adjacent the Barwon River. This development was completed in 2005.

Detailed conditions applying to these uses and their operation, scale, buildings and works, subdivision, development plans etc were contained in Ordinance provisions forming part of the Amendment.

The accompanying Section 173 Agreement dealt in particular with landscaping of the site, staging of the subdivision, construction of Windsor Road and transfer of open space land to the Council.

The existing zoning of the subject land and surrounds is Appendix 1 and an aerial photo is Appendix 2. The subject land adjoins King Lloyd Reserve to the south.

Details of the land transfer arrangement in the Agreement and attached lease include:

Whilst the residential subdivision and the restaurant boathouse (Barwon Edge) have been completed and operational for over 10 years, the land transfer anticipated by the Agreement and associated subdivision of land has not been completed.

Council’s Property and Procurement Department considers that some terms of the existing agreement and lease expose Council to possible costs and risks including:


Discussion

In order to avoid some of the above exposures, discussions have been taking place over many years with the owner to see if alternative arrangements which better suit both parties can be agreed.

Council’s position has also been influenced by the King Lloyd Reserve Master Plan which indicates that part of the land to be retained by the owner pursuant to the original Agreement(lot 10 in Appendix 3) could be used for sports grounds, in particular a north/south oriented hockey field.

From the owner’s viewpoint there would seem to be considerable benefit in being able to maintain freehold title to the restaurant land and the surrounding landscaped setting (which whilst being generally accessible to the public, is physically associated with and focused on the restaurant and does not naturally attract the wider public i.e. non-restaurant users).

Negotiations with the owner have been more or less centred on the owner retaining most of Lots 11 & 12 as shown in Appendix 3 and in return lot 10 would be transferred to Council.

Over recent times the negotiations have been further complicated by:

Council officers believe that in these circumstances there is now little value in pursuing negotiations with the owner. The only positive outcome for Council is to have Lot 10 transferred to it which would enable a north/south oriented hockey field to be established. Any other land configuration enabling only an east-west hockey field (privately owned or otherwise) or further passive open space is not supported and is not consistent with the King Lloyd Reserve Masterplan. As this Masterplan notes, this general area is well served with passive recreational facilities and walking tracks along the Barwon River and Balyang Sanctuary just downstream on the east side of Shannon Avenue. There is little value in pursuing negotiations and for Council to become responsible for the management of further passive recreational land in this area (which for the most part has already been provided by the owner and is accessible to the public).

Ending the existing Section 173 Agreement as recommended will result in a need to amend the zoning of that part of the subject land which was zoned Public Park and Recreation zone in anticipation of the Agreement being implemented. At this stage it is proposed that preparation of the necessary Planning Scheme Amendment to make this zone change be held in abeyance pending Council consideration of the owners proposal for a small-scale convention function facility which may impact on future zonings on the land.


Environmental Implications

The land as it is currently developed and used consists of buildings and formal parkland areas which enhance the general environs of the Barwon River and the associated shared pathway. Lot 10 is unimproved land formerly used for turf production and farming.

The Council’s King Lloyd Reserve is located to the south of the subject land. Future development of that reserve will seek to protect the values of the park, enhance the landscape quality of the reserve, promote effective management of the tree stock and improve facilities, infrastructure and functioning for broad community use whilst retaining the natural ambiance of the precinct.


Financial Implications

The financial implications arising out of the existing Agreement arrangements have been discussed in the report and constitute a major factor in the recommendation that the current Agreement be ended.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

Section 177 (2) of the Planning & Environment Act enables an Agreement to be ended by Council with the Approval of the Minister or by Agreement between the parties to an Agreement.

If the Agreement is to be ended as recommended, notice will be required under s189 of the Local Government Act as Council would be surrendering its right to have land transferred to it which could be interpreted as selling or exchanging land.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No officers involved have a direct or indirect interest in this matter.


Risk Assessment

Ending the Agreement as recommended reduces the risks of Council exposure to adverse financial implications as described in this report.


Social Considerations

There are no social considerations to this report.


Human Rights Charter

The ending of this Agreement will not impact on basic human rights, freedoms and responsibilities as set out in the Charter.


Consultation and Communication

This report discusses issues affecting signatories to a Section 173 Agreement which should not impact on adjoining owners or the general public.

This report has not been subject to any external communication other than the existing owner.


Appendix 1 – Existing Zoning

Appendix 1 – Existing Zoning

Appendix 2 – Aerial Image

Appendix 2 – Aerial Image

Appendix 3 – Subject Land

Appendix 3 – Subject Land

[Back to List]

12. Draft Greenhouse Strategy

Source:

City Services - Environment and Waste Services

Acting General Manager:

Vicki Shelton

Index Reference:

Sustainability


Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek endorsement for the Draft Greenhouse Strategy to be placed on public exhibition for feedback. The feedback from the community will be used to inform the drafting of a final Greenhouse Strategy to be presented to Council for adoption.

Summary

P Dorling moved, L Gardner seconded -

That Council:

  1. endorse a greenhouse emissions reduction target of 50% based on 14/15 emissions (Option 5), and recognize Council's aspirations to reach zero carbon emissions;

  2. note that the endorsed target will be incorporated into the Draft Greenhouse Strategy and placed on public exhibition for four weeks;

  3. approve the public exhibition of the Draft Greenhouse Strategy for public comment.


Background

The City of Greater Geelong was recently announced as the third Australian local government to be certified as a One Planet Living Council. The City of Greater Geelong is committed to working towards the ten One Planet Living principles and the Greenhouse Strategy is the primary document guiding work to achieve zero carbon emissions.

The development of an updated Greenhouse Strategy is a key action of the City’s Environment Management Strategy under the strategic direction of “Leadership, Greenhouse and Energy”.

The Draft Greenhouse Strategy represents an update of Council’s Greenhouse Response 2008-2011 and builds on Council’s work on emissions reduction. The Greenhouse Strategy also incorporates work from the Low Carbon Growth Plan for Greater Geelong and provides an opportunity to bring together Council corporate and community emission reduction programs under the One Planet Living sustainability framework and principle of “Zero Carbon”.

Council’s emissions profile in 2015 was 23,135 tonnes of CO2-e. Council’s emissions come from energy (electricity and gas) used in buildings, Council owned lighting and fuels used in Council’s fleet.

Geelong’s community emissions profile in 2015 was 4,574,000 tonnes of CO2-e. Community emissions come from different sources; non-residential buildings, residential buildings, transport, industrial and agricultural activities, landfill waste and leased street lighting.


Discussion

The development of the Draft Greenhouse Strategy incorporates outcomes from consultation activities and background documents that have been produced:

Consultation:

Background documents:

Draft Strategy review

Greenhouse Strategy Reduction Target Options:

Using the 2015 baseline of 23,135 tonnes of CO2-e, there are seven emission reduction target options to 2020 that Council could pursue to reduce its corporate emissions.

Council is requested to endorse one of the target options shown in table 1. The endorsed target will be incorporated into the Draft Greenhouse Strategy and placed on public exhibition for four weeks.

Key action areas that support the target options include; energy efficiency (electricity and gas) in buildings, renewable energy (small and large scale) and carbon offset purchasing.

Table 1: Greenhouse Strategy Reduction Target Options

Option

Reduction target by 2020 based on 2014-15 emissions

TCO2-e saved annually

Financial Investment

NPV (2035)

1.

8%

2,024

$1,315,000

$ 2,932,408


2.

10%

2,313

$1,315,000
+ $2,170 p.a.

$ 2,889,008

3.

20%

4,626

$1,315,000
+ $19,515 p.a.

$ 2,542,108

4.

30%

6,934

$1,315,000
+ $36,825 p.a.

$2,195,909

5.

50%

11,567

$1,315,000
+ $71,573 p.a.

$1,500,949

6.

100%

23,135

$1,315,000
+ $158,333 p.a.

-$234,251

7.

100%

23,135

$9,315,000
+ $121,507 p.a.

$3,002,311

* Net Present Value (NPV) represents the cumulative total value of the initiatives for the twenty year period (2015-2035) by considering initial capital and expected cash inflows and outflows.

Table 1. demonstrates the range of emission reduction targets available to Council and various financial investments required to achieve each option including the return on investments in 2035.

The 8% reduction target is supported by capital funding within the 2016/17 and 2017/18 budget derived from collected landfill carbon charges.

The 8% reduction target is supported by an energy efficiency and solar program on Council’s top ten buildings. This program of works has a payback of 4.7 years and will provide a financial saving to Council of $265,781 per annum on completion of works (2 years).

Council is currently investigating reinvestment options of these savings into energy efficiency and renewable energy programs to further reduce operational costs and provide some ongoing financial stability for programs to meet Council’s emission reduction target.

It is important that Council transitions over time from purchasing offsets on an annual basis, to investments in energy efficiency works and solar systems to establish a net positive return on investment program.

Maintaining flexibility within the works program to take advantage of supporting funding including government grants as they become available will be important. This may allow for high capital investments projects such as large scale solar to be considered earlier if support funding becomes available.

Council is currently investigating Council staff accommodation options. This investigation may result in changes to building stock and baseline energy profile. The Greenhouse Strategy will be updated with any change to Council building stock pending the outcome of the assessment.

Council can play a key role in enabling positive change in the community. Through the Draft Greenhouse Strategy, Council aims to support community groups to deliver actions that reduce community emissions, including:


Environmental Implications

Greenhouse emissions are a major factor in driving global climate change. The Draft Greenhouse Strategy will assist in reducing Council and community generated greenhouse emissions.


Financial Implications

The Greenhouse Strategy will be supported through the recent carbon tax refund. This funding provides an opportunity to implement key energy efficiency and renewable energy actions. This funding will enable council, as a minimum, to meet the 8% target option listed in Table 1.

Financial savings from these actions could be reinvested to fund future energy efficiency works and a model to do this will be investigated. This is particularly important with the introduction of Council Rate Capping.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

There are no policy or legal implications.


Alignment to City Plan

The Draft Greenhouse Strategy aligns closely with City Plan strategic direction; Sustainable Built and Natural Environment. An objective within this is to partner with our community to encourage sustainable design and reduce resource consumption. The Greenhouse Reduction Strategy is listed as a key strategy for delivering Sustainable Built and Natural Environment priorities.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No Officer has a direct or indirect interest in the matter to which the report relates.


Risk Assessment

There have been no identified risks to Council in the development of the Draft Greenhouse Strategy.


Social Considerations

The development of the Draft Greenhouse Strategy provides an opportunity for the community to have a say on what action the City should take to minimise greenhouse gas emissions in the municipality.


Human Rights Charter

There are no known positive or negative impacts.


Consultation and Communication

Key stakeholder consultation has been an important component of the development of the Draft Greenhouse Strategy. Public exhibition of the Draft strategy will provide further opportunity for the public to comment.

Consultation undertaken is included in the ‘background’ of this report.


[Back to List]

13. Community Grants Program 2015/2016 – Summaru of Allocations – 1 January to 30 June 2016

Source:

Community Life/Community Development

General Manager:

Linda Quinn

Index Reference:

Grants Outgoing (Community Grants Program)


Purpose

The purpose of this report is to present details of allocations of the Community Grants program for the period 1 January to 30 June 2016.

This forms part of the ongoing accountability framework for managing the Community Grants Program in accordance with the City of Greater Geelong Grants, Donations and Sponsorship Policy.


Summary

P Dorling moved, L Gardner seconded -

That Council:

  1. notes the statement of allocations under the 2015/2016 Community Grants Program provided to community groups and organisations as detailed in Appendix 1-1 for the period 1 January to 30 June 2016;

  2. commends and congratulates the community groups and organisations who have received funding under the Community Grants Program for their efforts and contribution to the Geelong community.

Carried.


Background

The Community Grants Program is available to not-for-profit community groups and organisations who can apply for funds to support activities that will benefit the Geelong community.

In order to receive funds, applicants must comply with the established guidelines which govern the grant program.

A summary of allocations for the period 1 July to 31 December 2015 was provided in a report to Council on 15 March 2016.


Discussion

The allocation of grants assists with meeting the objectives of City Plan’s Community Wellbeing priority areas. This funding provides an opportunity to enhance the wellbeing of the community by building social capital and enabling community engagement through the provision of funds to assist with local activities.

Several grant rounds are advertised throughout the year and eligible applicants can apply through an online portal accessible through the Geelong Australia website.

The accountability framework for managing the Community Grants Program is in accordance with the City of Greater Geelong Grants, Donations and Sponsorship Policy and a management procedure provides guidance on administering the program.

Grants must support a specific activity, project or event that can demonstrate community benefit and address the set criteria detailed in the grant guidelines.

Submitted applications are then assessed based on the set criteria.

The outcome of the assessments is referred to a grants assessment panel that includes staff from the Community Life Division and from the City’s Chief Executive (Governance) area. The panel review the recommendations and provide the outcomes to the General Manager, Community Life for final approval.

All applicants are then advised of the outcome of their submissions.

A total $109,136.50 was allocated among 58 community organisations through the Community Grants Program between 1 January and 30 June 2016.

This brings the total amount awarded for the 2015/2016 financial year to $240,000 awarded among 126 community organisations. Details of allocations made between July and December 2015 were reported to Council on 15 March 2016.

Appendix 1-1 provides a list of groups, the type of projects and the amounts allocated during the period 1 January to 30 June 2016.


Environmental Implications

Some of the projects supported via this grant program undertake environmental activities.


Financial Implications

There are no financial implications.. All funds have been expended in accordance with the Community Grants Guidelines and within the $240,000 budget allocation.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The provision of grants to the community supports local, community organisations and endorses the aims of City Plan and the G21 Regional Plan.

This report is presented in accordance with the City of Greater Geelong Grants, Contributions, Donations and Sponsorship Policy.


Alignment to City Plan

The Community Grants Program aims to fund projects that assist in achieving goals and outcomes consistent with City Plan‘s Community Wellbeing objectives.

The grant guidelines provide details about the three priority areas of the Community Wellbeing objectives. This is to ensure applicants are made aware of the aims of the program and to assist them in developing their proposals.

The provision of grants is offered to assist community organisations to provide opportunities that benefit the wider Geelong community.

Applications are encouraged for projects that demonstrate or promote social inclusiveness, healthy lifestyles, healthy environments that provide broad benefits to the City of Greater Geelong community.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

The provision of grants is carried out in accordance with the Local Government Act 1989 Officer Direct or Indirect Interest.

The Community Grants Program has provision in the assessment process to record any conflict of interest relating to each grant application that is assessed.


Risk Assessment

The Community Grants Program is governed in accordance with Council’s monitoring, reporting and accountability framework.

Successful applicants are provided with an acquittal/evaluation form for their completion and return to Council as a record of the outcome of the grant funding they received. Annual audits are also conducted on a sample group of grant recipients.


Social Considerations

The provision of Community Grants provides an opportunity to support and strengthen communities to provide a broad range of activities for the benefit of the Geelong community.


Human Rights Charter

The Grants, Contributions, Donations, and Sponsorship Policy references the Chart of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.

The Charter states that human rights are essential in a democratic and inclusive society that respects the rule of law, human dignity, equality and freedom.

The provision of grants provides opportunities to assist in promoting social inclusiveness and projects that deliver broad community benefit.


Consultation and Communication

All groups are notified of the outcome of their grant application.

The list of allocations will be reported on the Geelong Australia Website.

The Community Development Department is responsible for communication of all matters relating to this report.


Appendix 1-1

Statement of Community Grant Allocations

1 January to 30 June 2016

Organisation

Project Title

Amount Allocated

2nd Lara Scout Group

Canvas Tents for Scout Camps

$2,500.00

AFL Barwon

Steven Motlop Squad (Geelong Diverse Academy) Indigenous and Multicultural Football Program

$2,500.00

Ardoch Youth Foundation

Community Garden - Northern Bay College, Hendy St Campus

$2,500.00

Australian Muslim Women's Centre for Human Rights

Pre-Ramadan Awareness Week

$2,700.00

Australian Skateboard Federation

VertFest! Skateboard Workshops

$1,800.00

Austrian Club Geelong Inc

Upgrade to Hall - Purchase & Installation of Vinyl Flooring for Community space

$2,000.00

Barwon Health Carer Respite Service

Young Carers Cook Program

$2,700.00

Bellarine Bears Baseball Club

Netting Batting Tunnel

$800.00

Belmont Bowls Club Inc.

Scoreboard Project

$1,000.00

Belmont Senior Citizens

Photocopier for Establishment of Admin

$2,000.00

Blind Sports and Recreation Victoria (BSRV)

Walking with Willpower in Greater Geelong

$2,900.00

Ceres Community Association

Ceres Temperance Hall - Chairs Upgrade Program

$1,500.00

Clifton Springs Tennis Club

Kitchen Under bench Oven Project

$1,000.00

Cobradah Senior Citizens Centre

Indoor bowls Project/Equipment Purchase

$1,000.00

Community Food Marketplace Ltd (trading as Geelong Farmers Markets)

Geelong Farmers Market - Feasibility Study/Business Plan

$3,900.00

Eastern Park Croquet Club

Air Conditioner and Shelving Project

$2,000.00

Friends of Edwards Point Reserve Inc

Walking Edwards Point

$1,000.00

Friends of Geelong Botanic Gardens

Conference of Australian Association of Friends of Botanic Gardens

$1,000.00

Friends of Kevin Kirby Inc

Kevin Kirby Reserve New Street Furniture

$2,000.00

Geelong & District Vietnam Veterans Assoc

50th Anniversary of Vietnam Veterans Day

$2,000.00

Geelong Buccaneers

Helmet Purchase

$1,686.50

Geelong Cement Bowls Club

Score Boards

$1,000.00

Geelong Concert Band

Replace 32" Timpani

$3,000.00

Geelong Disc Golf Club Inc

Pop-up Disc Golf Events

$2,000.00

Geelong Eastern Park Bowling Club inc.

Disabled Toilet

$2,500.00

Geelong Inclusive Limited

By The Bay Emergency Accommodation Project

$2,400.00

Geelong Radio Control Car Club

GRCCC Storage Container Project

$1,500.00

Geelong Rangers Soccer and Sports Club

Connected community PLUS Healthy lifestyle - Purchase of Kitchen Equipment

$1,300.00

Geelong RSL Bowls

Geelong RSL Bowls Scoreboard Replacement

$1,000.00

Greater Geelong Galaxy Football Inc.

Increasing girls participation in Geelong Soccer

$3,500.00

Grovedale Senior Citizens Club Inc

Office Equipment Set Up

$1,000.00

Holy Trinity Anglican Church Lara

Installation of Crossovers

$1,000.00

Indented Head Yacht Club Inc.

Sailing for Kids

$1,800.00

Lara Amateur Swimming Club Inc

Long term Sustainable Club Investment - Purchase of Kitchen Equipment

$2,000.00

Lara Community Garden and Art Precinct (LCGAP) Incorporated

LCGAP Multi Purpose Shelter

$1,500.00

Lara Heritage & Historical Inc

Electronic Surveillance System

$2,600.00

Lara Jean Association Inc

Movie Mayhem Project

$1,000.00

Leopold Tennis Club Inc.

Installation of LED lights on Courts 1 and 2

$1,750.00

Mount Duneed Progress Association Inc.

Overhead Projector and Screen Project

$1,600.00

Mt Rothwell Landcare

Purchase of Defibrillator

$2,000.00

Netball Victoria

Women in Sport and Leadership

$2,500.00

Ocean Grove Senior Citizens Club Inc

Office Upgrade

$1,500.00

PARKRUN INC t/a Parkrun Australia (You Yangs Parkrun)

You Yangs Parkrun

$3,000.00

Rotary Club of Queenscliffe Inc

RYDA Geelong (Young Driver Awareness Program - Geelong Region)

$2,000.00

Sacred Heart College

2016 Mind, Body and Soul Expo

$2,500.00

Scout Association of Australia, Victorian Branch, 1st Eastern Scout Group

Compliant Gas Cylinder Storage Equipment Project

$650.00

Serbian Orthodox Church Saint Nicholas Geelong

Outdoor Play Area Upgrade

$1,000.00

Short Statured People of Australia Inc.

Accessible Supermarket Trolley Project

$1,500.00

South Western District Ladies Golf Association Inc

Elite Junior Girls Coaching Program

$1,000.00

St John Ambulance - Barwon Division

Life Saving First Aid Equipment

$2,700.00

St Mary's Sporting Club - Netball

St Mary's Netball Scoreboard

$2,000.00

Stroke Association of Victoria

Geelong Stroke Support Centre

$2,000.00

Ten02 Incorporated

Faith Restoration (Panel Beating/Spray Painting Program)

$1,750.00

The Geelong Amateur Radio Club Inc

Club House Roof Project

$1,500.00

Treehouse Autism Family Support Group

Treehouse IT equipment for Admin Set up

$2,500.00

U3A Geelong Inc

Purchase of Defibrillator

$2,000.00

Victorian Heron Sailing Association

58th Heron National Championships

$2,500.00

Volunteering Geelong

St Marys Community Hub Set Up

$1,600.00

 

Total Allocated

$109,136.50


Note: Amendment from Summary of Allocations June to December 2015

The following community grant allocation was reported to Council on 15 March 2016. Funding was not required by the applicant. The $2,000 initially allocated was then returned to the community grants funding pool and was subsequently allocated during the period between January and June 2016.

Organisation

Project Title

Amount Allocated

Jirrahlinga Wildlife Sanctuary

‘It’s OK to be different’ – anti bullying Seminars

$2,000



[Back to List]

14. Renewal of Wicket Maintenance and Development Agreement between the City of Greater Geelong and the Geelong Cricket Association

Source:

Community Life

General Manager:

Linda Quinn

Index Reference:

SUB-16-3370 CRICKET

Report to:

 


Purpose

This report proposes to continue the Turf Wicket Maintenance Agreement between Council and the Geelong Cricket Association (GCA).


Summary

P Dorling moved, L Gardner seconded -

That Council approve the renewal of the Wicket Maintenance and Development Agreement between the City of Greater Geelong and the Geelong Cricket Association for a two year term via the allocation of $248,595 per annum plus Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustments.

Carried.


Background

Cricket within the City of Greater Geelong is managed and governed by three entities being the Geelong Cricket Association (GCA), Bellarine Cricket Association (BPCA) and the Geelong Cricket Club (GCC). This agreement deals specifically with the GCA who operate a turf based competition with the primary focus of the agreement being the maintenance support of the turf wickets. The City of Greater Geelong directly maintain the GCC’s wicket being the only premier cricket club in the region and the City directly maintain the synthetic wickets played upon by the BPCA.

The GCA has 38 clubs playing across 15 grades of cricket including 4 premier grades in turf based competition. The GCA represents 27 clubs within the Geelong region and draws its associated clubs from the Surfcoast and Golden Plains Shires.

The original Wicket Maintenance Agreement commenced in 2006. With an annual allocation from Council to the GCA of $168,800 for turf wicket maintenance and development. The Murgheboluc Cricket Club and St Albans Cricket Club were added to the agreement by Council in 2011. This addition and an annual increase in CPI now accounts for an annual disbursement of $248,595.

The previous Agreement recognises the GCA as the peak cricket body to administer the Council grant funds for turf wicket maintenance. CoGG provides the GCA with the authority to distribute these funds to associated clubs for the maintenance of turf wickets on Council owned or controlled land.

The existing agreement has been acknowledged by Cricket Victoria as making a significant contribution to cricket in Geelong.


Discussion

The GCA has 38 clubs playing across 15 grades of cricket, 27 from within the Geelong region, with in excess of 2500 senior and 1800 junior participants, accounting for cricketers playing on both turf and hard/synthetic wickets.

The turf competition acts as a pathway for Geelong cricketers as they progress from the GCA to premier league and then State competition. The approach of allocating the funds to the association was initiated to reduce the resource liability to Council. Key features of this agreement include;

This Agreement will commence on 1 October 2016 for a two (2) year term. The Agreement will be due for renewal at the completion of the 2017/2018 season (31 March 2018).

Council is currently working in collaboration with the G21 LGAs and Cricket Victoria on the G21 and Cricket Victoria Barwon Region Cricket Strategy to guide the development of cricket within the G21 region. The plan will address infrastructure, sports development and governance aspects and will involve all relevant stakeholders within the region.

Pending the outcome of the G21 and Cricket Victoria Barwon Region Cricket Strategy, it is recommended that the agreement be renewed for a further two (2) year term, until the end of the 2017/2018 season and the funds be expended by the GCA in the following manner:

$198,784

80%

To be used on the maintenance and preparation of 23 turf wickets.

$29,882

12%

To enable the GCA to replace and/or repair covers for synthetic wickets.

$19,929

8%

To assist the GCA with training and development requirements. This allocation is to be used for funding:

  • Junior development initiatives and programs.

  • The training of staff and volunteers in turf management.

  • The purchase of turf wicket maintenance equipment.

    And the installation of new or additional turf wickets by Clubs seeking admission to the GCA turf competitions.


The main amendments to this agreement from previous include:

The turf wicket Agreement is unique to City of Geelong and is acknowledged as providing support to the development of cricket.

In regards to the turf wicket component which forms the foundation of this agreement, there are 4 grades of turf competition that make up approximately 528 players in 2015/16. Based on the 2015/2016 contribution this equates to an approximate subsidy of $471 per player for the turf wicket component of the Agreement. This cost does not include the normal maintenance routines such as mowing, irrigation and weed control, undertaken by Council.

It is important to note that sports grounds with turf wickets have significantly limited use and only generally allow one-two days play per week. Cricket for the lower grades and junior participation therefore requires the provision of alternative hard wicket cricket facilities. Currently the City of Greater Geelong has no additional oval capacity available for Saturday cricket. Attachment 2 outlines the clubs involved, the divisions and type of wicket at each location.

At the conclusion of this Agreement CoGG reserves the right to cease funding the maintenance of turf wickets for any turf club that is still playing in a hard wicket competition. CoGG will not guarantee funding for the maintenance of turf wickets for clubs playing in a hard wicket competition after two (2) years.


Environmental Implications

There are no foreseeable environmental implications associated with this report.


Financial Implications

The increase in funding under the agreement is based on annual CPI increase. This is proposed to continue for a further two (2) year period and will start at $248,595.

It is recommended the allocation be adjusted annually in accordance with the CPI, as has been the case with the previous agreement.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

There are no legislative or legal ramifications associated with the adoption of this report.


Alignment to City Plan

The recommended project will align to the City Plan’s priority of Community Wellbeing, encouraging healthy lifestyles and connected communities through active recreation and participation in sport.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

There are no officer conflicts of interest relating to the project being proposed for submission or this report.


Risk Assessment

There are no immediate risks associated with this report.


Social Considerations

The expected population growth necessitates increased and improved provision of community sport and recreation facilities that provide a social outlet for the local community.

Participation in sport and recreational activities has long been recognised as an important contributor to community health and well being. Benefits of physical activity are well documented and include improved health, development of social skills, increased community connectedness and enhanced self-esteem.

As the premier grades of cricket are played on turf, the progression for junior players requires junior pathways with similar standards and facilities. It is essential that Council provide accessible options to juniors for the development of the sport.


Human Rights Charter

This report has no impact on human rights.


Consultation and Communication

The agreement provides for an annual report to be lodged with Council outlining the allocations made to GCA clubs for the maintenance of turf wickets, a schedule of the synthetic wickets replaced and details of expenditure on training junior development and the timing of payments to clubs. Additional reporting and analysis that the GCA can include such as the number of players benefiting from Council’s financial support has also been introduced as a requirement.

The GCA must provide a break down of juniors, males / females, culturally & linguistically diverse (CALD) participants and participants with a disability.


Attachment 1

Amount

%

Particulars

Reporting Required

$198,784

80%

To be used on the maintenance and preparation of 23 turf wickets.

  • Annual feedback from the clubs regarding the effectiveness of the agreement must be collated and provided to CoGG.

  • GCA shall provide an annual report by the end of May of each year of the agreement outlining all financial transactions, including;

    • Breakdown of funding allocations to the GCA clubs for the maintenance of turf wickets.

    • Detailed information relevant to funds paid to Clubs for the replacement/purchase of turf maintenance equipment.

    • Proof of payment including date on which the payments were made to the Clubs.

$29,882

12%

To enable the GCA to replace and/or repair covers for synthetic wickets.

  • The GCA must provide to CoGG, by the end of each season (31 March), a prioritised plan (in an agreed format – see attached template) for the following season outlining the synthetic wickets to be replaced and a works schedule detailing when these works will take place.

  • A report must also be submitted to CoGG at the completion of each season detailing the number of wickets repaired and/or replaced and the funds allocated.

$19,929

8%

To assist the GCA with training and development requirements. This allocation is to be used for funding;

  • Junior development initiatives and programs.

  • The training of staff and volunteers in turf management.

  • The purchase of turf wicket maintenance equipment.

  • And the installation of new or additional turf wickets by clubs seeking admission to the GCA turf competitions.

  • The GCA are required to provide a prioritised plan to CoGG, by August of each year (1 August), detailing their intended junior training, staff / volunteer training schedule for the following season and other relevant components relating to turf, staff training and equipment.

  • The GCA must detail the expenditure of the training and junior development component each year.

  • The monies will be released in September of each year in line with other disbursements.

$248,595

 



Attachment 2

GCA Competition

Div 1
1&2

Div 2
1&2

Div 1
3&4

Div 2
3&4

Div 3
1,2&3

GCA 5

GCA 6

GCA 7

GCA 8

Total

Wicket Type

TURF

TURF

HARD

HARD

HARD

HARD

HARD

HARD

HARD

 

Team (no. of teams)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alexander Thomson

 

2

 

2

 

 

 

 

 

4

Anakie

 

 

 

 

1

 

1

 

 

2

Bell Park*

 

2

 

2

 

 

 

 

 

4

Bell Post Hill

2

 

2

 

 

1

 

 

 

5

Corio Bay

 

 

 

 

3

 

 

 

 

3

Corio*

 

 

 

 

3

 

 

1

 

4

East Belmont

2

 

2

 

 

1

 

 

1

6

Geelong City

2

 

2

 

 

 

 

1

 

5

Geelong West

2

 

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

4

Grovedale

2

 

2

 

 

 

 

1

 

5

Guild

 

 

 

 

3

 

 

 

 

3

Highton

 

2

 

2

 

 

 

 

1

5

Lara

2

 

2

 

 

 

1

 

1

6

Leopold

2

 

2

 

 

 

 

1

 

5

Little River

 

 

 

 

3

 

 

 

 

4

Manifold Heights

2

 

2

 

 

 

 

1

 

5

Marshall

 

2

 

2

 

 

 

1

1

6

Murgheboluc

 

2

 

2

 

1

1

 

 

6

Newcomb and District

 

2

 

2

 

 

 

 

1

5

Newtown and Chilwell

2

 

2

 

 

 

1

 

1

6

North Geelong

2

 

2

 

 

 

1

 

 

5

North Shore (Club currently in temporary recession)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

South Barwon

2

 

2

 

 

1

 

1

1

7

St Albans

 

2

 

2

 

 

 

 

 

4

St Peters

 

2

 

2

 

 

 

1

 

5

Thomson

 

2

 

2

 

 

 

1

 

5

No. of teams

22

18

22

18

13

4

5

8

8

118

No. of players

242

220

242

220

143

44

55

88

88

1298

*Guild and Corio both have turf wickets but are not playing in turf competitions



[Back to List]

15. Delegations and Authorisation from Council to CEO and Staff

Source:

Strategy & Performance – Customer Service & Council Business

Acting General Manager:

William Tieppo

Index Reference:

Delegations


Purpose

To update the delegations from Council to the CEO and Council to members of Council staff. To appoint Lana Krauses, Town Planner, as an authorised officer under the Planning and Environment Act 1987.


Summary

P Dorling moved, L Gardner seconded -

  1. In the exercise of the powers conferred by section 98(1) of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) and the other legislation referred to in the attached instrument of delegation (Appendix 1), Greater Geelong City Council (Council) resolves that –

    1. There be delegated to the person holding the position, acting in or performing the duties of Chief Executive Officer the powers, duties and functions set out in the attached Instrument of Delegation to the Chief Executive Officer, subject to the conditions and limitations specified in that Instrument.

    2. The instrument comes into force immediately the common seal of Council is affixed to the instrument.

    3. On the coming into force of the instrument all previous delegations to the Chief Executive Officer are revoked.

    4. The duties and functions set out in the instrument must be performed, and the powers set out in the instruments must be executed, in accordance with any guidelines or policies of Council that it may from time to time adopt.

    5. It is noted that the instrument includes a power of delegation to members of Council staff, in accordance with section 98(3) of the Act.

  2. In the exercise of the powers conferred by section 98(1) of the Act) and the other legislation referred to in the attached instrument of delegation (Appendix 2), Council resolves that –

    1. There be delegated to the members of Council staff holding, acting in or performing the duties of the offices or positions referred to in the attached Instrument of Delegation to members of Council staff (Appendix 1), the powers, duties and function set out in that instrument, subject to the conditions and limitations specified in that instrument.

    2. The instrument comes into force immediately the common seal of Council is affixed to the instrument.

    3. On the coming into force of the instrument all previous delegations to members of Council staff (other than the Chief Executive Officer) are revoked.

    4. The duties and functions set out in the instrument must be performed, and the powers set out in the instruments must be executed, in accordance with any guidelines or policies of council that it may from time to time adopt.

  3. In the exercise of the powers conferred by section 224 of the Local Government Act 1989 and under section 147(4) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 Council resolves that:

    1. The member of Council staff referred to in the Instrument of Appointment and Authorisation (Appendix 3) is appointed and authorised as set out in the instrument.

    2. This instrument comes into force immediately the common seal of Council is affixed to the instrument.

Carried.


Background

These delegations are based on a model developed and maintained by Maddocks Lawyers who are engaged to provide an update service and include legislative changes up to June 2016.

The delegation model is based on:

  1. Delegations from Council to the CEO

  2. Delegations from Council to members of Council staff

  3. Sub-delegation from the CEO to Council staff.

This report addresses delegations from Council to the Chief Executive Officer and Council to members of staff and for the appointment of and Authorised Officer under the Planning and Environment Act 1987.


Discussion

Whilst no changes are proposed in the delegations from Council to the CEO, it is recommended that Council re-makes its instrument of delegation to the Chief Executive Officer on a regular basis to capture any new legislative powers, duties or functions enacted since the instrument of delegation was last made, refer Appendix -1
The proposed delegations of Council to members of staff detail sections of Acts and Regulations and nominate officers by position title to undertake specific powers, duties and functions on behalf of Council.

Delegations were last approved by Council in January 2016.

The changes in the June update were minor amendments, including:

Attachment 1 to the Instrument of Delegation sets out the complete schedule of the relevant powers, duties and functions being delegated.

Attachment 2 lists the changes from the previously endorsed Council to Staff delegations.

The Planning and Environment Act 1987 regulates enforcement and is reliant on authorised officers acting on behalf of the Responsible Authority (Council).

Lana Krausas has recently been employed by the Council and is required to be authorised under the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

Appendix 2 sets out the Instrument of Appointment and Authorisation under the Planning and Environment Act 1987.


Environmental Implications

There are no environmental implications relative to this report.


Financial Implications

There are no financial implications relative to this report.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The delegation and authorisation schedules have been prepared in accordance with the Maddocks lawyer’s model.


Alignment to City Plan

How we do business.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

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


Risk Assessment

A properly prepared system of delegations and authorisations minimises the likelihood of officers acting outside their powers and exposing Council to unacceptable risk. Regular review of the delegations ensures accountability and responsibility for decisions when the decision makers are identified. Delegations and authorisations can be subject to legal scrutiny in courts and tribunals.


Social Considerations

There are no social considerations relative to this report.


Human Rights Charter

No Human Rights are affected by the contents of this report.


Consultation and Communication

All delegations and authorisations are published on Council’s internal website, Cityweb. Managers are consulted on the updates to the changes in legislation that effect their areas of responsibility.


Appendix 1

Greater Geelong City Council
Instrument of Delegation
to The Chief Executive Officer

In exercise of the power conferred by section 98(1) of the Local Government Act 1989 ("the Act"), the Greater Geelong City Council ("Council") delegates to the member of Council staff holding, acting in or performing the position of Chief Executive Officer, the powers, duties and functions set out in the Schedule to this Instrument of Delegation,

AND declares that

  1. this Instrument of Delegation is authorised by a Resolution of Council passed on <date>

  2. the delegation

    2.1 comes into force immediately the common seal of Council is affixed to this Instrument of Delegation;

    2.2 is subject to any conditions and limitations set out in the Schedule; and

    2.3 must be exercised in accordance with any guidelines or policies which Council from time to time adopts, and

    2.4 remains in force until Council resolves to vary or revoke it.

  3. The member of Council staff occupying the position or title of or acting in the position of Chief Executive Officer may delegate to a member of Council staff any of the powers (other than the power of delegation conferred by section 98(3) of the Act or any other powers not capable of sub-delegation) which this Instrument of Delegation delegates to him or her.

 

THE COMMON SEAL of GREATER )
GEELONG CITY COUNCIL was affixed )
hereto in the presence of: )

____________________________
Chief Administrator

 

____________________________
Chief Executive Officer

 

Date:    /    /


SCHEDULE

The power to:

  1. determine any issue;

  2. take any action; or

  3. do any act or thing

arising out of or connected with any duty imposed, or function or power conferred on Council by or under any Act.

Conditions and Limitations

The delegate must not determine the issue, take the action or do the act or thing

  1. if the issue, action, act or thing is an issue, action, act or thing which involves

    1.1 awarding a contract exceeding the value of $2,000,000 (excluding GST), or exceeding $1,000,000 (excluding GST) where it is proposed not to accept the lowest tender;

    1.2 making a local law under Part 5 of the Act;

    1.3 approval of the Council Plan under s.125 of the Act,

    1.4 adoption of the Strategic Resource Plan under s.126 of the Act;

    1.5 preparation or adoption of the Budget or a Revised Budget under Part 6 of the Act;

    1.6 adoption of the Auditor's report, Annual Financial Statements, Standard Statements and Performance Statement under Part 6 of the Act;

    1.7 determining pursuant to s.37 of the Act that an extraordinary vacancy on Council not be filled;

    1.8 exempting a member of a special committee who is not a Councillor from submitting a return under s.81 of the Act;

    1.9 appointment of councillor or community delegates or representatives to external organisations; or

    1.10 the return of the general valuation and any supplementary valuations;

  2. if the issue, action, act or thing is an issue, action or thing which is required by law to be done by Council resolution;

  3. if the issue, action, act or thing is an issue, action or thing which Council has previously designated as an issue, action, act or thing which must be the subject of a Resolution of Council;

  4. if the determining of the issue, taking of the action or doing of the act or thing would or would be likely to involve a decision which is inconsistent with a

    4.1 policy; or

    4.2 strategy

    adopted by Council; or

  5. if the determining of the issue, the taking of the action or the doing of the act or thing cannot be the subject of a lawful delegation, whether on account of section 98(1)(a)-(f) (inclusive) of the Act or otherwise; or

  6. the determining of the issue, the taking of the action or the doing of the act or thing is already the subject of an exclusive delegation to another member of Council staff.


Appendix 2

Greater Geelong City Council
Instrument of Delegation
to Members of Council Staff

In exercise of the power conferred by section 98(1) of the Local Government Act 1989, and the other legislation referred to in the Schedule (Attachment 1), Greater Geelong City Council ("Council") by this instrument:

  1. delegates each duty and/or function and/or power described in columns 1 and 2 of the Schedule (and summarised in column 3 of the Schedule) to the member of Council staff holding, acting in or performing the duties of the office or position described opposite each such duty and/or function and/or power in column 4 of the Schedule;

  2. delegates each duty and/or function and/or power described in columns 1 and 2 of the Schedule (and summarised in column 3 of the Schedule) to any member of Council staff to whom a member of Council staff listed in column 4 of the Schedule reports;

  3. declares that a delegate is not authorised by this Instrument of Delegation to:

    3.1 determine any planning permit application which any Councillor requests be referred to the Development Hearings Panel, Planning Committee or Council and such request is made before the delegate has made a decision on the permit application; or

    3.2 exercise the power conferred by the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to determine upon any application in cases where six or more objections to the grant of the permit have been made.

    3.3 refuse a permit under Section 52(1A) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

  4. declares that–

    4.1 this Instrument of Delegation is authorised by a resolution of Council passed on <date> and

    4.2 the delegation authorised by a resolution of Council passed on 27 January 2016 is revoked; and

    4.3 the delegation:

    4.4 the delegate must not determine the issue, take the action or do the act or thing:

 

THE COMMON SEAL of GREATER )
GEELONG CITY COUNCIL was affixed )
hereto in the presence of: )

 


Chief Administrator


Chief Executive Officer

Date:    /    /


Appendix 3

Greater Geelong City Council
Instrument of Appointment and Authorisation
(Planning and Environment Act 1987)

By this instrument of appointment and authorisation Greater Geelong City Council -

  1. under section 147(4) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 - appoints the officer listed below to be an authorised officer for the purposes of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and the regulations made under that Act; and

  2. under section 232 of the Local Government Act 1989 authorises the officer listed below generally to institute proceedings for offences against the Acts and regulations described in this instrument.

Lana Krausas – Town Planner

It is declared that this instrument -

  1. comes into force immediately upon its execution;

  2. remains in force until revoked.

This instrument is authorised by a resolution of the Greater Geelong City Council on <date>.

THE COMMON SEAL of GREATER )
GEELONG CITY COUNCIL was affixed )
hereto in the presence of: )

 


Chief Administrator


Chief Executive Officer

Date:    /    /


[Back to List]

16. Sale and Purchase of land - Use of CEO Delegation

Source:

Strategy & Performance - Property & Procurement

Acting General Manager:

William Tieppo

Index Reference:

Council Property Management


Purpose

For Council to endorse the use of the CEO’s delegation to approve the sale and purchase of land where the consideration is less than $500,000. The current limit is $150,000.


Summary

L Gardner moved, P Dorling seconded -

That Council endorse the use of the CEO delegation to approve property sales and purchases (including easements, access and discontinued roads) as follows:

  1. where the consideration is less than $500,000 excluding GST;

  2. a budget exists for purchases;

  3. the land being sold is not open space;

  4. any sales of land are notified under s189 of the Local Government Act and, if submissions are received the decision to sell the land is approved by Council.

Carried.


Background

At its meeting on 10 February 2015 Council endorsed a policy relating to land transactions which established policy in relating to:

The policy is publically available on the Geelong Australia web site under the heading Sale of Land – Advice to Purchasers.

Note: Transactions include both the sale and purchase of land, including sale of rights to use or access Council land (easements and other rights) and discontinued roads.


Discussion

One section of the policy adopted on 2015 related to the use of the CEO’s delegation and advised as follows:

Who decides if land can be sold?

Minor land sales with consideration of less than $150,000 excl GST are approved by the Chief Executive Officer under delegation providing the land is not open space and there are no submissions received following the notice of intention to sell land. The Ward Councillor is informed of and comments on sales proposed to be approved by the CEO.

Otherwise all other transactions are approved by resolution of the full Council.”

The use of the CEO’s delegation for minor land transactions has been in place for at least 10 years and has worked effectively reducing the time and effort required to finalise a transaction.

In all instances the Ward Councillor has been asked to comment on the proposed transaction, and of all approvals given under delegation, no submissions have been received. In most circumstances the transaction is of no interest to persons other than the purchaser, and where road discontinuances are involved any person directly affected is usually required to consent writing to the potential loss of access rights or road frontage.

There are transactions with values greater than $150,000 that are of little interest to others and some have involved properties which have ceased to be used for Council purposes, and have been included in the budget as sales. With purchases the item is usually included in the adopted budget and the land is required to support a funded building or engineering project. In the circumstances it is considered reasonable raise the limit on the use of the CEO’s delegation for such sales and purchases to $500,000.


Environmental Implications

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


Financial Implications

The proceeds from the sale of the land are non recurrent income for which provision is made in the annual budget. As property assets are disposed of the written down value is adjusted on the asset register.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

When selling land, under delegation or otherwise, there is a requirement to give notice of intention to sell under s189 of the Act. S223 of the Act enables submitters to have their submissions heard, and Council has established the Submissions Review Panel consisting of Councillors/Administrators for this purpose. No general delegation has been given to allow a special committee to consider submissions which must be considered by Council. Hence the use of delegation to approve the sale of land will be reviewed by the Council where submissions are received, whether they are heard or not heard.


Alignment to City Plan

How we Do Business


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

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


Risk Assessment

Section 189 of the Local Government Act (“LG Act”) requires that Council obtain a certified valuation dated not more than six months prior to the sale of the land being the date of the contract of sale.


Social Considerations

There are no social considerations relevant to this report.


Human Rights Charter

No human rights will be affected by the recommendation of this report.


Consultation and Communication

Relevant internal departments have been consulted in the preparation of this report The extension of the use of the CEO delegation to sell properties was raised with the Administrators at the Strategic Workshop on 19 July 2016.


[Back to List]

17. Tender and Award of: Hendy Street Children and Family Centre

Source:

Strategy & Performance – Capital Projects

Acting General Manager:

William Tieppo

Index Reference:

C15851 Hendy Street Children and Family Centre


Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek Council consent to delegate to the Chief Executive Officer the power to accept or reject tenders for each of the Hendy Street Children and Family Centre project; provided tenders fall within the adopted budget.


Summary

P Dorling moved, L Gardner seconded -

That Council delegate to the Chief Executive Officer its powers and functions to accept or reject a tender and sign the contract documents for the construction and associated works for Hendy Street Children and Family Centre project provided it is within budget.

Carried.


Background

Since receiving funding for the Hendy Street Children and Family Centre development project Council has moved through the project development phases and is now finalising the design of the facility.

As the design of the facility is being finalised Council will enter the procurement phase for the project.

The project is being tendered through the State Government Construction Suppliers Register (CSR). The CSR allows local government to enter into contracts for the purchase of building and construction services.

The rules for utilising the panel state that we must seek tenders from a minimum of five (5) pre-qualified contractors registered with on CSR panel. Two of which are to be locally based companies and one of which hasn’t been invited to tender in the last six (6) months.

This process provides council with the shortest possible tendering timeframe, and if it can be awarded under delegation it will allow Council the best opportunity to deliver the project on time.


Discussion

The Capital Projects and Contracts and Purchasing departments are exploring prudent and expeditious mechanisms to achieve opening deadlines for the facility, noting that the award of the construction contract will be beyond officer delegations.

The current project timelines will see the full documentation and contract specifications for this project finalised in August 2016 and ready for awarding in November 2016.

The timing for the appointment of a contractor means that it would be beneficial if the Chief Executive Officer entered into the contract under delegation. This would expedite the Council reporting and approval process which takes between 4 and 6 weeks to complete.

If awarding of the contract is delayed it could have a significant impact on project delivery and the subsequent opening date for the facility.


Environmental Implications

The building is being designed and built to Council’s 5 Star Green Star requirements.


Financial Implications

The project is funded through Council’s budgetary allocations in both the current and future financial years.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

Against the above timeframes and expected milestones there may be inadequate time for Council to formally determine the outcome of the tenders in its normal capacity. This report provides the policy and legal mechanisms necessary for the Chief Executive Officer to award or reject tenders.


Alignment to City Plan

The project is contained within Council’s budget which support the strategic directions in our Community Wellbeing, Growing Our Economy, and Sustainable Built & Natural Environment areas.


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No council officers involved in this project or report have declared a direct or indirect interest in this matter.


Risk Assessment

There will be a risk to Councils reputation and grant funding commitments if this project cannot be completed in time for the 2018 pre-school year.


Social Considerations

Council’s commitment to the construction of the Hendy Street Children’s and Family centre is in response to the recommendations of the Northern Infrastructure Plan.

If Council is unable to complete this projects in a timely manner there is likely to be disruption to early childhood services.


Human Rights Charter

It is not evident or likely that this report would negatively impact any of the rights contained in the Charter of Human Rights.


Consultation and Communication

There are no communication issues or requirements with acceptance of the proposed recommendation.


[Back to List]

18. Tender and Award of: Barwon Heads Main Drainage Outfall, Ozone Road, Barwon Heads

Source:

City Services - Engineering Services

Acting General Manager:

Vicki Shelton

Index Reference:

Barwon Heads - Ozone Road - drainage


Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek Council consent to delegate the power to accept or reject tenders to the Chief Executive Officer for the construction of a main drainage outfall into the Barwon River off Ozone Road, Barwon Heads.


Summary

K Alexander moved, P Dorling seconded -

That Council delegate to the Chief Executive Officer its powers and functions to accept or reject a tender within the allocated budget and sign the contract documents for the construction and associated works for the following project:

  1. C02317 Main Drainage outfall – Ozone Road, Barwon Heads

Carried.


Background

Barwon Heads is problematic in terms of drainage. It is low lying and relatively flat which gives rise to flooding issues within the town. A main drainage study of the town was completed by WBM Oceanics Australia in November 2005 and mitigation options were recommended. Stage 1 of the mitigation solution was the construction of an 825mm diameter storm water main from Bridge Road to Clifford Parade that was completed in 2006. Stage 2 involved the construction of a new 600mm diameter main from Clifford Parade to Flinders Parade in 2011. Stage 3 involved the upgrade of Clifford Parade storm water pumping station to a capacity of 800L/s in 2013/14. Stage four is the current project to upgrade the main drainage outfall into the Barwon River off the intersection of Flinders Parade and Ozone Road.

This outfall has been in the planning and design phase for a number of years. Approving authorities include Council, Barwon Coast Committee of Management (BCCM), Parks Victoria and the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP).

Design of the outfall has been carried out by Civil Engineering Consultant GHD and overseen by Council’s Design Unit. The outfall of the pipe will extend approximately 20 metres into the Barwon River in the deepest part of the channel. The construction method will include a temporary ‘cofferdam’ construction including dewatering.

All approvals are now in place and the project is nearing the tender stage.


Discussion

The Engineering Services department is seeking to expedite the construction for the outfall project, noting that the construction contract for the project is beyond officer delegation. The contract is also in excess of the $2.0Mil delegation authority of the Chief Executive Officer which triggers a report to Council.

The current project timelines will see the tender evaluation process completed by October 2016. The timing for the appointment of a contractor means that it would be beneficial if the Chief Executive Officer can enter into the contracts under delegation. This is because the Council reporting process generally takes between 4 and 6 weeks to complete.

If awarding of this contract is delayed, it could have an adverse impact on project delivery as it could delay the commencement date once the tender evaluation process is complete.


Environmental Implications

The drainage outfall proposed will provide proper drainage for Barwon Heads. Due to the inclusion of a sump and pumping station litter trap in previous stages of construction, storm water runoff is less contaminated with silt and refuse prior to final discharge into the river.

It is anticipated that minimal vegetation removal will be required to complete the project.

During the course of construction and the manufacture and procurement of materials, there is expenditure of energy sources and greenhouse gas emissions. This does cease, however, when construction is complete.

The project does not create waste with the exception of some excess spoil. The proposal does not affect any natural habitats.


Financial Implications

Funding of $2.4 Mil has been allocated in the 2016/17 Financial Year from the C02317 Task 60 cost code. This project is within budget and is a significant storm water outfall construction project that will be a once off Capital Cost with minimal ongoing short to medium term maintenance costs. Long term maintenance (30 plus years) will need some consideration as the pipe outfall is permanently submerged and may require a further ‘cofferdam’ style of construction to replace the outfall valve of the pipe.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

Against the above timeframes and expected milestones there is minimal time for Council to formally determine the outcome of the tenders in its normal capacity.

This report provides the policy and legal mechanisms necessary for the CEO to award or reject tenders.


Alignment to City Plan

This report aligns with the City Plan as follows:

Community Wellbeing:


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No council officers involved in this project or report have declared a direct or indirect interest in this matter.


Risk Assessment

Council has made a commitment to deliver this project by June 2017. There will be a risk to Council’s reputation if this project cannot be completed in time. It is also important to deliver the project within the current financial year to eliminate the problems associated with funding rollovers.

There is some risk to Council from a constructability perspective to allow delegation authority to the Chief Executive Officer. This is due to the specialised construction methods employed by contractors during the outfall construction phase of the project that will require supervision and approval by Council works inspectors.


Social Considerations

The provision of a compliant drainage system is aligned to Council’s City Plan as described above. Nuisance and problematic flooding events in Barwon Heads will be reduced.


Human Rights Charter

In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any adverse human rights issues.


Consultation and Communication

There are no communication issues or requirements with acceptance of the proposed recommendation. Prior to construction commencing, further consultation will be carried out with the approval authorities and the affected residents of Barwon Heads.

Appendix 1 - PLAN

Appendix 1 - PLAN

[Back to List]

19. Tender and Award of: Elcho Channel Main Drainage Infrastructure, Lara

Source:

City Services - Engineering Services

Acting General Manager:

Vicki Shelton

Index Reference:

McManus Road, Heales Road, Lara - Special Rates and Charges


Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek Council consent to delegate the power to accept or reject tenders to the Chief Executive Officer for the construction of main drainage infrastructure at the Geelong Ring Road Employment Precinct (GREP), Lara.


Summary

K Alexander moved, P Dorling seconded -

That Council delegate to the Chief Executive Officer its powers and functions to accept or reject a tender within the allocated budget and sign the contract documents for the construction and associated works for the following project:

  1. C17301 Stage 1 Elcho Channel Special Charge Scheme (SRC 322) Main Drainage Construction.

Carried.


Background

The Elcho Channel main drainage Special Charge Scheme has been under development since 2013 in its current form. The scope of work was confirmed by Council when it resolved to declare the Special Charge Scheme at its meeting of 10 May 2016.

The scheme is designed to allow for full and unencumbered development of 250Ha of industrial land at the GREP. The new drainage infrastructure will allow the industrial land to drain without risk of flooding up to the 1% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) storm event. Once completed, the drainage system will be capable of treating and retarding the storm water runoff from the industrial estate to best practice standards.

Stage 1 of the scheme is in the final design stage and is ready for tender. Stage 2 is planned for the 2017/18 FY and included the remaining components of the scheme.


Discussion

The Engineering Services department is seeking to expedite the construction for the drainage construction project, noting that the construction contract for the project is beyond officer delegation. The contract is also in excess of the $2.0Mil delegation authority of the Chief Executive Officer which triggers a report to Council.

The current project timelines will see the tender evaluation process completed by October 2016. The timing for the appointment of a contractor means that it would be beneficial if the Chief Executive Officer can enter into the contracts under delegation. This is because the Council reporting process generally takes between 4 and 6 weeks to complete.

If awarding of this contract is delayed, it could have an adverse impact on project delivery as it could delay the commencement date once the tender evaluation process is complete.


Environmental Implications

The drainage infrastructure proposed is part of a overarching drainage strategy that will convey and retard storm water run off from the industrial estate and treat it to best practice standards prior to discharge back into the Elcho Channel.

It is anticipated that no vegetation of significance will be required to be removed to complete the project.

During the course of construction and the manufacture and procurement of materials, there is expenditure of energy sources and greenhouse gas emissions. This does cease, however, when construction is complete.

The project does not create waste with the exception of some excess spoil. The proposal does not affect any natural habitats.


Financial Implications

Funding of $4.2 Mil has been allocated in the 2016/17 Financial Year from the C17301 program. This project is within budget and is a standard drainage construction project that will be a once off Capital Cost with minimal ongoing maintenance costs.

As a Special Charge Scheme, $1.45M will be recovered as income from a benefiting property owner. This funding will be fully recovered at the completion of works.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

Against the above timeframes and expected milestones there is minimal time for Council to formally determine the outcome of the tenders in its normal capacity. This report provides the policy and legal mechanisms necessary for the CEO to award or reject tenders.


Alignment to City Plan

This report aligns with the City Plan as follows:

Community Wellbeing:


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No council officers involved in this project or report have declared a direct or indirect interest in this matter.


Risk Assessment

Council has made a commitment to deliver this project by March 2017. There will be a risk to Council’s reputation if this project cannot be completed in time. It is also important to deliver the project within the current financial year to eliminate the problems associated with funding rollovers.

There is minimal risk to Council from a constructability perspective to allow delegation authority to the Chief Executive Officer. This is due to the well rehearsed standard construction methods employed by contractors during the drainage construction phase of the project that will require direct supervision and approval by Council works inspectors.


Social Considerations

The provision of a compliant drainage system is aligned to Council’s City Plan as described above. Opportunities for employment in the region will be enhanced as land is able to be developed and businesses come on line.


Human Rights Charter

In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any adverse human rights issues.


Consultation and Communication

There are no communication issues or requirements with acceptance of the proposed recommendation.


[Back to List]

20. Tender and Award of: Portarlington North East Group of Roads, Portarlington

Source:

City Services - Engineering Services

Acting General Manager:

Vicki Shelton

Index Reference:

Portarlington - Special Rates and Charges


Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek Council consent to delegate the power to accept or reject tenders to the Chief Executive Officer for the construction of roads in the north east area of Portarlington bounded by Hood Road, Mercer Street, The Esplanade and Fisher Street.


Summary

K Alexander moved, P Dorling seconded -

That Council delegate to the Chief Executive Officer its powers and functions to accept or reject a tender within the allocated budget and sign the contract documents for the construction and associated works for the following project:

  1. C17302 Portarlington North East Group (SRC 340) Road Construction

Carried.


Background

The Portarlington Roads North East Group Special Charge Scheme has been a community lead project since 2010. The scope of work was confirmed by Council when it resolved to declare the Special Charge Scheme at its meeting of 27 January 2016.

During the subsequent VCAT referral period, no applications were made and the scheme is now ready for tender.

Discussion

The Engineering Services department is seeking to expedite the construction for the road construction project, noting that the construction contract for the project is beyond officer delegation. The contract is also in excess of the $2.0Mil delegation authority of the Chief Executive Officer which triggers a report to Council.

The current project timelines will see the tender evaluation process completed by September 2016. The timing for the appointment of a contractor means that it would be beneficial if the Chief Executive Officer can enter into the contracts under delegation. This is because the Council reporting process generally takes between 4 and 6 weeks to complete.

If awarding of this contract is delayed, it could have an adverse impact on project delivery as it could delay the commencement date once the tender evaluation process is complete.


Environmental Implications

The road infrastructure proposed, provides proper sealed access and improved drainage. Dust is eliminated and storm water runoff is less contaminated with silt prior to final discharge into the bay.

It is anticipated that no vegetation removal will be required to complete the project.

During the course of construction and the manufacture and procurement of materials, there is expenditure of energy sources and greenhouse gas emissions. This does cease, however, when construction is complete.

The project does not create waste with the exception of some excess spoil. The proposal does not affect any natural habitats.


Financial Implications

Funding of $3.4 Mil has been allocated in the 2016/17 Financial Year from the C17302 program whilst the remainder of funds will come from the core C02301 Street construction program. This project is within budget and is a standard road construction project that will be a once off Capital Cost with minimal ongoing maintenance costs.

As a Special Charge Scheme, it is anticipated that $3.4Mil will be recovered as income from property owners. This funding will be recovered over a 5 year period when the scheme is billed and invoicing commences.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

Against the above timeframes and expected milestones there is minimal time for Council to formally determine the outcome of the tenders in its normal capacity. This report provides the policy and legal mechanisms necessary for the CEO to award or reject tenders.


Alignment to City Plan

This report aligns with the City Plan as follows:

Community Wellbeing:


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No council officers involved in this project or report have declared a direct or indirect interest in this matter.


Risk Assessment

Council has made a commitment to deliver this project by March 2017. There will be a risk to Council’s reputation if this project cannot be completed in time. It is also important to deliver the project within the current financial year to eliminate the problems associated with funding rollovers.

There is minimal risk to Council from a constructability perspective to allow delegation authority to the Chief Executive Officer. This is due to the well rehearsed standard construction methods employed by contractors during the road construction phase of the project that will require direct supervision and approval by Council works inspectors.


Social Considerations

The provision of a properly constructed road network is aligned to Council’s City Plan as described above. Dust and mud is eliminated and a safe means of vehicle access is provided to all.


Human Rights Charter

In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any adverse human rights issues.

It is further considered that the construction of the roads upholds the right to freedom of movement (Section 12 of the Human rights Charter) by enhancing a person’s ability to move freely within the area they choose to live.


Consultation and Communication

There are no communication issues or requirements with acceptance of the proposed recommendation.


[Back to List]

21. Road Renaming - North/South Section Benita Place, Leopold

Source:

Strategy & Performance - Financial Services

Acting General Manager:

William Tieppo

Index Reference:

Financial Management Reporting


Purpose

To seek approval to rename the north/south section of Benita Place, Leopold to “Saxbee Way, Leopold”.


Summary

P Dorling moved, L Gardner seconded -

That Council approve the renaming of the North – South section of Benita Place, Leopold to “Saxbee Way, Leopold”.

Carried.


Background

Council is the responsible authority for naming and renaming roadways under the Local Government Act 1989. To administer this, Council is required to utilise the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010 (the Guidelines).

The section of Benita Place running south of Benita Place and connecting to Stringers Lane is currently disjointed and a no-through roadway.

An incident occurred whereby a resident phoned an ambulance to attend their property in the section of Benita Place accessed off Stringers Lane. However, the ambulance attempted to access the property off the Melaluka Road entrance to Benita Place. Council was informed of the confusion, which has led to this renaming proposal.

As per principle 4(b) of the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010 Version 2 a road name must not be applied in a way that is ambiguous or could cause confusion for road users. The road should be unobstructed leading from point “a” to point “b” in a clear and logical manner. The name should not be applied in a disjointed manner.

Letters have been sent to all adjoining and affected property owners and residents advising them of Council’s intention to rename this section of roadway.


Discussion

It is proposed to rename the north/south section of Benita Place to “Saxbee Way, Leopold” and register the name with the Office of Geographic Place Names.

Due to a subdivision and development occurring, it is Council’s intention to rename the roadway in three stages (as per Appendix A).

The first stage, upon registration of the name “Saxbee Way”, will alter the addressing of properties accessed from Stringers Lane, Leopold. The second stage will be the title release of the subdivision which will remove the disjointed section of roadway. Once the roadway becomes a through road the third stage will be to readdress the properties at 35 & 50 Benita Place to Saxbee Way, Leopold.

The area being subdivided has no set completion date and therefore the disjointed section may cause further confusion for emergency services. Completing the renaming of this section of Benita Place will ensure that all properties are located in a timely manner should any further emergency arise.

The new name was chosen from Council’s ANZAC register, in honour of Sergeant Lilian Saxbee who served with the Australia Army during WWII in the Medical Women’s services area. Lilian was born in Geelong in 1942 and passed away in Melbourne in 1996.

The name “Saxbee” meets the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010 naming criteria. Therefore, it is not necessary to consider any other naming options.

The proposed renaming was advertised in the Independent newspaper on 8 July 2016 and the Geelong Advertiser newspaper on 9 July 2016. No submissions were received on this proposal.

Council has been unable to locate any surviving members of Sergeant Lilian Saxbee’s family.

Council has communicated via letter and survey, with all five adjoining properties and six affected property owners (11 in total). The survey was issued in accordance with the Guidelines for Geographic Names 2010 and requested residents to advise if they agreed or disagreed to the renaming. Two surveys were returned with one in favour and one against due to the costs associated with change of address notification.


Environmental Implications

There are no environmental issues arising from this report.


Financial Implications

The approximate cost to Council is $620.00. This includes advertising, notification to adjoining property owners and residents, 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.


Alignment to City Plan

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


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

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


Risk Assessment

If an emergency situation occurred, Council’s proposal to rename this section of roadway could minimise the risk or failure to be able to access a situation in a timely manner.


Social Considerations

The renaming of this roadway will allow for easier identification for the general 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 the adjoining and affected property owners advising them of the proposed renaming and inviting submissions.

The proposal was advertised in the Independent newspaper on 8 July 2016 and the Geelong Advertiser newspaper on 9 July 2016. There were no submission received from the advertisement on the proposal.

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

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


[Back to List]

22. Thompson Road, North Geelong - Proposed Footpath Construction - SRC 350 - Intention to Declare

Source:

City Services - Engineering Services

Acting General Manager:

Vicki Shelton

Index Reference:

Special Rates and Charge; Thompson Road North Geelong


Purpose

This report seeks a resolution by Council to consider an intention to declare a Special Charge Scheme to partially fund the construction of a footpath along Thompson Road between Morgan Street and Cowies Creek, North Geelong (See plan – Appendix 4).


Summary

L Gardner moved, P Dorling seconded -

That Council:

Gives notice of its intention to declare a Special Charge Scheme in accordance with Section 163 (1A) of the Local Government Act 1989 (The Act), as follows:

  1. The Special Charge is declared for a period of five (5) years commencing upon completion of the works and scheme finalisation.

  2. The Special Charge be declared for the purpose of defraying any expenses incurred by Council in relation to the construction of the footpath on Thompson Road, North Geelong between Morgan Street and Cowies Creek. Council considers the project:

    1. Will provide proper pedestrian access, improved pedestrian safety and enhancement to the general amenity for each of the properties included in the scheme;

    2. Will provide a special benefit to those persons required to pay the special charge (and who are described in succeeding parts of this Resolution); and

    3. Arises out of Council’s function of planning for and providing infrastructure for property owners.

  3. The total cost of project, be recorded as $287,799(Schedule A).

  4. It be recorded that, for the purposes of Section 163 (2A) of the Act, the special charge proceeds will not exceed the amount calculated in accordance with the prescribed formula (R x C = S), the:

    1. ‘benefit ratio’ (R) being calculated at 0.32 represents the special benefits to all persons liable to pay the special charge (Schedule B);

    2. ‘total cost’ (C) of performing the function described in part 1 (b) of this resolution based on estimated cost be recorded as $198,395; and

    3. ‘Maximum levy’ (S) be recorded as $64,295.

  5. the following be specified as the area for which the special rate is so declared:

    1. The area within municipal district of Council highlighted in the plan attached to this Resolution (Appendix 4).

  6. the following be specified as the land in relation to which the special charge so declared:

    1. Land within the area shown on the plan.

  7. the following be specified as the criteria which form the basis of the special charge so declared:

    1. Ownership of any land described in Part 1(e) of this Resolution.

  8. the following be specified as the manner in which the special charge so declared will be assessed and levied:

    1. Each lot receives a primary access and amenity benefit;

    2. The maximum levy is divided on a access and frontage share basis;

    3. The special charge will be levied by sending a notice to the person who is liable to pay, pursuant to section 163(4) of the Act.

  9. having regard to the preceding parts of this Resolution but subject to Section 166 (1) of the Act, it be recorded that;

    1. the owners of the land described in column 2 and 3 of Schedule C to the resolution are estimated liable for the respective amounts set out in column 7 of Schedule C; and

    2. such owners may, subject to any further resolution of Council pay the special charge in the following manner;

      1. the charge will become due and payable within one month of the issue of the notice requesting payment pursuant to Section 167 (3) of the Act;

      2. interest will not be charged for six months after the issue of the notice provided the person liable makes timely payment in accordance with any repayment arrangements that may be agreed on by Council; and

      3. in accordance with Section 172 of the Act, the interest rate payable on the special charge which has not been paid by the specific date is set at Council’s overdraft rate, reviewed every three months (provided that it shall not exceed the rate fixed by the Governor in Council by Order for the purposes of Section 172 (2A) in which case the rate of interest shall be the maximum rate fixed by the Governor in Council by Order for the purposes of this section).

  1. Consider any submissions made under Section 223 of the Act and the proposed declaration via Council’s Submissions Review Panel, and then by Council at a subsequent meeting, at which time Council will consider to make declaration in the form proposed.

  2. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to give public notice of the proposed declaration in accordance with sections 163 (1A) and (1B) of the Act and send a copy of the public notice to each person who is liable to pay the special charge in accordance with Section 163 (1C) of the Act.

Carried.


Background

Council’s footpath network strategy identifies the footpath construction priorities of which the Thompson Road, North Geelong is listed as a high priority for construction. It is considered that the proposed new footpath will provide the missing pedestrian link between Morgan Street and Cowies Creek Reserve and become a valuable community asset.

The footpath will provide a pedestrian link to the Recreation reserves. It will also satisfy the requirement of the Planning Scheme for footpath provision on both sides of the road for roads with traffic volumes in excess of 1000 vehicle per day.

Council Officers have developed a detailed Special Charge Scheme proposal including a cost estimate, Benefit Ratio calculation and cost apportionment spreadsheet. The estimated charges, along with more detailed information on the scheme, were shown to all potentially affected property owners who were asked to respond to the proposal via survey.

The survey results had fifteen (15) property owners respond representing a 43% response rate with four (4) in favour, ten (10) opposed and one (1) non committal to the scheme proposal. Of those opposing the scheme, concerns raised included:


Discussion

This project involves the proposed construction of 478 metres total length of 1.5 metre wide footpath. It is expected to be a safety improvement for pedestrian movements along a moderately trafficked road (approx 6000 vehicles per day) and fulfil part of the footpath priority obligations for Council.

The section of Thompson Road, North Geelong between Morgan Street and Cowies Creek is relatively flat and the footpath construction should not pose any difficulty for the selected contractor.

Cost apportionment for the scheme has been divided into access and amenity benefits. 50% of the total benefit has been apportioned to access. It is considered that all abutting properties with direct frontages to the proposed new footpath, regardless of size and shape, receive the same access benefit. An exception to this rule is the corner property (407-411 Thompson Road) with more than double the frontage of neighbouring properties where an increase of the access benefit has been applied.

The access benefit includes the provision of an all weather sealed surface that reduces the risk of accidents caused by uneven and slippery surfaces. In simple terms, a new footpath improves accessibility for all abutting properties.

The remaining 50% of benefit is attributed to amenity and this can best be described as the benefit the pathway provides to an abutting property by way of improved aesthetics, safety, enjoyment, comfort and property value. The amenity benefit is based on the actual footpath frontage to a property when existing driveways and footpath extents are taken into consideration.


Environmental Implications

The provision of a sealed pathway surface provides a permanent and safe means of access. During the course of construction and the manufacture and procurement of materials, energy is expended resulting in some greenhouse gas emissions. This ceases when construction is complete.

The project does not create waste with the exception of some excavated material.

The proposal does not affect any natural habitats.

The proposal will require some nature strip trees and shrubs to be trimmed but removal of vegetation is not expected.


Financial Implications

The project is a one off capital cost and there will be minimal ongoing maintenance costs. If approved, the scheme could proceed this financial year under the core footpath program C02303.

Financial details are as follows:

Maximum scheme levy to Property Owners (income)

$64,295

Scheme levy to Council

$134,100

Direct Funding by Council to reinstate existing footpath and driveways, new kerb and channel for a kerb return modification at Rodney Road, asphalt pavement reinstatement and reinforced concrete retaining wall and footing

$89,404

Total Project Cost

$287,799


From the table above, the net cost to Council for this project is estimated to be $223,504.


Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications

The scheme has been prepared in accordance with the Special Rate and Charge provisions of the Local Government Act 1989 along with the 2004 ministerial guidelines and Council’s Special Rates and Charges Policy.


Alignment to City Plan

This report aligns with the City Plan as follows:

Sustainably Built and Natural Environment


Officer Direct or Indirect Interest

No Council Officer involved with this process has any direct or indirect interest in the properties.


Risk Assessment

Provision of a sealed pathway will provide safer walking conditions for pedestrians by minimising the risk of personal injuries through conflict with vehicles and the elimination of uneven and slippery surfaces.

There are no identified risks for Council in making its intention to declare the scheme.


Social Considerations

The provision of properly sealed and drained pathways is aligned to Council’s City Plan as described above and provides improved connectivity and safety for pedestrians. It is further considered that the footpaths will enhance the general amenity of the area.


Human Rights Charter

In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any adverse human rights issues.

It is further considered that the construction of the footpaths upholds the right to freedom of movement (Section 12 of the Human rights Charter) by enhancing a person’s ability to move freely within the area they choose to live.


Consultation and Communication

Informal consultation was carried out in March 2015 with an information pack to affected property owners that included an initiation letter, a plan showing the location of works, a Special Rates and Charge Scheme brochure, a detailed cost apportionment spreadsheet and informal survey form.

Further correspondence to the affected property owners will be sent should Council make its intention to declare a Special Charge Scheme.


Appendix 1

SCHEDULE ‘A’

The works for the construction of footpaths in Thompson Road, North Geelong which consist of excavation, footpath, reinstatement of nature strip and driveways, miscellaneous construction works, legal advice and professional services associated with survey, engineering design, drafting, supervision and administration of the project all as included in the cost estimate shown below.

COST ESTIMATE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FOOTPATH – THOMPSON ROAD, NORTH GEELONG

ESTIMATED TOTAL COST OF FOOTPATH CONSTRUCTION

ITEM

DESCRIPTION

QUANTITY

UNIT

RATE $

AMOUNT $

1.00

GENERAL

 

 

 

 

1.01

Initial site establishment and set up, decamping and site cleanup and other fixed costs up to time of completion of works.

1

ITEM

$17,711.00

$17,711.00

1.02

Traffic management costs.

1

ITEM

$6,000.00

$6,000.00

1.03

Setting out of works.

1

ITEM

$700.00

$700.00

1.04

Service/Cable locations

1

ITEM

$800.00

$800.00

1.05

Internal supervision fee (COGG construction)

1

ITEM

$8,359.00

$8,359.00

2.00

EARTHWORKS & DEMOLITION

 

 

 

 

2.01

Excavation and disposal of all materials to limits of work as indicated on plan, including trimming for new road pavement, excavation of soft spots and removal of concrete.

268

m3

$60.00

$16,080.00

2.02

Saw-cutting of Asphalt paving.

64

m

$10.00

$640.00

2.03

Saw-cut of concrete kerb and channel

6

m

$10.00

$60.00

3.00

PAVEMENT WORKS

 

 

 

 

3.01

75mm compacted depth Class 3 40mm crushed rock, supplied, spread and compacted.

34

m3

$100.00

$3,400.00

3.02

150mm compacted depth Class 2 20mm crushed rock, supplied, spread and compacted.

27

m3

$120.00

$3,240.00

4.00

DRAINAGE

 

 

 

 

 

PITS

 

 

 

 

4.01

Modify existing Junction pit to match finished surface level and supply and fit Gatic type cover.

3

No.

$770.00

$2,310.00

5.00

CONCRETE WORKS KERBINB:

 

 

 

 

5.01

Concrete pram crossing 1.5m wide, including fine crushed rock bedding.

2

No.

$250.00

$500.00

 

CONCRETE WORK PAVING:

 

 

 

 

5.02

125mm (25 Mpa) concrete paving with SL72 mesh including crushed rock bedding and reinstate nature strip.

457

m2

$135.00

$61,695.00

5.03

175mm (32 Mpa) concrete paving with SL82 mesh including crushed rock bedding and reinstate nature strip.

182

m2

$140.00

$25,480.00

6.00

LANDSCAPING

 

 

 

 

6.01

Top soiling and seeding nature strips.

638

m2

$8.00

$5,104.00

7.00

SIGNING, LINE-MARKING AND FENCING

 

 

 

 

7.01

Relocation of permanent signs and posts as per plan.

1

No

$250.00

$250.00

8.00

PROVISIONAL ITEMS

 

 

 

 

8.01

Adjust level of existing telstra pit, electricity pit, sewer services lid and water services cover and replaced as needed.

1

ITEM

$13,000.00

$13,000.00

SUB-TOTAL

$165,329

10% Contingency

$16,533

Design

$9,920

Project administration

$6,613

CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE

$198,395



COUNCIL FUNDED WORKS

ITEM

DESCRIPTION

QUANTITY

UNIT

RATE $

AMOUNT $

1.00

GENERAL

 

 

 

 

1.01

Initial site establishment and set up, decamping and site cleanup and other fixed costs up to time of completion of works.

1

ITEM

$7,985.00

$7,985.00

1.02

Traffic management costs.

1

ITEM

$2,000.00

$2,000.00

2.00

EARTHWORKS & DEMOLITION

 

 

 

 

2.01

Excavation and disposal of all materials to limits of work as indicated on plan, including trimming for new road pavement, excavation of soft spots and removal of concrete.

118

m3

$60.00

$7,080.00

2.02

Saw-cutting of Asphalt paving.

124

m

$10.00

$1,240.00

2.03

Saw-cut of concrete paving

37

m

$10.00

$370.00

2.04

Saw-cut of concrete kerb and channel

27

m

$10.00

$270.00

3.00

PAVEMENT WORKS

 

 

 

 

3.01

150mm compacted depth Class 2 20mm crushed rock, supplied, spread and compacted.

33

m3

$120.00

$3,960.00

3.02

150mm compacted depth Class 3 40mm crushed rock, supplied, spread and compacted.

16

m3

$100.00

$1,600.00

3.03

30mm compacted depth 10mm nominal size type N Asphalt spread and compacted including emulsion prime & grit using a paver.

140

m2

$35.00

$4,900.00

4.00

DRAINAGE PITS

 

 

 

 

4.01

Modify existing Side Entry pit to Bike safe Grated Junction pit to match new finished surface level, supply and fit Grated cover.

1

No.

$800.00

$800.00

4.02

1set - of 2 pcs New Standard Weepa (weep holes) with 90mm Extension Dimension of weep holes 75W x 20H x 195D spaced @ 1.0m on center

83

No.

$6.00

$498.00

4.03

20mm aggregate backfill for drainage zone 250mm x 450mm (or 250mm) enveloped with geo-textile as per plan.

7.3

m3

$110.00

$803.00

5.00

CONCRETE WORKS KERBING: `

 

 

 

 

5.01

Remove existing concrete kerb and construct modified SM2 Semi-mountable kerb and channel 600mm wide as per plan and reinstate nature strip.

25

m

$156.00

$3,900.00

5.02

Concrete pram crossing 1.5m wide, including fine crushed rock bedding.

2

No.

$250.00

$500.00

 

CONCRETE WORKS PAVING:

 

 

 

 

5.03

175mm (32 Mpa) concrete paving with SL82 mesh including crushed rock bedding and reinstate nature strip.

129

m2

$140.00

$18,060.00

5.04

Reinforced Concrete Retaining Wall and Footing with SL72 mesh including 75mm compacted depth Class 3 FCR bedding and reinstate nature strip as per plan.

85

m

$165.00 $14,025.00

 

6.00

SIGNING, LINE-MARKING AND FENCING

 

 

 

 

6.01

Relocation of permanent signs and posts as per plan.

1

No

$250.00

$250.00

7.00

PROVISIONAL ITEMS

 

 

 

 

7.01

Adjust level of existing telstra pit, electricity pit, sewer services lid and water services cover and replaced as needed.

1

ITEM

$2,000.00

$2,000.00

SUB-TOTAL

$74,503

10% Contingency

$7,450

Design

$4,470

Project administration

$2,980

CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE

$89,404



Appendix 2

Benefit Ratio – Schedule ‘B’

A

Purpose

To construct a footpath in Thompson Road, North Geelong to provide all weather pedestrian access for property owners and the wider community. The project also includes kerb return modification works to improve vehicular and pedestrian safety

B

Coherence

The works will provide a physical pathway connection between Morgan Street and Recreation Reserve and will provide a special benefit to adjoining and remote properties.

C

Total Estimated cost of works

Direct funding by Council to reinstate existing footpath and driveways, new kerb and channel for kerb return modification at Rodney Road, asphalt pavement reinstatement and reinforced concrete retaining wall and footing.

$287,799

$89,404

 

Total Cost of Footpath Construction

$198,395

D

Identify Special Beneficiaries

35 properties with frontages to the proposed footpath are considered to receive access and amenity benefits.

E

Properties to include

The 35 abutting properties receive both access and amenity benefits. Therefore:

Total Special Benefits (in) is apportioned to 35 properties

There is one (1) Council owned property in the scheme. Therefore:

Total Special Benefits out of the scheme is apportioned to one property.

F

Estimate of Total Special Benefits

For this scheme, benefit will be apportioned on the basis of access and amenity by way of a Benefit Unit (BU). We shall assume that the makeup of the BU for each property comprises 1/2 BU of amenity and 1/2 BU for access benefits. The Council owned property shares the same access and amenity benefit as the private properties. A summary of the special benefits is shown in table form below:

 

 

35 Private Properties TSB (in)

1 Council Property TSB
(out)

 

TSB (in)

35 BU

 

 

Access

17.5 BU

0.5 BU

 

 

 

 

 

Amenity

17.5 BU

0.5 BU

 

 

 

 

 

Total Special Benefits

35 BU

1.0 BU

 

TSB (out)

1 BU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

G

Estimate of Total Community Benefit -TCB

It is considered that people in the community will receive a benefit from the works as the pathway is used to access other areas. Estimated pedestrian use of the footpath is 20% for the abutting property owners and 80% for the wider community. There are no amenity benefits considered for the wider community. If 20% of access benefit represents a total of 18 BU, 80% will represent 72BU.

 

 

 

 

 

TCB

72 BU

 

H

Calculate "Benefit Ratio" - R

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Benefits Ratio =

TSB (in)

=

35

0.32

 

 

TSB (in) + TSB (out) + TCB

 

35 + 1 + 72

 

I

Maximum Total Levy (S)

 

Maximum Total Levy S = R X C

 

 

 

 

 

$64,295

 

Council Contribution to Special Charge Scheme

 

 

 

 

 

$134,100



Appendix 3

SCHEDULE ‘C’
SPECIAL CHARGE SCHEME FOR FOOTPATH CONSTRUCTION - THOMPSON ROAD, NORTH GEELONG

COLUMN 1

COLUMN 2

COLUMN 3

COLUMN 4

COLUMN 5

COLUMN 6

COLUMN 7

Prop Key

Address

Legal Details

Apportionable frontage
(m)

Access Benefit

Amenity Benefit

Footpath Cost

280171

380 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

Lot 4 RP 15195

9.21

$518.50

$728.82

$1,247.33

280172

382 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

Lot 3 RP 15195

9.21

$518.50

$728.82

$1,247.33

280173

384 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

Lot 2 RP 15195

7.39

$518.50

$584.72

$1,103.23

280174

384A Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

Lot 1 RP 15195

9.21

$518.50

$728.82

$1,247.33

348297

386 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

Lot 14 LP 93927

15.24

$1,037.01

$1,205.97

$2,242.98

298770

388 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

1/2 Share of CP 155275

0.00

$1,037.01

$0.00

$1,037.01

280177

390 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

1/2 Share of CP 155275

0.00

$518.50

$0.00

$518.50

280178

394 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

Lot 1 LP 117090

1.73

$518.50

$136.90

$655.40

280179

396 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

Lot 2 LP 117090

8.28

$1,037.01

$655.21

$1,692.22

280180

398 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

Lot 3 LP 117090

1.20

$1,037.01

$94.96

$1,131.97

280181

400 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

Lot 8 LP 93927

15.24

$1,037.01

$1,205.97

$2,242.98

280182

402A Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

1/3 Share of Lot 18 LP 114984

3.02

$1,037.01

$238.98

$1,275.99

319642

402B Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

Lot 26 LP 114984, 1/3 Share of Lot 18 LP 114984

3.02

$1,037.01

$238.98

$1,275.99

319643

402C Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

1/3 Share of Lot 18 LP 114984

3.02

$1,037.01

$238.98

$1,275.99

280183

404-406 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

Lot 6 LP 93927, Lot 5 LP 93927

1.05

$1,037.01

$83.09

$1,120.10

280184

408-410 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

Lot 4 LP 93927, Lot 3 LP 93927

16.60

$1,037.01

$1,313.59

$2,350.60

280185

412 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

Lot 2 LP 93927

0.64

$1,037.01

$50.64

$1,087.65

280186

414 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

Lot 3 PS 503554

6.42

$1,037.01

$508.03

$1,545.04

280187

416 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

1/2 Share of Lot 4 PS 503554

4.58

$1,037.01

$362.03

$1,399.04

280188

418 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

1/2 Share of Lot 4 PS 503554

4.58

$1,037.01

$362.03

$1,399.04

280189

420 Thompson Road, NORTH GEELONG

Lot 2 PS 503554

16.2;

$1,037.01

$1,287.47

$2,324.48

280236

PARENT - 371 Thompson Road, BELL PARK

Lot 1 TP 164072 Ppsd Lots 1& 2 PS 641441

0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

344759

371 Thompson Road, BELL PARK

Pt Lot 1 TP 164072 Ppsd Lot 2 PS 641441

58.54

$518.50

$4,632.38

$5,150.88

280237

373-375 Thompson Road, BELL PARK

Lot 1 LP 145062

15.03

$1,037.01

$1,189.35

$2,226.36

301812

377 Thompson Road, BELL PARK

1/3 Share of Lot 2 LP 210814

12.70

$1,037.01

$1,004.97

$2,041.98

301813

1/379 Thompson Road, BELL PARK

1/3 Share of Lot 2 LP 210814

6.35

$1,037.01

$502.49

$1,539.50

311847

2/379 Thompson Road, BELL PARK

1/2 Share of Lot 2 LP 210814

6.35

$1,037.01

$502.49

$1,539.50

280239

1/381-383 Thompson Road, BELL PARK

1/6 Share of Lot 2 PS 641531

5.00

$1,037.01

$395.66

$1,432.67

280240

2/381-383 Thompson Road, BELL PARK

1/6 Share of Lot 2 PS 641531

5.00

$1,037.01

$395.66

$1,432.67

280241

3/381-383 Thompson Road, BELL PARK

1/6 Share of Lot 2 PS 641531

5.00

$1,037.01

$395.66

$1,432.67

280242

4/381-383 Thompson Road, BELL PARK

1/6 Share of Lot 2 PS 641531

5.00

$1,037.01

$395.66

$1,432.67

280243

5/381-383 Thompson Road, BELL PARK

1/6 Share of Lot 2 PS 641531

5.00

$1,037.01

$395.66

$1,432.67

280244

6/381-383 Thompson Road, BELL PARK

1/6 Share of Lot 2 PS 641531

5.00

$1,037.01

$395.66

$1,432.67

280245

385-387 Thompson Road, BELL PARK

Lot 5 LP 208936

24.03

$1,037.01

$1,901.54

$2,938.55

278564

1 Kelly Court, BELL PARK

Lot 6 LP 210814

45.77

$518.50

$3,621.86

$4,140.37

28024

7 407-411 Thompson Road, BELL PARK

Lot 4 LP 208205

71.58

$1,037.01

$5,664.26

$6,701.27



Appendix 4 - Plan

Appendix 4 - Plan

Attachment 1

PROCESS CHART

SPECIAL CHARGE PROJECTS –
(Section 163 – Local Government Act 1989)

THOMPSON ROAD, NORTH GEELONG

Stage

Status

Description

Approval to prepare scheme

Decision made to prepare scheme following consideration of surveys of residents and feed back from the community via informal survey. Council may then place the project in the budget system or proceed immediately to prepare a scheme. Scheme preparation involves survey, design and preparation of an apportionment of costs.

Intention to Declare Scheme

Report to Council providing information on scheme including advice of impending advertising of scheme and declaration of charge. Seeks Council approval by resolution to proceed with process.

Advertisement

 

The scheme is advertised in the local newspaper and all allotted property owners are notified by mail. This advertisement indicates Council’s intention and notification to ‘declare’ a scheme in a month’s time.

Submissions

 

From the time of advertising property owners have 28 days (as set down by the Local Government Act) to lodge submissions, either in support or opposition to the scheme.

Submissions Review

 

Panel Hearing A Submissions Review Panel is convened (quorum of three Councillors) and meets to consider submissions. Some submissions are written only, and other submitters may wish to be heard before the Panel. The Panel makes a recommendation to Council regarding the scheme.

Declaration Report

 

Any time 28 days after advertising the scheme and after the Submissions Review Panel has met and considered submissions, Council considers a report and may proceed to “declare” the charges in accordance with its advertised intent.

Subsequent to this the Finance Manager issues the levy notices and there is a formal charge placed on the property.

This is the final step in the process for Council to make a decision on the scheme.

Appeal

 

Property owners may lodge an application for review with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) within one month of issue of the levy notice. An appeal is listed, heard and determined by the Tribunal and this process generally takes three to four months. Decisions made by VCAT are binding on all parties.

Construction

 

Council may then proceed to construct the works. Invoices are issued seeking payment of the estimated cost within one month of commencement.

Final Cost Report

 

At the completion of the works the scheme is “finalised” taking into account actual costs incurred and payments are adjusted accordingly.



[Back to List]

Contents | Previous Page: Section A - Procedural Matters | Next Page: Section C - Assembly of Councillors