Banyule City Council 11 May 2015 Ordinary Meeting Agenda

Ordinary Meeting of Council

Council Chambers, Service Centre

275 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe

11 May 2015 commencing at 7.45 pm

Following the public forum commencing at approximately 7.30pm and may be extended to 8pm if necessary.

AGENDA

The Mayor’s Acknowledgement of the Wurundjeri People “Our Meeting is being held on the traditional lands (country) of the Wurundjeri people and I wish to acknowledge them as the traditional owners and pay my respects to their Elders.”

Apologies and Leave of Absence Nil Confirmation of Minutes Ordinary Meeting of Council held 27 April 2015 Disclosure of Interests Nil

1. Petitions

Nil

REPORTS:

2. People – Community Strengthening and Support

Nil

3. Planet – Environmental Sustainability

Nil

4. Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.1 Laane Avenue, Rosanna - Traffic Investigation ....................................................... 3

AGENDA (Cont’d)

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 11 May 2015 Page 2

4.2 Public Exhibition of Amendment C101 - Introducing Schedule 2 to the Special Building Overlay ................................................................................... 7

4.3 Warren Road, Viewbank – Proposed Children's Crossing ..................................... 13

4.4 Amendment to a permit for a new carport at 2/1 Della Torre Crescent, Ivanhoe (P352/2013) ............................................................................ 16

4.5 Planning Permit Application for an additional 15 Electronic Gaming Machines and associated buidlings and works at Montmorency Eltham RSL (P1143/2014) .................................................................................... 22

5. Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.1 Rate Capping Submission - Essential Services Commission Consultation Paper ............................................................................................... 39

5.2 Multicultural Advisory Committee - Vacancy of the position of committee chair .................................................................................................... 45

6. Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.1 Operating and Capital Financial Management Report for the Period Ended 31 March 2015 ............................................................................... 47

6.2 Assembly of Councillors ........................................................................................ 58

6.3 Items for Noting .................................................................................................... 60

7. Sealing of Documents

Nil

8. Notices of Motion

8.1 Memorial and Commemorative Plaques Policy ..................................................... 63

9. General Business

10. Urgent Business

Closure of Meeting to the Public That in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989, Council close the Meeting to members of the public and adjourn for five minutes to allow the public to leave the Chamber prior to considering the following confidential matter

11. Confidential Matters

11.1 Contractual matters.

Matters Discussed in Camera That all confidential matters and reports related to the above items remain confidential unless otherwise specified.

Closure of Meeting

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment


4.1 LAANE AVENUE, ROSANNA - TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION

Author: Walter Yew - Transport Engineer, City Development

Ward: Ibbott

File: F2015/57

Previous Items Council on 20 October 2014 (Item 4.2 - Laane Avenue, Rosanna - Traffic

Investigation)

Council on 21 July 2014 (Item 1.1 - Laane Avenue, Rosanna - Request for Traffic Management)

Council on 7 July 2014 (Item 1.2 - Laane Avenue, Rosanna - Request for Traffic Management)

Council on 29 July 2013 (Item 2.1 - Laane Avenue and Coorie Crescent, Rosanna - Traffic Investigation)

Council on 3 June 2013 (Item 1.1 - Laane Avenue and Coorie Crescent, Rosanna - Traffic Investigation)

Council on 4 June 2012 (Item 1.1 - Laane Avenue and Coorie Crescent, Rosanna - Traffic Investigation)

Council on 2 July 2012 (Item 2.1 - Laane Avenue and Coorie Crescent, Rosanna - Traffic Concerns)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A petition was presented to Council in July 2012 requesting Council consider a right turn ban to prevent traffic travelling northbound along Rosanna Road turning into Laane Avenue, or the permanent closure of Laane Avenue at Rosanna Road. A further petition was submitted in June 2013 requesting Council investigate the possibility of installing a physical device to permanently prohibit right turns into Laane Avenue from Rosanna Road. , At the 20 October 2014 meeting, Council considered a report in relation to traffic conditions at the intersections of Rosanna Road/Banyule Road and Rosanna Road/ Laane Avenue, Rosanna. Council resolved that VicRoads be requested to review the signal phasing at the Rosanna Road/Banyule Road intersection to consider increasing the time and opportunity for vehicles to turn right from Rosanna Road into Banyule Road. VicRoads conducted an investigation to determine the traffic signal phasing efficiency to meet the right turn demand. The data collected indicates that vehicles turning right into Banyule Road were given ample opportunity to make the right turn within one signal phase. The investigation also identified that some motorists ignore the “No Right Turn” signs and make an illegal turn into Laane Avenue during the restricted times.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1. Note that the Rosanna Road/Banyule Road, Rosanna traffic signals provide

adequate opportunity for vehicles turning right from Rosanna Road into

4.1


LAANE AVENUE, ROSANNA - TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION cont’d


Banyule Road. 2. Notify Victoria Police of the illegal right turning movements occurring in the

afternoon peak times in Laane Avenue from Rosanna Road, and request more frequent enforcement.

3. Advise the primary petitioner of this resolution.

OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act) requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter.

CITY PLAN

This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “maintain and improve Banyule as a great place to live”.

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 human rights issues.

BACKGROUND

Residents of Laane Avenue and Coorie Crescent presented a petition in June 2012 requesting Council consider a right turn ban to prevent traffic travelling northbound along Rosanna Road turning into Laane Avenue, or the permanent closure of Laane Avenue at Rosanna Road. At its meeting on 4 July 2012, Council resolved to install a right turn ban (4pm to 6 pm Monday to Friday). The time restricted right turn ban has been in operation since 17 September 2012. Figure 1 shows the location of the right turn ban.

4.1




Figure 1: Banyule Road and Laane Avenue, Rosanna

In June 2013, residents of Laane Avenue and Coorie Crescent presented an additional petition requesting Council investigate the possibility of installing a physical device to permanently prohibit right turns into Laane Avenue from Rosanna Road. At its meeting on 29 July 2013, Council considered a report on measures to reduce the amount of rat-running through Laane Avenue and resolved to extend the operating times of the right turn ban to 6:30pm. The report also considered traffic management options, and it was noted that the traffic speed and vehicle volumes were consistent with most Council’s local roads. No traffic management treatments in Laane Avenue were considered warranted at that time. At its meeting on 20 October 2014, Council considered a further report based on an independent traffic assessment into the traffic conditions at Laane Avenue. The report suggested that the existing phasing of the traffic lights at the intersection of Rosanna Road and Banyule Road could be optimised to increase provision for right turning traffic at this intersection, thus reducing the need for vehicles to turn right from Rosanna Road into Laane Avenue. Council resolved to: “Write to VicRoads requesting a review of the signal phasing at Banyule Road and Rosanna Road with the view of providing addition ‘green time’ to vehicles entering / exiting Banyule Road from Rosanna Road during the PM peak (3pm onwards).” Council formally requested VicRoads to review the signal phasing in November 2014. DISCUSSION Officers from VicRoads and Council conducted an investigation in March 2015 including traffic counts at the intersections of Rosanna Road with Banyule Road, and Laane Avenue. The data shown in Table 1 indicate the amount of times that the right green arrow was activated, and the number of vehicles that turned right into Banyule Road and Laane Avenue.

4.1




. .Table 1: Banyule Road and Laane Avenue, Rosanna - Movement Counts

It was observed that all vehicles waiting to turn right from Rosanna Road into Banyule Road were able to perform the turn at the first right turn green arrow. Consequently, VicRoads has advised that a review of the signal phasing is not required (Attachment 1). Regardless of the existing phasing at the intersection of Rosanna Road and Banyule Road, an average of eight drivers per hour chose to turn right into Laane Avenue at the times when the right turn is banned. On average, 36 vehicles per hour travel through Laane Avenue between 4:00pm and 6:00pm (based on traffic speed and volume counts conducted on 25 June 2013). It is considered that the increase of traffic volumes due to the observed illegal right turns into Laane Avenue has a negligible effect on the capacity of this road. It is proposed that Victoria Police be requested to increase the enforcement of the right turn ban at the intersection of Rosanna Road and Laane Avenue.

CONCLUSION

VicRoads has reviewed the right turn signal phasing for the northbound Rosanna Road traffic, at the intersection of Rosanna Road and Banyule Road, Rosanna. On-site observations and counts confirm that the existing traffic signal phasing and timing is appropriate as no delays or queues were evident for vehicles turning right into Banyule Road at the Rosanna Road / Banyule Road signal controlled intersection during peak traffic times. As there is a small percentage of motorists ignoring the ‘No Right Turn’ signs and making an illegal turn into Laane Avenue during the restricted times, Victoria Police will be requested to enforce the right turn ban.

ATTACHMENTS

No. Title Page

1 Response from VicRoads to Council request to review the signal phasing at the intersection of Rosanna Road and Banyule Road in Rosanna

66

Date Time (PM) Number of Right

Turn green arrow phases

Vehicles turning right into

Banyule Road

Vehicles turning right into

Laane Avenue

25/03/2015

3:00 to 4:00 33 114 27

4:00 to 5:00 38 118 9

5:00 to 6:00 40 198 9

TOTAL 111 430 45

26/03/2015

3:00 to 4:00 37 114 31

4:00 to 5:00 40 167 5

TOTAL 77 281 36

4.2



4.2 PUBLIC EXHIBITION OF AMENDMENT C101 - INTRODUCING SCHEDULE 2 TO THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY

Author: David Cox - Strategic Planning Co-ordinator, City Development

File: F2014/3971

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council’s C101 proposal is introducing a new Special Building Overlay, Schedule 2 (SBO2), with stormwater overland flow maps, into the Banyule Planning Scheme. The SBO2 will guide future development in local drainage areas, to respond to mapped stormwater risks. Public exhibition of Amendment C101 ended on 2 April 2015. About 100 submissions were received, and more than 20 gave support. Submissions were about: (1) consultation & information; (2) property value; (3) property insurance; (4) SBO2 mapping; (5) infrastructure capacity; (6) infrastructure maintenance; (7) SBO2 Schedule content, and (8) future development. Following public exhibition, Council can ask the Minister for Planning to appoint a Planning Panel to consider unresolved submissions that relate to the proposal. Once the Panel’s report is released, Council will receive a further report to consider if the amendment should be adopted, and whether any changes to the proposal are warranted. The Minister for Planning will then be asked to approve C101, so it can be gazetted and included in the Banyule Planning Scheme.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1. Notes that public exhibition of Amendment C101 is now complete and no

further submissions will be considered.

2. Write to all submitters, informing of Council’s consideration of submissions and how concerns may be resolved.

3. Write to the Minster for Planning, after all submitters have been contacted,

requesting the appointment of a Planning Panel, and refer unresolved submissions to a Planning Panel in accordance with s23(1)(b) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.



4.2


PUBLIC EXHIBITION OF AMENDMENT C101 - INTRODUCING SCHEDULE 2 TO THE SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY cont’d


CITY PLAN


BACKGROUND

The Banyule Flood Management Plan was adopted by Council on 27 August 2012. This Plan was prepared with Melbourne Water and includes actions to reduce stormwater risks across the City. These included priorities for doing stormwater modelling and mapping studies, to inform changes to the Banyule Planning Scheme, for a Special Building Overlay (SBO) in local drainage areas. Regional drainage modelling and mapping was previously done by Melbourne Water and included in the planning scheme. The purpose of a local drainage SBO is to identify land in urban areas where local stormwater overland flows can occur during extreme storms. Through the planning permit approval process, the SBO will require that Council officers assess new development proposals so development outcomes maintain the passage and storage of stormwater, minimise stormwater damage and help prevent significant rises in flow levels or velocity. Council appointed expert drainage consultants to do the local area stormwater modelling and mapping work. This resulted in the preparation of 1 in 100 year overland flow path maps. This work was then reported to Council on 17 February 2014, when Council resolved to prepare a local drainage SBO proposal and consult with affected residents before public exhibition of an Amendment to the planning scheme. Council’s consultants then started work to prepare the local drainage SBO maps (SBO2). The methodology to create these SBO2 maps used the 100 year overland flow path maps as a starting point. Parameters were then applied to define the main part of these 100 year flow paths, where an SBO2 would apply. The methodology was described in a technical report titled Development of the Special Building Overlay. Melbourne Water, the Catchment Management Authority and Floodplain Management Authority, were consulted through this process. Three community information workshops were held on 27 November, 2 and 3 December 2014. Land owners and occupiers affected by the SBO2 received a letter, inviting them to attend one of the sessions. Over 250 people attended. Discussions and available material helped inform people about the work done. This included the initial mapping for the SBO2. Arising from this consultation, Council received telephone and counter enquiries, letters and emails. This consultation helped inform some refinements to the initial SBO2 maps. On 1 December 2014 Council resolved to request the Minister for Planning’s authorisation, so Council could then prepare Planning Scheme Amendment C101. This proposal is for Schedule 2 to the Special Building Overlay (SBO2) for the Banyule Planning Scheme. Following authorisation, Council was able to publically exhibit C101.

4.2




EXHIBITION OF AMENDMENT C101

Amendment C101 was formally exhibited from Thursday 26 February 2015 to Thursday 2 April 2015. Public notice was given by:

Letters to all landowners and occupiers included in the proposed SBO (approximately 4,100).

Letters to prescribed ministers, as per the Planning and Environment Act.

Letters to relevant Government Authorities, including Melbourne Water.

Letters to neighbouring municipalities.

Advertising in local Leader newspapers and the Government Gazette.

Information on Council’s website and at Council’s Service Centres.

During public exhibition, more than 220 phone call and email enquiries were received. Several people also visited Council’s Service Centres and asked questions. More than 100 written submissions were received, of which 23 gave support. A summary of submissions is in Attachment 1. Issues raised by submitters can be broadly described under eight themes. 1 Consultation and Information: Some submitters wanted more information about the proposal, to clarify how it was prepared and its effect on their land. 2 Property Value: Some submitters thought the proposal would affect property value. Some included advice from real estate agents, whilst others requested a reduction in Council rates. 3 Property Insurance: Some submitters raised concerns for their property’s insurance, suggesting that insurance costs would increase. 4 SBO2 Mapping: Some submitters queried the mapping, including the methodology used by Council’s expert drainage consultant. Some said that they had never experienced severe storms, whilst others indicated that the SBO2 maps were different from what had been experienced. Several submitters, who had experienced severe storms, supported the SBO2. 5 Infrastructure Capacity: Some submitters raised concerns about the need to upgrade drainage infrastructure. Others were concerned that past development had increased stormwater runoff, whilst some believed their local infrastructure was adequate and the SBO2 was not needed. 6 Infrastructure Maintenance: Council’s maintenance of existing local drainage infrastructure was queried by some submitters. These submitters expressed concern that local drains were infrequently cleaned. Some submissions included photographic evidence of drains near their land, to illustrate how storm debris affects local drainage infrastructure. 7 SBO2 Schedule Content: Some submitters proposed changes to the wording of Schedule 2 to the SBO, particularly for exemptions where a planning permit would not be required. 8 Future Development: Some submitters indicated that future development would be more restrictive as a consequence of the SBO2. This included concern for

4.2




additional time and costs for planning permits. Others said that they were not

planning to develop their land or wanted to see less development in their local area.

DISCUSSION

Initial consideration of submissions is shown in Attachment 2. Many of the themes raised by submitters have been previously considered by Planning Panels for similar proposals, by other Councils and Melbourne Water. In consultation with Melbourne Water and following a review of Panel decisions for similar proposals, it appears that concerns for Property Value and Property Insurance are not determining factors for applying an SBO in the planning scheme. Submissions prompting improvements to drainage Infrastructure Capacity or querying Council’s drainage Infrastructure Maintenance approach are matters for Council to consider in its role as the local drainage authority. For:

Infrastructure Capacity: Council’s progress on stormwater mapping has been the priority. Arising from this work, Council is now better positioned to start considering priority places for future drainage works. In addition to Council’s 2015/16 capital works program, master planning for local drainage catchments may be done. This planning would involve catchment analysis that informs a long-term program for drainage works for prioritised places. The scope and timing of any future master planning for catchments would be considered separately from Council’s current priority to complete C101.

Infrastructure Maintenance: Council’s maintenance approach is to provide timely responses to customer requests. This initiates action for Council officers to visit reported locations and do maintenance cleansing. This process can be initiated by contacting Council’s Customer Service team.

Submissions about Consultation and Information for the C101 proposal, concerns for the SBO2 Mapping, the effectiveness of the SBO2 Schedule Content, and SBO implications for Future Development are all relevant to the C101 proposal. To address concerns for:

Consultation and Information: Council’s submission for the future Planning Panel will highlight the consultation done and information provided, for public exhibition. The submission will also indicate that the November and December 2014 sessions helped to share information and raise awareness to the SBO2 proposal.

SBO2 Mapping: Council’s submission for the future Planning Panel will also be informed by an Expert Witness, and acknowledge Melbourne Water’s involvement. Prior to the hearing, submissions that queried the SBO mapping will be referred to the Expert Witness, so a mapping review can be done. The outcome of this mapping review will then be given in an Expert Witness Statement for the future Planning Panel.

SBO2 Schedule Content: Council’s submission for the future Planning Panel will consider suggestions for revising the overlay’s schedule.

Future Development: Council’s submission for the future Planning Panel will describe Council’s approach for considering planning permit proposals to illustrate that the permit approval process is an effective mechanism to enable well-designed development in SBO2 affected areas.

4.2




Correspondence has been sent to submitters, to acknowledge their submission and advise that C101’s progress would be considered at this Council meeting. Submitters were also informed that Council may decide to forward unresolved submissions to a Planning Panel.

NEXT STEPS

Now that public exhibition for C101 is complete, it is recommended that Council write to the Minister for Planning and request the appointment of a Planning Panel to consider unresolved submissions.

Before initiating the Panel process, submitters will receive correspondence about Council’s resolution and the next stage for Amendment C101. This correspondence will advise submitters of Council’s general response to the key themes. Doing this will help submitters consider their future participation in the C101 Amendment process. For example, residents may wish to have matters resolved through direct customer requests to Council where concerns relate to maintenance cleaning of drains, as opposed to making a submission to the Panel Hearing.

Prior to the Public Exhibition of C101 Council was required by Ministerial Direction No. 15 to pre-set a Directions Hearing and a Panel Hearing with Planning Panels Victoria. The Directions Hearing, which sets the agenda for the Panel Hearing, is currently scheduled to happen during the week of 22 June 2015. The Panel Hearing is currently scheduled to happen during the week of 20 July 2015. Planning Panels Victoria would contact submitters directly for final dates and their participation.

A few weeks after the Panel Hearing, the Panel would provide a report to Council for Council’s subsequent consideration. Council would then receive a further report on this matter, to consider the merits of adopting C101 and to request the Minister for Planning’s final approval so an SBO2 can be included in the Banyule Planning Scheme.

CONCLUSION

Amendment C101 is the culmination of over three years of work, arising from Council’s 2012 Banyule Flood Management Plan. Council’s expert drainage consultant has analysed the local stormwater conditions and appropriate parameters have been used to prepare the C101 SBO2 maps. Using these maps in the Banyule Planning Scheme will significantly improve Council’s ability to enable safer development in areas affected by extreme stormwater flows. Appropriate consultation has been done, before and during public exhibition of Amendment C101. This is evidenced by receipt of over 100 submissions. Many of the issues raised by submitters are relevant to Council’s activities as the local drainage authority. By progressing the C101 proposal, to achieve a final outcome for the Banyule Planning Scheme, Council is better positioned to consider future drainage works across the municipality. Priorities and timing of these works would be based on future catchment analysis that will be subject to separate reporting to Council. After writing to submitters, to respond to the key themes raised and give an update on the C101 process, Council can then pursue the Minister for Planning’s appointment of a Planning Panel to consider unresolved submissions.

4.2




ATTACHMENTS

No. Title Page

1 Summary of Submissions to C101 68

2 Proposed responses to Key Themes contained in submissions 71

4.3



4.3 WARREN ROAD, VIEWBANK – PROPOSED CHILDREN'S CROSSING

Author: Ana Caicedo - Traffic & Transport Team Leader, City Development

Ward: Hawdon

File: 2015/141

Previous Items Council on 17 November 2014 (Item 4.2 - School Crossing Superviser Program

Update)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A request has been received from Viewbank College to install a children’s crossing on Warren Road, Viewbank, owing to an increase of traffic and pedestrian volumes as a consequence of a growth in the number of enrolled students.. Subsequent investigations, including a traffic speed and volume survey, have confirmed that the construction of a crossing and appointment of a supervisor is warranted. The installation cost for a raised crossing on Warren Road is estimated at $35,000 and the provision of a permanent school crossing supervisor is estimated to cost approximately $10,000 per year. It is being recommended that Council allocates additional funds within future budgets to build the crossing and allocate a supervisor.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1. Consider allocating $35,000 within future Capital Works budgets for the design

and construction of a raised children’s crossing on Warren Road, Viewbank;

2. Following the installation of a children’s crossing on Warren Road: a. Fund the provision of a school crossing supervisor; b. Include the school crossing in future funding submissions for the

VicRoads’ School Crossing Supervisor Subsidy Scheme; and

3. Write to Viewbank College advising them of Council’s decision.



CITY PLAN

This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “support sustainable transport”.

4.3


WARREN ROAD, VIEWBANK – PROPOSED CHILDREN'S CROSSING cont’d




BACKGROUND

In early 2015 as part of its Capital Works Program, Council installed two children’s crossing in the vicinity of Viewbank College, on Banyule Road and Graham Road, Viewbank. Figure 1 shows the location of the recently installed and proposed children’s crossings.

Figure 1: Children’s Crossings Serving Viewbank College In February 2015, a letter was received from Viewbank College (Attachment 1) requesting an urgent review for funding for a supervised children’s crossing in Warren Road, Viewbank. The main concerns raised relate to an increase of traffic and pedestrian volumes as a consequence of a growth in the number of enrolled students.

DISCUSSION

The results of a traffic speed and volume survey carried out in March 2015 indicate a peak of approximately 190 vehicles per hour travel along Warren Road coinciding with the school’s start and end hours, and the speed at which most vehicles (85th percentile) travel through this road at these times is about 33 km/h.

4.3


WARREN ROAD, VIEWBANK – PROPOSED CHILDREN'S CROSSING cont’d


In order to determine the potential usage of an additional crossing to serve Viewbank College, pedestrian and traffic counts were carried out during peak times. Table 1 shows the results of these counts. The number of pedestrians and vehicles confirm that the proposed crossing meets the warrants for a supervised crossing to serve a secondary school. Table 1: Pedestrian and Vehicle Counts – Warren Road, west of Robern Parade

Date Time Pedestrians Vehicles Pedestrians x Vehicles

23-Mar-15 3:30-4:30 PM 241 123 29,643

22-Apr-15 8:00-9:00 AM 173 396 68,508

WARRANTS 20 250 25,000

The installation of a children’s crossing, and subsequent appointment of a crossing supervisor is recommended.

FUNDING IMPLICATIONS

The design and construction cost of a raised children’s crossing for Warren Road is estimated at $35,000, and the provision of a permanent school crossing supervisor is estimated to cost approximately $10,000 per year, with VicRoads’ subsidy covering around 27% of the costs and the remaining 73% being borne by Council, based on the 2014/15 Subsidy Scheme structure. Council’s 2015/16 draft Budget includes upgrades to two existing children’s crossings in Cape Street, Heidelberg and Weidlich Road, Eltham North. The combined cost of these projects is $65,000. It is recommended that Council allocate $35,000 in future budgets to construct a raised children’s crossing in Warren Road, Viewbank.

CONCLUSION

Viewbank College requested Council consider the installation of a supervised children’s crossing in Warren Road, Viewbank. Pedestrian and traffic counts confirm that the site meets the warrants for the installation of a supervised children’s crossing. The installation cost for a raised crossing on Warren Road is estimated at $35,000. It is recommended that Council allocates additional funds within future budgets to build the crossing and allocate a supervisor.

ATTACHMENTS

No. Title Page

1 Letter from Viewbank College 73

4.4



4.4 AMENDMENT TO A PERMIT FOR A NEW CARPORT AT 2/1 DELLA TORRE CRESCENT, IVANHOE (P352/2013)

Author: Christopher Mullan - Development Planner, City Development

File: P352/2013

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The applicant has lodged an amendment to an existing permit to retain a double width shade sail carport and associated modified driveway, a bin storage area next to the carport, and other hard surfaces. The carport, and the associated widened driveway and footpaths is not supported as it is inconsistent with the preferred landscaping and car parking objectives within Council’s Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy, and vehicle crossing requirements. This report recommends an outcome that is considered to be appropriate. However, the recommendation is different to what has been requested by the applicant.

RECOMMENDATION

PART A: That Council, having complied with Section 50 to 62 and 72 to 76 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 issue a Notice of Decision to amend Planning Permit P352/2013 including the following changes:

Conditions 1 (a), (b) and (c) be retained on the permit to result in a single width carport and driveway, to reinstate the nature strip, and to align the fencing with the single width driveway.

Condition 1 (d) be removed to maintain the location of the bin storage area next to the carport.

PART B That the land owner be advised that the double width shade sail carport is to be removed in accordance with Planning Permit P352/2013, and the associated nature strip and landscaping areas are to be reinstated within 60 days of the date of this amended permit.

Planning Permit Application: P352/2013

Development Planner: Mr Christopher Mullan

Address: 2/1 Della Torre Crescent, IVANHOE

Proposal: Amendment to remove Conditions 1 (a), (b), (c) and (d) of the original permit to maintain the existing conditions regarding the double width shade sail carport structure, bin storage area, fencing, footpaths, and concrete area

4.4


AMENDMENT TO A PERMIT FOR A NEW CARPORT AT 2/1 DELLA TORRE CRESCENT, IVANHOE (P352/2013) cont’d


within the nature strip that were constructed without planning approval.

Existing Use/Development: Single dwelling

Applicant: Mrs Leanne Winch

Zoning: Neighbourhood Residential Zone – Schedule 3

Overlays: Environmental Significance Overlay – Schedule 1

Vegetation Protection Overlay – Schedule 3

Notification (Advertising): The application was advertised in accordance with Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 by way of distribution of letters to adjoining and nearby land owners and occupiers.

Objections Received: Two plus one letter of support that contains two parties

Ward: Griffin

Council has received a request to amend the permit pursuant to Section 72 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987) to legitimise an unlawfully constructed double carport and associated works. The applicant has applied to undertake the following changes to the planning permit and endorsed plans as reflected in amended plans received by Council on 21 October 2014: Amendment to the permit requested

1. Condition 1 (a) to be removed. This condition states “The double car parking space to revert back to being a single car parking space of the same width as the existing vehicular crossover to the street, and the overhead shade sail structure reduced in size so that it covers this single car space only. The portion of the site currently occupied by the additional car parking space to revert back to a landscaped zone, containing planting to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority”.

2. Condition 1 (b) to be removed. This condition states “The entrance to the single car parking space and the 1.5 metre high front fence to properly align with the existing single crossover”.

3. Condition 1 (c) to be removed. This condition states “All concrete hard surfacing located outside the property boundary to be removed and the nature strip reinstated to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority”.

4. Condition 1 (d) to be removed. This condition states “The rubbish bin storage area located adjacent to the car parking area and the front fence to be removed, and landscaping reinstated to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority”.


Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates.

4.4




Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter.

BACKGROUND/HISTORY

The subject site forms part of a multi-unit development that was constructed in 1980. The development was subsequently subdivided into separate lots in 1981. A planning investigation for the subject site commenced on 14 February 2013 with regards to the unlawfully erected double carport and associated works without a planning permit. This investigation was closed off on 14 April 2013 as a result of Planning Permit Application No. P352/2013 being lodged to retrospectively legitimise the unlawful works which more specifically are described as a constructed double width shade sail carport, modified vehicle access, and associated hard paving. It also appears that around that the time a Weeping Bottle Brush (Callistemon viminalis) street tree that was located in proximity to the west of the crossover to the subject site was removed. Council’s GIS system indicates that the tree was removed between November 2012 and January 2014. A portion of the nature strip where the street tree was located was also concreted within this time to create a wider vehicle access without the relevant approval from Council Asset Protection Department. Planning Permit P352/2013 was initially issued on 2 January 2014 but rather than allowing the unlawful works to remain as constructed, the permit ultimately issued allowed for development of the land for buildings and works comprising the demolition of the existing carport, the construction of a fence and erection of a shade sail. As such, the permit was issued to allow for a single width shade sail carport, reinstated landscaping areas, and a reinstated nature strip and it was therefore expected that the land owner would subsequently undertake the necessary rectification works. Rather than complying with the conditions of permit P352/2013, the land owner is now endeavouring to once again legitimise the unlawful works by formally requesting the amendment to delete conditions of the permit which form part of the current application.

Locality Plan

Figure 1: Locality plan

N

4.4




SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

The subject site is located on the south-eastern corner of Della Torre Crescent and Kenilworth Parade. This site is occupied by a double storey brick veneer dwelling with a tiled roof, and is part of a multi-unit development which was constructed in the early 1980s, and shares party walls with other dwellings within the development. The dwelling is setback approximately 6.8 metres from the front boundary, with a car parking space located in front of the dwelling and accessed via Kenilworth Parade.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

The application was advertised pursuant to section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987) because it was deemed that the application could cause material detriment to third parties. The application was advertised by mail to adjoining and surrounding property owners and occupiers. A total of two objections have been received. Grounds of objection are summarised as follows:

The course of action to appeal against conditions was clearly stated on the Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit. However, the applicant failed to exercise this option.

Twelve months have elapsed since the decision was made and is now attempting to remove conditions in their entirety through an amendment process. The amendment process was not intended to be a conduit to either reverse or cancel all other conditions.

The footprint of the shade sail carport is more than double the footprint of the original carport.

The structure does not blend in with the surrounds and would be detrimental the neighbourhood character.

The structure was erected without planning permission. It cannot be certain that the steel posts have been installed in accordance with the BCA.

The double width shade sail carport results in two vehicles now using the single width accessway from Kenilworth Parade.

There is an increased hazard for entering and exiting the property. The Council has moved the “no standing” signs about 6 metres further east from the corner on Kenilworth Parade because of the danger of accidents.

The bin enclosure is obtrusive and is a detriment to the ongoing ambience of the property as a whole.

The on-going non-compliance and on-going process is having an emotional impact.

Amenity impacts of the structure on the neighbouring property.

The proposed 1.52 metre high timber fencing is inconsistent with previous correspondence regarding the fence which stated the brick pillars were to be erected.

REFERRAL COMMENTS

The application was referred to Council’s Construction, Engineering, and Parks and Gardens Departments. The following concerns were raised:

The widening of the crossover would not be supported as it does not meet Council’s specifications where the crossover must be a minimum of 9 metres from the intersection of the lot boundaries.

4.4




The concreted portion to widen the crossover has not been approved by Council.

Council does not have any records of the removal of the Weeping Bottlebrush street tree.

PLANNING CONTROLS

The proposed amendments should be considered in context of the current planning controls applying to the land. This relates primarily to the Neighbourhood Residential Zone (Schedule 3) and the Environmental Significance Overlay (Schedule 3), for which approval was originally required under. As the subject site is located within the Neighbourhood Residential Zone, the proposal was also considered having regard to the objectives and design responses of the Garden Suburban Precinct 3 within Clause 22.02 Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy and Clause 54 ‘ResCode’. It is also noted that there have been no substantial changes to the controls that affect the site or relevant policies.

TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION

The double width carport structure is considered to be of greater visual dominance on the streetscape than the previously approved single width carport due to its proximity to the property boundary, and the additional width in built form and hard paving. The structure is considered to be contrary to the neighbourhood character objective of minimising the visual dominance of car parking facilities. The added presentation of built form to the street is also considered contrary to the vegetated presentation objectives of Schedule 1 to the Environmental Significance Overlay. The portion of the nature strip that has been concreted without Council’s consent (which is necessary to facilitate vehicle movements from the second car parking space requested) results in reversing turning movements within the nature strip that are considered to be unsafe. This is due to sight lines, turning movements close to the intersection, and the potential for vehicle access over the kerb. A double width crossover is considered to be contrary to Council’s Residential Vehicle Crossing Policy due to the length of this frontage (14.267 metres), the resulting impacts on landscaping opportunities along this streetscape, and the proximity to the Della Torre Crescent-Kenilworth Parade “T” intersection, a double width crossover for this property would be contrary to the objectives and decision criteria of Council’s Residential Vehicle Crossing Policy. As mentioned within the Engineering and Construction referral comments, a widened crossover would not be supported as it is located less than 9 metres from the intersection. The extent of hard paving throughout the northern setback is increased by approximately 37 square metres due to the carport, bin storage and footpaths. The minimal amount of permeable space is contrary to the preferred vegetated streetscape and the landscaping objectives within Council’s Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy and Schedule 1 to the Environmental Significance Overlay. The loss of a street tree to accommodate the concrete portion of the nature without any replacement street trees is also considered to be detrimental to the preferred landscaped character of the area.

4.4




CONCLUSION

The double width car parking area and vehicle crossing width to facilitate vehicle moments is not in accordance with State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks and the planning controls relevant to the land and the application. The removal of Condition 1 (d) is however considered appropriate. As such, it is considered that the conditions that have been requested to be removed should be retained so that permission is given for a single width car space and shade sail. The retained conditions will also require the nature strip next to the driveway to be reinstated and additional permeable space be provided for landscaping.

ATTACHMENTS

No. Title Page

1 Advertised documents 74

2 Advertised plans 93

3 Technical consideration 97

4.5



4.5 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION FOR AN ADDITIONAL 15 ELECTRONIC GAMING MACHINES AND ASSOCIATED BUIDLINGS AND WORKS AT MONTMORENCY ELTHAM RSL (P1143/2014)

Author: Chris McInnes - Development Planner, City Development

Ward: Hawdon

File: P1143/2014

Previous Items Council on 10 November 2014 (Item 2.1 - Montmorency-Eltham RSL Electronic

Gaming Machine increase proposal: Council response to the Victorian Commission for Gaming and Liquor Regulation (VCGLR))

Council on 6 May 2013 (Item 5.1 - Montmorency-Eltham RSL - Electronic Gaming Machines)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A Planning Permit application has been lodged to allow the placement of an additional 15 Electronic Gaming Machines to the Montmorency-Eltham RSL, associated buildings and works to create space for these additional machines, as well as new office and administration areas and other internal reconfiguration and renovation works. The increase in floor area also necessitated that this application is also for a the provision of car parking to the satisfaction of Council, with additional two car parking spaces are proposed to be provided following reconfiguration of three existing parallel car parking spaces opposite the premises. Council has been made aware of the applicant’s intention to apply for an increase in the number of permitted Electronic Gaming Machines on the site since 2013, and the lodgement of this planning application follows approval for this increase from the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation (VCGLR) on 23 December 2014. As Council owns the land upon which the premises are located, any variation to the number of Electronic Gaming Machines permitted on the premises would also require a variation to the lease. Issues requiring consideration include the appropriateness of placing additional Electronic Gaming Machines at the premises, the impact of the proposed buildings and works, and any parking and traffic issues that could arise as a result of the proposal. Approval is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

PART A

That Council having complied with Section 52, 58, 60, 61 and 62 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, resolves that a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit be issued in respect of Application No. P1143/2014 for the development of the land for the construction of a ground and upper

4.5


PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION FOR AN ADDITIONAL 15 ELECTRONIC GAMING MACHINES AND ASSOCIATED BUIDLINGS AND WORKS AT MONTMORENCY ELTHAM RSL (P1143/2014) cont’d


floor extension to an existing restricted place of assembly, extension of an existing licensed liquor area, installation and use of an additional fifteen (15) electronic gaming machines and provision of car parking to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority pursuant to Clauses 36.02, 52.06, 52.27 and 52.28 of the Banyule Planning Scheme at 12-24 Mountain View Road MONTMORENCY subject to the following conditions:

Plans 1. Before the use and development permitted by this permit starts, amended

plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the advertised plans submitted with the application but modified to show:

(a) Landscaping as required by Condition 2 of this permit;

(b) Landscape and tree zones to be clearly marked with hatching, colour coding or similar and distinguished from useable open space areas;

(c) A plan notation indicating that no building works or facilities are to be provided within the dedicated landscape areas;

(d) Engineering plans showing a properly prepared design with computations for the internal drainage and method for of disposal of stormwater from all roofed areas and sealed areas to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority; and

(e) All sustainable design features indicated in the submitted Sustainable Design Assessment (SDA). Where sustainable design features outlined in the SDA cannot be visually shown, include a notes table providing details of the requirements (i.e. energy and water efficiency ratings for heating/cooling systems and plumbing fittings and fixtures, etc).

2. The development permitted by this permit must not be commenced until a satisfactory detailed landscaping plan is submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. Such plan must be prepared by a person suitably qualified or experienced in landscape design and shall include:

(a) The identification of existing vegetation (which is not intended to be removed), and nomination of vegetation for removal throughout the site;

(b) Provision of formed garden beds with edging around the landscape zone within the front setback to prevent cars parking within those areas

(c) A plan notation indicating that no building works or facilities are to be provided within the dedicated landscape areas;

(d) An indigenous and/or drought tolerant planting theme;

(e) A schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground cover, which includes the location and size at maturity of all plants, the botanical names of such plants and the location of all areas to be covered by grass, lawn or other surface material as specified;

(f) Location and details of paving, steps, retaining walls, water tanks,

4.5




clotheslines, fence design details and other landscape works including cut and fill.

General 3. The development as shown on the endorsed plans or described in the

endorsed documents must not be altered or modified except with the written consent of the Responsible Authority

4. The use or development permitted by this permit must not, in the opinion of the Responsible Authority, adversely affect the amenity of the locality by reason of the processes carried on; the transportation of materials, goods or commodities to or from the subject land; the appearance of any buildings, works or materials; the emission of noise, artificial light, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, vapour, steam, soot, ash, dust, waste water, waste products, grit, or oil; the presence of vermin, or otherwise.

5. Noise emissions from any equipment required for refrigeration, air-conditioning,

heating, ventilation and the like must comply with State environment Protection Policy (Control of Noise from Commerce, Industry and Trade) No N-1 and/or Environment Protection (Residential Noise) Regulations 1997 and/or Environmental Protection Authority Noise Control Guidelines TG 302/92, whichever is deemed to be appropriate by the Responsible Authority.

Urban Design / External Appearance 6. All external materials, finishes and paint colours are to be to the satisfaction of

the Responsible Authority. Tree Protection / Landscaping 7. Except with the further written consent of the Responsible Authority, no

vegetation (other than that indicated on the endorsed plan, or exempt from planning permission under the provisions of the Banyule Planning Scheme) shall be damaged, removed, destroyed or lopped.

Time Limits 8. In accordance with section 68 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, this

permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:

(a) The development is not commenced within two years of the date of this permit;

(b) The development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit.

In accordance with section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing:

(a) Before the permit expires, or

(b) Within six months afterwards, or

4.5




(c) Within 12 months afterwards if the development started lawfully before the permit expired.

Permit Notes (A) Expiry of Permit In the event that this permit expires or the subject land is proposed to be used

or developed for purposes different from those for which this permit is granted, there is no guarantee that a new permit will be granted. If a permit is granted then the permit conditions may vary from those included on this permit having regard to changes that might occur to circumstances, planning scheme provisions or policy.

(B) Building Permit Required Building Permit must be obtained prior to the commencement of any works

associated with the proposed development.

(C) Building over Easements No structure shall be built over any easement on the subject land except with

the consent of the relevant Responsible Authority.

(D) Memorandum of Consent for Works Council’s Construction Department must supervise all works undertaken on

Council assets within private property, Council Reserves, easements, drainage reserves and/or road reserves, including connection of the internal drainage system to the existing Council assets. Prior to the commencement of any works, an application must be made and a permit received for:

A “Memorandum of Consent for Works” for any works within the road reserve; and/or

A “Drainage Connection Permit” for any works other than within a road reserve.

Asset Inspection Fee (E) Prior to the commencement of building works on site in accordance with Local

Law 1, a non-refundable Asset Inspection Fee is payable to Council for the inspection of existing Council assets. For further information in relation to this process and the relevant fee please contact Council’s Construction Department on 9490 4222; and

PART B That Council agrees ‘in principle’ to an amendment to the lease for the Council owned land occupied by the Montmorency-Eltham RSL to allow for an increase in Electronic Gaming Machines to fifty (50).

4.5




Planning Permit Application: P1143/2014

Development Planner: Chris McInnes

Address: 12-24 Mountain View Road MONTMORENCY

Proposal: Development of the land for the construction of a ground and upper floor extension to an existing restricted place of assembly, extension of an existing licensed liquor area, installation and use of an additional fifteen (15) electronic gaming machines and provision of car parking to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority pursuant to Clauses 36.02, 52.06, 52.27 and 52.28 of the Banyule Planning Scheme

Existing Use/Development: Restricted place of assembly

Applicant: NBA Group Pty Ltd

Zoning: Public Park and Recreation Zone (PPRZ)

Overlays: Design and Development Overlay, Schedule 8 (DDO8)

Environmental Significance Overlay, Schedule 4 (ESO4)

Vegetation Protection Overlay, Schedule 1 (VPO1)

Notification (Advertising): Public notification of the proposal carried out by way of:

The mailing of notices to adjoining property owners and occupiers;

The placement of notice boards at all entrances to the site as well as at the entrance to the premises for a 3 weeks period; and

The placement of a public notice in the Diamond Valley Leader on 11 March 2015.

Objections Received: Four (4) objections received

Ward: Hawdon

4.5




PROPOSAL

It is proposed to install an additional Electronic Gaming Machines (EGM’s) into an existing gaming area within the Montmorency-Eltham RSL, which is located within the ground of Petrie Park on Mountain View Road, Montmorency. The building is located on land leased to the RSL by Council. There are currently 35 EGM’s on the premises, with this application proposing the installation of an additional 15 machines, bringing the total number of EGM’s up to 50.

In order to create space for the additional EGM’s it is also proposed to extend the existing building on both the ground and upper level, however the outward components of the extension works would be minor and would encroach only into existing garden areas in the vicinity of the north-west corner of the building. A new 77 square metre upper level balcony area is proposed, which would face north east into Petrie Park, extending from above the entrance to the ground floor to the north-west corner of the building. The external works will result in an overall floor area expansion of 67.5 square metres. Internal works will comprise of a new internal staircase, relocated office and administrative areas, the expanded gaming area, as well as other minor internal reconfiguration and renovation works. These works in turn mean that it is necessary to extend the licensed liquor and gaming areas, otherwise known as the red line and green line areas.

It is also proposed to provide five new formed 45° parking bays opposite the premises by reconfiguring the existing informal parallel parking bays opposite the entrance to the building on the other side of the main driveway into Petrie Park. The reconfiguration would involve the installation of a new retaining wall and result in a loss of park area of approximately 38 square metres on a sloping section of the park. These new parking spaces would be available to all park users, and not just to patrons of the RSL. Despite the creation of these new parking spaces, the increase in usable floor area as part of this proposal still requires Council to consider car parking requirements pursuant to Clause 52.06 of the Banyule Planning Scheme.



CITY PLAN


BACKGROUND/HISTORY

The building was originally constructed by the former Montmorency RSL Sub-Branch Inc. in the 1960’s and has been renovated and extended on a number of occasions since that time. The building has a floor area of approximately 445 square metres in total, which includes a gaming area, bistro, offices, kitchen and amenities.

4.5




Montmorency-Eltham RSL is an approved gaming venue with a total of 35 machines within the restricted gaming area. A Full Club Liquor Licence is in place. During the past few years, a number of smaller RSL clubs in Victoria have been experiencing financial hardship, resulting in some closures and mergers. The former Eltham RSL, which was located in the neighbouring municipality of Nillumbilk, closed in 2010, resulting in a majority of the members transferring to Montmorency, along with a number of associated sporting clubs, and the re-naming of the Montmorency club to reflect this change. The Heidelberg RSL closed in January 2013, and this club had previously operated 25 EGMs. In March 2013 the Montmorency-Eltham RSL committee agreed to secure the entitlements for 15 of these machines, subject to the approval sought from the VCGLR and Council. The RSL building is located on Council-owned land. A ground lease has been in place for many years, firstly with the former Shire of Eltham and with Council. A new ten year lease was signed between Council and the Montmorency-Eltham RSL in 2014. Any changes to the number of EGMs being operated by the Club will require a variation to the lease agreement to be made. Council has been aware of the RSL’s intentions to increase the number of EGMs and undertake renovation works since mid-2013. Several meetings have occurred where Council advised the RSL that Council required a Social Economic Impact Assessment was required to understand the specifics of their plans, and thus make an informed decision regarding whether their proposals provide a net community benefit. On 6 May 2013 Council considered a report and resolved as follows:

Council advise the Montmorency-Eltham RSL that the proposal for increased gaming machines will be considered having regard to the Council policy and the detailed submissions prepared by the RSL and any community feedback before a final Council position is reached.

As a planning permit is also required for both the renovations and the increase in EGMs, the RSL was advised to conduct a Social and Economic Impact Assessment and lodge a planning permit application to enable the detailed assessment of their application to occur together with community consultation. However, rather than lodging the planning application for their renovation and the Social Economic Impact Assessment to Council, the Montmorency-Eltham RSL instead lodged an application to the VCGLR, which triggered a very short timeframe in which Council had to respond. As a result, on 11 November 2014 Council resolved to endorse a submission to the Victorian Commission for Gaming and Liquor raising initial concern with the additional gaming machines and also resolving as follows:

“1. Note the continuing nature of the planning permit application for the renovation and EGM increase and that this process will be used to clarify and confirm Council’s position regarding the proposed renovation and EGM increase; and 2. Further note the continuing nature of the Master Plan being developed for Petrie Park and Rattray Reserve.”

4.5




The written submission was subsequently submitted to the VCGLR, and Council Officers attended the subsequent hearing on 2 December 2014. A decision was handed down by the VCGLR on 23 December 2014 that the application be granted.

SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

The Montmorency-Eltham RSL operates from a building centrally located on the Council-owned land known as Petrie Park, located at 12-28 Mountain View Road Montmorency, and identified on the locality plan in Figure 1 below. In addition to the Club, there are a number of other buildings and uses contained within the Park including a Community Hall, Scout Hall, Pidgeon Club, Bowls Club, playground equipment and a sporting oval. There are 146 car spaces within the park, of which 133 (91%) are unrestricted.

Figure 1 – Locality Plan showing the location of the Montmorency-Eltham RSL building

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRw&url=http://vscmaps.wr.usgs.gov/yellowstone/default.aspx&ei=aG5ZVP-hBoKdmwWCp4GICA&bvm=bv.78677474,d.dGY&psig=AFQjCNECvzI6pjThSUM2s5hHTrgatPrHbA&ust=1415233501704256

4.5




PLANNING CONTROLS

The planning controls applicable to the site are outlined in Table 1 below: Table 1: Applicable Planning Controls

Control Clause Permit Triggered

Public Park and Recreation Zone 36.02 Yes

Environmental Significance Overlay – Schedule 4 42.01 No

Vegetation Protection Overlay – Schedule 1 42.02 No

Design and Development Overlay – Schedule 8 43.02 No

Car Parking 52.06 Yes

Licensed Premises 52.27 Yes

Gaming 52.28 Yes

POLICIES CONSIDERED

Relevant policies considered in the assessment of this proposal are outlined in Table 2 below: Table 2: Relevant Planning Scheme Policy

Policy Clause

State Policy Planning Framework

Settlement 11

Built Environment and Heritage (including sub clauses) 15

Economic Development 17

Transport 18

Infrastructure 19

Local Planning Policy Framework

Land Use 21.04

Built Environment 21.06

Safer Design Policy 22.03

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

The proposal was advertised by way of direct notices to surrounding properties and more widely within the locality by way of a public notice published in the Diamond Valley Leader on 11 March 2015. A total of four 4 signs were also placed on the site with one sign at each recognised entrance to Petrie Park, and one additional sign outside the entrance to the RSL club between 10 March 2014 and 1 April 2014. As a result of the notification process, two objections have been received. Grounds of objection include:

Concern the proposal would cause an increase in the amount of waste generated and exacerbate existing amenity issues related to the odour of decomposing food waste emanating from the rubbish bins;

Intoxicated persons leaving Petrie Park and then loitering in surrounding streets, causing damage to public and private property and making excessive noise;

4.5




Possible increase in the demand for on-street parking along Mountain View Road, which would have a detrimental impact of local residents;

Concern that additional car parking spaces will result in a loss of available public open space; and

Additional EGM’s may exuberate issues surrounding problem gambling, as well as result in lost income for local businesses.

CONSULTATION

A public ‘drop-in’ style information session was held on the RSL premises on the evening of 24 March 2014 so as to allow for local residents to discuss the proposal with the permit applicant and Council Officers. The Ward Councillor was also in attendance at this session. This session was attended by one member of the public, seeking further information and viewing the plans. A consultation meeting was held between the two objectors to the application, representatives from the RSL and Council Officers on 21 April 2015, where objectors were given an opportunity to discuss their concerns.

REFERRAL COMMENTS

Council’s Engineering Services section has reviewed the proposed development and is satisfied that it would result in an acceptable outcome from both a traffic and car parking perspective. Council’s Leisure and Culture Section and Social Planning Unit were also notified of the proposal. Leisure and Culture are currently in the midst of preparing a Master Plan for Petrie Park, with a separate consultation process occurring at the same time this planning assessment was being carried out.


STATE AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORKS (SPPF & LPPF) The proposal is considered to be generally consistent with the relevant provisions of the State and Local Planning Policy Framework. The proposal will have a positive impact on the immediate surrounds through the modernisation of the RSL facility, will not result in the loss of any trees and result in only a minimal loss of public open space, offset by the provision of some extra car parking spaces. A new balcony component on the RSL building will assist with passive surveillance of the rest of Petrie Park during the evening hours. Extra revenue generated by the additional EGM’s will lead to additional community benefits and the possibility of additional employment. However, consideration also needs to be given to the negative aspects of allowing for additional EGM’s accessible by the local community, including the possibility that the placement of these additional machines could encourage patrons to gamble to excess or lead or contribute to gambling addictions. The money spent using the machines could be spent elsewhere in the local economy. The applicant justifies the additional machines partly by the fact that recent closures of two other RSL clubs in the local area has resulted in the removal EGM’s within the community, and even when the 15 additional machines which are proposed by this application are taken into account, there has still been a net loss in the number of machines locally available.

4.5




Further detail about the State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks is included as Attachment 2 to this report. ADDITIONAL ELECTRONIC GAMING MACHINES The application seeks planning permission for the installation and use of an additional 15 Electronic Gaming Machines (EGMs) at the venue and will bring the total number of EGMs at the subject premises from 35 to 50. The applicant claims that the increase in the number of EGM’s is necessary in order to make the club sustainable in terms of the total number of EGM’s on the premises and taxation implications under the revised Victorian EGM system in operation since 2012. The applicant claims that the increase will ensure the future viability of the club, and in turn its ability to contribute to the local community. Pursuant to Clause 52.28-2 of the Banyule Planning Scheme, a planning permit is required to install or use a gaming machine. The purpose of this Clause is stated as being:

To ensure that gaming machines are situated in appropriate locations and premises.

To ensure the social and economic impacts of the location of gaming machines are considered.

To prohibit gaming machines in specified shopping complexes and strip shopping centres.

The decision guidelines provided within this Clause are listed as being:

The State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.

The compatibility of the proposal with adjoining and nearby land uses.

The capability of the site to accommodate the proposal

Whether the gaming premises provides a full range of hotel facilities or services to patrons or a full range of club facilities or services to members and patrons

The RSL club is long established in its current position, having been located within Petrie Park since the late 1960’s. A limited number of EGM’s were introduced to the club in the mid 1990’s in line with the legalisation which legalised EGM’s in Victoria at this time. Two of the purposes of the Public Park and Recreation Zone which the site is zoned are:

To recognise areas for public recreation and open space; and

To provide for commercial uses where appropriate. It is considered that this proposal, which expands an already existing use of the site, is compatible with adjoining and nearby land uses as it provides a facility for the recreation of local residents, as gaming is recognised as a legitimate and legal form of entertainment, and is a long established commercial use which is considered to be appropriately located. A social and economic impact assessment has been submitted, and indicates that the proposal will result in a mild net benefit to the community, given the balance between the amount spent by patrons on gaming and

4.5




the associated local employment generation and donations made by the Club to the community. It is considered that the site is capable of supporting the increased number of EGM’s. The applicant was requested to provide a ‘green line’ plan to show the extent of the gaming area as part of a further information request, and claims that the additional 15 EGM’s could be accommodated without expanding the ‘green line’ area. Proposed buildings and works however will extend the premises to allow space for not only the additional machines, but also additional space within this ‘green line’ for the provision of additional lounge areas. It is submitted by the applicant that this additional space will assist in the minimisation of any harm resulting from patrons spending long periods of time within the gaming area, by allowing space to take a break from gaming activities, as well as allow for a more spacious atmosphere. As stated elsewhere in this report, it is considered that there is sufficient car parking available to accommodate any increased patronage resulting from the increased number of EGM’s, and that recent closures of other gaming venues in the surrounding area result in a net loss of available EGM’s locally, even when these additional 15 machines are taken into account. BUILDING AND WORKS Buildings and works are proposed as part of this application, which would result in a comparatively minor increase in overall floor area and the building footprint, as well as a new upper level balcony that will look out into the park. There are also other internal renovations proposed including the expanded gaming area as described previously. The proposed works are an extension to an existing building that has been in place for many years. It is considered that the proposed works would have a positive impact on Petrie Park, as it will update the look of the RSL building without resulting in the loss of any trees or usable public open space, as the building footprint will only extend into existing garden areas surrounding the building. A detailed landscaping plan can form a condition of any permit issued in order to ensure that the new building is appropriately landscaped upon completion. CAR PARKING IMPLICATIONS There is no specific car parking requirement listed at Clause 52.06 for the existing restricted place of assembly use. As such, car parking provision must be provided to Council's satisfaction. In determining the appropriate provision of spaces, the nearest comparable use is a 'hotel' which Clause 52.06 requires 3.5 spaces to be provided for each 100 square metres of leaseable floor area where a Parking Overlay applies, or 0.4 spaces per patron in other areas. Whilst no parking overlay applies, it is considered that this is a reasonable ratio to apply given the nature of the extension, whereby a relatively small section of the addition is enclosed space available to the public, and the mix of uses proposed renders it difficult to determine the exact number of patrons able to be accommodated within the venue at any one time. With the increase in floor area of 214 square metres to the existing building (including the balcony area), an additional seven car parking spaces would be considered to be appropriate under this ratio. As previously described, two additional parking spaces are proposed.

4.5




A traffic report prepared by O’Brien Traffic has been provided to support the request for a reduction in parking spaces. The report outlines the following:

The peak operating time of the RSL are generally outside the peak operational times of the reserve, being 10am-2pm and 5pm – 9pm.

Parking survey data collected during peak operating times demonstrated at least 23 spaces available during the day peak, and at least 35 spaces during the evening peak

There is minimal evidence of parking spillage into the surrounding area from the RSL.

There is no expected increase to the patron numbers associated with the RSL after the development.

The site is 400 metres from the Montmorency Railway Station.

The RSL proposes to expand its community bus service, which would pick up and drop off patrons.

Two additional parking spaces are proposed within the reserve car park. It is considered that the car parking provision is acceptable and should be supported for the following reasons:

The proposed increase in floor area is minimal, and the buildings and works component of the application is largely a rearrangement of the existing facilities already available at the venue. As such, it is unlikely that the demand for car parking would increase significantly as a result of the extensions to the building.

The submitted traffic report prepared by O’Brien Traffic prepared on 18 December 2014 included traffic survey data which indicated that vacant car parking spaces were available within Petrie Park during all survey periods, which were carried out at different times of the day and on different days of the week. However, it should be noted that as this time period is close to Christmas, it is possible some regular activities within the park were not operating.

The premises is located a short walk from the Montmorency Railway Station.

The applicant advises that many patrons tend to arrive in groups sharing the same vehicle.

Peak operating time for the RSL is usually during evening hours, when the demand for car parking for other activities within Petrie Park is minimal.

The RSL plans to use part of the projected increase in revenue from the additional EGM’s to expand its community bus service, which would pick up and drop off patrons.

Some additional spaces are proposed to be provided as part of the application. Although the provision of these spaces would result in the loss of approximately 38 square metres of open space, it is important to note that these additional parking spaces would be available to all users of the park at all times, and not just for RSL patrons.

4.5




The nature of Petrie Park and its variety of uses at different times of the day and week make it difficult to be able to provide a sufficient amount of off street parking that will accommodate for all park users at all times. Further, the allocation of more of the park for car parking would result in less available open space for park users. There will inevitably be occasions when a number of events being held within the park at the same time will result in overflow parking into surrounding streets. However, it is considered that this is not a regular situation, and needs to be balanced with the need to devote as much of the available space for park facilities as practically possible. It is also considered that such an overflow situation is more likely to occur during day times, when multiple outdoor activities are occurring, whilst patron numbers for the RSL use would normally peak during the early evening when more car parking is usually available. EXTENSION TO LIQUOR LICENCE AREA As a result of the floor area increasing and the reconfiguration of the internal floor plan, it is necessary to apply for an increase to the approved licensed area for liquor consumption and gaming. The applicant has therefore submitted a new ‘red line’ (alcohol) plan as part of the application. There are no proposed alterations to the liquor licence type or the hours of operation. It is considered that the expansion of the licensed area is relatively minor in terms of liquor licensing considerations, and should be supported by Council. The use is long established and the total floor area increase is minimal. The proposed new upstairs deck area looks out over the park and faces away from Residential zoned land toward the Railway line (with some distance between the deck area and the northern residential zoned land) and is unlikely to add significant noise to the current arrangements at the venue. OBJECTOR CONCERNS Concerns in relation to car parking have been address above, however comments in relation to the remaining grounds of objection are as follows: Increase in the amount of waste generated An objector has raised concern that approval of the proposal would result in an increase in the amount of kitchen waste generated, exacerbating an existing issue of odours emanating on occasion from outside waste collection bins. These bins are located a significant distance away from the RSL building, to the rear of the Community Hall. The proposal does not include any expansion of existing dining facilities, and whist increased patronage expected to result from the renovated facilities may marginally impact on the amount of waste generated, it is not considered that this amount would be significant. This is an ongoing issue that would occur whether a planning permit had been applied for or not. The RSL has a number of operational measures in place in order to minimise odour from the waste bins including daily emptying, cleaning of the bins and not placing food scraps in the bin until the evening hours. The bin is also locked to ensure that the lid remains closed. Notwithstanding this, the RSL has given Council an undertaking that it will investigate further measures to prevent odours

4.5




from rubbish bins having a detrimental impact on neighbouring properties, including the possibility of containing the bins in an enclosed shed. Intoxicated persons An objector residing on Mountain View Road has stated that there has been long term issues related to intoxicated persons exiting Petrie Park late at night and causing excessive noise and damaging property, with the objector of the opinion that these persons are drinking alcohol at the RSL or Community Hall and then heading up to Mountain view Road in order to catch taxis. In response, a representative from the RSL advises that they believe that this is not the case. Their advice is that taxis are instructed to collect patrons from the RSL at the entrance of the building, and further that complaints relating to intoxicated persons are occurring hours after the club has stopped serving alcohol, and that these intoxicated persons that the objector is referring to are using the park area to consume alcohol and are not RSL patrons. Whist it is plausible that some RSL patrons may on occasion create excessive noise and/or elect to hail taxis from the street rather than wait near the entrance to the building, it is considered that it is more likely that these issues stem from the illegal consumption of alcohol, and other social issues, related to the use of park facilities late at night. These are fundamentally law and order issues, and beyond the scope of what can be considered in the instance of this application. Further, it is also noted that the RSL has a policy of not offering its facilities for functions likely to result in sizable groups of younger people consuming alcohol such as 18th and 21st birthday celebrations, specifically to ensure that the amenity of nearby residents is not affected. The impact of the additional EGM’s on the local community Concern was also raised by one of the objectors that money spent on poker machines was being diverted from local business, and that the additional EGM’s would exuberate problem gambling within the local community. It is considered that the Montmorency-Eltham RSL is a local business, and if a person wishes to make use of gaming machines and they are not available locally, it cannot be sustained that they would instead elect to spend this money on other items, and it is instead considered likely that they would instead choose to travel to another location. The negative effects on the community caused by problem gambling are well known and well publicised. It is acknowledged that EGM’s do contribute to the problem, and also that additional machines may exuberate existing issues. It is however important to note that vast majority of people using gaming machines use them responsibly, and are not problem gamblers. In 2009, 70% of Australians participated in some form of gambling (Commonwealth of Australia 2015). Poker Machines are only one of the many forms of gambling legally available in Victoria, although one which is perhaps more highly visible. Any form of gambling has the potential to cause negative effects in the community if carried out irresponsibly, and recent developments in technology enable anyone with internet access, or even just a mobile phone, to gamble large amounts of money on sporting events or participate in other forms of online gaming without even leaving their own home.

4.5




CONCLUSION

The proposed increase in the number of Electronic Gaming Machines and associated extension works are considered to be an acceptable outcome with regard to the relevant State and Local planning policy.

ATTACHMENTS

No. Title Page

1 Plans 101

2 Additional Information 107

5.1

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life


5.1 RATE CAPPING SUBMISSION - ESSENTIAL SERVICES COMMISSION CONSULTATION PAPER

Authors: Gina Burden - Manager Governance and Communication, Corporate

Services

Peter Utri – Acting Director Corporate Services, Corporate Services

Tania O’Rielly – Manager Finanace & Procurement, Corporate Services

File: F2015/167

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In the lead up to the State Election in November 2014, the then Opposition Labor Party announced that if elected, one of its policies would be to introduce rate capping for Victorian Councils. Upon its successful election, the State Government referred the development of the rate capping framework to the Essential Services Commission of Victoria (ESC). The ESC has been asked to complete the review by October 2015 for implementation in 2016-17. The ESC has now released its Consultation Paper (attached) on the proposed rate capping and variation framework. The Paper provides an overview of the local government sector, key principles that will guide the ESC’s review, and a series of questions about the potential design features of the rate capping framework. The questions raised include whether the Consumer Price Index (CPI) is an appropriate benchmark for cost increases, what consultation should occur with the community as part of a rate increase decision being made, how supplementary valuations should be treated, and the factors that should be taken into account for proposed rate increases above the rate of CPI. All councils have been encouraged to participate in the ESC consultation process. Submissions to the Consultation paper are due on 15 May. A submission has been prepared on behalf of Banyule (attached) which is based on feedback from Councillors, and information and views which have previously been circulated to the Community.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1. Note the release of the Essential Services Commission’s (ESC) Consultation

Paper on Local Government Rates Capping and Variation Framework; 2. Endorse Banyule’s Submission to the Consultation Paper (attached); and 3. Forward a copy of the submission to the ESC by the due date of 15 May 2015.

5.1


RATE CAPPING SUBMISSION - ESSENTIAL SERVICES COMMISSION CONSULTATION PAPER cont’d




CITY PLAN

This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “advocate on behalf of our community”.

BACKGROUND

In January 2015, the Essential Services Commission of Victoria received terms of reference from the State Government to consider and report on the development of a state-wide capping and variation framework for council rates. The ESC is required to undertake the review and complete it by October 2015 for implementation in 2016-17. The ESC has worked with the local government sector previously, when they developed a local government services reporting framework. Similarly, for this review, they have advised they will be consulting extensively with all interested parties, recognising the significance and impact the final framework will have for local government and the Victorian community. Since the initial announcement that the State Government had intention to introduce rate capping based on CPI, Council, along with other local councils and the sector’s peak bodies, have all expressed and voiced concern that CPI is not an appropriate benchmark for measuring council costs. The main concern is that introducing such a model will significantly restrict the way in which councils are able to raise revenue in the future and will have detrimental impacts on the delivery of services to the community and the ability to maintain or provide local infrastructure. The ability to make a submission on the ESC Consultation Paper allows Council the opportunity to formally provide feedback on what will be a major reform for local government.

ADVOCACY

The Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) had already commenced preliminary discussions with the Government on these matters, including the view that CPI is not an appropriate benchmark for measuring council costs. The ESC Consultation Paper allows an important opportunity for the sector to now influence development of the model that will be introduced in 2016/17. The MAV also established a Finance and Rate Capping Taskforce and a campaign page on its website, in response to the Federal Budget cuts to core financial assistance grants and Labor’s proposed rate capping policy. Late last year the MAV Taskforce, which is made up of representatives from 42 councils, endorsed the commissioning of work by a top tier consultancy to construct an independent local

5.1




government cost index which reinforces CPI has no bearing on changes to councils’ cost movements.



DISCUSSION

Terms of reference The ESC have stated in the consultation paper that their approach to designing a rates capping and variation framework must align with the Government’s objectives. The terms of reference set out a number of objectives for the framework, including to:

Contain the cost of living in Victoria while supporting council autonomy and ensuring greater accountability and transparency in local government budgeting and service delivery.

Promote rates and charges that are efficient, stable and reflective of services that the community needs and demands.

Promote rates and charges that are set at a level that ensures the sustainability of the councils’ financial capacity and council infrastructure.

In applying these objectives, the ESC have developed a set of 8 principles to guide them and the sector in the design and implementation of a workable and effective rates capping and variation framework. The principles are: 1. Local communities differ in their needs, priorities and resources 2. Local communities and ratepayers are entitled to hold their councils to the

highest standards of accountability and transparency when setting rates 3. The framework should support the autonomy of councils to make decisions in

the long term interests of their community and ratepayers 4. Councils will need to satisfy the burden of proof outlined in the framework when

seeking a variation above the cap 5. Rate increases should be considered only after all other viable options have

been explore 6. The framework should support best practice planning, management systems

and information sharing to uphold council decision making 7. The framework should be flexible and adaptable 8. There should be few surprises for ratepayers and councils in the

implementation of the framework ESC Focus In the Consultation Paper the ESC have stated that:

“Our focus will be on developing an effective framework for capping rates which includes a credible variation process for councils that can clearly demonstrate their need to go above capped increases. While we are mindful of the need for simplicity when designing the framework, we are also determined that the framework does not inadvertently or partially shift responsibility for rate-setting

5.1




from councils to the commission. Councils are responsible for the services they provide and therefore the rates they levy and the legacies they leave. The framework will clearly place the onus on councils to demonstrate that their rates are being set in line with the services they provide to their communities and in line with the long term interests of their ratepayers.”

Local Government’s View The MAV on its campaign page for the Rate Capping and Financial Assistance Grants Taskforce, states:

“Victorian local government has unanimously opposed Victorian Labor’s rate capping policy, which proposes councils should apply to the Essential Services Commission if they want to raise rates above CPI.

Councils are a distinct tier of government with democratically elected councillors to make decisions on behalf of the community. The autonomy of councils must be respected and councils must retain the flexibility to set appropriate budgets that meet local community priorities and needs. A legislated process already provides that councils make budget decisions in an open, transparent and accountable way that involves community input.

Rate capping in Victoria in the 1990s resulted in councils deferring spending on capital programs such as roads maintenance and renewal. This led to faster deterioration of roads and other assets, and has consequently imposed higher costs on future generations of ratepayers to renew and upgrade under-maintained community infrastructure.

The $225 million asset renewal gap identified by the Auditor General is due to council-owned assets deteriorating faster than councils can fund their maintenance, renewal and replacement. This is projected to grow to $2.6 billion by 2026. If rate capping is introduced, it will result in a long-term devastating impact on the quality and availability of local roads and community facilities across Victoria.”

Council’s Views Banyule Council generally concurs with the arguments of the sector as indicated above and also supports the views of the MAV which has always argued that councils do not deliver electricity, bread and milk, the common household goods and services which are measured by the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Councils in Victoria deliver more than 100 community services and fund construction and material costs to maintain $73 billion in community facilities. Like all councils, Banyule has been subject to reduced funding from both Federal and State Governments. In addition, the factors driving up our costs are different from those affecting the increase in prices of common household goods and services, measured by the CPI. For example, the Home and Community Care services Council provides to elderly residents enable them to maintain fulfilling lives and live longer in their own homes. This service is experiencing cost pressures well in excess of the growth in CPI, cost pressures brought on by changing regulatory standards, increased fuel, transport and wage costs, and declining levels of funding. These are all beyond Council’s control.

5.1




The cost of petroleum based products that are used in buildings, roads and footpaths, as well as the cost of electricity for Banyule’s street lights, are all increasing at rates greater than CPI. Once again, these cost increases are beyond the control of Council. Despite these challenges, Banyule Council is considered an efficient, well managed and financially sound organisation. Council has always adopted its budgets based on maintaining services at a level the Banyule community expects, while renewing aging assets and delivering key capital projects. However, there is concern that over time, rate capping will have a compounding effect on Council’s revenue base impacting on asset renewal and resulting in service reductions. In a rate capped environment, Council would not be able to continue to build, renovate or renew infrastructure and community assets, and cover State and Federal Government funding shortfalls. Apart from service reductions, this could also lead to the sale of assets from non-essential Council owned land, longer waits for sporting club funding, which would be at a premium, and funding for playgrounds, parks and gardens, which are all community assets that are much used and valued by the Banyule community.

TIMELINES

The following timelines are relevant to note:

ESC Consultation Paper on Local Government – Rates Capping & Variation Framework released late April 2015

Submissions to the Consultation Paper due 15 May 2015

ESC to complete the review and report to the State Government by October 2015

The rate capping and variation model is to apply for council budgets from the 2016/17 financial year

CONCLUSION

The clear message from the State Government, has been that they expect Victorian councils to keep their rates in line with CPI and that any increases above this must provide a clear benefit to ratepayers. While this message is simple to understand and immediately appealing to ratepayers, it belies the complexity of issues and factors that impact on the setting of council rates. These factors, many of which are out of councils’ control, include: the effects of cost shifting from State and Federal Governments; declining grants and subsidies; and cost increases related to construction, utilities, materials and wages costs that are well above CPI. The State Government has passed the responsibility of determining a suitable model for rate capping to the ESC, and it would appear from their Consultation Paper that there is a genuine interest in developing a framework that will meet the objectives of the State Government while ensuring councils maintain the capacity to raise revenue and remain financially sustainable into the future.

5.1




ATTACHMENTS

No. Title Page

1 Local Government Rate Capping & Variation Framework - ESC Consultation Paper April 2005

109

2 Banyule's Submission - ESC Consultation Paper 159

3 ESC Rate Capping Consultation Paper, Banyule City Council Submission (May 2015)

160

5.2



5.2 MULTICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE - VACANCY OF THE POSITION OF COMMITTEE CHAIR

Author: India Mortlock - Community & Social Planner, Community Programs

File: F2015/167

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In October 2014 Council resolved to re-appoint Cr Garotti as the lead delegate and Cr Di Pasquale as the substitute delegate for Council’s Multicultural Advisory Committee. Cr Garotti has resigned from the position of lead delegate and the position is therefore vacant. Cr Di Pasquale is the substitute delegate. The involvement of Councillors in the Committee provides an essential link between the Committee and Council. The position of lead delegate also has responsibility for chairing the Committee meetings. This report considers the appointment of a new lead delegate and substitute delegate to the Multicultural Advisory Committee.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council appoint Councillor (to be decided) as the lead delegate to the Multicultural Advisory Committee.



CITY PLAN

This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “encourage diverse and inclusive community participation”.

BACKGROUND

During 2013 Council resolved to establish an Advisory Committee to assist Council to work more effectively with Council’s Multicultural communities. In October 2014 Council resolved to re-appoint Cr Garotti as the lead delegate and Cr Di Pasquale as the substitute delegate for Council’s Multicultural Advisory Committee.

5.2


MULTICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE - VACANCY OF THE POSITION OF COMMITTEE CHAIR cont’d


Multicultural Advisory Committee meetings are held bi-monthly. The first meeting was held on 20 March 2014 and there have been subsequent meetings on 29 May, 31 July, 2 October, 20 November, 5 February and 16 April. The Multicultural Advisory Committee plays a key role in guiding the development and implementation of the Multicultural Plan 2014-2017. Council’s advisory committees have an advisory role and do not hold any authority to make decisions or commitments on behalf of Council. The involvement of Councillors in the Committee provides an essential link between the Committee and Council. The terms of reference for the Multicultural Advisory Committee (see Attachment 1) stipulate that the role of the Councillor lead delegate appointed to the Committee is: • To act as Chairperson of the BMAC • To be the link between Council and the BMAC • To table issues and concerns to Council on behalf of the BMAC • To nominate another Councillor to attend meetings in his/her absence 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 negative human rights issues. The nature of the Multicultural Advisory Committee in fact enhances Council’s advocacy function in affirming the individuals’ rights to freedom of expression especially in underrepresented groups in our community. It is considered that the Advisory Committees enhances individual’s rights to Freedom of Expression as contained in section 15 of the Charter. CONCLUSION Cr Rick Garotti has resigned from the position of lead delegate to the Multicultural Advisory Committee. The position is vacant. Council is required to appoint a new lead delegate to the Multicultural Advisory Committee

ATTACHMENTS

No. Title Page

1 Multicultural Advisory Committee - Terms of Reference 168

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely


6.1 OPERATING AND CAPITAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED 31 MARCH 2015

Author: Tania O'Reilly - Manager Finance & Procurement, Corporate Services

File: D15/58889

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Operating and Capital Financial Management (OCFM) Report for March 2015 is presented in accordance with section 138 of the Local Government Act 1989 which requires quarterly statements to Council on the budgeted revenue and expenditure for the financial year with the actual revenue and expenditure to date. Operational Performance: Banyule City Council (BCC) has forecast to deliver an operating surplus of $6.41m (against the 2014/2015 adopted budget of a $6.0m deficit - $12.40m favourable to the full year budget). Greater revenue than budgeted has been forecasted to be received of $10.12m (7.82%). Expenditure is also tracking better than that budgeted by $2.28m (1.68%). The sales of strategic property are the main contributor with BCC reporting a net gain on disposal of assets of $9.22m greater than that budget. There are greater saving in the street lighting project, now estimated at $1.30m ($900k reported in December 2015 report). Operational savings have been reported in employee benefits of $1.09m and interest on income and investments $0.7m. A number of other smaller movements against budget, both favourable and unfavourable, are explained throughout this report and which have contributed to the overall favourable forecast position. Management will continue to review the operational and capital year to date variances throughout the year and amend the full year forecast as required. Capital Works and Initiatives Performance: At the end of March 2015 a total of $22.81m has been spent on capital works and initiatives against the approved budget of $49.26m (includes carry-forward projects). How these key projects are tracking against budget is detailed within this report.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Operating and Capital Financial Management Report for the period 31 March 2015 be received.

CITY PLAN

This report is in line with Council’s City Plan objective to "manage our financial resources in a sustainable manner".

6.1


OPERATING AND CAPITAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REPORT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED 31 MARCH 2015 cont’d


BACKGROUND

The Operating and Capital Financial management (OCFM) report comprises a review of the current performance against year to date budget and full year budget. FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE: As at 31 March 2015 the financial performance of Banyule City Council is favourable to budget by $12.40million. The budgeted $6.0m deficit is forecasted to be a $6.41m surplus. The Net property sales variance of $9.22m is the most significant contributor to the improvement on the financial performance to date. The remaining $3.18m favourable variance is due to operating activities and capital works and initiative forecast adjustments. CAPITAL WORKS AND INITIATIVES: The total Capital Works and Initiatives including carry forward projects for the full year 2014-15 is budgeted to be $49.26m. At the end of March 2015 a total of $22.81m has been spent on capital works and initiatives as compared to $15.01m at the end of December 2014. This is behind the expected YTD budget due to timing from a delay in commencement of certain projects and processing of March 2015 invoices. A carry forward of $5.09m (10.33%) has been projected – expenditure only. In addition to the actual spend of $22.81m committals for works have been raised for $6.25m (total $29.06m) compared to YTD budget of $35.48m. Overall the Capital Works program is currently $2.97m under budget with a projected saving of $1.30m for Streets Lights upgrade project, $270,000 for community grants and $1.63m for vehicle and plant purchase. There are a large number of projects currently in implementation stage, for which cost adjustments to the budget are yet to be determined as final payments to contractors are to be assessed and made. In summary it is estimated that:

$41.20m will be expended by end of 2014-15 fiscal year;

$5.09m will be carried forward to 2015-16; and

$2.97m will be a saving.

6.1




VARIANCE ANALYSIS - Year to Date (YTD) and Full Year (FY) results As at 31 March 2015 the YTD results are tracking favourable to budget in both income (10.30%) and expenditure (6.20%). It is noted that YTD results show that Council is tracking more favourably, than the FY forecast as Council recognises 100% of the rate income at the beginning of the financial year, in accordance with the Accounting Standards. Continuous assessment of all income and expenses year to date is being undertaken by management to fully inform the FY forecast each month. In some instances the YTD variance is attributed to timing and phasing of budgets and as such does not equate to a permanent adjustment against forecast. The consolidated operating result is budgeted to gradually reduce over the year to an operating budget surplus of $6.41m as at 30 June 2015. Variances due to phasing of the budget have been noted as follows:

o subscriptions and IT maintenance and service charges paid upfront for

the 12 months

o seasonal trends in income noted in Leisure and Aquatic facilities

o majority of dog and cat registrations take place in March and April

o grant receipts noted as quarterly, bi-annual or annual not monthly

At this time of the year it would be reasonable to expect expenditure to be approximately 65%-75% spent, with a remaining budget of 35%-25%. As per the March results 32% of the budget has been unspent and appears reasonable. It should also be noted that the majority of March 2015 invoices are yet to be processed. Invoices are usually paid in the following month. KEY FULL YEAR (FY) FORECAST VARIANCES – MARCH 2015 The below key variances of significance for consideration are as follows: *figures provided are rounded to the nearest $’000 - small rounding differences exist across various categories

INCOME The total Full Year favourable movement in actual income against forecast is $10.12m (7.82%). Details are noted below.

Description Annual Budget $’000

Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

General Rates & Charges (85,364) (85,706) 342

Higher than expected supplementary income generated - $300k favourable (December $266k)

6.1




Associated increase in the Municipal charges from supplementary income - $42k favourable (December $35k)


Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

Interest on Rates and Special Charges income

(24) (202) 178

It is anticipated that additional income of $180k will be generated for the year above budget (represents 0.21% of total general rates and charges income) due to late payments.

Last year interest charges for the first 2 instalments were waived by Council with the introduction of the new legislation related to payment options. The legislation has now been in place for a full cycle and interest is being charged for non-payment of rates as per the Penalty Interest Act (11.5% per annum).


Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

Grants & Subsidies - Recurrent (13,145) (12,988) (157)

Favourable movements:

o Additional grant income of $229k (December forecast $258k) is anticipated due to increased funding from the growth in home care, planned activity groups and prices for delivered meals. The additional funding from that budgeted is also as a result of a 1.8% index uplift back dated to July 2014. The income received from additional grant funding will also see a rise in expenditure against budget.

o Greater utilisation of Childcare enrolment income generation at Joyce

Avenue, St Hellier and Morobe Street of $162k (December $149k).

Unfavourable movements:

o Reduction of income from grant funding of $399k (December forecast

$457k) for the Audrey Brooks and Olympic Village pre-school programs. The programs that generate the corresponding grant income have not been run as planned as a result of recent renovations of these building. Expenditure has also been affected accordingly (i.e. reduced).

o Grants Commission will not increase by CPI (as budgeted) but will remain

at the prior year level which is an unfavourable movement of $131k.

6.1





Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

Grants & Subsidies – Non Recurrent (1,083) (914) (168)


A few grants have been received related to Community Partnerships and Programs. The largest is a $50k grant for Community Safety. All programs will have an associated spend within materials, contracts & services expense.

Unfavourable movements: Capital works and initiative projects comprise the majority of the unfavourable movement and are noted across a number of projects.

o Yulong Res Multipurpose Training Facility & Nets $90k unfavourable to

budget. The $90k was budgeted to be received in the 2015 financial year but was received and recognised as income in June 2014.

o Watsonia Library Redevelopment $99k unfavourable to budget. $125k

was budgeted to be received however this amount was received in 2014 (prior year), with additional funding of $26k received in 2015.


Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

User Fees & Charges Income (14,585) (14,710) 125


Income is being derived from the newly installed parking meters at Heidelberg and Greensborough greater than projected by $217k favourable (December $197). This trend is expected to continue. Any additional revenue will be transferred to reserves to offset the initial cost of implementation and their future maintenance costs and expansion as per council resolution.

Immaterial variances against budget have been identified across numerous

divisions which have contributed to the remaining $199k variance. Examples provided below:

o Fire Service Levy reimbursement of administration costs

o Functions, administration and Marketing

o Planning and Property Management

o Transfer Station and Waste Management

6.1





Unfavourable Banyule Leisure Facilities Management of $291K due to impacts of redevelopment works (December $111k). Management will continue to seek contra savings where possible.


Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

Statutory Fees and Income (6,787) (6,704) (82)

Development Planning fees & Advertising received are higher than anticipated $208k (favourable)

Municipal Laws has noted less income from parking fines and has anticipated a full year forecast adjustment of net $272k (unfavourable).


Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

Interest Income (1,407) (2,140) 734

Interest on Investments - a review of the current interest received against budget has resulted in an increase to the forecast by $734k and includes the additional cash invested from the sale of the school properties.


Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

Contributions Income (2,752) (2,642) (110)


WaterMarc Profit Sharing arrangement will generate an additional $467k income in 2015 against budget. The profit share income generated in future years will be transferred to a maintenance reserve to support future maintenance requirements.

Council has received a total of sixteen unbudgeted contributions, mostly from local organisations and sporting clubs to contribute to capital works projects. Two of the largest unbudgeted contributions were:

o from the Traders Association for refurbishment of the Burgundy Street

public restrooms for $88k.

o $80k was received regarding Municipal Emergency Management

Planning.

6.1





Stormwater management plan implementation is $500k unfavourable to the 2014/2015 budget of $1m. Overall the project funding will be fully receipted, however $500k will be received equally over the next 2 years ($250k in 2016 and $250k in 2017) and $500k will be receipted in 2015. A carry forward of $500k will need to be facilitated into future years.

There has been a $450k unfavourable variance against the Ivanhoe Park Pavilion Redevelopment – Ivanhoe Juniors. A budgeted $300k of state government grant funding and a $150k club contribution have been marked as carry forwards, and will not be received in this financial year.


Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

Net Gain on Disposal of Assets (1,688) (10,905) 9,217

The net gain on disposal of assets is the difference between the written down value and the sale proceeds of assets. Variances occur when assets which were or were not originally included in the budget have been sold or are no longer intended to be sold. The key variance of $10.3m is as a result of the former Bellfield site sale. The remaining variance is due to other property projections both favourable and favourable.

EXPENDITURE

The total Full Year favourable movement in actual expenditure against forecast is $2.28m (1.68%). Details are noted below.


Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

Employee Benefits 56,749 55,664 1,086

An adjustment has been made to the forecast as a result of the Enterprise

Bargaining salary increase by 3.35% from 1 July 2014 against that budgeted. The forecast adjustment is for a saving of $295k (favourable).

A subsequent adjustment of $275k has been made in February 2015. This adjustment represents a further identified saving of 0.5% included in the budget for increments for all staff that fall within a banding. The additional provisioning is not expected to be required above the current allowances now in the budget in accordance with the Enterprise Agreement requirements.

Banyule Leisure Facilities Management Enterprise Agreement amendments for overtime and training which are now reflected in the new EA schedule provision with savings to budget of $321k.

6.1




Audrey Brooks & Olympic Village program costs of $192k have been reduced due to the delay in the completion of the new play rooms. This has a corresponding impact on the Grants & Subsidies – recurrent income forecast.


Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

Materials, Contracts & Services 43,143 41,678 1,465

Public street light replacement program has been forecast to be under budget by $1.30m (December $900k) against a budget of $4.68m. This is primarily due to much better contract rates received than budgeted. Contributing to the net remaining movement are favourable variances in operational costs such as plant charges and waste disposal savings. These savings have been offset against contracting costs incurred as a result of the use of contractors to cover staff vacancies and professional costs across BCC. This includes unbudgeted legal support for specific activities and issues that have arisen during the year across divisions.


Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

Utility charges 3,796 4,273 (476)

Utilities costs for the Watermarc facility were fully assessed during the quarter from the cogeneration plant usage, including the seasonal impact and reduced by $117k favourable against budget (December $110k).

The forecast for Street lighting and Building Maintenance and Services has also been amended to reflect the true total spend on Utility charges (electricity, water and gas). This has resulted in the projected variance of $569k unfavourable.


Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

Donations & Grants Expense 928 747 182

All funding against Community Grants account (89123) has been removed whilst an agreed spend within the Community Services Grant (44810) has been increased, an overall reduction of 19.55% across donations and grants expenditure.


Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

Contributions Expense 5,713 5,786 (74)

6.1




No significant movements identified.


Forecast $’000

Variance $’000

Other Expense Expense 2,191 2,093 98

No significant movements identified.

OTHER KEY INFORMATION

Council Investments

For the first 9 months of this financial year all of Council’s investments have continued to be held in high rated short term Bank Term Deposits. Currently the Term Deposits are earning a weighted average of 3.08%. The earning rate has decreased 0.36% since 30 June 2014 (at 3.44). Interest rate is predicted to fall further in the near future in the current economic climate. Council is placing its investments in Term Deposits with major and secondary banks. The investment interest rates offered by the banks reflect a combination of the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) official cash rate and the requirements for money on any given day by Banks. The official cash rate as set by the RBA is currently 2.25% and has not moved since it was reduced by 0.25% on 4 February 2015 which was 2.50%. Council cash and cash equivalent investment comparison for the 2 months:

28 February 2015 $’M

31 March 2015 $’M

Term deposits 69.81 78.06

On Call 10.90 4.70

Total Banyule Investments 80.71 82.76

Restricted Funds:

Assets replacement reserve 1.96

Long service leave 8.59

Unexpended grants & contribution 3.08

Trust funds 0.67

Deposit held 0.69

Total Restricted Funds 14.99

Available Funds 67.77

Term deposits are all held with A1+ and A2 rated banks. (Standard & Poor’s Short Term Rating.)

6.1




School Sites Council purchased the following school sites with settlement for all sites taking place on 11 November 2013.

1. Former Haig Street Primary School site: 52 Haig Street, Heidelberg Heights (Haig Street site).

2. Former Bellfield Primary School site: 229 Banksia Street, Ivanhoe (Ivanhoe site).

3. Former Banksia La Trobe Secondary College site: 228-230 Banksia Street, Bellfield (Bellfield site).

The Haig Street Primary School site was sold on 20 June 2014 to a consortium with Metricon, conditional to planning permit and associated subdivision for $15,864,407 with three instalments expected ($3,664,407 June 2015, $7,500,000 June 2016, and $4,700,000 June 2017). The former Bellfield Primary School has been sold to Stockland Development Pty Ltd for $22,100,000 with settlement effected in February 2015. The former Banksia La Trobe Secondary College has been offered to the State Government and Education Department as a potential education site opportunity. To date, no interest has been shown. Council will now progress exploring options for the site. Management Reviews The carbon tax legislation was repealed effective 1 July 2014. Due to this legislative change a detailed review has been undertaken. A separate report will be presented to Council for consideration, outlining the amount of the projected saving against budget for 2016/2015. The sale of assets reviews noted as pending in the December 2015 report has since been undertaken and the impact incorporated into the March 2015 performance. Days Outstanding – Creditors / Debtors Council officers will continue to enhance our Operating and Capital Financial Management report. Future reports will also include reporting on outstanding debtors and creditors.

6.1




CONCLUSION

The financial forecast for Banyule City Council is for a $6.41m operating surplus. Revenue is favourable to budget by 7.82% and expenditure is favourable to budget by 1.68%. Management will continue to assess actuals against budget throughout the next quarter and each month will make any necessary forecast adjustments. It is anticipated that the full year actuals will continue to align to what has been forecasted, which is significantly better than budgeted for both revenue and expenditure for the year.

ATTACHMENTS

No. Title Page

1 Profit and Loss Graph - March 2015 172

2 Profit and Loss Summary - March 2015 174

3 Capital Works and Initiatives Summary - March 2015 175

6.2



6.2 ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS Author: Cindy Ho - Governance Officer, Corporate Services

File: F2014/337

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Under the Local Government Act 1989 an Assembly of Councillors is defined as:

A meeting of an advisory committee of the Council, if at least one Councillor is present or; A planned or scheduled meeting of at least half of the Councillors and one member of Council staff which considers matters that are intended or likely to be:

a) the subject of a decision of the Council or; b) subject to the exercise of a function, duty or power of the Council that has been

delegated to a person or committee. In accordance with Section 80A of the Local Government Act 1989 Council is required to report as soon as possible to an Ordinary Meeting of Council a record of any assemblies of Councillors held. Below is the latest listing of notified assemblies of Councillors held at Banyule City Council. RECORD OF ASSEMBLIES

1 Date of Assembly: 27 April 2015

Type of Meeting: Councillor Briefing

Matters Considered: Items on the Council Agenda for the Ordinary Meeting of 27 April 2015 (excluding confidential items) as listed below:

1.1 Petition for a Seat on Waterdale Road, Ivanhoe

1.2 Petition to build a skate park in Petrie Park, Montmorency

4.1 Pedestrian Movements - Rosanna Railway Station

4.2 Ivanhoe Primary School - Parking Investigation

4.3 One Flintoff Project - Progress Report

4.4 1 Flintoff Street, Greensborough - Proposed Council Offices - Planning Permit Application (No.P311/2015)

4.5 Proposed development of eight three storey dwellings at 27 Livingstone Street, Ivanhoe (P315/14)

5.1 Municipal Association of Victoria's Draft Strategic Work Plan 2015-16

6.1 Debt Management Strategic Plan

6.2 Items for Noting

6.3 Proposed Governance Local Law No.2 (2015) - Incorporating Meeting Procedures Code (2015)

6.2


ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d


6.4 Assembly of Councillors

General Business

Anzac Day Services

Councillors Present: Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Craig Langdon Tom Melican

Staff Present: Simon McMillan – Chief Executive Officer Allison Beckwith – Director Community Programs Scott Walker – Director City Development Geoff Glynn – Director Assets & City Services Peter Utri – Acting Director Corporate Services Gina Burden – Manager Governance & Communication Daniel Kollmorgen – Manager Transport, Sustainability & Municipal Laws Emily Outlaw – Council Governance Liaison Officer Sanjev Sivananthanayagam – Transport Engineer Joseph Tabacco – Manager Property & Economic Development Jackie Bernoth – Coordinator Development Planning

Others Present: Nil

Conflict of Interest: Nil

RECOMMENDATION

That the Assembly of Councillors report be received.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

6.3



6.3 ITEMS FOR NOTING Author: India Mortlock - Community & Social Planner, Community Programs

File: F2015

RECOMMENDATION

That Council note the following minutes/reports: 1. The Banyule Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (LGBTI)

Advisory Committee held on 14 April 2015

2. The Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee held on 15 April 2015

3. The Banyule Multicultural Advisory Committee held on 16 April 2015

The following Minutes or Reports are presented for noting:

1.

Report/Committee Name: Banyule Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (LGBTI) Advisory Committee

Officer: India Mortlock

Brief explanation: The LGBTI Advisory Committee held its seventh meeting on Tuesday 14 April 2015 at the Tom Roberts room. The minutes from the meeting are in Attachment 1. The aim of the LGBTI Advisory Committee is to provide Council with advice and information on issues facing the LGBTI community and on the development and implementation of Council’s LGBTI Plan. Councillor Mulholland chaired the meeting and Councillor Langdon also attended the meeting. Six committee members attended the meeting. There were no recommendations for Council’s consideration from this meeting.

2.

Report/Committee Name: Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee

Officer: Shawn Neilsen

Brief explanation: The Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee held its meeting on Wednesday 15 April 2015 in meeting rooms 1 & 2 of Council Offices in Rosanna. The minutes from the meeting are in Attachment 2. The aim of the Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee is to provide Council with advice and information on issues facing people with disabilities and their carers, and on the development and implementation of Council’s Disability Action Plan.

6.3


ITEMS FOR NOTING cont’d


ATTACHMENTS

No. Title Page

1 Minutes - LGBTI Advisory Committee - 14/4/15 182

2 Minutes - Multicultural Advisory Committee 16/4/15 186

3 Minutets Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee - 15/4/15 190

Councillor Mulholland chaired the meeting and Councillor Langdon also attended the meeting. Eight committee members attended the meeting. There were no recommendations for Council’s consideration from this meeting.

3.

Report/Committee Name: Banyule Multicultural Advisory Committee

Officer: India Mortlock

Brief explanation: The Multicultural Advisory Committee held its seventh meeting on Thursday 16 April 2015 in the Council Chambers. The minutes from the meeting are in Attachment 3. The aim of the Multicultural Advisory Committee is to provide Council with advice and information on issues facing the multicultural community and on the development and implementation of Council’s Multicultural Plan. Councillor Mulholland chaired the meeting. Five committee members attended the meeting. There were no recommendations for Council’s consideration from this meeting.

8.1

Notice of Motion


8.1 MEMORIAL AND COMMEMORATIVE PLAQUES POLICY

Author: Cr Craig Langdon

File: F2014/492-02

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move:

1. “That a report be prepared for Council’s consideration on the development and

adoption of a policy and/or protocols for Memorials and Commemorative Plaques in Public Places.”

Explanation From time to time Council receives enquiries from the public seeking permission to erect and pay for memorials in public places in memory of lost loved ones. This might take the form of a small plaque on a park bench or could be an artwork of some type. Currently Council does not have a formal policy in place regarding how it should deal with applications of this type. Further there are no set guidelines in place regarding when it is appropriate for Council itself to commission commemorative plaques with regard to the launch of a new facility, event, or the like. When Council opens a new building, playground/open space, or has significantly funded a project or event, it is appropriate that Council’s contribution to the community be acknowledged and commemorated through the use of plaques or some other form of commemoration. An appropriate policy or set of protocols would allow for Council to adopt a consistent approach in relation to applications for public memorials and in the use of commemorative plaques. In developing a draft policy officers should consider the approaches taken by other similar organisations and councils, the costs associated with ongoing maintenance, and responsibility for management of the memorials.

CR CRAIG LANGDON Olympia Ward

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

ATTACHMENTS

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 11 MAY 2015 Page 65

4.1 Laane Avenue, Rosanna - Traffic Investigation

Attachment 1 Response from VicRoads to Council request to review the signal phasing at the intersection of Rosanna Road and Banyule Road in Rosanna ............................................................... 66

4.2 Public Exhibition of Amendment C101 - Introducing Schedule 2 to the Special Building Overlay

Attachment 1 Summary of Submissions to C101 ................................................... 68

Attachment 2 Proposed responses to Key Themes contained in submissions..................................................................................... 71

4.3 Warren Road, Viewbank – Proposed Children's Crossing

Attachment 1 Letter from Viewbank College .......................................................... 73

4.4 Amendment to a permit for a new carport at 2/1 Della Torre Crescent, Ivanhoe (P352/2013)

Attachment 1 Advertised documents ..................................................................... 74

Attachment 2 Advertised plans .............................................................................. 93

Attachment 3 Technical consideration ................................................................... 97

4.5 Planning Permit Application for an additional 15 Electronic Gaming Machines and associated buidlings and works at Montmorency Eltham RSL (P1143/2014)

Attachment 1 Plans ............................................................................................. 101

Attachment 2 Additional Information .................................................................... 107

5.1 Rate Capping Submission - Essential Services Commission Consultation Paper

Attachment 1 Local Government Rate Capping & Variation Framework - ESC Consultation Paper April 2005 ............................................... 109

Attachment 2 Banyule's Submission - ESC Consultation Paper .......................... 159

Attachment 3 ESC Rate Capping Consultation Paper, Banyule City Council Submission (May 2015) ................................................................. 160

5.2 Multicultural Advisory Committee - Vacancy of the position of committee chair

Attachment 1 Multicultural Advisory Committee - Terms of Reference ................ 168

6.1 Operating and Capital Financial Management Report for the Period Ended 31 March 2015

Attachment 1 Profit and Loss Graph - March 2015 .............................................. 172

Attachment 2 Profit and Loss Summary - March 2015 ......................................... 174

Attachment 3 Capital Works and Initiatives Summary - March 2015 .................... 175

6.3 Items for Noting

Attachment 1 Minutes - LGBTI Advisory Committee - 14/4/15 ............................. 182

Attachment 2 Minutes - Multicultural Advisory Committee 16/4/15 ...................... 186

Attachment 3 Minutets Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee - 15/4/15 ......................................................................................... 190

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.1

Item: 4.1 Attachment 1: Response from VicRoads to Council request to review the signal

phasing at the intersection of Rosanna Road and Banyule Road in Rosanna


Att

ach

men

t 1

4.1

Item: 4.1 Attachment 1: Response from VicRoads to Council request to review the signal phasing at the intersection of Rosanna Road and Banyule Road in Rosanna


Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2 Attachment 1: Summary of Submissions to C101


Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2



Att

ac

hm

en

t 2

4.2

Item: 4.2 Attachment 2: Proposed responses to Key Themes contained in submissions


Key Submission Theme

Council Proposed Response as at 11 May 2015

1 Consultation and Information

Council’s approach has included information sessions and discussions with affected landowners and occupiers. This happened in late 2014, to help raise profile for public exhibition which happened from late February to early April 2015. Telephone calls, emails and meetings with submitters have also helped to share information. The public exhibition process was also supported by frequently asked questions and maps provided on Council’s website.

2 Property Value

It is not the application of the Overlay that makes land prone to stormwater flows. The Overlay is simply a mechanism for identifying, for strategic and statutory panning purposes, the stormwater flow characteristics of the area.

Information for stormwater flow potential on properties is already available to prospective purchasers through encumbrance certificates issued by retail water companies under Section 239G of the Melbourne Metropolitan Board of Works Act 1958 or Land Information Certificate which is issued by Council under Section 229 of the Local Government Act 1989.

3 Property Insurance Insurance is an issue for individual householders and not a factor relevant to the application of the SBO. The inclusion of the Overlay in the scheme represents an important piece of information for property owners and potential purchasers and developers.

4 SBO2 Mapping It cannot be assumed that severe stormwater has never previously affected land referred to in a submission. Even if a severe storm has not affected the land in recent years, it is likely that it will happen at some time in the future. The SBO2 maps have estimated the main areas where severe stormwater flows may affect the land. This is storm water that has a 1% chance of occurring in any year.

Council shall review and confirm the SBO2 mapping for those properties where a mapping concern was raised. This work will be done by the expert drainage consultants and included in their statement at the future Panel Hearing.

5 Infrastructure Capacity

Council’s approach to upgrading drainage infrastructure is to prioritise future works in-line with known risks and through future annual budget processes.

Council’s ongoing work for stormwater management will help prioritise locations for future drainage improvements, with scheduling and timing subject to annual budgeting.

For property development, it is current practice to require on-site detention of stormwater. Council manages this through the issuing of planning permits and permit conditions for on-site works to be done.

The occurrence of overland flows is due to the magnitude of stormwater flows across land. Local drainage infrastructure is generally designed to manage the more regular 1 in 5 year storm. It is the purpose of the SBO2 to manage risks associated with the less frequent but more severe 100 year storm.

6 Infrastructure Council’s maintenance approach is to give timely responses to customer queries about drainage maintenance. Incoming

Att

ach

men

t 2

4.2

Item: 4.2 Attachment 2: Proposed responses to Key Themes contained in submissions


Maintenance queries are used to prompt maintenance cleansing action.

7 SBO2 Schedule Content

Council will consider the changes and respond to them at a Planning Panel. It is noted that the head provision of the SBO, at Clause 44.05 of the Planning Scheme, already contains many exemptions.

8 Future Development The SBO2 is a long-term approach to better protect people and their property from severe stormwater impacts. SBOs have been applied in many municipalities and are considered an effective tool to manage development impacts. This can be done by achieving habitable floor levels above stormwater flows and other on-site works that help with the safe passage of flows. These design outcomes can avoid longer-term costs of repair and restoration after severe storms.

If the SBO2 is the only reason a planning permit is required then the application can be submitted to the VicSmart process at Council. VicSmart is a short permit process designed for simple applications like those in the SBO2. A VicSmart application is exempt from advertising and a permit decision can be issued by Council within 10 business days provided that all the application requirements have been met. The information requirements and the assessment criteria for a VicSmart application are clearly set out in the planning scheme.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.3

Item: 4.3 Attachment 1: Letter from Viewbank College


Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4

Item: 4.4 Attachment 1: Advertised documents


Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 2

4.4

Item: 4.4 Attachment 2: Advertised plans


Att

ach

men

t 2

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 2

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 3

4.4

Item: 4.4 Attachment 3: Technical consideration



REFERRAL COMMENTS

Engineering

The application was referred to Council’s Engineering Department for comment. The following comments were provided:

Council’s Residential Vehicle Crossing Policy states the following:

o Two or more vehicle crossings will be considered where two or more

dwellings are proposed on a corner site. In assessing an application for two or more vehicle crossings for a concern site, the following criteria will be taken into account:

The vehicle crossing must not be located within 9 metres of the fence line of an intersecting street.

As such, for the subject site, the widening of the existing crossover would not be supported.

Construction

The application was referred to Council’s Construction Department for comment. The following comment was formally provided:

The widening of the crossover would not be supported as it does not meet Council’s specifications. On corner lots, the crossover must be a minimum of 9 metres from the intersection of the lot boundaries.

The following comment was informally provided:

The widened portion of the crossover between the property boundary and the footpath does not have Construction approval.

Parks and Gardens

The application was informally referred to Council’s Parks and Gardens Department for comment regarding the removal of a Weeping Bottle Brush (Callistemon viminalis) street tree that was located in close proximity to the crossover prior to its widening. No records were found stating that the removal of this street tree was granted. CLAUSE 22.02 RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBOURHOOD CHARACTER POLICY The subject site is located within Garden Suburban Precinct 3 within Clause 22.02 Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy. This precinct seeks to maintain and enhance the character of the area through various design and landscaping measures, including low front fencing with landscaped front gardens, landscaping the front setback to improve the garden setting and discourage car parking in front of dwellings, enhancing avenues of street trees, by designing developments within only one single width crossover and a driveway that is softened with curves and vegetation, and by ensuring carports and garages do not dominate the streetscape. OVERLAY PROVISIONS Schedule 1 to the Environmental Significance Overlay requires planning approval for both the construction of a fence and the shade sail carport structure. It seeks to achieve this by aiming to have 50% of site available for native vegetation, lawn and other pervious space, by maintaining the natural environment as the dominant visual element of the area, and by the effect of the development on the natural ecosystems.

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.4



PARTICULAR PROVISIONS Clause 52.06 Car Parking states that ground level car parking must not visually dominate public space, that the design of car parks must take into account their use as entry points to the site, and that landscaping and trees must be planted to provide shade and shelter, and soften the appearance of ground level car parking. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION The bin storage area and the associated fencing around it has been designed and located to incorporate into the surrounding built forms on the site and are not considered to compromise the streetscape. Due to the location and limited visual impacts of the bin storage area on the streetscape, the removal of Condition 1 (d) is considered to be acceptable. However, the proposed removal of conditions relating to the size of the carport, the need to align the car space and fencing with the existing single width crossover, and the additional concrete next to the crossover are not supported due to the following:

The double width carport structure is of greater visual dominance on the streetscape than the previously approved single width carport. The structure is considered to be contrary to the neighbourhood character objective of minimising the visual dominance of car parking facilities.

The Kenilworth Parade boundary length for the subject lot is 14.267 metres. Due to the length of this frontage, the resulting impacts on landscaping opportunities along this streetscape, and the close proximity to the Della Torre Crescent-Kenilworth Parade “T” intersection, a double width crossover for this property would be contrary to the objectives and decision criteria of Council’s Residential Vehicle Crossing Policy.

As mentioned within the Engineering and Construction referral comments, due to the location of the crossover in relation to the Della Torre Crescent-Kenilworth Parade “T” intersection (less than 9 metres), modifications to this crossover would not be supported and would be contrary to Council’s crossover requirements.

The portion of the nature strip that has been concreted without Council’s consent results in reversing turning movements within the nature strip that are considered to be unsafe with regards to sight lines, turning movements in close proximity to the intersection, and the potential for vehicle access over the kerb.

The extent of hard paving throughout portion of the site that is north of the dwelling due to the double width car parking facility, the footpaths and the bin storage area result in a reduction of pervious surfaces by approximately 37 square metres. The remaining permeable space is limited to three small garden beds that cane enables the retention of one tree but can only accommodate the planting of some small shrubs. The concreted portion of the nature strip has also resulted in the loss of a Callistemon street tree, which further compromises the streetscape. The loss of permeable space for landscaping is considered to be detrimental to the preferred vegetated streetscape and the landscaping objectives within both Council’s Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy and Schedule 1 to the Environmental Significance Overlay. Due to the presentation of this frontage towards the Della Torre Crescent-Kenilworth Parade “T” intersection, the loss of landscaping opportunities is considered to be visually prominent on the streetscapes for both streets.

The lack of a replacement street tree for the removed Callistemon, which was located to the west of the crossover, is also considered contrary to the preferred neighbourhood character which seeks to ensure that street trees are provided to enhance the tree streetscapes. The removal of this street tree was required to accommodate the additional concrete within the nature strip to enable vehicle access to the widened car parking area.

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.4



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.5

Item: 4.5 Attachment 1: Plans


Att

ach

men

t 1

4.5



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.5



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.5



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.5



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.5



Att

ach

men

t 2

4.5

Item: 4.5 Attachment 2: Additional Information


Att

ach

men

t 2

4.5

Item: 4.5 Attachment 2: Additional Information


Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1

Item: 5.1 Attachment 1: Local Government Rate Capping & Variation Framework - ESC Consultation Paper April 2005


Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1

Item: 5.1 Attachment 1: Local Government Rate Capping & Variation Framework - ESC

Consultation Paper April 2005


Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.1




Att

ach

men

t 2

5.1

Item: 5.1 Attachment 2: Banyule's Submission - ESC Consultation Paper


Placeholder for Attachment 2

Rate Capping Submission - Essential Services

Commission Consultation Paper

Banyule's Submission - ESC Consultation Paper

0 Pages

Att

ach

men

t 3

5.1

Item: 5.1 Attachment 3: ESC Rate Capping Consultation Paper, Banyule City Council

Submission (May 2015)


ESC RATE CAPPING CONSULTATION PAPER – BANYULE CITY

COUNCIL SUBMISSION (MAY2015)

THE FORM OF THE CAP While a cap based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) is simple to understand and apply, are there any issues that we should be aware of? Banyule Council, like most councils and other industry bodies, is of the opinion that the use of a simplistic measure such as CPI to cap municipal rates is inappropriate. Banyule Council supports the views of the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV), which has always argued that Councils do not deliver electricity, bread and milk, the common household goods and services which are measured by the CPI. Councils in Victoria deliver more than 100 community services and fund construction and material costs to maintain $73 billion in community facilities. Like all councils, Banyule has been subject to reduced funding from both Federal and State Governments. In addition, the factors driving up Council costs are different from those affecting the increase in prices of common household goods and services, measured by the CPI. The argument repeated throughout the industry is that the growth in costs, the cost to maintain the scale of infrastructure under council control, cost shifting from other tiers of Government, the costs of compliance under a growing regulatory environment and the growing demands of communities, all require a level of rate revenue in excess of an index which is based on typical consumer goods costs. The current proposal to cap council rates to the CPI is a knee jerk reaction that does not give voracity to the complex nature of the local government industry. There is a flawed base assumption that the level of rating undertaken by local government has not been appropriate and there is a problem that needs to be fixed. A global assumption seems to have been made that all councils are rating too highly and that councils will be able to operate effectively within a capped environment. Banyule would like to understand the evidence that supports this base premise and understand the evidence that exists to support a global cap. Despite these challenges, Banyule Council is an efficient, well managed and financially sound organisation. What are some ways to refine the cap (for example, alternative indices), in line with the Government’s objectives? Each municipality enters a rate capped environment with pre-existing and differing financial conditions. Each Council should be able to present its justification for a rate set on the needs of its local community. This rate should be based on the evidence of the efficiency of its current core service provision, the extent of costs shifted to maintain current levels of service provided on behalf of the community and other levels of government and on the condition and required

Att

ach

men

t 3

5.1

Item: 5.1 Attachment 3: ESC Rate Capping Consultation Paper, Banyule City Council Submission (May 2015)


spend to renew local infrastructure under its control and required to be maintained for its community. A rate cap as proposed will significantly impact on the local community through the reduction in services to the community, the risk of failing local infrastructure and a far higher long term cost to communities through the eventual renewal gap caused (generational impact). Should a rate cap be required it should be done so on the review of local conditions and should take into account the views of the community and their expectations of service levels as outlined within Best Value principles. 3. Should the cap be set on a single year basis? Is there any merit in providing an annual cap plus indicative caps for the next two to three years to assist councils to adopt a longer term view in their budgeting and planning, particularly when maintaining and investing in infrastructure often takes a longer term perspective? How should such a multi-year cap work in practice? Councils are required at a minimum to provide a four year strategic resource plan. It is critical for the Essential Service Commission to set a four year estimate as a minimum to ensure consistent strategic resource planning in councils. Should the cap be based on historical movements or forecasts of CPI? The rate cap should not be based on CPI. If a rate cap is introduced it should be on a forecast index (based on key local government cost factors) that reasonably allow councils to provide the services and infrastructure required by their communities. The cap should allow for the management of long term significant infrastructure initiatives. Should a single cap apply equally to all councils? No, as mentioned earlier a rate cap should not be a blunt instrument. Any cap introduced should recognise the current financial position and other key local government factors of a Council, the future infrastructure renewal commitments of the Council, and reflect those costs actually incurred by Council operations including cost shifting. THE BASE TO WHICH THE CAP APPLIES What base should the cap apply to? Does it include rates revenue, service rates/charges, municipal charges and special rates/charges? An appropriate cap if applied should be applied to all rates and charges as defined in the Local Government Act. General fee for service revenue, for goods and services provided in an open market, should not be capped. Should the cap apply to total revenue arising from these categories or on average rates and charges per assessment? Any appropriate cap should be levied on the average rates and charges per assessment.

Att

ach

men

t 3

5.1




How should we treat supplementary rates? How do they vary from council to council? Supplementary rates should be excluded from calculations in the year they are derived and included in subsequent years’ assessments. It is important that whatever base is selected to measure the cap it is consistent between all councils and can reasonably be projected. Supplementary rates are not usually known for the current year until after the following year’s strategic budget has been endorsed. If estimates used differ significantly from actual results this could distort the results and the ability to make an informed assessment of the actual rate charged against the expected rate capped. This may result in greater effort in providing reconciliations and substantiation of variances. What are the challenges arising from the re-valuation of properties every 2 years? The current cycle of two year re-valuations leads to a significant increased administrative cost for Councils. The redistribution of rates every two years from revaluation destroys any correlation a rate cap has with the rate paid by an individual assessment. A return to a four year valuation cycle would allow more time for the message of a capped rate to be understood. A four year cycle deals better with localised aberrations in the property market cycle. A capped environment with forecast caps, without redistributions every two years, would allow for property owners to budget appropriately. Revaluations every four years at the beginning of a Council’s term would provide stability and reduce confusion for the full term of a Council. The period in which the valuations are being undertaken should also be considered to align with the budget process and allow adequate time and resources to finalise prior to the completion of the budget documentation for community consultation. What should the base year be? If a cap is introduced, the base year should be the 2018- 2019 financial year, as a new Council would have carriage of the capped environment. This would allow the appropriate time for the research to be concluded as to what an appropriate rate cap for each council should be having regard to key local government factors. THE VARIATION PROCESS How should the variation process work? Any variation process should take local community needs into account but not so onerous as to add significant administrative burden. If the cap is set at an appropriate level, the majority of councils would be able to manage their long term finances. This would reduce the need to seek ongoing variations. In the event that Council does require variations there should be an as of right exemption for demonstrated cost shifts within the process. It would be beneficial if councils were able to seek variations if their financial situation or infrastructure needs were demonstrated to be outside of key sustainability indicators. An initial levelling period may be appropriate for some councils so that the relative position of councils on key sustainability index measures could be established and maintained.

Att

ach

men

t 3

5.1



The current proposal for rate capping works on a premise that councils are relatively alike. Under what circumstances should councils be able to seek a variation? Any reasonable request for assessment of a variation should be granted. Councils are responsible authorities managing billions of dollars of the community’s assets and services. It is reasonable to assume they would not waste the Commission’s time on minor matters. The variation application should be judged on the clear criteria of a community benefits test: including

Demonstrated community demand and support

Financial sustainability

Infrastructure Sustainability

Change management

Regional significance

Cost shift

Market forces

Historical liabilities It should be noted that local government is responsible for long term planning and financial management of the Community’s investments. Seeking a variation needs to be for circumstances deemed significant. Apart from the exceptions identified by the Government (namely, new infrastructure needs from a growing population, changes in funding levels from the Commonwealth Government, changes in State Government taxes and levies, increased responsibilities, and unexpected incidents such as natural disasters), are there any other circumstances that would justify a case for above cap increases? A funding call for Council to make a contribution to the Local Authorities Superannuation Fund - Defined Benefit Scheme. As per previous question.

There must be inbuilt considered approaches to ensure councils continue to maintain their assets. How will the Commission differentiate between a Council that has maintained its asset renewal ratio but not had the capacity to invest into new assets; against a Council that has continued to invest in new infrastructure through exemption requests but not invested in asset renewal? A Council’s growth cycle must be considered. The needs and reasons for exceptions across the various Councils may differ considerably. Council needs to be in a position to manage efficiently and provide the much needed services across its community at whatever growth cycle it happens to be in. What should councils need to demonstrate to get a variation approved? What baseline information should be required for councils to request a variation? A possible set of requirements could include:

the council has effectively engaged with its community

there is a legitimate case for additional funds by the council

the proposed increase in rates and charges is reasonable to meet the need

the proposed increase in rates and charges fits into its longer term plan for funding and services

Att

ach

men

t 3

5.1




the council has made continuous efforts to keep costs down. We would like stakeholders’ views on whether the above requirements are adequate. The information required as a baseline is reasonable. The issue however, lies in the subjectivity of the information and at what threshold would the Commission consider a submission. A clear set of weightings and locally relevant KPIs needs to be established (based on key local government factors) so as to justify variation requests in a municipality to relative local need. The exercise of rate capping should not result in local communities becoming homogenised. Local character and identity should remain important factors for consideration. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT What does best practice in community engagement, process and information look like? Are there examples that we can draw from? Councils undertake extensive community engagement exercises on an ongoing basis. These processes occur throughout the year with key stakeholders and inform the strategic planning of the organisation to meet the needs of the community, and articulate the priorities around resource allocation. Banyule has an extensive community engagement and planning process that it undertakes and feeds back to its community in an iterative cycle. This engagement process helps to establish the key themes, initiatives and priorities for the short, mid and long term future of the municipality. The current Banyule City Plan is a key exemplar of this work. INCENTIVES How should the framework be designed to provide councils with incentives to pursue ongoing efficiencies and respond to community needs? How could any unintended consequences be minimised? Incentives are a reasonable tool in a rate capped environment to provide future flexibility such as a series of rate credits for future major infrastructure projects. However, the premise exists that there is excess capacity to begin with. An incentives system benefits organisations that either have a larger cash base or have been less efficient in the past. Financial incentives need to be funded by the State Government not from local government funds.

TIMING AND PROCESS A rates capping and variation process should ensure there is enough time for Councils to consult with their ratepayers and for ratepayers to provide feedback, and for us to review councils’ applications. To ensure the smooth functioning of the rates capping and variation framework, it is particularly important that it aligns with Councils’ budget processes. We are interested in stakeholders’ views on how this can be achieved. A four year forecast of the capped rate would aid greatly in the strategic budgeting. The Commission would assess the 4 year strategic budget on a rolling basis. Any significant variation to the 4 years would require an amended assessment. This would provide a longer term outlook and maintain ongoing business functionality and expectations.

Att

ach

men

t 3

5.1



The current Council elections cycle prevents good strategic management as new Councillors do not have sufficient time to assess the strategic needs of the organisation. There is little time to submit variation submissions or assess the new priorities a Council may have been elected to implement in time to inform the budget cycle for the following financial year. The criteria for lodgement of applications should be fair across councils to ensure all information provided is relevant (directly and indirectly impacting on the request) and can be carefully assessed – full disclosure. This would be best suited at a point in time prior to endorsement of the Strategic Resource Plan each year.

TRANSITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS What transitional arrangements are necessary to move to the new rates capping and variation framework? Is there merit in phasing in implementation over a two year period to allow for a smooth transition? There is merit in this and it would be most beneficial if the phasing started with a new Council term. Timing – consideration of the timing of the assessment of rates variations is critical in delivering business continuity. Consideration of the timing of Local Government elections and the ability for elected Councillors to be in a position to influence the budget including stakeholder consultation noting a requirement to deliver an approved budget and City Plan prior to 30 June 2015 each year. Where decisions are pending the Council needs to be in a position to continue its business of delivering quality services and infrastructure to its community. ROLES What are stakeholders’ views on the respective roles of the key participants? Should the Commission’s assessment of rates variations be advisory or determinative? The Commission’s role should be determinative. OTHER MATTERS Is there a need for the framework to be reviewed to assess its effectiveness within three years time? There is a critical requirement for a comprehensive review of the program post implementation. This review should include both the quantitative and qualitative effects on Councils upon review. A base line study should be undertaken at the outset of rate capping to determine the level of economic activity undertaken currently by councils and look at the underlying sustainability of current council finances, infrastructure and services. The study should examine any shifts in these factors across the study period as a result of the rate capping. How should the costs of administrating an ongoing framework be recovered? The framework is a State initiative, any funding for the administration of the framework, the review of its effectiveness, or reporting associated with the scheme should be bourne by the State possibly in consultation with the MAV so as not to create a further cost shift to local government

Att

ach

men

t 3

5.1




OTHER MATTERS RAISED IN EARLIER CHAPTERS We are interested in hearing from stakeholders on:

whether we have developed appropriate principles for this review

whether there are other issues related to the design or implementation of the

rates capping and variation framework that stakeholders think are important

supporting information on the major cost pressures faced by councils that are

beyond their control and the impact on council rates and charges The Principles should recognise the need to have a sound understanding of the economic and social context in which local governments operate including provision of community need into the long term future. The rate capping framework must be well developed, carefully applied, and its impacts transparently, independently, and robustly evaluated. Banyule notes Principle 1 that “Local communities differ in their needs, priorities and resourcing”, which is fundamental to the role of local governance across Victorian communities. Rate capping will be a further ongoing consideration in how councils manage limited resources (and State imposts) impacting the community. Council stewardship decisions in the interests of the community and ratepayers (Principle 3) is endorsed, as is transparency (Principle 2) in setting rates. Any further proposed further demonstration however must recognise existing requirements, current best practice, local usefulness, and regulatory burden. (The LGPRF for example has been significant resource burden with limited usefulness.) To this end the burden of proof in cap variation (Principle 4) needs to be clear, commensurate in scope to the variation sought, contextually fair, and take into account the self-determination of each local government community. Where such principles are held, it should therefore follow that burden-of-proof requirements should also apply to State government regulation and decision making. The “Other viable options” and “Best practice planning” (Principles 5 and 6) will be complex to apply in practice and in activity areas already requiring significant resourcing. Principles 7 and 8 require the State to undertake strong evidence gathering in the application of any rate capping regime. Other issues relating to the design or implementation of rate capping are noted as:

Impact of reduced resources and services, for ratepayers

The changing and growing demands of residents for continuation of existing services and further expectations.

The ongoing local role of councils in enabling community well-being and ability to work effectively in partnership with State and Federal Governments.

Recognition of timely infrastructure provision, rather than lagging behind community need. (i.e. provision now for communities in the future)

Population growth is one factor to be considered, as is also demographic changes (e.g. aging communities) and these impacts on services relied upon by the community.

Consideration to also allow for rate capping increases linked to State and Federal Government funding decreases.

Further information to be provided by the State Government as to workable, cost effective, and sustainable suggestions for any alternative income sources.

Funding for the increased (and ongoing increasing) administrative burdens.

Consideration given to State-funded independent monitoring of impacts and sustainability as a result of a rate capping regime on Victorian communities.

Clear approaches developed as to how introduction of rate capping will unduly skew Council reporting and resource spending, and particularly in relation to experiences in States with rate capping schemes.

That the base issue leading to the State response to impose a rate capping system be addressed. i.e. If weaknesses in rating practices have been found, that systems and

Att

ach

men

t 3

5.1



practices be introduced to address this, rather than a potentially short and longer term community-damaging system.

That the economic and social impacts of such a system should be independently and transparently investigated by the State first.

Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2

Item: 5.2 Attachment 1: Multicultural Advisory Committee - Terms of Reference


BANYULE CITY COUNCIL - MULTICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

TERMS OF REFERENCE

Name: Banyule Multicultural Advisory Committee (BMAC) Aim: The aim of BMAC is to provide Council with advice on multicultural issues and

on the development and implementation of Council’s Inclusion, Access and Equity Framework (IAEF) and Multicultural Plan.

Key Objective:

The priority of the committee is to assist with the implementation of the Multicultural Plan 2014-2017.

Additional Objectives:

Provide feedback and advice to Council on its policies, plans and services that impact multicultural communities

Consider and provide advice on key Government initiatives, programs and reviews

Advocate on behalf of multicultural communities

Consider funding and other opportunities as they may arise

Assist Council to promote the benefits of cultural diversity within the Banyule municipality and beyond

Provide advice to Council with its communication, engagement and consultation with multicultural communities

Assembly of Councillors and Conflicts of Interest The BMAC is considered an Assembly of Councillors as defined under section S80A Local Government Act 1989.

Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2



An Assembly of Councillor form must be completed and sent to Council’s Governance unit as soon as possible at the completion of the meeting for inclusion in the next Council Meeting Agenda. The Assembly of Councillor form records:

the names of all Councillors and members of Council staff attending;

the matters considered;

any conflict of interest disclosures made by a Councillor

whether a Councillor who has disclosed a conflict of interest leaves the assembly as required by the Local Government Act .

The written record of an Assembly of Councillors as soon as practicable must be: (a) reported at an ordinary meeting of the Council; and (b) incorporated in the minutes of that Council meeting

Conflicts of Interest as defined by the Local Government Act S80A (3) Councillors: Councillors must leave the meeting if the matter under consideration could be considered a conflict of interest. The Councillor must disclose they have a conflict of interest regarding any item being considered. The same criteria for conflict of interest for an Assembly of Councillors, applies to this Advisory Committee. Staff: A staff member should declare a conflict of interest if providing advice on the matter to Council. Membership: The BMAC membership will consist of up to 15 community members and will include representation from:

Council (additional to the 15 community members)

Residents

Community Organisations, Agencies and Service providers who have a focus on provision of services to multicultural communities in Banyule

Community Groups

All BMAC positions are voluntary positions. Selection process: The selection committee will include the Manager Health, Ageing and Community Planning and the Community and Social Planning Team. The committee will assess the nominations against the selection criteria and recommend appointments to Council.

Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2



Role of members (criteria): Advisory Committee members will be able to demonstrate:

Knowledge and understanding of the needs and issues affecting multicultural communities

An interest and involvement in local and/or broader multicultural community affairs, advocacy and networks

An interest and understanding of Local Government services and programs from a multicultural community perspective

The ability to contribute to the strategic development of multicultural policy at local government level

Direct links to local ethnic community populations and/or organisations

Experience and/or understanding of the role of an advisory committee Council will aim to ensure that members of the Committee reflect the diversity of the Banyule community including ethnicity, age, gender and different geographical areas across Banyule. Terms of Appointment:

Appointments will be for a two year term

Expressions of Interest for membership will be advertised for a minimum of 14 days

Council will appoint a Councillor to Chair the meetings

Members completing a two year term may re-apply for a further two year term

The membership of the Committee will be reviewed as part of the on-going review and implementation of the IAEF and associated plans.

The operations of the Committee will be evaluated annually to ensure it continues to be effective and relevant.

Members are free to resign from BMAC at any time. Previous nominations may be considered to fill the vacancy. An Expression of Interest (EOI) process will be undertaken if there are no previous nominations that meet the criteria.

Meeting Frequency and Duration:

The BMAC will meet bi-monthly for a duration of 1.5 hours

It is expected that each member attend a minimum of 60% of all meetings

Role of Councillor:

To act as Chairperson of the BMAC

To be the link between Council and the BMAC

To table issues and concerns to Council on behalf of the BMAC

To nominate another Councillor to attend meetings in his/her absence

Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2



Executive Support:

The Community and Social Planning Unit of Council will provide Executive support to BMAC.

Accountability and Extent of Authority:

BMAC members have an active role to provide feedback and advice to Council on issues relating to cultural diversity within the municipality.

BMAC members participate in discussions at bi-monthly meetings.

BMAC members have an advisory role and do not hold any authority to make decisions or commitments on behalf on Council.

Monitoring and reporting:

The minutes of BMAC meetings will be circulated to members via email for confirmation, and then placed on Council’s website for viewing.

All Committee minutes will be presented to Council for noting.

Recommendations and requests arising from BMAC meetings will be presented to Council for consideration. Where this occurs, the request will require the majority support of the committee members present. Responses to recommendations will be determined based on Council’s legislative role, stated commitments in Council’s Policies and Plans and budgetary processes.

Evaluation and Review: An annual evaluation of BMAC will be carried out to identify successes, challenges and areas for improvement for the committee. The BMAC Terms of Reference and membership will be reviewed and evaluated on a bi - annual basis or as required for any significant changes. Reimbursement of expenses: Individual members of the Committee will be reimbursed for transport related costs they have incurred in participating in meetings and related activities.

Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1

Item: 6.1 Attachment 1: Profit and Loss Graph - March 2015


Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1

Item: 6.1 Attachment 1: Profit and Loss Graph - March 2015


Att

ach

men

t 2

6.1

Item: 6.1 Attachment 2: Profit and Loss Summary - March 2015


Att

ach

men

t 3

6.1

Item: 6.1 Attachment 3: Capital Works and Initiatives Summary - March 2015


Att

ach

men

t 3

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 3

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 3

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 3

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 3

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 3

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.3

Item: 6.3 Attachment 1: Minutes - LGBTI Advisory Committee - 14/4/15


Att

ach

men

t 1

6.3



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.3



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.3



Att

ach

men

t 2

6.3

Item: 6.3 Attachment 2: Minutes - Multicultural Advisory Committee 16/4/15


Att

ach

men

t 2

6.3



Att

ach

men

t 2

6.3



Att

ach

men

t 2

6.3



Att

ach

men

t 3

6.3

Item: 6.3 Attachment 3: Minutets Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee - 15/4/15


Banyule Disability and Inclusion Advisory Committee (BDIAC) Minutes from Committee Meeting 15/04/2015, 5.30 -7.00pm

Council Offices 44 Turnham Avenue, Rosanna

1. Attendance and apologies

Attendees:

Cr Jenny Mulholland (Chairperson), Cr Craig Langdon (Deputy Chairperson), Nancy Sadka,

Anna Constas, Simon Chong, Louise Pearson, Stephanie Krt, Luke Nelson, Jeff Walkley,

Theonie Tacticos (Team Leader, Community & Social Planning), Lisa Raywood (Manager,

Health , Aged Services and Community Planning), Shawn Neilsen (Social planner). Janice

Castledine, Sherridan Bourne (MetroAccess)

Apologies: Salima Osborne, Allison Beckwith (Director, Community Programs). Mick Hollman,

Barbara Brook, Sheryl O’Connor, Robert Runco

Note that committee member Madeleine Sobb has now resigned from the Advisory

Committee as she has moved out of the area.

2. Welcome and introductions:

Cr Mullholland formally opened the meeting. It was noted that Shawn Neilsen has replaced

Helen Parker as the contact person for the BDIAC meetings and is now leading on the

Disability Planning portfolio for Council. Shawn will support the Committee and send minutes

and agendas.

3. Previous minutes

The minutes of the previous meeting were emailed 27th March, adopted on the 31st March, and posted on the website. The minutes will go to Council in May for noting. The Committee were informed that a meeting with interested members was held to discuss Council’s Draft Integrated Transport Strategy on 26th March. The comments made at the meeting will be incorporated in the strategy and the Committee will be notified when the next version of the strategy is available. It was noted that comments on the Draft Strategy are still open via Council’s website.

4. Disability Action Plan

The Committee discussed the presentation from Moonee Valley Council at the last meeting. A

series of comments were made about the planning process used by Moonee Valley that will

be used to inform how Council develops it Disability Action Plan (DAP). (These comments

were collated in a separate document and circulated to the committee members).

Att

ach

men

t 3

6.3



The Committee was presented with a proposed timeline outlining the development of

Council’s DAP which included allocated times for Community Consultation. The Committee

was happy with the proposed timelines.

The Committee discussed the various opportunities for consulting with the community about

the DAP and emphasised the importance of reaching a diverse audience, and getting as many

comments, responses, and interest as possible.

The following suggestions were made by the Committee:

Preparing a survey or surveys that target people with a disability as well as carers,

organisations, and open to those in neighbouring Councils. It was suggested that

there may be one entrance point to the survey that allows people to then select the

most appropriate survey for them. It was suggested that Council can use its HACC

service to promote and gain responses to the Survey.

It was recommended that the survey be produced in a variety of formats to enable

those with different needs to access and participate in the survey.

It was recommend that a community forum be considered as part of the consultation

process and that perhaps a NDIS information session could be combined with the

consultation process to attract more people to participate.

Action: Council to circulate an updated timeline and consultation plan prior to the May

BDIAC meeting to be agreed to at the May meeting.

Responsibility: Council

5. Local Report Watch

Members discussed the range of NDIS related forums that are currently being delivered in

Victoria. Certain members will be attending events over the past week and agreed to report

back to the next meeting on the events, and whether there is a need to deliver a localised

Banyule event.

Action: Members to feedback on NDIS forums at May BDIAC meeting


6. Council presentations

The Committee was informed that other advisory Committees have recently had

presentations from different Council departments on the various roles of Council.

Att

ach

men

t 3

6.3



These have included:

The customer service team outlining the way that Council receives and responds to

the various requests it receives from the community.

The Human Resources team briefly outlining the values and behaviours that govern

how Council officers behave and work. It was mentioned that as BDIAC members are

volunteers of Council these values also apply to Council’s Advisory Committee

members.

It was agreed that these presentations would be of value and interest to BDIAC and

presentations would be organised for future meetings.

Action: Council to organise Customer Service and Human Resources presentations for future

BDIAC meeting.


Next meeting & Committee Photo.

The next BDIAC meeting is scheduled for May 20th. Present members of the Committee were

invited to have their picture taken. The Committee was informed that other Council

Committees include brief information about Committee members on the Council website.

Council officers will contact Committee members to gain their consent before placing any

information of the website.

Action: Council to circulate photo and proposed wording for website and members to agree

(or not agree) to having information placed on the website.


Thank you and next meeting:

5.30pm – 7pm on Wednesday 20th May Rosanna Office 44 Turnham Ave Rosanna

Att

ach

men

t 3

6.3

