Banyule City Council Agenda 2 June 2014

Ordinary Meeting of Council

Council Chambers, Service Centre

275 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe

2 June 2014 commencing at 7.45pm

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

Confirmation of Minutes Ordinary Meeting of Council held 19 May 2014

Disclosure of Interests

1. Petitions

1.1 Proposed Development (3 dwellings) at 10 Avoca Street, Heidelberg .............................................................................................................. 3

REPORTS:

2. People – Community Strengthening and Support

2.1 Draft Electronic Gaming Machine Policy 2014 ........................................................ 5

3. Planet – Environmental Sustainability

3.1 Achieving Permanent Planning Controls for Substantial Trees in Banyule's Garden Court and Garden Suburban Neighbourhoods ........................... 9

4. Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment

4.1 Amendment C71 - Corrections to Banyule Planning Scheme .............................. 13

4.2 Banyule Rights of Way Policy and Strategy .......................................................... 15

5. Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.1 Summary of Proposed Budget & City Plan Written Submissions .......................... 21

5.2 Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) State Council May 2014 ......................... 38

AGENDA (Cont’d)

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 2 June 2014 Page 2

6. Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

6.1 Operating Financial Report for Period Ended 30 April 2014 .................................. 41

6.2 Assembly of Councillors ........................................................................................ 43

7. Sealing of Documents

7.1 Sealing of Documents ........................................................................................... 47

8. Notices of Motion

8.1 Planning of Ford Park, Bellfield ............................................................................. 49

8.2 Food Quality Assurance Equipment for Somalia .................................................. 51

8.3 Outdoor Advertising Opportunities ........................................................................ 52

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 matters.

11. Confidential Matters

11.1 Contractual Matters

11.2 Contractual Matters; AND Proposed Developments

11.3 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

1.1

Petitions


1.1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT (3 DWELLINGS) AT 10 AVOCA STREET, HEIDELBERG

Author: Vi Tran - Development Planner, City Development

Ward: Ibbott

File: P1110/2013

SUMMARY A petition with 57 signatures has been received objecting to the application for a planning permit for a multi unit development (construction of three double storey dwellings at the rear of the existing single storey dwelling) and removal of native vegetation at 10 Avoca Street, Heidelberg.

The petition prayer is as follows:

We, the undersigned, wish to lodge a petition with the Banyule City Council to consider our objection to the proposed development on 10 Avoca Street, Heidelberg (ref no. P1110/2013). The details of our objection are set out the attachment to this petition.

The petition has been received from residents from Heidelberg within the immediate vicinity of the subject site. Grounds of objection outlined in the attachment to the petition (see Attachment 1) include concerns with respect to:

Neighbourhood character;

The intensity of development;

Removal of native trees; and

Parking and traffic.

OFFICER COMMENT

A detailed assessment of the application against the relevant sections of the Banyule Planning Scheme will be undertaken in due course by Council Officers.

RECOMMENDATION

1. That Council receives and notes the petition. 2. Concerns raised in the petition be considered by officers in assessing the

merits of the application. 3. The primary petitioner is advised accordingly.

ATTACHMENTS

No. Title Page

1 Details of objection 54

2.1

People – Community Strengthening and Support


2.1 DRAFT ELECTRONIC GAMING MACHINE POLICY 2014

Author: Michelle Rowe - Community & Social Planner, Corporate Services

File: F2014/249

SUMMARY

To present the Draft Banyule Electronic Gaming Machine Policy and Community Consultation Report to Council for consideration, discussion and potential adoption.

OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

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. 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 People Policy, key direction to “promote and support health and wellbeing”.

BACKGROUND

Following the Councillor Briefing Session on 6th February 2014 the Banyule Electronic Gaming Machine Policy and Plan 2008 was reviewed (in line with City Plan Commitment 1.1.3) and a new Policy drafted in line with Council’s preferred Policy direction. The new Banyule Electronic Gaming Machine Policy 2014 Policy has been drafted to:

Reflect the Council’s positions around its various decision making arenas;

Explain the role and importance of Social and Economic Impact Assessments (SEIA)

Articulate a harm minimisation focus direction in postcode area 3081; while maintaining the balance for open, fair and transparent decision making and guidance for applicants through the planning application process.

ADVOCACY

This Electronic Gaming Machine Policy will inform Council’s agenda and advocacy position in relation to EGMs.

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.

2.1


DRAFT ELECTRONIC GAMING MACHINE POLICY 2014 cont’d


It is considered that the subject matter does raise issues relating to the Charter, specifically “the right to protection of families and children”. This right includes matters which impact and affect the welfare of children within the family, and there has been much debate and research into the effects of EGM’s and gambling on the welfare of families and children.

CONSULTATION

The draft policy was available for public comment over a period of four weeks. Contact was made with each venue and specific feedback sought in relation to the Policy. Other than informal telephone discussions, only one other piece of written feedback was provided. This feedback was considered and has been incorporated in the final version of the draft policy. A summary of the feedback received is contained in Attachment 2.

DISCUSSION

Banyule’s Electronic Gaming Machine (EGM) Policy and Plan was a five year plan adopted by Council on 19th May 2008. There has been substantial change over the past five years in the legislative framework and context within which EGMs operate. It was necessary to update Banyule’s EGM Policy and Plan so that it remains relevant and useful. Considerable work has been underway over the past four months to review and update the policy so that it reflects and guides Banyule City Council’s strategic policy positions in relation to Electronic Gaming within the municipality and surrounding areas, where the Council has a direct decision making responsibility; is acting as a referral authority; or has an advisory role. At a briefing on 10 February 2014, Councillors approved the process associated with the development of Banyule’s Electronic Gaming Machine Policy Statement and Plan 2014. In broad terms the review involved:

Reviewing previous Council Policies and supporting materials;

Seeking direction as to the Council’s preferred Policy model;

Updating Policy Discussion and new Draft Policy in line with current policy context;

Establishing a Policy Reference Group to clearly define broad intent of Council’s Policy position;

Circulating the Draft EGM Policy and Background Paper for community comment

Establishing a Working Group to support and oversee the implementation of the 2014 Policy Framework.

The EGM Council Policy Statement has been separated from the background discussion material and the more operational and procedural implementation documents. It is anticipated that in doing so, greater role clarity among all levels of the Council will be achieved.\

2.1




POLICY OBJECTIVE

The EGM Policy Statement defines the various Council positions on electronic gaming machines (EGMs) proposed within Banyule and in close proximity to our municipality, and provides the basis for development of an Electronic Gaming Machine Policy Implementation Plan. This Policy Statement defines how the Council will respond to applications for new venues, additional machines and transfers of machines between venues. The Policy Statement can also be used to guide Council’s response to other gambling related matters. The EGM Policy Statement has been developed in line with Part1A—Local Government Charter of the Local Government Act 1989 and in line with current State Government Policy, Legislation and Victorian Planning Provisions (VPP’s).

THE COUNCIL’S INFLUENCE

While all forms of gambling can lead to a range of complex social issues, Banyule City Council acknowledges that it has a clear role around EGMs, which include:

Responsible Authority—in accordance with the Planning and Environment Act 1987, in deciding on applications for planning permits;

Site, premises or land owner/manager—in situations where gaming venues are already established or proposed to be situated, are owned, managed or vested in the authority of ;

The Referral Authority—where an application for planning permit is made within a neighbouring municipality (Darebin, Yarra, Boroondara, Manningham, Nillumbik and Whittlesea) and is referred to Banyule City Council for comment;

Key Stakeholder and Community Advocate—during times of government review or alternative mechanisms involving community consultation and community advocacy; and

Administrator of Community Benefit Grant & Trust Agreements— The Council’s Grant Administrators may support the administration on behalf of Contributing Gaming Venues.

This Policy is therefore limited in its scope to the area of EGMs and not the broader and more general policy area of gambling.

CONCLUSION

The draft Policy now represents a clearly stated Council position, which is generally perceived as being both fair and transparent, and a sound basis from which to build sound working relationships with the industry and community alike. The Draft Policy is presented to Council for consideration and adoption. This policy once approved will update and replace the previous 2008 policy and plan.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council adopt the Electronic Gaming Machine Policy. (attached).

2.1




ATTACHMENTS

No. Title Page

1 Draft - Banyule Electronic Gaming Machine Policy 56

2 Consultation Summary 62

3.1

Planet – Environmental Sustainability


3.1 ACHIEVING PERMANENT PLANNING CONTROLS FOR SUBSTANTIAL TREES IN BANYULE'S GARDEN COURT AND GARDEN SUBURBAN NEIGHBOURHOODS

Author: Klover Apostola - Strategic Planner, City Development

File: F2013/884

Previous Items Council on 29 July 2013 (Item 4.2 - Permanent controls for substantial trees in

Banyule's Garden Court and Garden Suburban Neighbourhoods)

Council on 16 December 2013 (Item 4.2 - Permanent Planning Controls for Substantial Trees in Banyule's Garden Suburban and Garden Court Neighbourhoods)

SUMMARY

To advise that Council’s Amendment C80 proposal for a permanent overlay control for Substantial Trees in Banyule’s Garden Court and Garden Suburban neighbourhoods has been approved, and is now part of the Planning Scheme.



CITY PLAN

This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “protect and enhance our natural environment”.

BACKGROUND

The Vegetation Protection Overlay Schedule 5 (VPO5) is a planning scheme control that requires a planning permit for the removal or lopping of Substantial Trees so that they can be protected where appropriate, and effectively considered when development is proposed. The VPO5 was introduced to the Banyule Planning Scheme as a temporary tree control in 2010. Council’s Planning Scheme Amendment C80 proposed that the VPO5 be made a permanent control in the Banyule Planning Scheme. The proposal was supported by the “Strategy for Substantial Trees in Banyule’s Garden Court and Garden Suburban Neighbourhoods”. This document reviewed the use of the temporary control and recognised the contribution that Substantial Trees make to the local character, environment, natural heritage and habitat.

3.1


ACHIEVING PERMANENT PLANNING CONTROLS FOR SUBSTANTIAL TREES IN BANYULE'S GARDEN COURT AND GARDEN SUBURBAN NEIGHBOURHOODS cont’d


The C80 proposal was publically exhibited last year, and was then considered by a Planning Panel, who recommended it be approved with some refinements. At the Council meeting on 16 December 2013, Council adopted the refined proposal and resolved to request the Minister for Planning’s approval. Amendment C80 was approved on 8 May 2014 and was published in the Government Gazette on 15 May 2014. It is now a permanent part of the Banyule Planning Scheme. The final VPO5 is given in Attachment 1.


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.

DISCUSSION

Operation The approval of the permanent VPO5 means that a permit is required for the removal or lopping of Substantial Trees which are over 12 metres high, and/or with a diameter of 40cm or more at 1.4m above the trunk base. It affects residentially zoned properties in parts of Bundoora, Greensborough, Watsonia, Watsonia North, Macleod, Yallambie, Viewbank, Rosanna, Heidelberg, Heidelberg Heights, Heidelberg West, Bellfield and Ivanhoe as shown in the map in Attachment 2. Recent analysis and review of the temporary control has shown that it has resulted in an increased awareness of tree protection. This is because the VPO5 requires existing trees to be considered early on in the design process for residential developments. It has been successfully tested at VCAT and has not had a significant impact on development yields. Between November 2010 (when the temporary VPO5 was introduced) and November 2012 there were 416 applications which triggered a planning permit application for tree removal and/or tree lopping by VPO5. Of these applications 87.5% were solely for removal of a Substantial Tree. Some of these applications did not require a permit as they were not Substantial Trees, and Council’s arborist was able to give advice about appropriate tree care. Most were given approval for tree removal or lopping. In other cases the applications were amended to become tree pruning proposals, as Council’s arborist found that retention could be achieved with correct management. Only 6% of applications were refused by Council’s arborist. When a permit was given to allow removal, a ‘2 for 1’ principle for replacement planting was required. The volume of planning permit applications associated with the VPO5 control, in excess of 200 applications per year plus additional tree considerations as part of development applications, require dedicated arborist staff to assess and process within reasonable service levels. Such resources will need to be included as part of ongoing budgets.

3.1


ACHIEVING PERMANENT PLANNING CONTROLS FOR SUBSTANTIAL TREES IN BANYULE'S GARDEN COURT AND GARDEN SUBURBAN NEIGHBOURHOODS cont’d


Marketing Now that permanent controls for substantial trees in the Garden Court and Garden Suburban neighbourhood character areas it is important to advise the general community that a planning permit is required for works on large trees in these areas. This help to improve compliance with the control and manage expectations of protecting large trees. Appropriate notification in the Banner and Council’s town planning services is suggested to promote the permanency of the controls. Further Review of Tree Controls As some form of tree controls exist on all residential land in Banyule it is appropriate that at some stage a review of how the various controls interact and operate together is appropriate. Improving clarity and consistency of our planning controls would help to manage community and development expectations around trees across the municipality. Therefore it is recommended that a review of tree controls across the municipality be considered as part of Council’s future work planning.

CONCLUSION

Amendment C80 is the culmination of much work done by Council, including consultation with the community, and detailed research and analysis to underpin the use of the final control that is now part of the Planning Scheme. It is an important achievement, considering the significant contribution large trees make to landscape values, the preferred neighbourhood character and ecological functions in Banyule.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1. Note the approval of the permanent Vegetation Protection Overlay, Schedule

5 in the Banyule Planning Scheme and the improved tree protection provided by the control;

2. Promote the permanent protection of substantial trees in Garden Court and

Garden Suburban neighbourhood character areas to the community through The Banner and Council’s statutory planning service;

3. Consider a review of the various tree controls in the Banyule Planning

Scheme across the municipality as part of Council’s Strategic Planning team’s work programming.

ATTACHMENTS

No. Title Page

1 Schedule 5 to the Vegetation Protection Overlay 64

2 Areas affected by Schedule 5 to the Vegetation Protection Overlay 67

4.1

Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment


4.1 AMENDMENT C71 - CORRECTIONS TO BANYULE PLANNING SCHEME

Author: Fae Ballingall - Strategic Planner, City Development

File: F2014/208

SUMMARY

To inform Council of the opportunity to process a minor administrative amendment to the Banyule Planning Scheme.



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”.

BACKGROUND

Council’s 2010 Planning Scheme Review highlighted the need to fix-up the planning scheme for corrections and anomalies. Since 2010, progress on various separate Amendments means an opportunity can now be taken to consolidate various fix-ups into one Amendment. Council has the option of ‘fast-tracking’ correctional amendments. This is done under section 20(4) of the Planning and Environment Act (Act) and enables the Minister for Planning to amend a Planning Scheme, with exemption from notice requirements. DISCUSSION

Collation of various opportunities has revealed that an administrative tidy-up of the Banyule Planning Scheme may include:

Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) updated to align with Banyule’s City Plan 2013-2017.

Overlay and Zone Map anomalies, including incorrect addresses, property boundaries, grammatical errors, and use of up-to-date terminology.

MSS and Overlay schedule tidy-up to enable improved consistency and clarity. This includes refined structure and content of permit requirements, decision guidelines and reference documents.

Further detail for all proposed changes is in Attachment 1. This amendment proposal has been prepared as policy-neutral and is consistent with State Government criteria. Any final refinement of the proposal from the Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure (DTPLI) feedback may be progressed under officer delegation, as it is a procedural proposal only.

4.1


AMENDMENT C71 - CORRECTIONS TO BANYULE PLANNING SCHEME cont’d


CONCLUSION

Council is now in a position to progress a suite of corrections to the Banyule Planning Scheme. The next steps will be to:

Prepare final Amendment C71 documentation.

Prepare a Delegates Report.

Send a request that the Minister amend the Banyule Planning Scheme under section 20(4) of the Act.

Receive DTPLI feedback on the proposal for any final refinements.

Upon completion, inform on the final outcome. RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1. Write to the Minister for Planning and request a correctional amendment for the

Banyule Planning Scheme, pursuant to section 20(4) of the Planning and Environment Act, to enable the changes listed in Attachment 1.

2. Note that in accordance with procedural updates for the Banyule Planning

Scheme, all amendment documentation associated with C71 will be progressed under officer delegation.

ATTACHMENTS

No. Title Page

1 Table of Proposed Changes to the Banyule Planning Scheme 69

4.2



4.2 BANYULE RIGHTS OF WAY POLICY AND STRATEGY

Author: Michelle Herbert - Senior Transport Engineer, City Development

File: F2014/785

Previous Items Council on 18 November 2013 (Item 4.4 - Draft Banyule Rights of Way Policy and

Strategy 2013-2023)

SUMMARY

Following the resolution of the Council meeting on 18 November 2013, the Draft Banyule Rights of Way Policy (the Policy) and Draft Banyule Rights of Way Strategy (the Strategy) were released for public consultation in December 2013, with consultation open for a three month period to 7 March 2014. Six submissions were received. The submissions have been considered and reflected in the Policy and Strategy.

The purpose of the Policy is to clarify Council’s role with respect to, and facilitate the co-ordinated management of Rights of Way (and unused roads) within the City of Banyule. The Vision for the Policy is:

To provide well-managed, safe and accessible Rights of Way throughout the City of Banyule that enhance the local and wider community wellbeing, while maintaining and creating new opportunities for pedestrians, cyclists, public safety and community amenity.

The Strategy establishes the direction and identifies actions that will contribute to supporting decision making for Rights of Way across the municipality into the future.





CITY PLAN

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

4.2


BANYULE RIGHTS OF WAY POLICY AND STRATEGY cont’d


BACKGROUND

This item was considered at the Ordinary Meeting of Council held Monday, 18 November 2013. At that meeting, Council resolved that: “1. The Draft Banyule Rights of Way Policy and Strategy be placed on public

exhibition for consultation and comment between the period 25 November 2013 to 7 March 2014.

2. On receipt and consideration of community feedback, a further report be

submitted to Council for the purpose of adopting the Rights of Way Policy and Strategy for the next 10 year period.”

In accordance with Council’s resolution, copies of the Draft Banyule Right of Way Policy and Strategy were made available at Council’s customer service centres, libraries and on the Banyule City Council website. Advertisements were also placed in the Heidelberg Leader and Diamond Valley Leader on two separate occasions, in December 2013 and February 2014. Key stakeholders including shopping centre coordinators and traders groups were emailed copies of the documents directly. Six submissions were received from the community including comments from internal stakeholders. A summary of the submissions and proposed resolution of the issues raised is attached (Attachment 1). The item was listed for consideration at the Council Meeting on 19 May 2014 but was deferred to ensure that all attachments are correctly included. These now form part of the report for consideration. SUMMARY OF ISSUES RAISED IN SUBMISSIONS The main issues raised in the submissions included:

Classification of Rights of Way.

Discontinuance and pursuance of land sales for Class 2 Rights of Way.

Return to embracing Rights of Way as a community amenity.

Contribution of bluestone-paved Rights of Way to Neighbourhood Character.

Overlooking of private open space if development fronting a Right of Way is permitted.

More explanation of Rights of Way definitions required.

Council to address issues that cause damage to properties (issues arising from construction/drainage works on Rights of Way)

Requirement of separate exhibition for special charge schemes.

Requests for discontinuance to require unanimous support from all adjacent property owners; and

Clarification around drainage issues. All submission responses were considered and addressed and a final version of the Policy (Attachment 2) and the Strategy (Attachment 3) have been developed. In particular, the following amendments have been made:

The two-tier classification of Rights of Way has been amended to include a Class 1D Rights of Way. Class 1D Rights of Way are those Rights of Way which are not required for a road function but would serve a stormwater overland flow path function and should be retained.

4.2




Further, the classification system recognises the differing uses of Rights of Way and the possibilities of community use such as walking, cycling and ‘laneway events’.

Drainage Infrastructure and Stormwater Overland Flow paths have been included as a key issue and actions identified.

Rights of Way definitions have been more clearly defined.

The heritage value of Rights of Way includes those with bluestone elements and other heritage elements (such as pit lids, signage) and Rights of Way located within areas affected by Heritage Overlay Controls within the Banyule Planning Scheme.

It is recognised that special charge schemes should require separate exhibition.

The current Rights of Way (Road) Discontinuance Policy provisions have been included in the Policy and Strategy. It is proposed to rescind the current Discontinuance Policy.

RESTRUCTURE OF RIGHT OF WAY POLICY AND STRATEGY

The final Policy and Strategy have been restructured and reformatted with a more logical and consistent format. The restructure of the documents provides in the Policy a clear definition of Council’s role with respect to co-ordinated management of Rights of Way. The Vision, Principles and Objectives are clearly defined in the Policy. Issues have been defined and categorised. The Strategy has been restructured to allow for each issue to be discussed in a standard format – legislative context; background; issue; objective; and discussion, with appropriate actions and performance measures attributed to each key issue.

TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION

Rights of Way support and complement the existing road network throughout the municipality by providing direct and/or alternative access to properties abutting them and as alternative access to other streets and community facilities. With over 30km and 260 individually identified Rights of Way throughout the municipality, a clear strategy has been developed to manage these valuable community assets. The key issues in the management of Rights of Way have been identified as: Identification

Identification and categorisation of Rights of Way

Naming and numbering of Rights of Way Clarification

Heritage

Illegal occupancy and encroachment Maintenance

Maintenance, cleansing and infrastructure

Drainage infrastructure and stormwater overland flow paths

4.2




Improvement

Construction of Unconstructed Rights of Way

Activation of Rights of Way within Activity Centres

Rights of Way abutting existing or proposed Development

Transport, parking and loading in Rights of Way Closure

Temporary or Permanent Closure

Discontinuance A total of 32 key actions have been defined and prioritised to address the issues identified. Actions include:

Improving the compilation, auditing, accessibility and management of Rights of Way information in the municipality.

Categorisation of Rights of Way, having regard to the Road Management Plan.

Establishing a database identifying those Rights of Way suitable for activation within Activity Centres

Developing guidelines for:

o Rights of Way directly abutting existing or new development within the

municipality, including where a development proposes a new or existing Rights of Way as its primary or secondary access way.

o preferred design parameters for Rights of Way in Activity Centres behind

shops.

Implementing maintenance and service standards for constructed and unconstructed Rights of Way in accordance with the Road Management Plan.

Establishing a heritage management plan identifying appropriate maintenance and service standards for Rights of Way with a heritage value.

A regular program of monitoring and review, and adjustment to the policy where needed.

More detail is available in the Right of Way Strategy 2014-2024 (Attachment 3). The restructure of the Policy and Strategy includes incorporation of the provisions of the current Rights of Way (Road) Discontinuance Policy within the Policy and Strategy. It is therefore proposed to rescind the current Rights of Way (Road) Discontinuance Policy. FUNDING IMPLICATIONS Funding for some of the actions within the Strategy can be implemented within existing resources. Many of the actions, however, require additional funds and will be referred to future budgets for consideration. Whilst preparing the Action Plan for the Strategy, a ten year perspective for timing of the actions has been taken. This will be considered in Council’s ten year capital budget planning process. A summary of the funding required to undertake the Strategy is set out in Table 1 below:

4.2




Table 1: Funding Required for the Rights of Way Strategy

Priority Timing Funding (as below)

1 Short to Medium Term - Address within the next 2 to 5 years, subject to annual budget processes.

$16,000 (audit, re-categorisation)

$50,000 (development guidelines)

$144,000 annually (maintenance costs)*

$125,000 annually (major maintenance pool)**

2 Long Term – Address within the next 6 to 10 years, subject to annual budget processes.


$25,000 (development guidelines)

$25,000 (Discontinuance and Sale)



Ongoing Action forming the basis of maintenance, evaluation and/or recurring programs. Action that is currently being undertaken and is identified for ‘continued’ action in each year.

Approximately $20,000 per annum

* Approximately 80% of this funding is currently funded. ** Currently $50,000 major maintenance funded. CONCLUSION The Draft Banyule Rights of Way Policy and Strategy were placed on public exhibition for consultation and comment between the period 25 November 2013 to 7 March 2014. Six submissions were received. All submission responses were considered, and a final version of the Rights of Way Policy and the Rights of Way Strategy have been developed to be considered for adoption by Council. The final Policy and Strategy have been reordered and reformatted to provide a more logical and consistent format.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council: 1. Adopt the Banyule Rights of Way Policy and Banyule Rights of Way Strategy

2014-2024.

2. Note the proposed increase to maintenance standards for Rights of Way and adopt these subject to budget allocation for the 2014/15 and subsequent budgets.

3. Rescind Council’s Rights of Way (Road) Discontinuance Policy (February 2000).

4. Write to all people who made submissions on the draft Rights of Way Policy and Rights of Way Strategy and thank them for their submission.

4.2




ATTACHMENTS

No. Title Page

1 Summary of Submissions to the Draft Banyule Rights of Way Policy and Strategy

75

2 Banyule Rights of Way Policy 113

3 Banyule Rights of Way Strategy 2014-2024 127

5.1

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life


5.1 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED BUDGET & CITY PLAN WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Author: Peter Utri - Manager Organisational Performance, Corporate Services

File: F2014/647 and F2014/712

SUMMARY

This report is to inform Council and the community about written submissions received to date for the Proposed Budget 2014-2015 and Draft City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 2). Council is using this forum to be as open as it can with its community as to the emerging issues being presented around the Draft City Plan and Proposed Budget. At the Council Meeting on 5 May 2014, notice was given for ‘Preparation of the Budget for the period 1 July 2014 to 30 June 2015’ and ‘Preparation of Banyule’s City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 2)’, including notification of the exhibition period for public submissions. This is a statutory requirement under the Local Government Act 1989 and enables members of the community to make a formal submission under section 223 of the Act. Copies of the proposed Budget 2014-2015 and City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 2) were then made available for community comment from 6 May to 4 June 2014. Submissions will be formally considered at the Council Meeting to be held on Monday 23 June 2014. Formal submissions can be received until close of business 4 June 2014. Late submissions to the process may be considered by Council at its discretion after this date and before the 23 June meeting. Late submissions do not have an “as of right” ability to speak to the item. However, the opportunity for the community to put forward questions to Council exists at all Banyule’s Council meetings. All eligible submitters have been informed of their right to speak to their submission on the night they are considered by Council.



CITY PLAN

This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction of “engage meaningfully with our community” and “Provide responsible financial management and business planning processes”.

5.1


SUMMARY OF PROPOSED BUDGET & CITY PLAN WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS cont’d


BACKGROUND

At the Council Meeting on 5 May 2014, notice was given for ‘Preparation of the Budget for the period 1 July 2014 to 30 June 2015’ and ‘Preparation of Banyule’s City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 2)’, including notification of the exhibition period for public submissions. A copy of the proposed Budget 2014-2015 and City Plan was then made available for community comment from 6 May to 4 June 2014. This is a statutory requirement of under the Local Government Act 1989 and is known as section 223 submissions. This provides members of the public an opportunity to make a written submission on the draft documents as proposed by Council. It also gives the opportunity for submitters to speak and address the Council in support of their submission on the night they are decided upon by Council. A summary of the submissions received to date are contained within this report. Submissions are de-identified to the public where privacy concerns are evident. All Councillors receive copies of all the full submissions for consideration. Council has taken this interim step to report on the progress of submissions to:

illustrate the nature of submissions to date

give confidence to the community that all submissions receive due consideration in a timely manner preceding the final considerations and decisions on the night of adoption of the City Plan and Budget.

As at 5.00pm on Monday 26 May 2014, fourteen (14) formal submissions had been received in relation to the Budget and City Plan. Submissions remain open until close of business on 4 June 2014. Council must consider any submissions on a proposal (or proposals) contained in the draft budget and Council Plan in accordance the Local Government Act 1989.

LEGAL CONSIDERATION

Advertisements have been placed in ‘The Age’ and Leader newspapers at the commencement of the public notice period. Copies of the City Plan and Budget are available on Council’s website and at the Ivanhoe, Rosanna and Greensborough Service Centres. These have been available from Tuesday, 6 May 2014. The documents are also available at local libraries and neighbourhood houses. The required statutory notice advertisement appeared on Council’s website on Tuesday, 6 May 2014, and in ‘The Age’ on Wednesday, 7 May 2014. In accordance with the provisions of Section 223 of the Act, submitters will be provided with the opportunity to address Council in support of their submissions. The public notice informs the community of Council’s intention to adopt Banyule’s City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 2) in accordance with Sections 125 and 126 of the Local Government Act 1989, at a Council Meeting on Monday, 23 June 2014.

5.1




The public notice also informs the community of Council’s intention to adopt Banyule’s Budget for 2014-2015 (in accordance with Section 130 of the Local Government Act 1989) at a Council Meeting on Monday, 23 June 2014.


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. It is considered that the subject matter of the City Plan does not raise any human rights issues but enhances the human rights of our community. As a part of Council’s commitment to community engagement, the City Plan and Budget have been developed through extensive consultation and engagement. This process of community involvement has promoted and facilitated specific rights outlined in the Charter, namely the right to take part in public life and the right to freedom of expression. The preparation and adoption of Council’s Budget actually facilitates the protection of many of our communities Human rights as funding for many Council projects, programs and initiatives is directly related to protecting and enhancing the Human rights of our community. Council continues to work on behalf of its community to ensure the upholding of human rights for all.

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED

City Plan and Budget Submissions The submissions received are detailed in a summary form. Analysis of the submissions has been undertaken to try to understand the nexus of the proposal to the strategic intent Council has outlined in its Proposed City Plan. This is not possible in all instances and is best fit in others. In Council’s final considerations the extent (if any) to which a proposal may achieve Council’s strategic aims for its community, its capacity to undertake the action, or the material impact on other aspects of the plan or budget, are considered.

Submissions Response

1 Submission on behalf of the Rotary Club of Bundoora. Summary: Mental Health Reserve park shelter: Application for $4000 to assist the Club in the construction of a ‘shelter’ over the BBQ area at Greenwood Park (Mental Health Reserve), Greenwood Drive, Bundoora.

Linkages to our strategic intent for the community for this type of public initiative exists in the following: Key direction: 3.1 Maintain and improve Banyule as a great place to live

In the existing focus area: 3.1.4 Develop, renew and maintain Banyule’s public assets to defined and agreed standards

Key direction: 3.4 Enhance Banyule’s public and open spaces

In the existing focus areas: 3.4.2 Provide and maintain well designed public spaces that have great public amenity, are accessible and

5.1





strengthen community connections 3.4.3 Provide suitable community gathering spaces and look for opportunities for new and shared spaces and facilities Key initiatives include:

Assess new opportunities for improving access to existing spaces and facilities.

Key direction: 4.1 Engage meaningfully with our community

In the existing focus area: 4.1.1 Engage community members in issues of local concern to develop local solutions and support community members to contribute their strengths, knowledge and capacity

2 2(a)

Submission from a member of the community Summary: Emphasis on Ivanhoe library redevelopment - The proponent has requested Council to concentrate on the development of the Ivanhoe library as a priority initiative.

The following key direction most closely describes our strategic intent related to Ivanhoe library redevelopment project. This key direction is further articulated through focus areas and key initiatives, as follows: Key direction: 3.4 Enhance Banyule’s public and open spaces

In the existing focus area: 3.4.2 Provide and maintain well designed public spaces that have great public amenity, are accessible and strengthen community connections Key initiatives include:

Redevelop the Ivanhoe Library:

Complete drawings for the redevelopment of the Ivanhoe Library site

2(b) Future budget projections

and potential impacts on the residential property rates - The proponent has suggested Council needs to focus on restraint in future budget projections. The proponent is concerned about the impact on ratepayers from the levels of rate increases forecast in the strategic budget.

The relevant key directions, focus areas and key initiatives that address these concerns are as follows. Key direction: 5.2 Provide responsible financial management and business planning processes

In the existing focus areas: 5.2.1 Achieve a responsible budget Key initiatives include:

Review and update Council's 10 year capital works plan

Continue to actively pursue opportunities for aggregated collaborative procurement activities, eg. Municipal Association Victoria, Procurement Australia, Eastern Region and others.

Maintain our annual budget within accepted Victorian Auditor-General Office (VAGO) guidelines for prudent financial operation

Implement our rating strategic plan based on stability, equity, efficiency and transparency

Implement our Debt Plan actions

Continue rating at levels that support the increasing asset renewal and service cost shifting pressures faced by Council.

5.1





5.2.3 Develop sound long-term plans for capital works, asset maintenance and financial management Key initiatives include:

Review and relaunch our financial reporting format to provide improved transparency and simplification of information for our community on a quarterly basis.

Provide Council with the strategic financial information required to enable good governance of the Municipality on an ongoing basis

Finalise asset plans across all asset classes on an ongoing basis.

5.2.4 Create corporate planning and reporting processes that show what we are doing and how we are performing Key initiatives include:

Review the City Plan 2013-2017 (for Year 3)

Review corporate key performance indicators in line with state government requirements and best practice recommendations from the Local Government Performance Reporting Framework.

Ensure alignment of all strategic planning to the City Plan objectives and the organisation’s values.

Implement the financial reporting component in the Local Government Performance Reporting Framework (LGPRF).

Key direction: 4.3 Advocate on behalf of our community

In the existing focus areas: 4.3.1 Work in partnership with community, groups, local agencies and different levels of government to advocate for improved services, infrastructure and social outcomes Key initiatives include:

Develop partnerships with State and Federal Government, key commercial and community organisations, to seek funding for the development of programs, services and facilities.

Continue to advocate to government agencies for the appropriate upkeep of non-council owned open space including: Parks Victoria land, Vic Roads reserves, and Melbourne Water reserves.

Actively engage with community groups and services to advocate for responsive and sustainable services.

Advocate to Government and key organisations for improved outcomes for people in Banyule who are aged or have a disability (ie Community Transport, Commonwealth Aged Care Reforms and National Disability Insurance Scheme)

4.3.2 Identify opportunities for more equitable funding and service arrangements with state and federal government Key initiatives include:

Represent to our community the effects of cost shifting from other levels of government and its impact on Banyule.

5.1





3 Submission on behalf of Austin Health: Summary: The Wellness Walk 2014 - Sponsorship Arrangements. The submission is a request for Sponsorship (by Banyule City Council) of ‘The Wellness Walk 2014’ in the form of a cash contribution of $20,000 and in-kind support valued at $18,000.

Linkages to our strategic intent for the community for this type of public initiative exists in the following: Key direction: 1.1 Promote and support health and wellbeing

In the existing focus area: 1.1.3 Foster communities that support and create opportunities for people to live healthy and fulfilling lives. Key initiatives include:

Support community groups with community grants and access to buildings

Key direction: 1.2 Provide services for people at important life stages Key direction: 3.3 Support thriving commercial and retail activity

In the existing focus area: 3.3.1 Support activity centres to enhance local retail and commercial activity


In the existing focus areas: 4.1.1 Engage community members in issues of local concern to develop local solutions and support community members to contribute their strengths, knowledge and capacity 4.1.2 Listen and respond to our community, especially under-represented groups

Key direction: 4.2 Encourage diverse and inclusive community participation

In the existing focus areas: 4.2.1 Work in partnership with the community to promote inclusion, diversity and good local governance 4.2.2 Encourage people to participate in volunteer and community activities 4.2.3 Ensure the access and connectedness of under-represented groups to Council facilities, activities and services


In the existing focus areas: 4.3.1 Work in partnership with community, groups, local agencies and different levels of government to advocate for improved services, infrastructure and social outcomes 4.3.2 Identify opportunities for more equitable funding and service arrangements with state and federal government

5.1





4 Submission on behalf of the Livingstone Community Centre (LCC): Summary: The submission is presented in support of a program initiative within the proposed budget which currently sees the support of Neighbourhood Houses and Learning Centres throughout Banyule increasing to $15,000 (plus CPI) funding per annum for the next four years.



Support Neighbourhood Houses to provide community and education programs, including:

Increase overall recurrent support funding to Neighbourhood houses (additional $65,000 budgeted per annum)

Key direction: 1.2 Provide services for people at important life stages Key direction: 1.4 Celebrate and promote Banyule’s diversity and heritage

In the existing focus area: 1.4.1 Support leisure, arts and cultural activities that strengthen connection to place, heritage, diversity and community

5 Submission on behalf of the Watsonia Traders Association: Summary: The submission is a request for Sponsorship (by Banyule City Council) of ‘Watsonia Motor Show November 2014’ in the form of a cash sponsorship of $15,000



Support community groups with community grants and access to buildings

Key direction: 1.4 Celebrate and promote Banyule’s diversity and heritage


Key direction: 1.5 Support people to achieve their economic potential

In the existing focus area: 1.5.1 Encourage and assist the development of small business

Key direction: 3.3 Support thriving commercial and retail activity

In the existing focus area: 3.3.1 Support activity centres to enhance local retail and commercial activity 3.3.2 Work in partnership with businesses to market

5.1





and promote Banyule’s retail and commercial offer Key direction: 4.1 Engage meaningfully with our community

In the existing focus area: 4.1.1 Engage community members in issues of local concern to develop local solutions and support community members to contribute their strengths, knowledge and capacity Key initiatives include:

Co-ordinate and deliver Community Development and local RSL grant programs


In the existing focus area: 4.2.1 Work in partnership with the community to promote inclusion, diversity and good local governance Key initiatives include:

Develop priorities and action plans that promote and celebrate Banyule's diverse communities through events and celebrations.

6 Submission on behalf of the Rosanna Fire Station Community House: Summary: The submission is presented in support of a program initiative within the proposed budget which currently sees the support of Neighbourhood Houses and Learning Centres throughout Banyule increasing to $15,000 (plus CPI) funding per annum for the next four years.







7 Submission from President Banyule Reconciliation Summary: Banyule Reconciliation requests Council to consider the funding of an additional flag pole at the Council

Linkages to our strategic intent for the community for this type of public initiative exists in the following: Key direction: 1.4 Celebrate and promote Banyule’s diversity and heritage

In the existing focus area: 1.4.1 Support leisure, arts and cultural activities that strengthen connection to place, heritage, diversity and

5.1





Offices in Ivanhoe to enable the flying of the Aboriginal Flag at all times.

community Key direction: 4.2 Encourage diverse and inclusive community participation

In the existing focus areas: 4.2.1 Work in partnership with the community to promote inclusion, diversity and good local governance Key initiatives include:

Implement Council's Inclusion, Access and Equity Plan (IAEP) and associated action plan actions for Year 1.

Develop priorities and action plans that promote and celebrate Banyule's diverse communities through events and celebrations.

4.2.3 Ensure the access and connectedness of under-represented groups to Council facilities, activities and services Key initiatives include:

Work in consultation with the Indigenous Participation Project Working Group to prepare a four year action plan associated with the building and works and redevelopment activities for the indigenous gathering place precinct.

8 Submission on behalf of the Diamond Valley Learning Centre (DVLC): Summary: The submission is presented in support of a program initiative within the proposed budget which currently sees the support of Neighbourhood Houses and Learning Centres throughout Banyule increasing to $15,000 (plus CPI) funding per annum for the next four years.







9 Submission from a member of the community Summary: Support for the energy efficient street-lights project (changing the globes to lower

Linkages to our strategic intent for the community for this type of public initiative exists in the following: Key direction: 2.3 Deliver appropriate action on climate change

In the existing focus area: 2.3.1 Reduce our impact on climate change by reducing Council's energy consumption and waste

5.1





electricity use). Enquiry whether Council has plans to use solar panels, especially on Council buildings.

Key initiatives include:

Improve streetlight energy efficiency (this will significantly reduce Council’s ongoing energy costs and result in a 19% reduction in overall greenhouse gas emissions), through initiatives including:

Implement the streetlight project to change 8,000 lights for more energy efficient lighting.

Complete installation of solar hot water at three Council buildings.

Deliver a continued certification program against ISO14001 Environmental Management Standards

Continue Council’s energy efficiency initiatives toward carbon neutrality.

Plan for a progressive roll out of our energy plan, prioritising the installation of $700,000 of solar photovoltaic panels on Council buildings over the remainder of this Council’s term of office.

Continue to deliver our Community energy education initiative.

10 Submission from a member of the community Summary: Future budget projections and potential impacts on future Council rates –

The proponent is concerned about the financial sustainability of the budget, the approach used to set the budget seems based on a ‘wish list’, and rating increases have been above CPI for a number of years.

The proponent has suggested Council needs to focus on restraint in future budget projections.

The proponent is concerned about the impact on ratepayers from the levels of rate increases forecast in the strategic budget, and has queried some aspects that could be looked at (eg capital works projects and employee costs)

The proponent supports the ALP policy to restrict council rate increases to CPI or below.













5.2.4 Create corporate planning and reporting processes that show what we are doing and how we are

5.1





performing Key initiatives include:













Key direction: 5.1 Develop and deliver best value services and facilities

In the existing focus areas: 5.1.1 Identify opportunities for strengthened and additional income streams 5.1.2 Actively seek non-Council sources of financial support for capital projects 5.1.3 Identify potential Council investments that offer a mix of economic, social and environmental benefit 5.1.4 Continually review service levels, especially in areas where affordable, quality delivery is challenging 5.1.5 Ensure evidence based decision making seeking knowledge from practice, experience and research

5.1





11 Submission from the President of the Lower Plenty Traders Association Summary: The Lower Plenty Traders association seeks financial support for an allocation in the budget for a public art piece - A Sculptured Seat and Landscaping project near the corner of Para Rd & Main Rd Lower Plenty. The Lower Plenty Traders have allocated $20,000 of their funds to the Project and are seeking $30,000 from Banyule Council to complete the overall project.


In the existing focus area: 1.1.1 Develop passive and active recreation, leisure and arts Key initiatives include:

Provide arts programs that contribute to employment pathways, personal skill development and general wellbeing of young people.

Key direction: 1.3 Develop and promote safety and resilience in our community

In the existing focus area: 1.3.1 Support, address and advocate for community safety

Key direction: 1.4 Celebrate and promote Banyule’s diversity and heritage


Key direction: 1.5 Support people to achieve their

economic potential In the existing focus area: 1.5.1 Encourage and assist the development of small business

Key direction: 3.1 Maintain and improve Banyule as a great place to live



In the existing focus area: 3.3.1 Support activity centres to enhance local retail and commercial activity


In the existing focus areas: 3.4.2 Provide and maintain well designed public spaces that have great public amenity, are accessible and strengthen community connections 3.4.3 Provide suitable community gathering spaces and look for opportunities for new and shared spaces and facilities Key initiatives include:


5.1








In the existing focus areas: 4.2.1 Work in partnership with the community to promote inclusion, diversity and good local governance 4.2.2 Encourage people to participate in volunteer and community activities 4.2.3 Ensure the access and connectedness of under-represented groups to Council facilities, activities and services

12 Submission from a member of the community. Summary: Future budget projections and potential impacts on future Council rates as a result of the draft Federal Budget. The proponent is concerned about the proposed changes to levels of Federal funds being provided to States, the possibility of extension to the GST (goods and services tax), and the potential impacts that this would have on Council’s municipal rates and charges.













5.2.4 Create corporate planning and reporting

5.1





processes that show what we are doing and how we are performing Key initiatives include:













Key direction: 5.1 Develop and deliver best value services and facilities

In the existing focus areas: 5.1.1 Identify opportunities for strengthened and additional income streams 5.1.2 Actively seek non-Council sources of financial support for capital projects 5.1.3 Identify potential Council investments that offer a mix of economic, social and environmental benefit 5.1.4 Continually review service levels, especially in areas where affordable, quality delivery is challenging 5.1.5 Ensure evidence based decision making seeking knowledge from practice, experience and research

5.1





13 Submission on behalf of the North East Neighbourhood House Network. Summary: The submission is presented in support of a program initiative within the proposed budget which currently sees the support of Neighbourhood Houses and Learning Centres throughout Banyule increasing to $15,000 (plus CPI) funding per annum for the next four years. And $5,000 for the Contact community centre.







14 Submission from the President of the Ivanhoe Traders Association (ITA) on behalf of the 2014 ITA Committee Summary: The ITA seeks financial support to fore-go the interest component of a capital works debt for the upgrade of the Ivanhoe Street scape (previously completed) to the value of $149,692

The relevant key directions, focus areas and key initiatives that address these concerns are as follows:

Key direction: 1.5 Support people to achieve their

economic potential In the existing focus areas: 1.5.1 Encourage and assist the development of small business Key initiatives include:

Deliver small business support, including:

Provide networking and training opportunities that respond to local business needs.

Work in partnership to provide one-to-one advice and planning sessions.

Continue to develop and deliver on our Banyule Business website (Your Gateway to Business in Banyule) a dedicated link for businesses in Banyule including a focus on how they can access the tender opportunities available with Council.

Review the purpose and scope of Business Directory.

Provide funding to Traders Groups for the development of local shopping precincts through the special rates scheme ($520,000 budgeted in 2014-2015)

Communicate with business to promote business excellence and provide up to date support and advice.

1.5.2 Review Council’s procurement guidelines with a stronger emphasis on the support of local employment, social and environmental impacts.

5.1





Key initiatives include:

Pursue, where feasible, an increase in the percentage of locally produced or provided goods and services purchased by Banyule, including:

Review our purchasing guidelines to encompass an emphasis on local procurement ensuring that State and Federal competition laws are adhered to.

Key direction: 3.1 Maintain and improve Banyule as a great place to live


Key direction: 3.2 Strengthen local activity and employment areas

In the existing focus area: 3.2.1 Explore funding opportunities to grow activity areas, including Greensborough, Heidelberg and Ivanhoe 3.2.2 Encourage investment that supports local jobs growth 3.2.4 Create community hubs at Ivanhoe, Watsonia and Heidelberg West 3.2.5 Develop plans that encourage investment and development opportunities for growth and regeneration of business and employment


In the existing focus areas: 3.3.1 Support activity centres to enhance local retail and commercial activity 3.3.2 Work in partnership with businesses to market and promote Banyule’s retail and commercial offer Key initiatives include:

Assist in building the capacity of traders’ associations to continually improve governance.

Conduct improvement works to Rosanna shopping precinct, including lighting and landscaping around trees.

Market and promote investment activity in shopping centres.


In the existing focus areas: 3.4.2 Provide and maintain well designed public spaces that have great public amenity, are accessible and strengthen community connections 3.4.3 Provide suitable community gathering spaces and look for opportunities for new and shared spaces and facilities Key initiatives include:


5.1







Full Copies of the submissions have been provided to Councillors for their information and consideration prior to the 23 June 2014 Council Meeting. Councillors are required to consider all the submissions in order to determine whether it will adopt the proposed Budget 2014-2015 and draft City Plan 2013-2017 (Year 2) with or without change.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council note the submissions received to date and formally consider them at the Council Meeting to be held on 23 June 2014.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

5.2



5.2 MUNICIPAL ASSOCIATION OF VICTORIA (MAV) STATE COUNCIL MAY 2014

Author: Emily Outlaw - Council Governance Liaison Officer, City Development

File: F2014/507

SUMMARY

To provide an update of the Banyule motions submitted to the MAV State Council held on 16th May 2014.



CITY PLAN

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

BACKGROUND

The MAV holds two State Council Meetings per year. The State Council is the governing body. It is made up of representatives from each member council. Councillor Jenny Mulholland is the MAV representative and Councillor Tom Melican is the substitute. The meetings provide an opportunity for Councils to put on the agenda issues of common interest and importance to all Victorian Councils. The MAV then advocates on behalf of Local Government in relation to these matters. Prior to the meetings the MAV encourages Councils to submit motions for the agenda. The usual practice is to provide a few paragraphs of background information together with the actual motion being recommended. At its meeting on the 14th April 2014 Council considered and proposed one motion to be submitted to the MAV State Council (Resolution CO2014/93). Council then submitted a late motion after an Urgent Business item (Resolution CO2014/120) was raised at its meeting of 5th May 2014 following the announcement by the Victorian Labor party that it planned to cap rates for local Councils.

5.2


MUNICIPAL ASSOCIATION OF VICTORIA (MAV) STATE COUNCIL MAY 2014 cont’d


ADVOCACY

A key governance function of Council is to advocate on behalf of the community on issues of importance. By representing the interests of the community in a range of forums, Council has the capacity to attract additional resources to the municipality and resolve complex issues that affect the liveability of the city. The MAV State Council is a key forum that is used to advocate on behalf of the community.



MAV STATE COUNCIL

Council submitted two motions to the MAV, including one late motion: 1. Amenity of Development Sites 2. Victorian Labor Party Policy on Council Rate Capping – Late Motion The first of Banyule’s motions regarding Amenity of Development Sites was moved and was carried without debate. Motions regarding the proposed rate capping policy were submitted by many Councils as it is a prominent issue for Local Government and was a cause for debate and discussion during the meeting. Council’s late motion was passed along with the other motions being combined and also carried. Attached are the May 2014 State Council resolutions.

CONCLUSION

Resolutions are assessed by the MAV Board to determine how they will be progressed. Updates on the progress made against each resolution are sent to members before the next meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council notes the report.

ATTACHMENTS

No. Title Page

1 MAV State Council Resolutions May 2014 165

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely


6.1 OPERATING FINANCIAL REPORT FOR PERIOD ENDED 30 APRIL 2014

Author: Doug Baker - Financial Accountant, Corporate Services

File: BS12/025/001

SUMMARY

Presentation of Operating Financial Report for the ten months ended 30 April 2014.

CITY PLAN

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

BACKGROUND

The Financial Report has been prepared on an accrual basis in accordance with Australian Accounting Standards. Council’s financial performance for the ten months of the financial year is unfavourable compared to the year to date budget. The consolidated operating surplus at 30 April 2014 is $15,275,812 which is an unfavourable variance of $8,123,909 compared to the estimated budget year to date surplus of $23,399,721. The unfavourable variance to date is mainly due to four properties that were budgeted to be sold in the current financial year, but are unlikely to be sold before 30 June 2014. The budgeted sale price of the properties is $7.36 million (refer to Graph 1 – Income). The Capital Works program shows a significant timing variance in expenditure and income. A few of the larger valued projects have not yet commenced or will not be completed this financial year. These projects will be carried forward to next financial year for completion (refer to Graph 2 – Expenditure). The financial results in this Report, however, show strong stability over the past ten months, apart from the delayed sale of the properties this financial year.

Property Reallocation Program

Council’s practice is to provide details to the public in relation to property acquisitions and disposals after contractual matters have been settled. During the period 1 November 2013 to 30 April 2014 Council has disposed of property known as 66-78 Main Street Greensborough being the land adjacent to and under Greensborough Walk.

6.1


OPERATING FINANCIAL REPORT FOR PERIOD ENDED 30 APRIL 2014 cont’d


Economic Data

For the first ten 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 3.43%. The earning rate has decreased 0.48% since 31 July 2013. The weighted average interest rates have ranged from 3.91% for July 2013 to a low of 3.36% for October 2013. 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 2.5% and has not moved since it was reduced by 0.25% on 7 August 2013. The previous change was a decrease of 0.25% on 8 May 2013.

CONCLUSION

Ten months into the financial year some significant budget variances have been identified. For the Income Statement operating result, the sale of properties that was budgeted to occur in the current financial year but have not yet been sold this year, have reduced the actual surplus to 30/4/2014 compared to the budget year to date at 30/4/2014. This, in turn, will also unfavourably impact on the year end operating result where the forecast actual deficit will be larger than the budgeted deficit. The variances related to Capital Works – Assets expenditure, are largely timing differences, and relate to major projects that were budgeted to occur in the current financial year and the projects will be carried forward to next year for completion. The economic data and investment environment has been reasonably stable in recent months.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Operating Financial Report for the period 30 April 2014 be received.

ATTACHMENTS

No. Title Page

1 Operating Financial Report 10 months ended 30 April 2014. 178

6.2



6.2 ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS Author: Cindy Ho - Governance Officer, City Development

File: F2014/337

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: 19 May 2014

Type of Meeting: Councillor Briefing

Matters Considered: New Residential Zones

Councillors Present: Steven Briffa Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Wayne Phillips

Staff Present: Daniel Kollmorgen, Manager Strategic and Economic Development

Others Present: Nil

Conflict of Interest: Nil



Matters Considered: 1.1 McArthur Road, Ivanhoe East - Speed Limit Reduction

2.1 Government funding for 15 hours of kindergarten 4.1 Banyule Rights of Way Policy and Strategy 4.2 Review of the State Planning Policy Framework 4.3 Studley Road, Ivanhoe - Parking Restrictions 4.4 Livable Housing Project - Implementation and

Evaluation Update 4.5 Public Safety Infrastructure Fund - A Safer Mall 4.6 Extension of Time to Planning Permit P626/2010 -

4 Gona Street, Heidelberg West 5.1 Proposal to formally name the Right of Way

6.2


ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d


bounded by Waterdale Road, Jellicoe and Beatty Streets, Ivanhoe

5.2 School sites redevelopment project: Community engagement and advocacy update

5.3 Multicultural Advisory Committee - appointment of additional members

6.1 Assembly of Councillors 8.1 Bridge Linking Warringal Parklands with Banksia

Park 8.2 McCrae Road and Homewood Court, Rosanna

Traffic Concerns 10.1 Urgent Business - Financial Assistance Grants

Annual Indexation Pause

Councillors Present: Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Rick Garotti Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Wayne Phillips

Staff Present: Simon McMillan, Chief Executive Officer Allison Beckwith, Director, Community Programs Scott Walker, Director, City Development Geoff Glynn, Director, Assets & City Services Keith Yeo, Director, Corporate Services Gina Burden, Manager, Governance, Information and Laws Daniel Kollmorgen, Manager of Strategic & Economic Development Emily Outlaw, Council Governance Liaison Officer Joel Elbourne, Manager Development Services Jackie Bernoth, Acting Coordinator Development Planning Luca Verduci, Planning Technical Officer David Bailey, Engineering Services Coordinator

Others Present: Nil



Type of Meeting: Confidential Councillor Briefing

Matters Considered: Confidential Matters -

Councillors Present: Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Wayne Phillips

Staff Present: Simon McMillan, Chief Executive Officer

6.2


ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS cont’d


Allison Beckwith, Director, Community Programs Scott Walker, Director, City Development Geoff Glynn, Director, Assets & City Services Keith Yeo, Director, Corporate Services Darren Bennett, Manager Leisure, Recreation and Culture Tom Zappulla, Leisure Facilities Place and Partnerships Coordinator

Others Present: Nil




Matters Considered: 1. Police Representative Forum/ Dinner 2. Federal Government Funding - 15 Hours of

Kindergarten?

Councillors Present: Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Wayne Phillips

Staff Present: Simon McMillan, Chief Executive Officer Allison Beckwith, Director, Community Programs Scott Walker, Director, City Development Geoff Glynn, Director, Assets & City Services Keith Yeo, Director, Corporate Services Giovanna Failla, Manager Youth and Family Services

Others Present: Justin Goldsmith, Heidelberg Police Station Nick Barbournis- Greensborough Police Station


RECOMMENDATION

That the Assembly of Councillors report be received.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

7.1

Sealing of Documents


7.1 SEALING OF DOCUMENTS Author: Jeanette Kringle - Property Co-ordinator, City Development

Ward: Griffin

File: F2013/1146

The following documents require the affixing of the Common Seal of Council: 1

.

PARTY\PARTIES: Banyule City Council (Council) and East Ivanhoe Preschool Inc.

OFFICER: Jeanette Kringle FILE NUMBER: F2013/1146 DOCUMENT: Lease and Service Level Agreement ADDRESS: 1 King Street, Ivanhoe VIC 3079 WARD: Griffin BRIEF EXPLANATION: Council is the owner of a purpose built Preschool

situated at 1 King Street, East Ivanhoe VIC 3079. This building is currently operated as the East Ivanhoe Preschool Centre. In order to ensure the continued operation and level of service, a Lease and Service Level Agreement have been agreed between parties for a period commencing 1 August 2013 and ending on 30 April 2015. (This ending date will align with the ending dates of existing kindergarten leases). In recognition of the community service provided by the Centre, it is recommended the commercial rental of $27,500.00 be waived in this instance and a nominal rent of $104.00 per annum plus GST be applied. Council should support entering into and formally ratifying the Lease and Service Level Agreement by resolving to affix its Common Seal to the Lease and Service Level Agreement.

7.1

Sealing of Documents

SEALING OF DOCUMENTS cont’d


2.

PARTY\PARTIES: Banyule City Council (Landlord) and United Industries (Aust) Pty Ltd (new Tenant)

OFFICER: Jeanette Kringle FILE NUMBER: F2013/969 DOCUMENT: Lease ADDRESS: Tenancy 1, 226 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe WARD: Griffin BRIEF EXPLANATION: Council is the owner of the commercial premises

known as Tenancy 1, 226 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe (the premises). The existing tenant has decided not to renew its lease and to vacate the premises on 31 May 2014. Negotiations have been undertaken with a new Tenant and public notice of Council’s intention to enter into a new lease has been given. The submission period closes on 3 June 2014 and at the time of writing this report no submissions have been received. “In principle” agreement has been reached on the terms and conditions of the Lease, which is subject to completion of the necessary statutory procedures and Council’s formal ratification. Essentially, the Lease with the new Tenant is for a period of three years commencing on 10 June 2014 with an option for a further term of three years. Subject to no submissions being received, Council should support entering into and formally ratifying the Lease by resolving to affix its Common Seal to the Lease.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Common Seal of the Banyule City Council be affixed to the following documents: 1. Lease and Service Level Agreement between Banyule City Council and the East

Ivanhoe Preschool Centre Inc. to ensure the continued operation of the East Ivanhoe Preschool Centre Inc at 1 King Street, East Ivanhoe VIC 3079 for the period commencing 1 August 2013 and ending on 30 April 2015.

2. Subject to no submissions being received in response to the public notice of

Council’s intention to enter into the Lease, the Lease between Banyule City Council and United Industries (Aust) Pty Ltd in respect of Tenancy 1, 226 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe, for a period of three years commencing on 10 June 2014.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

8.1

Notice of Motion


8.1 PLANNING OF FORD PARK, BELLFIELD Author: Cr Craig Langdon

Ward: Olympia

File: F2013/947

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move:

“That, as an initial step in the process of developing a clear plan for the future development of Ford Park: 1. Council arrange to facilitate a workshop of key stakeholders and the local

community generally, on the future of Ford Park. 2. The meeting, to be held at the Bellfield Community Centre, should explore the

community’s and the key stakeholders’ views on the use of Ford Park. 3. The results of the workshop to be reported back to Council. 4. The current master plan be used as the starting point for any new proposals to

ensure that the costs of the original master plan have not been wasted and to limit any cost increases in preparing a way forward.”

Explanation Bellfield and adjacent residential areas have been rapidly evolving in recent years. Until relatively recently the typical character of this area could be best described as having a largely ageing population with its housing stock dominated by the traditional two or three bedroom dwellings, each located on a single block of land. However in recent years, there has been a steady increase in multi-dwelling developments replacing these traditional dwellings. This is having two key impacts on Bellfield and adjacent residential areas:

It is increasing the population density and therefore also increasing the demand for good quality accessible public open space

Many of the people moving into the area as a result of the availability of this new housing stock, have young families, thus increasing the need to provide facilities to cater for children’s sport and recreation.

There is also an increasing interest from some sections of the broader community to undertake planting of food producing plants in public areas. As a result Council is now in the process of preparing policies on both nature strip planting and community gardens. Both of these will be available for Council to consider in the coming months. Ford Park is the largest parcel of active public open space in Bellfield. For a decade or so its usage levels in terms of active sport had fallen due to a number of sporting clubs that were previously located there ceasing to exist due to falling membership numbers. However, as a result of the changing housing and population trends described above, the demand for active and passive recreation activities is now increasing.

8.1

Notice of Motion

PLANNING OF FORD PARK, BELLFIELD cont’d


One community group is advocating for the creation of a community orchard to be established in Ford Park. Whilst Council prepared a draft masterplan for Ford Park several years ago, due to changed circumstances this was never adopted and will need to be reviewed. Given the circumstances outlined above, the time is appropriate to recommence the process of developing a clear vision for Ford Park so that it is best placed to serve the changing Bellfield community into the future.

CR CRAIG LANGDON Olympia Ward

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

8.2

Notice of Motion


8.2 FOOD QUALITY ASSURANCE EQUIPMENT FOR SOMALIA

Author: Cr Rick Garotti

Ward: Grimshaw

File: F2014/947


“That Council:

1. Recognise a request from the Somali community in Banyule to assist them in advocating to relevant State and Federal Government agencies to obtain equipment used for food quality assurance and quarantine purposes that might no longer be required by the agencies. The Somali Australia Council of Victoria (SACOV) would collect any equipment made available by agencies and organise for its distribution to Somalia where it would be used to assure the safety of food provided by aid agencies for human consumption.

2. Liaise with the relevant community leaders in Banyule to establish the type of

equipment required and the agencies to be contacted. 3. Formally advocate on behalf of the community by writing to the relevant

agencies.” Explanation Somali community leaders in Banyule advise that there are many cases where food provided by aid agencies in Somali may be unsafe for human consumption. The consumption of unsafe food can have significant health impacts for Somali people. Somali community leaders in Banyule would like to provide equipment to aid agencies on-the-ground in Somali that can be used to assure the safety of food before it is distributed to people for consumption. Somali community leaders have had some preliminary dialogue with State and Federal Government agencies about accessing used food testing and quarantine equipment that is due to be replaced by the agencies. They are hoping to secure some of this equipment and distribute it to Somalia. They are seeking assistance from Banyule City Council to help advocate to the relevant agencies on their behalf.

CR RICK GAROTTI Grimshaw Ward

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

8.3

Notice of Motion


8.3 OUTDOOR ADVERTISING OPPORTUNITIES Author: Cr Rick Garotti

Ward: Grimshaw

File: F2013/947


“That Council Officers investigate and report back to Council on a range of opportunities to expand the revenue that Council generates from outdoor advertising. The report should include investigation of: 1. the opportunities and challenges for a range of possibilities including but not

limited to:

Advertisements on existing Council-owned outdoor assets, such as bins in shopping strips, on a fee-for-advertisement basis.

Expand the number of available sites on Council-owned buildings and land across the municipality that support large advertising signs and billboards.

Increase the number of advertising signs that clubs and sporting groups are permitted to display on pavilions.

2. the most appropriate means by which each opportunity could be advanced

within the requirements of the Banyule Planning Scheme and Council Policy. For some opportunities this could involve the establishment of a carefully constructed Expression of Interest (EOI) process to optimally engage interested service providers.”

Explanation

At a recent briefing of Council regarding Council’s existing Outdoor Advertising Policy which was revised in 2010, Councillors identified a number of opportunities to expand the revenue that Council generates from outdoor advertising. Councillors recognised that revenue raised from outdoor advertising can support Council investment in vital services and infrastructure while reducing the burden on other revenue sources such as rates. In this context, Councillors are seeking a thorough investigation of the feasibility and practicality of identified opportunities whilst having regard to the Banyule Planning Scheme and Council Policy.

CR RICK GAROTTI Grimshaw Ward

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

ATTACHMENTS

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 2 JUNE 2014 Page 53

1.1 Proposed Development (3 dwellings) at 10 Avoca Street, Heidelberg

Attachment 1 Details of objection .......................................................................... 54

2.1 Draft Electronic Gaming Machine Policy 2014

Attachment 1 Draft - Banyule Electronic Gaming Machine Policy .......................... 56

Attachment 2 Consultation Summary .................................................................... 62

3.1 Achieving Permanent Planning Controls for Substantial Trees in Banyule's Garden Court and Garden Suburban Neighbourhoods

Attachment 1 Schedule 5 to the Vegetation Protection Overlay ............................. 64

Attachment 2 Areas affected by Schedule 5 to the Vegetation Protection Overlay ............................................................................................ 67

4.1 Amendment C71 - Corrections to Banyule Planning Scheme

Attachment 1 Table of Proposed Changes to the Banyule Planning Scheme ........................................................................................... 69

4.2 Banyule Rights of Way Policy and Strategy

Attachment 1 Summary of Submissions to the Draft Banyule Rights of Way Policy and Strategy.......................................................................... 75

Attachment 2 Banyule Rights of Way Policy ........................................................ 113

Attachment 3 Banyule Rights of Way Strategy 2014-2024 .................................. 127

5.2 Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) State Council May 2014

Attachment 1 MAV State Council Resolutions May 2014 .................................... 165

6.1 Operating Financial Report for Period Ended 30 April 2014

Attachment 1 Operating Financial Report 10 months ended 30 April 2014. ......... 178

Att

ach

men

t 1

1.1

Item: 1.1 Attachment 1: Details of objection


Att

ach

men

t 1

1.1

Item: 1.1 Attachment 1: Details of objection


Att

ach

me

nt

1

2.1

Item: 2.1 Attachment 1: Draft - Banyule Electronic Gaming Machine Policy


Banyule City Council

Draft Electronic Gaming Machine Policy

2014

Att

ach

me

nt

1

2.1



DIRECTORATE: CORPORATE SERVICES

SECTION: COMMUNITY & SOCIAL PLANNING

POLICY: DRAFT BANYULE ELECTRONIC GAMING MACHINE

POLICY 2014

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER SOCIAL PLANNING & POLICY OFFICER

DATE ADOPTED BY COUNCIL presented for consideration to Council on June 2nd 2014

POLICY OBJECTIVE

The following Policy Statement defines the various Council positions on electronic gaming machines

(EGMs) proposed within Banyule and in close proximity to our municipality. It provides a basis for

further consultation and input into the possible development of an Electronic Gaming Machine Policy

Implementation Plan. This Policy Statement defines how the Council will respond to applications for

new venues, additional machines and transfers of machines between venues. The Policy Statement

can also be used to guide Council’s response to other gambling related matters.

BACKGROUND

This Policy Statement has been developed in line with Part1A—Local Government Charter of the

Local Government Act 1989 and in line with current State Government Policy, Legislation and

Victorian Planning Provisions (VPP’s).

THE COUNCIL’S INFLUENCE

While all forms of gambling can lead to a range of complex social issues, Banyule City Council

acknowledges that it has a clear role around EGMs, which include:

Responsible Authority—in accordance with the Planning and Environment Act 1987, in

deciding on applications for planning permits;

Site, premises or land owner/manager—in situations where gaming venues are already

established or proposed to be situated, are owned, managed or vested in the authority of ;

The Referral Authority—where an application for planning permit is made within a

neighbouring municipality (Darebin, Yarra, Boroondara, Manningham, Nillumbik and

Whittlesea) and is referred to Banyule City Council for comment;

Key Stakeholder and Community Advocate—during times of government review or

alternative mechanisms involving community consultation and community advocacy; and

Administrator of Community Benefit Grant & Trust Agreements— The Council’s

Grant Administrators may support the administration on behalf of Contributing Gaming

Venues.

This Policy is therefore limited in its scope to the area of EGMs and not the broader and more

general policy area of gambling.

HAVE YOUR SAY

On the Draft

Banyule Electronic Gaming Machine Policy 2014

Att

ach

me

nt

1

2.1



THE ELECTRONIC GAMING MACHINE INDUSTRY

Electronic Gaming Machines can be found in clubs and hotels within Banyule. The subtle difference

in the role that clubs play, as compared to hotels is recognised within this policy statement.

The community building role that ‘not for profit’ clubs play within our community needs to be

recognised, while balanced against the backdrop of the potential negatives associated with problem

gambling.

In relation to hotels, Council looks forward to working alongside operators in ensuring that a

greater percentage of the moneys paid by them towards the Community Support Fund is allocated

back to the community from which it is derived.

In each situation the application or proposal to increase numbers of EGM’s will be assessed on its

own individual merits, based on the proponent’s ability to demonstrate net community harm and an

ability to build community relationships to achieve local community outcomes. As this will be

evidenced by the proponent’s Social and Economic Impact Assessment (SEIA), each proposal is

expected to be accompanied by a SEIA, compiled in line with the Council’s relevant SEIA Guideline.

POLICY, PRINCIPLE STATEMENTS

The following Policy Statements will guide Banyule City Council when determining an application or

matters directly associated with EGMs:

1. RESPONSIBLE MANAGEMENT OF EGM DENSITY AND REDUCING GAMING LOSSES

Gaming is recognised as a legitimate form of entertainment, however it is acknowledged that Local

government has a responsibility to explore approaches to prevent and reduce harm from gaming on

our community.

The introduction of mandatory and systematic management programs by the Victorian Commission

for Gambling and Liquor Regulation (VCGLR) is supported. For example, we support the capping the

number of EGMs in the municipality, particularly in local areas where community indicators

represent higher levels of vulnerability. In areas where greater vulnerability is identified, Banyule

City Council would advocate for working to decrease EGM numbers.

Despite likely population growth, due to the disproportionate level of harm reasonably anticipated,

Banyule City Council opposes a future increase of EGM numbers within these more vulnerable

communities, particularly within and surrounding the 3081 postcode.

It is recognised that the potential for negative impacts on our community is not solely related to the

number of EGMS within Banyule, but also relates to access to gaming machines within a 5km radius

of Banyule’s municipal borders.

All EGM applications will be considered against their ability to demonstrate comparative community

benefit, any increase in EGMs would be of particular concern and will be opposed where a negative

impact can be reasonably anticipated.

The transfer of EGMs between venues will not be supported in situations where the potential for a

negative social impact is demonstrated (including when the transfer will result in the concentration

of EGMs in areas of vulnerability, as identified by the Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) and

other relevant indicators of health and wellbeing disadvantage).

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/by%20Subject/2033.0.55.001~2011~Main%20Features~Main%20Page~1

Att

ach

me

nt

1

2.1



Collaboration with neighbouring and other Councils, State and Federal Governments and

proprietors in ensuring best practice gaming operations is supported.

2. SUPPORTING THOSE AFFECTED BY EGM PROBLEM GAMBLING

It is acknowledged that problem gambling is a complex social issue, which requires a series of

interrelated interventions.

Availability of locally accessible support services for problem gamblers and inclusive community

support services for citizens adversely affected by gaming is encouraged.

The mandatory subscription of the gaming industry to the State Government managed best practice

responsible gaming and harm minimisation principles is supported.

All information and resources made available, particularly in relation to Gamblers Help should be

made available in all relevant languages and in formats suitable for people with disabilities (i.e. Large

Print, Braille, audio and easy English).

3. INCREASED ACCOUNTABILITY AND PARTNERSHIP IN THE MANAGEMENT OF THE

COMMUNITY SUPPORT, BENEFIT AND TRUSTS FUNDS AND AGREEMENTS

Local influence—The Council will continue to act as Administrator Community Benefit Grant and

Trust Agreements on behalf of Contributing Gaming Venues on a net cost to Council basis.

Establishing and maintaining partnerships with Clubs to ensure the meaningful administration and

distribution of the Community Benefit Funding allocation is viewed as important within the City of

Banyule.

Clubs are encouraged to establish and maintain community networks and explore opportunities for

creative community partnerships in the development of local projects, programs and community

events.

Community Benefit Statements and benefit activities reported on will be assessed for compliance

with the stated commitments in proponents SEIA, Planning Permit conditions and other relevant

commitments.

State influence—Improved accountability for ensuring that a greater percentage of gambling funds

obtained by the State Government are directed back into and managed by the communities from

which they were obtained is an aspiration of this Policy.

Periodic Assessment of Community Benefit and Community Support Fund Statements will be

undertaken to ensure that the benefits claimed are tangible, and demonstrate a resulting local

community benefit.

Att

ach

me

nt

1

2.1



4. UNDERSTANDING THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF GAMING

A copy of the Social and Economic Impact Assessment (prepared by a suitably qualified practitioner)

will be required to be provided with all applications for additional EGMs or new Electronic Gaming

venues. The SEIA will incorporate a report which demonstrates community engagement undertaken.

A Working Definition of SEIA—A Social and Economic Impact Assessment involves a process

for managing potential outcomes of a proposal, more than the delivery of a report as an outcome in

itself. It is not just about demonstrating awareness of potential changes but more so, what is

proposed to be done to manage those anticipated changes. The aim of a SEIA is to demonstrate a

proponents commitment and ability to do no harm, or at least an ability for managing the changes

anticipated to produce less harm.

Strength for Councils authority to request a SEIA is offered by Sections 4(2)(c) and (2)(d) of the

Planning and Environment Act 1987 which sets out the objectives of the planning framework

established by the Act and enables the integration of environmental, social and economic policies in

land use and development planning. In addition, Section 60(1A)(a) of the Act allows the Council as

the Responsible Authority to consider “any significant social and economic effects of the use or

development for which the application is made”.

Clear SEIA guidelines, associated decision making criteria and workflow processes will assist

proponents in preparation of their applications and requests for information.

A list of all the postcodes of the catchment area which the new venue or additional machines

propose to service, will be required when an application is referred to Banyule City Council by a

neighbouring municipality.

Proponents will be expected to demonstrate a considered planning approach to internal venue

design, with clearly defined activity separation and compatible land uses within and external to the

building envelope.

Banyule City Council supports responsive social and recreational policies which encourage

proponents for new Electronic Gaming venues to demonstrate sustainable and adaptive building

construction principles that will provide opportunities for the venue to cater for a range of

alternative recreation uses in the future.

The implications of patronising gaming venues in association with Council’s Service delivery, will be

regularly canvassed across Council Service areas.

5. ADVOCACY, ADVICE AND ACTION

All decisions and advice provided by Banyule City Council in relation to matters of gaming will be

made in accordance with this policy, the relevant provisions of the Banyule Planning Scheme and

relevant implementation guidelines.

When an application for additional machines, new venues or transfers of machines between venues,

is not supported, Banyule City Council will coordinate a submission to the Victorian Commission of

Gambling and Licensing Regulation (VCGLR).

Att

ach

me

nt

1

2.1



The VCGLR will continue to be lobbied as required to ensure the role and views of Banyule are

considered.

Banyule City Council will advocate for the appropriate and meaningful distribution of funds from the

community benefit and support funding allocations and oversee the coordinated administration of

Grants Trust Agreements in an open, transparent and accountable manner.

The wellbeing of the community, in particular the impacts of problem gambling will continue to be

monitored and an understanding of the impact of gambling on our local communities will be used to

inform strategic action plans.

6. CONTRACT MANAGEMENT

Any application for new or additional EGMs at venues which are situated on land that is owned or

managed by Council will not be supported without a SEIA which demonstrates a process for

achieving net community harm.

This Electronic Gaming Machine Policy Statement will be considered in relation to Council owned

buildings, the establishment of new or renewed contracts, leases, legal agreements and recreation

and leisure policies.

Clubs and Venues situated in buildings or land owned or managed by the Council will be expected to

contribute to the local Community Grants Trust.

Gaming venues and the community will be encouraged to work together in the development and

ongoing management of gaming venues’ community benefit programs and initiatives.

7. REFERENCE AND WORKING GROUPS AND PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES

A Council Reference Group will be convened to oversee development of Procedural Guidelines to

support the implementation of this Policy.

A Council Working Group convened by the Community and Social Planning Unit will oversee the

procedural implementation. Convened as required, this group will maintain currency of awareness

of gaming related matters.

Future strategic plans will consider the relevance, implications and application of this policy

framework.

8. POLICY REVIEW AND REVISION

This policy Statement will be reviewed within four years from the date of adoption or as triggered

by changes to legislation, Government or Council policy direction or in response to any other

requirement which may trigger the need to do so.

Notional Policy Review date: 30th May 2018.

Att

ach

men

t 2

2.1

Item: 2.1 Attachment 2: Consultation Summary


Attachment 2—Outcomes of the Community Engagement Feedback Draft Electronic Gaming Machine Policy (May 2014)

Community Member Feedback

The only feedback received from community was from Susan Rennie, Regional Advisor on the Prevention of Gambling Related Harm. This feedback targeted the use of certain terms such as ‘Harm’ and ‘Proponent’ and questioned one line in the policy as being too general. These points have been clarified and any perceived ambiguity removed. No other community feedback was received.

On receiving no feedback from venue operators, Michelle Rowe, Social Planner telephoned each gaming venue to discuss the policy further and

answer any questions. The following is a summary of the feedback provided.

Feedback received from the following Venues Venue Feedback Summary

BUNDOORA BOWLING CLUB YULONG RESERVE, CAMERON PARADE BUNDOORA3083

Great idea for open communication. Encourages venues to involve Banyule Council from the start and to work through the matters before they become issues. It’s clear that Council is neither for or against EGM's and will assess each application on its own individual merits. It seems clear and Bundoora Bowling Club is happy to be involved in the future.

GREENSBOROUGH HOTEL 75 MAIN STREET GREENSBOROUGH VIC3088

Have received the draft policy. No issues identified with the Policy, as long as it’s clear and applied consistently to everybody. They are strong advocates for gaming funds to come back to the community from which they are derived and happy to be involved with future discussions on how to ensure community support funds are retuned to community.

MONTMORENCY RSL PETRIE PARK, 16 MOUNTAIN VIEW ROAD MONTMORENCY VIC

They have received & read the draft Policy. They appreciated the call and the opportunity to discuss the draft Policy. They advised that the venue management were interested in the timing of the policy. Council Officer M. Rowe explained that need for the policy to be reviewed, updated and replaced to reflect the current EGM landscape and that a clear intention to be open and transparent was included. No concerns were noted nor required changes identified.

WATSONIA RSL 6 MORWELL AVENUE WATSONIA VIC3087

Great idea for open communication. Encourages venues to involve Banyule Council from the start and to work through the matters before they become issues. It’s clear that Council is neither for or against EGMs and will assess each application on its own individual merits. It’s clear and as a Club Operator, they are happy to be involved in the future.

WEST HEIDELBERG RSL 180 BELL STREET WEST HEIDELBERG VIC3081

Agree with policy and money going back to community from which it came is important. Did not feel the need to comment. All good. And thanks for the call.

Att

ach

men

t 2

2.1

Item: 2.1 Attachment 2: Consultation Summary


Att

ach

men

t 1

3.1

Item: 3.1 Attachment 1: Schedule 5 to the Vegetation Protection Overlay


Att

ach

men

t 1

3.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

3.1



Att

ach

men

t 2

3.1

Item: 3.1 Attachment 2: Areas affected by Schedule 5 to the Vegetation Protection Overlay


Att

ach

men

t 1

4.1

Item: 4.1 Attachment 1: Table of Proposed Changes to the Banyule Planning Scheme


C71 – Table of Changes

No. Clause Name Proposed Change P.S. Maps

Comment

1.

21.01 Municipal Snapshot Updates Municipal Snapshot to align with Banyule’s City Plan 2013-2017 Removes detail from ‘Community Profile’ section and this information becomes a new Reference Document at 21.09.

N/A Gives improved clarity for the relevance of these documents in line with Practice Note 4 ‘Writing a Municipal Strategic Statement’ and Practice Note 32 ‘Review of Planning Scheme’

2.

21.02 Vision and Strategic Framework Updates Vision and Strategic Framework to align with Banyule’s City Plan 2013-2017 Strategic Framework Plan updated to new naming conventions for Activity Centres as described in Plan Melbourne

N/A Gives improved clarity for the relevance of these documents in line with Practice Note 4 ‘Writing a Municipal Strategic Statement’ and Practice Note 32 ‘Review of Planning Scheme’

3.

21.04 Housing Change ‘Policy References’ to ‘Reference documents’’

N/A Ensures appropriate weight is given to these documents.

4.

21.06 Built Environment Change ‘Policy References’ to ‘Reference documents’’


5.

21.07 Transport and Infrastructure Change ‘Policy References’ to ‘Reference documents’’


6.

21.08 Local Places Updates headings and terminology for Activity Centres Change ‘Policy References’ to ‘Reference documents’’ Greensborough plan to be updated to include 4 Poulter Avenue in the ACZ

N/A Updates headings and terminology for Activity Centres in line with Plan Melbourne Ensures appropriate weight is given to documents. A permit has already been issued and consultation done for a development and the rezoning, (for an area to be used for car parking) was part of their s173 Agreement for the permit condition.

7.

21.09 Reference Documents Add

21.09-1 1. Banyule Heritage Places Review 2. Banyule Heritage Strategy 3. Banyule Heritage Guidelines Beaumont Estate 4. Banyule Heritage Guidelines Beauview Estate 5. Banyule Heritage Guidelines Ivanhoe Views Estate 6. Banyule Heritage Guidelines Mount Eagle Estate 7. Banyule Heritage Guidelines Sherwood Grove/ Thoresby Avenue 8. Banyule Heritage Guidelines Warringal Village 9. Banyule City Council, Warringal Parklands & Banyule Flats Cultural Heritage Assessment 10. Ivanhoe Activity Centre Heritage Items and Precincts 11. Loyola Seminary and Environs Heritage Plan 12. National Trust of Australia (Victoria) Classification Report – Buildings Committee, Loyola College, Watsonia 13. The Glenard Estate and its Parks 14. The Mount Eagle Estate Common Parks Conservation Plan

21.09-2

N/A Add

21.09-1 1. Council adopted document 2. Council adopted document 3. Council adopted document 4. Council adopted document 5. Council adopted document 6. Council adopted document 7. Council adopted document 8. Council adopted document 9. Council adopted document 10. Loyola Seminary and Environs Heritage Plan 11. Removal of DDO proposed for this site. Important that documents that give guidance remain relevant and are existing Reference Documents to this overlay are retained. 12. Existing Reference Document to a policy 13. Existing Reference Document to a policy

21.09-2

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.1




Comment

1. Banyule City Council Student Accommodation Guidelines 2. Banyule Safer Design Guide, City of Banyule 28 April 2003 3. Banyule City Council Liveable Housing Design Guidelines 4. Banyule City Council Tree Planting Zone Guidelines 2011 5. Banyule City Council Vehicle Crossing Policy 2012 6. Landscape Assessment for Significant Ridgelines in Banyule 2012 7. AS4970-2009 Protection of trees on development sites 8. Banyule Weed Management Strategy 9. Advisory List of Rare or Threatened Plants in Victoria

21.09-6 1. Banyule City Council, An Inventory of Sites of Environmental Significance in the City of Banyule and Adjoining Areas 2. Banyule City Council Significant Trees and Vegetation Register 3. Banyule City Council Strategy for Substantial Tree’s in Banyule’s Garden Court and Garden Suburban Neighbourhoods 4. Banyule City Council, Tree Planting Zone Guidelines 5. Beardsell C, Sites of Faunal and Habitat Significance in North East Melbourne 6. Landscape Report, Loyola College Complex, Office of Corrections Train ing Centre, Grimshaw Street, Watsonia 7. Loyola Seminary and Environs Heritage Plan 8. Melbourne Parks and Waterways, Lower Plenty River Concept Plan Vegetation Report 9. Melbourne Parks and Waterways, The Middle Yarra River Concept Plan – Dights Falls to Burke Road 10. Melbourne Parks and Waterways, The Middle Yarra River Concept Plan – Burke Road to Watsons Creek 11. National Trust (Victoria) Significant Trees Register 12. National Trust of Australia (Victoria) Classification Report – Buildings Committee, Loyola College, Watsonia 13. National Trust of Australia (Victoria) Classification Report – Buildings Committee, Loyola College, Watsonia 14. Streeton Views Neighbourhood Design Guidelines 1993-34

21.09-7 1. Banyule City Council, Community Profile February 2014 2. Banyule City Council Liveable Housing Design Guidelines 3. Banyule City Council Student Accommodation Guidelines 4. Banyule Safer Design Guide, City of Banyule 28 April 2003 5. Design and Development Guidelines, Macleod Primary School Land 6. Streeton Views Neighbourhood Design Guidelines 1993-94 7. National Trust of Australia (Victoria) Classification Report – Buildings Committee, Loyola College, Watsonia 8. Loyola Seminary and Environs Heritage Plan 9. Darebin Parklands and Rockbeare Park Environs Development Guidelines 10. 250 Waterdale Road, Ivanhoe – Urban Design Guidelines 11. Ivanhoe Structure Plan 2012 12. Ivanhoe Activity Centre Heritage Items and Precincts 13. Use and Development Guidelines – 108-110 Bolton Street, Lower Plenty

21.09-8 1. Banyule Activity Centre Car Parking Strategy 2. Banyule Integrated Transport Strategy 2003-2013 3. Banyule Road Safety Plan

21.09-9 1. Banyule Heritage Places Review 2. Banyule Heritage Places Study 3. Structure Plan for the Heidelberg Precinct 2007 4. Summary of the Heidelberg Precinct Structure Plan Update

21.09-1 1. Replaces the Banyule Culture Strategy with the Banyule Arts Plan

21.09-3 1. Change the Outdoor Advertising Policy date from September to August 2001

21.09-4 1. Replaces ‘Banyule Environment Policy and Strategy 1997’ with ‘Banyule Planet: Environmental Sustainability Policy and Strategy 2013-2017’

1. Council adopted document 2. Council adopted document 3. Council adopted document 4. Existing reference document in Schedule to an Overlay 5. Council adopted document 6. Existing reference document in Schedule to an Overlay 7. Existing reference document in Schedule to an Overlay 8. Existing reference document in Schedule to an Overlay 9. Existing reference document in Schedule to an Overlay

21.09-6 1. Existing reference document in Schedule to an Overlay 2. Existing reference document in Schedule to an Overlay 3. Existing reference document in Schedule to an Overlay 4. Existing reference document in Schedule to an Overlay 5. Existing reference document in Schedule to an Overlay 6. Landscape Report, Loyola College Complex, Office of Corrections Train ing Centre, Grimshaw Street, Watsonia 7. Loyola Seminary and Environs Heritage Plan 8. Existing reference document in Schedule to an Overlay 9. Existing reference document in Schedule to an Overlay 10. Existing reference document in Schedule to an Overlay 11. Existing reference document in Schedule to an Overlay 12. Removal of DDO proposed for this site. Documents that give relevant design and development guidance and/or are listed as reference documents to the schedule to this Overlay should be retained. 13. Removal of DDO proposed for this site. Documents that give relevant design and development guidance and/or are listed as reference documents to the schedule to this Overlay should be retained. 14. Removal of DPO proposed for this site. Documents that give relevant design and development guidance and/or are listed as reference documents to the schedule to this Overlay should be retained.

21.09-7 1. Previously in MSS. Preference to have detail contained as a Reference Document so as to be more readily updated. 2. Council adopted document 3. Council adopted document 4. Council adopted document 5. Removal of DDO proposed for this site. Documents that give relevant design and development guidance and/or are listed as reference documents to the schedule to this Overlay should be retained. 6. Removal of DPO proposed for this site. Documents that give relevant design and development guidance and/or are listed as reference documents to the schedule to this Overlay should be retained. 7. Removal of DDO proposed for this site. Documents that give relevant design and development guidance and/or are listed as reference documents to the schedule to this Overlay should be retained. 8. Removal of DDO proposed for this site. Documents that give relevant design and development guidance and/or are listed as reference documents to the schedule to this Overlay should be retained. 9. Existing reference document in Schedule to an Overlay 10. Existing reference document in Schedule to an Overlay 11. Council adopted document 12. Reference Document proposed to be included in 22.06 as part of this Amendment. 13. Removal of DDO proposed for this site. Documents that give relevant design and development guidance and/or are listed as reference documents to the schedule to this Overlay should be retained.

21.09-8 1. Council adopted document 2. Council adopted document 3. Council adopted document

21.09-9 1. Council adopted document 2. Council adopted document 3. Council adopted document 4. Summary of the Heidelberg Precinct Structure Plan Update

21.09-3 1. Incorrect date

21.09-4 1. Replaces with current Council adopted strategy/ policy 2. Incorrect date

21.09-5 1. Replaces with current Council adopted strategy/ policy 2. Replaces with current Council adopted strategy/ policy

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.1




Comment

2. Change the Outdoor Advertising Policy date from September to August 2001

21.09-5 1. Replaces ‘Banyule Health Plan 2004-2007’ with ‘Banyule People: Health and Wellbeing Policy and Strategy 2013-2017’ 2. Replaces ‘City of Banyule Cultural Strategy 2007-2011’ with ‘Banyule Arts Plan 2013-2017’

21.09-6 1. Replaces ‘Banyule Environment Policy and Strategy 1997’ with ‘Banyule Planet: Environmental Sustainability Policy and Strategy 2013-2017’ 2. Replaces ‘Banyule City Council Stormwater Quality Management Plan’ with ‘Banyule Planet: Water Sustainability Plan 2013’ 3. Replaces ‘Municipal Bicycle Strategic Statement’ with Banyule Bicycle Strategy (2010 – 2020) and Banyule Bicycle Policy (2010 – 2020)

21.09-8 1. Replaces ‘Municipal Bicycle Strategic Statement’ with Banyule Bicycle Strategy (2010 – 2020) and Banyule Bicycle Policy (2010 – 2020) 2. Replaces ‘Banyule Road Safety Strategy’ (2010) with ‘Banyule Road Safety Plan’ (2010-2015)

21.09-9 1. Updates heading ‘ Greensborough Principle Activity Centre’ to ‘Local Places’ Remove

21.09-2 1. City of Banyule Neighbourhood Character Strategy, Mike Scott & Associates 1999

21.09-7 1. Urban Design Guidelines for Ivanhoe Shopping Centre

21.09-8 1. North Eastern Metropolitan Regional Roads Strategy

21.09-6 1. Replaces with current Council adopted strategy/ policy 2. Replaces with current Council adopted strategy/ policy 3. Replaces with current Council adopted strategy/ policy

21.09-8 1. Replaces with current Council adopted strategy/ policy 2. Replaces with current Council adopted strategy/ policy

21.09-9 1. Aligns with Activity Centre naming conventions given in Plan Melbourne Remove

21.09-2 1. This document has been superceded by the 2012 Neighbourhood Character Strategy

21.09-7 1. This document has been superceded by the Ivanhoe Structure Plan 2013

21.09-8 1. This document no longer relevant as a Reference Document in the context of State Government direction for Integrated Transport Planning

8.

22.01 Outdoor Advertising Policy Change ‘Policy References’ to ‘Reference documents’’

N/A

9.

22.02 Residential Neighbourhood Character Policy

Remove reference to the DDO4 which has been replaced with the ACZ plus minor formatting edits. Change ‘Policy References’ to ‘Reference documents’’ Removes ‘City of Banyule Neighbourhood Character Strategy, Mike Scott & Associates 1999’ from Reference Documents.

N/A Ensures policy reflects with zoning changes.

Ensures appropriate weight is given to these documents.

1999 Neighbourhood Character Strategy has been superceded by an updated Neighbourhood Character Strategy.

10.

22.03 Safer Design Policy Change ‘Policy References’ to ‘Reference documents’’


11.

22.04 Non-Residential Uses in Residential Zones Policy

Grammatical error in p2, dot point 3. Currently reads “located a on corner” but should read “located on a corner”. Change ‘Policy References’ to ‘Reference documents’


12.

22.05 Business Plans Policy Removes the Clause 22.05 (Business Plans Policy) from the Local Planning Policy Framework.

N/A Business Plans are no longer adopted by Council; Business Plans are developed by local trader associations for local traders.

13.

22.06 Cultural Heritage Conservation Policy Adds the Ivanhoe Precincts Heritage Study to Reference documents Change ‘Policy References’ to ‘Reference documents’’ Adds Banyule City Council, Warringal Parklands & Banyule Flats Cultural Heritage Assessment

N/A Completed in 2013 this study gives important guidance for heritage areas in Ivanhoe and is an appropriate inclusion as a policy reference document.

14.

Cl 37.08 Schedule 1 to the Activity Centre Zone Revise the ACZ schedule’s Framework Map and Precinct 4 Map to include 4 Poulter Street, Greensborough

N/A A permit has already been issued and consultation done for a development and the rezoning, (for an area to be used for car parking) was part of their s173 Agreement for the permit condition.

15.

42.01s1 Schedule 1 to the Environmental Significance Overlay – Yarra River, Plenty River and Darebin Creek

Policy neutral fix-ups to structure and content of permit requirements, decision guidelines and reference documents.

N/A Change will improve consistency, clarity and ensure all schedules to the ESO are up-to-date.

16.

42.01s2 Schedule 2 to the Environment Significance Overlay – Macleod Red Gum Area



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.1




Comment

17.

42.01s3 Schedule 3 to the Environment Significance Overlay – Sites of Botanical, Zoological and Habitat Significance



18.

42.01s4 Schedule 4 to the Environment Significance Overlay – Significant Trees and Areas of Vegetation



19.

42.01s5 Schedule 5 to the Environment Significance Overlay – Streeton Views Estate



20.

42.02s1 Schedule 1 to the Vegetation Protection Overlay – Plenty River East Area


N/A Change will improve consistency, clarity and ensure all schedules to the VPO are up-to-date.

21.

42.02s2 Schedule 2 to the Vegetation Protection Overlay – Loyola Seminary Precinct



22.

42.02s3 Schedule 3 to the Vegetation Protection Overlay – Eaglemont, Ivanhoe East and Ivanhoe Area



23.

42.02s4 Schedule 4 to the Vegetation Protection Overlay – Elliston Estate


N/A Change will give consistency, improve clarity, and ensure all schedules to the VPO are up-to-date.

24.

42.02s5 Schedule 5 to the Vegetation Protection Overlay – Substantial Tree Protection Area


N/A Change will give consistency, improve clarity, and ensure all schedules to the VPO are up-to-date.

25.

42.03s1 Schedule 1 to the Significant Landscape Overlay – Watercourse Environs

Policy neutral fix-ups to structure and content of permit requirements, decision guidelines and reference documents. Grammatical error in Clause 4 - change ‘grater’ to ‘greater’

N/A Change will give consistency, improve clarity, and ensure all schedules to the SLO are up-to-date.

26.

42.03s2 Schedule 2 to the Significant Landscape Overlay – Yarra Valley Landscape Area


N/A Change will give consistency, improve clarity, and ensure all schedules to the SLO are up-to-date.

27.

43.01 Schedule to the Heritage Overlay HO 131 - Spelling of “Eothern’ to be changed to ‘Eothen’ HO 78 - Change ‘St James Anglican Parish Church & Hall’ to St James Anglican Parish Church.

N/A

28.

43.02s2 Schedule 2 to the Design and Development Overlay

Removes the Loyola Precinct Design and Development Overlay MAP No 6DDO

This Design and Development Overlay was introduced to ensure that the redevelopment of this surplus land was done within the broader character context of the area and respected the heritage attributes of the Loyola Seminary (including gates, fences and original grounds). This land has since been developed for residential purposes and subsequently the need to manage the redevelopment of the surplus land is no longer needed.

29.


Removes the Macleod Primary School Area Design and Development Overlay MAP No 6DDO

This Design and Development Overlay was introduced to ensure that the redevelopment of this surplus land was done with the broader character context of the area. This land has since been developed for residential purposes and subsequently the need to manage the redevelopment of the surplus land is no longer needed.

30.


Removes the Remove DDO6 Use and Development Guidelines, 108-110 Bolton Street, Lower Plenty.

MAP No 13DDO

This Design and Development Overlay was introduced to ensure that the redevelopment of this surplus land was done with the broader character context of the area. This land has since been developed for residential purposes and subsequently the need to manage the redevelopment of the surplus land is no longer needed.

31.


Remove DDO8 from 38 & 40 Hailes Street Greensborough MAP No 3DDO

The properties at 38 & 40 Hailes Street Greensborough are affected by DDO8 and are at the edge of this control, which applied to the vast area of land that is mostly east of the Plenty River. Under normal circumstances the DDO8 applies to land that is also affected by a VPO1 or ESO1. When this does not occur the DDO8 becomes confusing as it makes direct reference to the neighbourhood character east of the Plenty River, which corresponds with VPO1 and ESO1. Properties in Hailes Street are affected by VPO5. In this instance these properties are the only two in this pocket of development that are affected by DDO8. Thus the DDO is an anomaly and not the absence of a VPO1 or ESO1, neither of which could be reasonably justified to be applied to these properties. 38 Hailes Street has a HO.

32.

43.04s1 Schedule 1 to the Development Plan Overlay – Streeton Views

Removes Development Plan Overlay MAP No 11DPO & No 12DPO

The role of DPO1 is to facilitate the appropriate subdivision of this land. This was completed some years ago and many lots are affected by s173 agreements restricting development. The DPO1 is now considered to be redundant and can be removed from the planning scheme. Development Plan approval will still be needed pursuant to the s173 agreements on affected property titles.

33.

43.04s3 Schedule 3 to the Development Plan Overlay - College Views Estate, Bundoora

Removes Development Plan Overlay MAP No 1DPO

DPO3 is no longer required as the subdivision of lots has been completed.

34.

42.01s4 Schedule 4 to the ESO Removes ESO4 at 4 and 5 Eton Court, Heidelberg. MAP No 16ESO

The River Red Gum affected by this Overlay at 4 Eton Court has died and was removed last year (with consent from Council).

35.

Rezoning Rezone land at 24 Longacres Rd Yallambie & 377 Lower Plenty Rd Viewbank. 24 Longacres Rd Yallambie should be NRZ2 and & 377 Lower Plenty Rd Viewbank should be PPRZ

MAP No 11

While the address looks very different, these properties are side by side. It appears that the PPRZ has been applied to 24 Longacres Rd by mistake and that the NRZ2 (former R1Z) has been applied to 377 Lower Plenty Rd Viewbank by mistake.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.1




Comment

36.

Rezoning Rezone 321 Liberty Parade, Heidelberg West from PPRZ to GRZ1 MAP No 9

The property at 321 Liberty Parade, Heidelberg West interfaces with land zoned PPRZ. There is an error in the extent of the PPRZ as it should not be applied to this site. Rather, the land should be zoned GRZ1.

37.

Rezoning Rezone Wattle Drive from PUZ3 to R1Z between Wungan & Hooper St and PUZ4 to R1Z

MAP No 6

Current zoning of Wattle Drive east of Wungan Street does not reflect its current or preferred future use as a local road.

38.

Rezoning A number of allotments used for residential purposes are affected by both the NRZ2 & PPRZ. This is an error and the allotments should all be rezoned to NRZ2

MAP No 7

Properties at 111 Para Rd. & 4, 6A, 6B, 6C, 6D & 10 Dobson Rd. interface with land zoned PPRZ. There is an error in the extent of the PPRZ because it should not be applied to the above sites; instead they should be zoned exclusively NRZ2.

39.

Rezoning Rezone 38A & 38B Green Street from R1Z to PPRZ. MAP No 14

A portion of Rossi Park also known as 38A & 38B Green St. is zoned R1Z instead of PPRZ and needs to be rezoned in accordance with the other portion of this parcel of land to reflect the current and preferred future use of the land.

40.

Rezoning Rezone portions of 125 & 127 Bonds Rd. Lower Plenty from PUZ1 to LDRZ MAPS No 12 & 13

This is a mapping anomaly, which is also shown on the map from the old format Banyule planning scheme. A strip of land on both properties, parallel to their southern boundaries, is zoned PUZ1. Both properties are used and developed for residential purposes. The strip of land does not align with any parcel or property boundaries. The adjacent land at 117-123 Bonds Rd is zoned PUZ1 reflecting its current ownership & former use as an electricity substation.

41.

Rezoning Rezone land at 24 Longacres Rd, Yallambie & 377 Lower Plenty Road, Viewbank. 24 Longacres Rd should be RZ1 and 377 Lower Plenty should be PPRZ.

MAP No 11

These properties are adjacent. It appears that the PPRZ has been applied to 24 Longacres Rd by mistake.

42.

Rezoning Rezone portion of 39 Adam Crescent, Montmorency from PPRZ to R1Z to correct a mapping anomaly

MAP No 8

39 Adam Crescent is a residential lot with a single dwelling. The land is split zoned R1Z and PPRZ. 39 Adam Cres is privately owned and used for residential purposes. It is not used for a public use.

43.

Rezoning Rezone section of Banksia Street between Waterdale and Oriel Roads from RDZ1 to RDZ2.

MAP No 9

RDZ1 is an anomaly given the status of adjoining sections of Banksia Street. Support for this change received by VicRoads.

44.

Rezoning Rezone sections of St Helena Road/ Karingal Drives MAPS No 3 & 8

Road sections not properly covered by RDZ1 and 2. Support for this change received by VicRoads.

45.

Rezoning Rezones 4 Poulter Avenue, Greensborough to ACZ MAP No 7

A permit has already been issued and consultation done for a development and the rezoning, (for an area to be used for car parking) was part of their s173 Agreement for the permit condition.

46.

Rezoning Rezones section of 8 The Boulevard from PCRZ and R1Z MAP No 19

This is residential and the current zone is an anomaly.

47.

Rezoning Incorrectly applied R1Z and PCRZ across 5 allotments Rezones properties 54 – 58 Poulter Avenue, 7-11 Bicton Street and a section of the Poulter Avenue road reserve

MAP No 7

Incorrect application of the PCRZ and R1Z on the associated property boundaries.

48.

Rezoning Incorrect application of the PUZ on part of an LDRZ property MAP No 13

The PUZ at 117-123 Bonds Road does not match up with the property boundary and extends into 125 Bonds Road which is LDRZ. This is an anomaly and should be changed so that the PUZ and LDRZ correspond with property boundaries.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2 Attachment 1: Summary of Submissions to the Draft Banyule Rights of Way Policy and Strategy


BANYULE RIGHTS OF WAY STRATEGY 2014-2024

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2 Attachment 1: Summary of Submissions to the Draft Banyule Rights of Way Policy

and Strategy


Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................ 1

1.1. Purpose .................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2. Rights of Way Definition .................................................................................................... 1

1.3. Rights of Way Ownership .................................................................................................. 1

2. STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION ................................................ 2

2.1. Vision, Principles and Objectives .......................................................................... 2

3. BACKGROUND, ISSUES & ACTIONS ....................................... 3

3.1. Existing Rights of Way Assets ............................................................................... 3

3.2. Key Issues ............................................................................................................... 3

3.3. Identification ............................................................................................................ 4

3.3.1. Identification and Categorisation of Rights of Way ................................ 4

3.3.2. Naming and Numbering Rights of Way .................................................... 7

3.4. Clarification ............................................................................................................. 9

3.4.1. Heritage ...................................................................................................... 9

3.4.2. Illegal Occupancy and Encroachment ................................................... 10

3.5. Maintenance .......................................................................................................... 11

3.5.1. Maintenance, Cleansing and Infrastructure .................................................................... 11

3.5.2. Drainage Infrastructure and Stormwater Overland Flow paths ................................. 16

3.6. Improvement ......................................................................................................... 17

3.6.1. Construction of Unconstructed Rights of Way .......................................... 17

3.6.2. Activation of Rights of Way in Activity Centres ......................................... 18

3.6.3. Rights of Way abutting existing or new development .............................. 20

3.6.4. Transport, Parking and Loading in Rights of Way .................................... 23

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2 Attachment 1: Summary of Submissions to the Draft Banyule Rights of Way Policy and Strategy


3.7. Closure................................................................................................................... 25

3.7.1. Temporary or Permanent Closure .......................................................... 25

3.7.2. Discontinuance ........................................................................................ 26

4. IMPLEMENTATION .................................................................. 29

4.1. Strategy Implementation ...................................................................................... 29

4.2. Timing .................................................................................................................... 30

4.3. Costing and Budget Allocation ............................................................................ 30

4.4. Monitoring and Review Process .......................................................................... 31

5. APPENDICES ........................................................................... 32

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2

Attachment 1: Summary of Submissions to the Draft Banyule Rights of Way Policy and Strategy


1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Purpose

The purpose of the Banyule Rights of Way Strategy 2014 – 2024 is to define and clarify how the Banyule Rights of Way Policy is to implemented and administered. The Strategy outlines the background and key issues identified in the strategic and operational management of Rights of Way, and identifies the management, implementation and review processes to achieve the vision, principles and objectives set out in the Policy. Definitions used in the Policy have the same meaning in the Strategy.

1.2. Rights of Way Definition

Rights of Way are generally narrow roads providing access to the rear or side of properties. There may be a right to use land for road or access purposes or land set aside on a plan of subdivision as a ‘road’ but never used or constructed as a ‘road’. Butterworth’s Concise Australian Legal Dictionary defines a ‘right of way’ as – ‘A right to pass over public or private land. The public has a right to pass over

a highway, which arises by way of statute or as a result of the dedication of the road. A right of way may exist for limited purposes and use for any other purpose may amount to a trespass.’

It also defines a ‘highway’ as – ‘Land set aside by long usage or by government Act as a public carriageway.’ Victorian State Government statutes and regulations provide no categorical definition for a right of way. For the purposes of this document, the definition adopted for Rights of Way means those numbered and named in Banyule City Council’s Road Register (as amended from time to time).

1.3. Rights of Way Ownership

Prior to the introduction of the Subdivision Act in 1989, legislative requirements for subdividing land did not provide for title to infrastructure assets to be transferred to Council upon registration of a Plan of Subdivision. It was common for allotments on the Plan of Subdivision to be sold to individual owners leaving the infrastructure assets, including title to the Rights of Way, in the name of the subdivider or original owner of the land. As a result Council is rarely the registered owner of such infrastructure assets, but is the custodial manager. While Council may not be registered as the owner, this custodial managerial role confers on Council legal and regulatory responsibilities, and customer expectations.

2.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION

2.1. Vision, Principles and Objectives

This Rights of Way Strategy will be implemented in accordance with the Vision, Principles and Objectives set out in the Banyule Rights of Way Policy.

The Vision is:


In consideration or implementation of this Strategy reference should be made to the following documents and any revisions or updates:

City Plan 2013 - 2017

Banyule Access and Inclusion Policy

Banyule Activity Centre Parking Policy and Strategy

Banyule Activity Centre Structure Plans

Banyule Drainage Policy 1998

Banyule Environment Strategy, 2003

Banyule Integrated Transport Strategy, 2003-2013

Banyule Local Law No. 1 (2005) General Local Law

Banyule Municipal Strategic Statement

Banyule Neighbourhood Character Strategy

Banyule Planning Scheme

Banyule Public Open Space Strategy 2007 – 2012

Banyule Road Management Plan

Banyule Road Register

Banyule Safer Design Guidelines

Banyule Street Numbering and Naming Guidelines

Building Act 1993

Emergency Management Act 1986

Fences Act 1968

Geographic Place Names Act 1998

Local Government Act 1989

Planning and Environment Act 1987

Road Management Act 2004

Victorian Building Regulations

The following Acts of Parliament, associated guidelines and regulations also prescribe the use and management of Rights of Way:

Building Act 1993


Fences Act 1968

Geographic Places Names Act 1998


Metropolitan Fire Brigade Act 1958


Planning Scheme Decision Guidelines


Victorian Road Regulations

1.

3.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



BACKGROUND, ISSUES & ACTIONS

3.1. Existing Rights of Way Assets

Rights of Way support and complement the existing road network throughout the municipality by providing direct and/or alternative access to properties abutting them and as alternative access to other streets and community facilities. They are used by a variety of vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists and often contain utility services. With over 30km and 260 individually identified Rights of Way throughout the municipality, a clear strategy is essential to manage these valuable community assets.

The majority of Rights of Way in the City of Banyule were created as part of original subdivisions of land in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Land development at that time usually resulted in the creation of Rights of Way at the rear of properties for access by night carts and sometimes for drainage purposes. Given the age of the Rights of Way – with the majority over 80 years old, many of them are in need of maintenance and/or renewal.

Unconstructed and constructed Rights of Way exist in the municipality with a mixture of surfaces varying from concrete through asphalt, brick pavers, bluestone and sprayed seal. The majority of constructed Rights of Way are concrete and approximately 3.1m in width and are located in the southern half of the municipality. However, the widths of the Rights of Way which vary from 1.8m up to 9.9m govern their usefulness for future purposes.

Approximately 25% of all Rights of Way in the municipality are classified as unconstructed (8km) and have a gravel (1km) or dirt surface (7km) and minimal drainage infrastructure. The unconstructed Rights of Way create maintenance and access/safety issues for people of limited ability, pedestrians and cyclists. A number of Rights of Way have bluestone elements (drainage channel and/or edging) which have heritage value.

3.2. Key Issues

The key issues in the management of Rights of Way identified in the Rights of Way Policy are:

Identification


Naming and numbering of Rights of Way

Clarification

Heritage

Illegal occupancy and encroachment

Maintenance



Improvement




Transport, parking and loading in Rights of Way

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



Closure


Discontinuance The key issues are closely interrelated and should be viewed in context with each other. The following sections expand on each of the identified key issues.

3.3. Identification

3.3.1. Identification and Categorisation of Rights of Way

Legislative/political context

Section 205 of the Local Government Act 1989 provides that ‘A Council has the care and management of … all roads that the Council has agreed to have the care and management of’. Section 205 also states that this section is subject to the Road Management Act 2004. Background

Council’s Rights of Way Register lists all Rights of Way as part of the Public Road Register incorporated in the Road Management Plan. The Rights of Way Register contained rudimentary information on each Rights of Way and allows them to be listed as constructed and unconstructed. The Rights of Way data has recently been revisited and data has been collected within a number of categories – constructed/unconstructed, open/occupied, material used in construction, surface type, length and width. The additional data has made identification and categorisation of Rights of Way easier. Additional data in categorising each Rights of Way could include proximity to an Activity Centre or community hub, and the degree and type of usage. Issue

High-quality information will make it easier for Council to make informed decisions in relation to Rights of Way including:

determining Rights of Way over which Council has care and management;

Council’s maintenance and management practices; and

Council’s responsibilities. Objective

To maintain an up-to-date accurate and detailed database of all Rights of Way in the City of Banyule. To prioritise the use and management of all Rights of Way according to their public need. To establish classification criterion for all Rights of Way having regard to the Road Management Plan.

Discussion

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



Council has different data sources for Rights of Way information including asset register databases, infrastructure and cleansing registers, property registers and street files. Collection of accurate, up-to-date information into an appropriately managed ‘one-stop shop’ available on a corporate management system will facilitate improved Rights of Way management decisions using a more informative and strategic classification system. This Strategy supports undertaking an audit of all Rights of Way to provide information on current usage, construction, infrastructure needs, maintenance, potential for pedestrian and cyclist use and potential for activation. This Strategy supports the classification of Rights of Way according to a number of current and anticipated factors and uses to improve their management. The classification of Rights of Way will consider the following factors:

Requirement for public use

If not required for public use, then discontinued

Location:

o Within or close to an Activity Centre

o Within a retail centre

o Close to a community hub or other activity generator

o Outside of the above three categories.

An important conduit for pedestrians and cyclists

Constructed or unconstructed In investigating the above factors, a two tier Rights of Way classification scheme is proposed. This would be considered for inclusion in the next iteration of the Road Management Plan following consultation within Council departments and the community.

Classification Sub-Class Description

Class 1 1A Rights of Way within Activity Centre boundaries.

1B Rights of Way outside Activity Centre boundaries but serving an important function as connectors to local community hubs and uses, or important from a drainage, cycling and pedestrian perspective.

1C Rights of Way other than 1A and 1B that provide access to private property or for public use.

1D Rights of Way not having a road function but requiring retention for stormwater overland flow path function.

Class 2 None Rights of Way not required for public use.

Class 1A Rights of Way

Class 1A Rights of Way are described as required for public access and within the boundaries of an Activity Centre (Principal, Major and Neighbourhood). They are important for transport permeability (vehicular, parking, loading); and sustainable transport (pedestrians and cyclists). They are most likely to have, or have potential

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



for, new development opening directly onto them. The character and function of these Rights of Way are significant and need to be protected. They may form an important part of the minor or major drainage system (including performing a function as important overland flow path for stormwater). All Class 1A Rights of Way should be constructed and require comprehensive maintenance and cleansing services. Resources will be directed firstly to Class 1 Rights of Way. Class 1B Rights of Way

Class 1B Rights of Way are the second level of Rights of Way in terms of strategic functionality to Council. While outside Activity Centres and less likely to be required for access to significant development in the future, they serve an important function as connectors to smaller local community hubs, schools, public transport, open space etc. They are also likely to be used by the broader community. Depending on their level of functionality, they may be constructed or unconstructed. They may form an important part of the minor or major drainage system (including performing a function as important overland flow path for stormwater), off-road bicycle network and provide opportunity for open space usage. Class 1C Rights of Way

Class 1C Rights of Way are those Rights of Way which do not serve the broader community. They most likely exist in isolation to other Rights of Way and likely serve residents who abut them. They are likely to be unconstructed and unsuitable for new development accessing them directly.

Class 1D Rights of Way

Class 1D Rights of Way are those Rights of Way which are not required for a road function but would serve a stormwater overland flow path function and should be retained. Class 2 Rights of Way

Rights of Way which do not fit the criteria of Class 1A, 1B, 1C or 1D are likely to be no longer required for public use and could be considered for discontinuance and sale. These Rights of Way would typically be unconstructed.

Actions

No. Action Priority Responsibility Cost

3.3.1.1.

Implement the Rights of Way classification system detailed above and incorporate into the Banyule Road Management Plan.

1 Asset Management

Operating

3.3.1.2.

Survey all Rights of Way and update the Rights of Way Register as part of the Public Roads Register database.

1 Asset Management

$6,000

3.3.1.3.

Review the Rights of Way Register database to reclassify the Rights of Way assets into the new classification system.

1 Asset Management

$5,000

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



3.3.1.4.

Conduct an audit of all available Rights of Way asset information held within Council’s information system to determine the extent of information held and identify any gaps.

1 Engineering Services

$5,000

3.3.1.5.

Review the Rights of Way Register to ensure it captures information about Rights of Way including:

Surface Treatment

Carriageway characteristics

Drainage and Infrastructure

Overland flow path (flooding) status

Heritage Issues

Encroachments or obstructions.

1 Infrastructure Services

Included in 3.3.1.2

3.3.1.6.

Update the Rights of Way Register database on a regular basis to ensure updated Rights of Way information in relation to sales, discontinuances, encroachments and other relevant information.

Ongoing Asset Management

GIS Services

Included in operating costs

Performance measures

Rights of Way classification system and database established.

Rights of Way surveyed and Rights of Way Register updated regularly.

Rights of Way database maintained and updated regularly.

3.3.2. Naming and Numbering Rights of Way

Legal/political context

Clause 5 of Schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1989 confers on Council the power to name roads and Rights of Way. In exercising this power Council must act in accordance with the guidelines in force for the time being under the Geographic Place Names Act 1998 and must advise the Registrar of the action it has taken. The Banyule Street Numbering and Naming Guidelines also apply.

Background

With the activation of Rights of Way around Activity Centres and the increasing number of developments directly abutting Rights of Way, there is likely to be an increased number of commercial and residential buildings which have or will have direct access to Rights of Way without the benefit of an alternative access onto a ‘main street’.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



The naming of Rights of Way brings with it certain community expectations namely:

level of road maintenance/construction;

delivery of mail;

collection of garbage;

emergency vehicle access;

security; and

public lighting.

Issue

The creation of properties having their only frontage to Rights of Way creates issues where the property cannot be readily identified. This could cause issues service authorities including postal access and emergency services access.

Objective

To create an identity of place to Rights of Way where they are required as primary street addresses.

Discussion

Council is empowered under the Local Government Act 1989 to name roads and assign a number to any properties adjacent to any road. Any action by Council to number and name Rights of Way must be in accordance with the Geographic Place Names Act 1998 and the Street Numbering and Naming guidelines. Numbering and Naming of Rights of Way should only be considered when a property cannot be numbered to an existing property. In considering proposals to name Rights of Way Council must assess:

the necessity as opposed to desire to provide a street address;

the physical characteristics of Rights of Way, including the level of construction and width;

the level of support, or otherwise, of immediately affected property owners;

possible future development of adjacent and nearby land; and

the impact on the neighbourhood character. In selecting names for Rights of Way, Council must have regard to:

suggestions from developers and immediately affected property owners;

support of local interest parties;

indicative local history, flora or fauna and other significant features of the area; and

whether the suggested name is duplicated within the municipality. Actions


3.3.2.1.

Name and number Rights of Way only when a property cannot be numbered to an existing road, in accordance with Council guidelines.

Ongoing as required.

Governance and Laws.

GIS Services.

To be borne by the property developer


Numbering and naming Rights of Way carried out in accordance with Council’s Street Numbering and Naming guidelines.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



3.4. Clarification

3.4.1. Heritage


The Banyule Planning Scheme provides the legislative context for managing heritage issues.

Background

The Rights of Way Register 2009 includes one fully bluestone Rights of Way however a recent audit of that Register has revealed seven fully bluestone Rights of Way comprising a 920m length within the municipality, plus approximately twenty Rights of Way with a bluestone element i.e. drainage channel or edging. Some of these bluestone elements have become ‘hidden’ under a layer of dirt over the last 50 to 100 years. This has significant implications for future and ongoing maintenance and rehabilitation requirements. In addition to bluestone elements, Rights of Way within the City of Banyule may also have other heritage elements such as pit lids or signage.

Issue

Rights of Way constructed from bluestone are by nature quite uneven and are an access impediment for most Rights of Way users with the exception of motor vehicles, although in the case of ambulances, patient ride quality is compromised. In particular, the bluestone surface is an issue for pedestrians, cyclists, mobility scooter users and people with disabilities. Maintenance of the bluestone Rights of Way is also an issue, with bluestone pitchers expensive and difficult to source. Additionally, specialist skilled labour is required to rehabilitate bluestone Rights of Way. Whilst it is understood that a number of Rights of Way contain bluestone elements, the age of Rights of Way within Banyule means that they may also contain other varied heritage elements such as pit lids and signage, which need to further investigated for heritage value.

With bluestone Rights of Way approaching 100 years old, rehabilitation is a significant issue with a decision needed on the form and type of replacement surface, to be used. This will be dependent on whether the Rights of Way is affected by a Heritage Overlay control in the Banyule Planning Scheme. The method of construction of Rights of Way varies dependent on the existing/expected users of the Rights of Way and whether it currently has a bluestone element and/or lies within a Heritage Overlay area. Generally a concrete surface treatment would be best for Rights of Way expected to have high pedestrian and cyclist usage. The current practice of replacing bluestone and other heritage elements in Rights of Way is not defined, a program is required to identify the location and elements of the bluestone and other heritage element Rights of Way within the municipality and clarify appropriate maintenance and service standards and rehabilitation practices for heritage Rights of Way. Any review should be taken in consultation with Council’s heritage advisor.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



Objective

To preserve the heritage value of Rights of Way that have a heritage element (including bluestone) or that are located in areas affected by a Heritage Overlay control in the Banyule Planning Scheme.

To contribute to the preservation of existing streetscapes.

Actions


3.4.1.1.

Develop a program to expose and assess the condition of bluestone elements of Rights of Way which are covered with layers of dirt and gravel.

2 Operations $5,000

3.4.1.2.

Prepare a heritage management plan identifying appropriate maintenance, service standards and rehabilitation practices for Rights of Way with bluestone and other heritage elements both within and outside areas affected by a Heritage Overlay in the Banyule Planning Scheme.

1 Engineering Services – resources to be determined – Strategic Planning input

$10,000

3.4.1.3.

Consider using asphalt/concrete when Rights of Way with high pedestrian and/or bicycle usage need rehabilitation or upgrading.

Ongoing Operations Capital Works Program


Guidelines established identifying appropriate maintenance, service standards and rehabilitation practices for Rights of Way affected by a Heritage Overlay or containing heritage elements including bluestone.

Maintain Rights of Way in accordance with the Heritage Management Plan, subject to budgetary constraints.

3.4.2. Illegal Occupancy and Encroachment


Local Law No. 1 2005 General Local Law

Background

Illegal occupancy and encroachments occasionally occur where Rights of Way are unconstructed and under-utilised, and back directly onto residential properties. A recent revision of data indicated fifty four separate incidents of occupation/encroachment within Rights of Way. The encroachment generally occurs when an adjacent property owner plants trees/scrubs within the Rights of Way or erects a gate or fence across it. Encroachments notified by neighbouring residents or Council’s Infrastructure, Cleansing and Parks departments are reported to

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



Council’s Local Laws unit which instigate measures to remove the encroachment. Encroachment can also occur where property boundaries are unknown.

Encroachments within Rights of Ways identified as important stormwater overland flow paths can have a dramatic effect on flood levels and inundation to properties. These encroachments must be removed immediately.

Issue

Illegal occupancy and encroachments of Rights of Way are not in the general public interest and should be removed where it is necessary to retain the integrity of the

Rights of Way and benefits to the community.

Objective

To maintain Rights of Way free from illegal occupancy and encroachment.

Actions


Audit undertaken identifying any illegal occupancy or encroachment on Rights of Way.

Illegal occupancies or encroachments removed promptly.

3.5. Maintenance

3.5.1. Maintenance, Cleansing and Infrastructure


Section 205 of the Local Government Act 1989 provides that ‘A Council has the care and management of …all roads that the Council has agreed to have the care and management of’. Section 205 also states that this section is subject to the Road Management Act 2004. Section 40 of the Road Management Act 2004 provides that the responsible authority has ‘a statutory duty to inspect, maintain and repair public roads’. However, the statutory duty imposed by subsection (1) does not create a duty to upgrade a road or to maintain a road to a higher standard than the standard to which the road is constructed. Background


3.4.2.1.

Council will proactively remove unauthorised encroachments or gates are erected in Rights of Way.

2 Maintenance Operations

Include in maintenance costs

3.4.2.2.

Council will conduct an initial audit of all Rights of Way for encroachments and gates as part of its regular maintenance schedule and recheck for encroachments every 2 years to guard against future possible claims of adverse possession.



Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



The majority of Rights of Way within the City of Banyule were created as roads within a plan of subdivision and remain in the name of the original subdivider. Council has discretionary powers under the Local Government Act and the Road Management Act for the management of these Rights of Way. The management is undertaken by a number of Council departments including: Asset Management (maintenance of Rights of Way register); Property Services (discontinuance, selling of Rights of Way, valuations, legal matters); Infrastructure and Cleansing; Youth Services (graffiti); and Parks and Gardens (cutting grass, fire hazards etc.). Council’s Infrastructure and Cleansing Departments undertake maintenance and cleansing of all Rights of Way, including cleaning out drainage pits. They maintain both constructed and unconstructed Rights of Way. Generally, cleansing and maintenance is carried out on customer request however Rights of Way within or directly adjacent to shopping centres are cleaned once a fortnight. Expenditure on maintenance and cleansing is generally from the current operating budget with an additional $50,000 available for further more complex maintenance needs. Council’s Parks Department currently maintains 114 Rights of Way, with a maintenance routine of three to four cycles per year, an increase from the previous cycle of once a year. This is due to the growth season having increased in recent years due to rain and the reversal of drought conditions. This level of maintenance routine involves 12 two-man crews working two days to clear 13 Rights of Way each cycle. The Parks department is responsible for cutting grass, clearing vines and vegetation, removing branches and other green rubbish, and ensuring that a fire hazard does not exist during the spring/summer seasons. In recent years, Council’s Infrastructure, Cleansing and Parks Departments have noticed a trend of increased customer requests due in part to new residents moving in to the municipality, particularly in the Ivanhoe and Heidelberg areas where most Rights of Way are located. The provision of separate footpaths in Rights of Way in the municipality is not a usual occurrence due to the narrow width of the majority of Rights of Way. However, pedestrians do use Rights of Way as access ways to community facilities and as short cuts between facilities, for example the Rights of Way which runs between Ivanhoe Rail Station at Norman Street to the Ivanhoe Shopping Centre at Upper Heidelberg Road is well used by pedestrians and cyclists as a short and direct route between these facilities. The volume and speed of vehicles using Rights of Way is generally low, which assists in providing safer pedestrian and cycling conditions. Opportunities could be explored for shared road status with a posted lower speed limit of 20kph or less. Currently, there is no refuse collection provided to properties that front a Rights of Way, mainly due to Rights of Way width generally being 3.1m and Council’s side loading waste trucks being unable to operate in roads less than 5m wide. In these instances, rubbish bins need to be either privately collected or placed at the nearest intersection with an adjacent road. Within the City of Banyule, there is an issue with dumped rubbish being placed in Rights of Way by unknown persons; this is generally removed by Council’s Cleansing Department on a reactive basis. Melbourne Fire and Emergency Services Board (MFB) guidelines prescribe requirements for emergency vehicle access to a number of development scenarios from single residential to multi-storey commercial properties. The MFB prefer secondary access ways to be a minimum 3.5m wide. The width of awnings and

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



encroachment into Rights of Way also need to be considered in assessing development applications proposed to face Rights of Way. Ambulance Services stop at the closest and safest point of access to their destination. This can include Rights of Way if they are clear of vehicles and it is safe to travel. There are concerns with unmade and bluestone Rights of Way due to the bumpy ride and difficulty in manoeuvring injured or ill patients over these surfaces on trolleys. Similarly, Australia Post vehicles, particularly motorcycles can have minor difficulty negotiating unmade and bluestone Rights of Way. Identifying Council’s responsibility in the maintenance of Rights of Way and accurately defining appropriate maintenance and service standards is problematic for the following reasons:

the number of Rights of Way within the municipality (260 with varying conditions)

the responsibility to maintain rests only with those roads over which Council has agreed to have care and management of;

the level and type of construction is inconsistent;

constructed and unmade Rights of Way require different levels of maintenance;

the lack of obligation to undertake drainage or surface works on unmade roads.

Issue

Rights of Way should be maintained according to community amenity, health and safety requirements and other identified Council benefits.

Objective

To renew those Rights of Way that show good potential for public use, including pedestrian/cyclist usage.

Ensure that Rights of Way that are important for public use are accessible, safe and appropriately constructed and maintained.

Discussion

The Road Management Plan details the level of inspection and maintenance service for Rights of Way which are prioritised as category Level 4. The hierarchy classification is used to assist in prioritising works programs and also intervention responses to remedy defects; however the current constructed or unconstructed categorisation of Rights of Way gives little guidance for the prioritisation of Council resources in response to customer requests. The Strategy recognises the increased level of maintenance, cleansing and costs associated with Rights of Way and the likelihood that this will increase further in future years for Category 1 Rights of Way (particularly for Class 1A Rights of Way which require a high level of maintenance and cleansing in association with their higher public status) with some decrease for Category 2 Rights of Way as they are discontinued and sold. Until such time as Category 2 Rights of Way are sold, Council will assume responsibility to maintain all Rights of Way.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



The Strategy proposes a maintenance schedule for each new category of Rights of Way based on the proposed categorisation. The proposed maintenance schedule is detailed below with approximate costs. The maintenance schedule will be included in the consultation around the next iteration of the Road Management Plan and will be subject to budgetary constraints. Summary of Maintenance Requirements

Classification Maintenance Requirements Cost (Approx)

Class 1A Council to maintain both constructed and unconstructed Rights of Way.

For unconstructed Rights of Way, Council will provide 4 maintenance visits annually to remove vegetation aligned to the growing season.

For constructed Rights of Way, Council will provide a 2-weekly maintenance check, removing dumped rubbish, removing graffiti, checking drainage, infrastructure etc.

A major maintenance pool to be established to cater for the increasing Rights of Way maintenance liability.

$24,000/annually

$24,000/annually

$75,000/annually

Class 1B Council to maintain both constructed and unconstructed Rights of Way.


For constructed Rights of Way, Council will provide an 8-weekly maintenance check, removing dumped rubbish, removing graffiti, checking drainage.


$24,000/annually

$12,000/annually

$50,000/annually

Class 1C Council to maintain both constructed and unconstructed Rights of Way.


For constructed Rights of Way, Council will provide a 12-weekly maintenance check, removing dumped rubbish, removing graffiti, checking drainage.

$24,000/annually

$12,000/annually

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



Class 1D Council to maintain Rights of Way (not classified as Class 1A to 1C) for stormwater overland flow paths.

For all Rights of Way, Council will provide maintenance visits as required to ensure that stormwater overland flow paths are not compromised.

Included in above maintenance costs.

Class 2 Council will maintain both constructed and unconstructed Rights of Way until they are disposed of via a discontinuance and sale process.

Council will provide 3 to 4 maintenance visits a year aligned to the growing season for unconstructed Rights of Way to clear Rights of Way of all vegetation and to reduce any fire hazards. Dumped rubbish will also be cleared on these maintenance visits.

For constructed Rights of Way, Council will provide 4 visits per annum to clear dumped rubbish, remove graffiti etc.

$24,000/annually

Actions


3.5.1.1.

Maintenance of all constructed and unconstructed Rights of Way in line with the standards for Class 1 Rights of Way as detailed above. This is dependent on the above maintenance schedule being adopted as part of the next revision of the Road Management Plan and subject to budgetary constraints.

1 Asset Management

$245,000 annually

3.5.1.2.

Maintenance of all constructed Class 2 Rights of Way until discontinued and/or sold. This is dependent on the above maintenance schedule being adopted as part of the next revision of the Road Management Plan and subject to budgetary constraints.

1 Asset Management

Operations

$24,000 annually


All Rights of Way maintained in accordance with the maintenance requirements schedule.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



3.5.2. Drainage Infrastructure and Stormwater Overland Flow paths


Section 205 of the Local Government Act 1989 provides that ‘A Council has the care and management of …all roads that the Council has agreed to have the care and management of.’ Section 205 also states that this section is subject to the Road Management Act 2004.

Section 163 of the Local Government Act 1989 also provides that ‘A Council may declare a special rate, a special charge or a combination of both only for the purposes of— (a) defraying any expenses; or (b) repaying (with interest) any advance made to or debt incurred or loan raised by the Council— in relation to the performance of a function or the exercise of a power of the Council, if the Council considers that the performance of the function or the exercise of the power is or will be of special benefit to the persons required to pay the special rate or special charge.’

Background

Many Rights of Way have the dual purpose of not only providing access to properties, but also to service the properties with drainage and other services. The drainage can be provided by open gutters or underground drainage pipes. The stormwater overland flow path function of many Rights of Way also need to be identified and considered.

Issue

Council’s drainage policy, dating back to 1998, identifies a lack of or inappropriate infrastructure within the municipality. Some Rights of Way act as drainage outlets for properties situated on either side. Other Rights of Way, whilst not having a road function perform an important stormwater overland flow path function.

In particular, identifying Council’s responsibility for drainage within Rights of Way is complicated by:

the number of Rights of Way within the municipality; the level and type of drain construction is inconsistent; the lack of community support for Council to implement drainage schemes to

undertake drainage or surface works on unmade roads.

Objective

To preserve the stormwater overland flow path function of Rights of Way in known flood zones.

To enhance drainage along and within Rights of Way, as required.

Discussion

Council’s Drainage Policy has not been reviewed for some time. A revised Drainage Policy should support the development and maintenance of a drainage system which will maximise its efficiency, ensures public safety and protects the environment. Drainage maintenance issues will be addressed as set out in Section 3.5.1, with a new category of Right of Way established which addresses the needs of those Rights of Way which do not have road function but which need to be retained to service an important stormwater overland flow path function.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



Actions


3.5.2.1.

Review and Update Council’s Drainage Policy.


Operating Costs

3.5.2.2.

Maintenance of the drainage function of all Class 1 Rights of Way as previously described in Section 3.5.1

1 Asset Management

See Section 3.5.1


Maintenance and service standards for drainage within Rights of Way implemented in accordance with the Road Management Plan and Council’s drainage policy.

Drainage issues that cause damage to properties and compromise public safety addressed on an as-needs basis in accordance with the drainage policy.

Special charge drainage schemes implemented as required.

3.6. Improvement

3.6.1. Construction of Unconstructed Rights of Way


Clause 1 of Schedule 11 of the Local Government Act 1989 confers on Council the power to construct and maintain roads.

Background

Approximately 75% of the Rights of Way within the municipality are constructed with either a concrete or asphalt surface. The constructed Rights of Way are mainly in Activity Centres and are used primarily as access to properties located along them or access ways for pedestrians and cyclists. The remaining 25% of Rights of Way are unconstructed; the cost to construct them would be approximately $500 per linear metre based on the average 3.1m width. Council does not fund construction of unconstructed Rights of Way; the full cost would have to be borne by adjacent property owners and recovered through a special rate/charge scheme as allowed in the Local Government Act Section 163 (7). No such special rate/charge scheme has occurred in Banyule for many years. Other methods of paying for construction could be through developer contributions and planning permit conditions on adjacent development.

Issue

Unconstructed Rights of Way used by the community can pose a liability for Council.

Objective

To construct unconstructed Rights of Way, where improved amenity, health, safety and other benefits (including for cyclists and pedestrians) to Council and the community can be demonstrated

Discussion

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



Unconstructed Rights of Way which are likely to be categorised Class 1A and Class1B Rights of Way and serve a public need will be identified by Council via auditing and Council will facilitate their construction to remove maintenance issues and improve accessibility, subject to budgetary constraints. Council will consider initiating a special rate/charge scheme to achieve construction of unconstructed Rights of Way and those property owners that gain a benefit from the construction will be required to contribute to the cost of construction. Developer contributions may be applicable for the development of Rights of Way in Activity Centres where there is a strategic need to construct the Rights of Way and a development contribution plan has been prepared on adjacent development. Actions


3.6.1.1.

Where Council has identified that an unconstructed Rights of Way is needed for public purposes, Council will facilitate its construction to reduce maintenance requirements and improve accessibility. Funding the construction of unconstructed Rights of Way will be either by a special rate/charge scheme or a developer contribution plan.

1 Asset Management/ Engineering Services

Capital Works Program

3.6.1.2.

Council will draw up a series of technical notes and drawings for the construction and rehabilitation of unconstructed Rights of Way.


Operating costs


Maintenance and service standards for constructed and unconstructed Rights of Way developed in accordance with the Road Management Plan.

Roads on unconstructed Rights of Way constructed through Special Rate/Charge Schemes as required.

3.6.2. Activation of Rights of Way in Activity Centres


The Banyule Planning Scheme and Activity Centre Structure Plans provide the legislative context.

Background

Activity Centres are identified areas for growth and activity by the State Government. State Planning Policy obliges Council to consider higher densities, particularly in Principal Activity Centres such as Greensborough and Major Activity Centres such as Ivanhoe and Heidelberg. To plan for Activity Centres, Council has undertaken structure plans which give Council, local community and other stakeholders a long term plan to guide land use and development in the centres.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



Rights of Way within/close to Activity Centres and community hubs are particularly important because these are locations where strategic land use planning is promoting increased dwelling density. In these locations, there is a need for Rights of Way to support activated edges with property developments, easy pedestrian and cyclist access to nearby places, in addition to servicing the needs of motor vehicles. At the same time, Rights of Way close to Activity Centres tend to be quite narrow – approximately 3.1m in width, often with some heritage value. Activation of Rights of Way close to Activity Centres could take many forms, including the development of residential and commercial dwellings with ground floors opening directly to Rights of Way. Transport options, access for pedestrians and cyclists, carriageway widths, drainage, lighting and public safety all need to be taken into consideration. Activation could also open up Rights of Way for street festivals, street art and other uses. Whilst the City of Banyule does not currently have a ‘laneway culture’, improving laneways to provide interesting and useable community space is important particularly in those Rights of Way which directly abut Activity Centres. Land use planning for activity centres has established meaning to the term ‘Pedestrian Priority Precinct’. A pedestrian priority precinct is a network of streets around an Activity Centre, where the priority for transport is given over to pedestrians. These streets would typically have wider footpaths, lower speed limits (generally 40kph) and many pedestrian crossing facilities located along them. These precincts could be used as a tool to prioritise those Rights of Way which would be suitable for activation. Issue Rights of Way are increasingly becoming important frontages for residential developments. Consequently, consideration of enhanced urban design for the interface between Rights of Way and residential land will help promote activated frontages, permeable edges and Rights of Way that promote safety for all users. Objective

To activate Rights of Way spaces within and close to Activity Centres and community hubs.

Discussion

The identification and development of a demonstration revitalisation project in one or two Rights of Way in each Activity Centre could offer an opportunity to explore and test different scenarios and have a major long term benefit. Rights of Way in different Activity Centres in Banyule will require different design treatments to meet differing needs and expectations. Priority for activating the Rights of Way will be for the Class 1A category Rights of Way, however, Class 1B Rights of Way will be investigated and supported as they arise. The preparation of urban design guidelines for physical improvement to Rights of Way should ensure a design focus to prioritise pedestrian needs within Activity Centres over other modes of transport. The remodelled Rights of Way design should be safe to walk along, designed to promote very low traffic speeds and a new design ethos that takes an integrated approach to preferred design outcomes at the interface. Actions

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2




3.6.2.1.

Prepare a map for Ivanhoe, Heidelberg and Greensborough identifying Rights of Way suitable for activation having regard to the established ‘pedestrian priority precincts’ around Activity Centres.


$15,000

3.6.2.2.

Prepare guidelines for preferred design parameters for Rights of Way in Activity Centres behind shops.


$15,000

3.6.2.3.

As part of Activity Centre and Structure Plan planning, identify a small number of Rights of Way that could be candidates for revitalisation demonstration projects.


$10,000

3.6.2.4.

Advocate for and support community uses such as festivals and events in Rights of Way within Activity Centres.

Ongoing All of Council N/A


Rights of Way suitable for activation within the Principal and Major Activity Centres identified in an appropriate database.

Guidelines setting out appropriate design parameters for Rights of Way in Activity Centres established.

Maintenance and service standards for constructed and unconstructed Rights of Way within Activity Centres developed in accordance with the Road Management Plan.

3.6.3. Rights of Way abutting existing or new development


The Banyule Planning Scheme provides the legislative context. Background

Rights of Way within/close to Activity Centres and community hubs are important because these are locations where strategic land use planning is promoting increased dwelling density. There is potential to consolidate a number of backyards on large blocks and provide a development opportunity which might not otherwise exist if access was only permitted from the street. As such, infill developments proposing the use of Rights of Way for access have been permitted by Council. Many developments propose vehicular and pedestrian access solely along Rights of Way.

Issue

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



Increasingly, developers are proposing both primary and secondary access off Rights of Way which are narrow in width, are not constructed to the appropriate trafficable standard, do not have satisfactory pedestrian and cyclist access, and lack a number of amenities such as lighting, security, appropriate drainage and garbage collection facilities. Currently, Council lacks guidelines which deal comprehensively with this issue. An associated issue is where a development may suggest a ‘new’ Rights of Way within the site envelope to provide access to all or part of the development. Funding of improvements to the Rights of Way may also be an issue. In order to accommodate development accessing directly to Rights of Way, a number of issues will need to be addressed for Rights of Way including:

Surface Treatment - it is important to provide a surface suitable for a mixed pedestrian and vehicular environment. As development off Rights of Way are likely to be close to Activity Centres, the surface should be fully accessible to all users and be bicycle friendly. In the majority of instances a concrete surface treatment would be preferred; this should incorporate traffic calming treatments capable of reducing traffic speeds to 20km/hr or less. Attention should be given to the Banyule Safer Design Guide, when mixing pedestrians and cyclists with vehicular traffic. Design involving bluestone would need to ensure that acceptable DDA access is maintained. The cost to construct the surface treatment and any additional infrastructure such as drainage improvements is to be borne by the developer.

Carriageway width – as Rights of Way are typically 3.1m wide or less, consideration needs to be given to widening carriageways to allow unimpeded access, particularly in relation to larger developments, accommodating other residents, emergency vehicle access, Australia Post delivery and waste collection etc. Rights of Way need to be wide enough to safely allow for a mixed pedestrian/vehicular environment. Guidelines relating to preferred surface treatment, carriageway width and infrastructure requirements for developments fronting Rights of Way should be developed to define the optimal environment for all users. The guidelines should consider possible mechanisms for achieving widening Rights of Way, including (but not exclusive of any other means) by negotiation with planning permit applicants in lieu of parking dispensation of proposed developments abutting the Rights of Way.

Utility service and drainage provision – Developers should be responsible for all costs and infrastructure associated with the provision of water, gas, electricity, communications and drainage to the development. Provision must be made for current drainage and legal point of discharge infrastructure in the Rights of Way. Any works required to dig up the Rights of Way surface treatment should be reinstated to Council satisfaction.

Street lighting – Rights of Way can be isolated, hazardous and dark places. Consideration needs to be given to the existing street lighting (if any) and the provision of adequate lighting for the new development to encourage safe use of the Rights of Way. Adequate carriageway width should be provided for positioning of light poles. To provide pedestrian safety and security in Rights of Way, there must be direct lines of sight through the entire Rights of Way.

Encroachment into the Rights of Way – Consideration should be given to the urban form of the development and whether there are encroachments into the

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



Rights of Way such as balconies etc., which would impede vehicular access and or block pedestrian/cyclist movement or create blind spots.

Emergency Vehicle Access and Waste Collection – Proposed developments must comply with the requirements set out in the Metropolitan Fire and Emergency Service Board’s guidelines - GL-27 Planning Guideline for Emergency Vehicle Access and Minimum Water Supplies. On Rights of Way less than 5m wide, Council’s waste collection vehicles are unable to collect waste. As part of the approval for any development to face a Rights of Way less than 5m wide, a waste management plan should be developed to the satisfaction of Council.

Traffic Management in Rights of Way – For any development that is anticipated to change the volume of vehicular traffic or increase the volume of pedestrian and cyclist traffic, a traffic impact statement should be submitted to demonstrate to the satisfaction of Council that the Rights of Way can safely accommodate the increased vehicular/pedestrian movements. Realignment works may be required to provide space for turning circles for vehicles through splayed corners or similar improvements between the development and the broader street network; these should be the responsibility of the developer to design and fund.

Objective:

To ensure that any upgrade or improvement of Rights of Way adjacent to existing or new Development occurs in a way that improves the accessibility, connectivity and safety of the Right of Way.

To clarify standards required by Council when a new or proposed development is proposed with its primary or secondary access off either an existing or new Rights of Way.

To ensure landowners and developers contribute financially to the capital and maintenance cost of upgrading Rights of Way.

Discussion

Broader Council strategies and Activity Centre planning direct a need to provide effective land use and development objectives that meet long term community needs and maintain and enhance infrastructure. Rights of Way, particularly those close to Activity Centres and transport hubs provide an opportunity for a different type of development form, less reliant on vehicular transport and which presents directly to the Rights of Way. When planning applications for developments adjacent to Rights of Way are received, attention should be given to improvement of the Rights of Way as set out in the proposed Guidelines (3.6.3.1). All costs associated with improvement of the Rights of Way in association with the development as determined by Council should be borne by the developer. This should include the full extent of the Rights of Way from the development to the main road exit, depending on the size and extent of the development. Implementation and funding will be set out in the guidelines to be developed as part of 3.6.3.1 Actions

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2




3.6.3.1.

Prepare transport and design guidelines for improvements to Rights of Way to ensure that:

The proposed ‘new’ or existing Rights of Way addresses all access issues, including preferred surface treatment, carriageway width, all infrastructure including drainage, lighting requirements.


$25,000

3.6.3.2.

Ensure that all criteria set out in the guidelines can be met prior to approving any development accessing existing or ‘new’ Rights of Way.

Ongoing Strategic Planning/ Statutory Planning

Include in operating costs

3.6.3.3.

Ensure that issues of urban design such as encroachment into a Right of Way have been considered for developments proposed to face Rights of Way to the satisfaction of Council.




Guidelines established for Rights of Way abutting existing or new development.


Rights of Way construction and upgrading schemes implemented and funded through Development Contributions/Special Charge/Rate Schemes as required.

3.6.4. Transport, Parking and Loading in Rights of Way


Parking and stopping vehicles in Rights of Way is influenced by the Road Safety Act (1986), Local Government Act (1989) and Council’s Local Laws. The Transport Integration Act 2007 also applies. Background

Rights of Way support and complement the existing road network within the municipality, by providing direct or alternative access to properties. They are used by a wide variety of transport users, including pedestrians and cyclists. Issue

Transport movements along Rights of Way take many forms and comprise many issues, including:

vehicular access and swept paths to properties abutting the Rights of Way,

pedestrian and cyclist access to nearby Activity Centres and community hubs,

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



reduced carriageway width leading to conflict between pedestrians and vehicular traffic, vehicles traveling in opposite directions, difficulty in access for emergency vehicles and the inability to provide footpaths on three metre wide Rights of Way,

Sight distance at intersections (typically Rights of Ways are not provided with adequate visual splays at intersections)

Car parking impeding vehicular and emergency vehicle access,

loading in Rights of Way situated at the back of shops and other facilities in Activity Centres.

surface treatments not being suitable for general accessibility and smooth ride by cyclists. The surface condition of Rights of Way is important to ensure that it is functional to all users.

Objective

To enhance transport safety and accessibility of Rights of Way

To provide for the effective integration of transport and land use within Rights of Way

Discussion

In general, the narrow carriageway width of Rights of Way is seen as a positive as it tends to lead to reduced vehicular speeds, reducing the risk of injury to pedestrians and cyclists, and giving the impression of a more personable and safe space. The volumes and speed of vehicles that utilise Rights of Way are generally low, so having vehicles and pedestrians sharing the same space is considered an acceptable outcome if vehicle speeds can be maintained below 20km/hr. Any carriageway widening will need to preserve the low speed environment and be weighted towards improving conditions for more sustainable transport. Consideration also needs to be given to Council’s safer design guide. Given the narrow nature of the vast majority of Rights of Way, there is little opportunity to park in them. In the event that a Rights of Way is widened in future, consideration needs to be given to the effects of parking, particularly with new development with little parking provided, not blocking the access of other Rights of Way users or emergency vehicles. Generally, a Rights of Way would have to be over 5.5m to allow parking to take place. Similarly, in commercial areas and behind shops in Activity Centres, many Rights of Way are used as the primary access for delivery and loading/unloading of goods. Again, this needs to be structured either by timing or location to prevent blocking access to the Rights of Way. The delivery and loading of goods shall occur in a manner that does not obstruct the use of the Rights of Way by other users and shall cause minimal disruption in the area. Actions

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2




3.6.4.1.

No parking or stopping of vehicles will be allowed in Rights of Way where through access is impeded by a parked/stopped vehicle.

Ongoing Local Laws Operating Costs

3.6.4.2.

The delivery and loading of goods shall occur in a manner that does not obstruct the use of the Rights of Way by other users and causes minimal disruption to the area.


3.6.4.3.

The design and provision of transport infrastructure in Rights of Way will at all times provide for a safe, effective and accessible area for all users.

Ongoing Engineering Services

Statutory Planning

Operating Costs



Rights of Way construction schemes implemented and funded through Special Charge/Rate Schemes as required.

3.7. Closure

3.7.1. Temporary or Permanent Closure


The powers of Council over traffic are conferred pursuant to Section 207 of the Local Government Act 1989 and include the powers set out in Schedule 11 of the same Act. Issue

In certain circumstances there is a need to close a road (either permanently or temporarily) in order to restrict or prevent vehicular traffic movements, or in order to prevent any injury to any person; or damage to any property (including damage to the road itself) or for as long as is necessary for a procession, public ceremony or function. Situations arise where the closure of the Rights of Way is required in order to restrict vehicular access whilst still providing continued pedestrian access in the context of the legislation. Activation of Rights of Way in Activity Centres may also lead to a need to close a Rights of Way whilst still allowing pedestrian and/or cyclist movement, and/or allowing for street festivals. Objective

To ensure suitable consultation prior to the temporary or permanent, partial or full closure or discontinuance of Rights of Way.

Actions


Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



3.7.1.1.

Consult with the local community when undertaking temporary and permanent closures of Rights of Way.


Operating Costs

3.7.1.2.

All temporary and permanent closures to be undertaken to Council satisfaction.


Operating Costs


Temporary or permanent closure of Rights of Way achieved consistent with Council’s community consultation process and is transparent.

3.7.2. Discontinuance


Section 206(1) of the Local Government Act (1989) confers on Council the power to discontinue a road and includes the powers set out in Clause 3 of Schedule 10 of the same Act.

Background

The Local Government Act (1989) provides Council with the power to discontinue Rights of Way where the Council forms the opinion that the Rights of Way or road is ‘no longer reasonably required for public use’. In general, this means that Council must be satisfied that adjoining property owners do not reasonably require access to their property via the Rights of Way or road. Council does not encourage the discontinuance of Rights of Way that are constructed or contain open drains. However, such Rights of Way can be considered for discontinuance in certain circumstances i.e. when all abutting owners agree to meet the costs of removing the existing paving and/or installing an underground drainage system. There are a number of benefits from discontinuing Rights of Way that are no longer required, including:

Reduction in Council’s financial and legal liability e.g. cleansing, graffiti removal, maintenance, cleansing, drainage.

Increasing security of property and removing derelict and unused parcels of land.

Additional revenue from land transfer funds and possible rateable land. Objective

To discontinue and sell off Rights of Way no longer reasonably required for public access (Class 2 Rights of Way).

Discussion

The power to discontinue a road, and sell the resultant land, is conferred on Council pursuant to Section 206 (1) of the Local Government Act (1989) and includes the powers set out in Clause 3 of Schedule 10 of the Act.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



As discussed previously, Class 2 Rights of Way, that is any Rights of Way which does not fit the criteria of the Class 1 categorisation, are considered to be no longer required for public use and can be discontinued and sold. These Rights of Way would typically be unconstructed. Many Class 2 Rights of Way could be defined as unsightly, unused Rights of Way and the sale of these would remove unnecessary security risks and risks to public health and safety. Class 2 Rights of Way are to be identified and collated as part of the Rights of Way categorisation process discussed earlier. All Class 2 Rights of Way have the potential for discontinuance and sale. Once the Rights of Way has been assessed as suitable for discontinuance, the statutory process can begin. Council will not commence statutory procedures to discontinue Rights of Way until it is satisfied the Rights of Way is no longer required as a road by abutting owners or the public generally by reason of its:

existing vehicular and/or pedestrian access utilisation/needs;

future road network expansion needs and/or its role in the linkage of bicycle and pedestrian networks.

Function as an important path for the flow of overland stormwater Council will not support the discontinuance of Rights of Way and sale of the resultant land where a ‘landlocked’ situation would be created. Council’s City Valuer will value the resultant land at current market value taking into consideration the locality, siting, area and whether or not the land is, or is to become, encumbered. In selling off Rights of Way, consideration needs to be given to the current drainage infrastructure and the function of the Rights of Way as a path for the flow of overland stormwater. In most instances, each individual property that abuts a Rights of Way, has an equal carriageway entitlement for the use of land, with purchasers of the resultant land from the Rights of Way sale are encouraged to integrate the land in a manner which does not detract from the visual amenity of the neighbourhood, or areas of environmental, heritage or landscape significance. Actions


3.7.2.1.

Review and Update Council’s Discontinuance Guidelines and Procedures. Assess and prioritise all Class 2 Rights of Way for possible discontinuance and sale, having regard to existing property Legal Point of Discharge (LPOD) within Rights of Way.

2 Property Services

$25,000

3.7.2.2.

Council to recover all costs it incurs in the discontinuance and sale of Rights of Way to adjacent owners. Capital raised from sale of unwanted rights of way to be placed in a separate Rights of Way budget.

Ongoing Property Services

N/A

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2




Rights of Way discontinued where it is demonstrated that the Rights of Way is no longer required for public use.

The discontinuance of Rights of Way and sale of the resultant land is achieved consistent with Council’s community consultation process and is transparent.

The existing streetscape is retained by the integration/development of the resultant land abutting the streetscape in character with the surrounding neighbourhood.

Removal of crossovers.

4.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



IMPLEMENTATION

The City of Banyule Rights of Way Strategy identifies mechanisms to achieve a coordinated approach to Rights of Way issues within the municipality. Successful implementation of the Strategy requires:

Commitment of the necessary resources to undertake the collection of information, creation of databases and initial steps in the management actions;

A strategic approach to the management of Rights of Way within the City of Banyule;

Ongoing review of the Rights of Way implementation plan in relation to the strategy objectives; and

A coordinated approach to Rights of Way issues.

4.1. Strategy Implementation

The Strategy will be implemented by pursuing the actions within the Strategy including the following elements:







o preferred design parameters for Rights of Way in Activity Centres

behind shops.

Reviewing the Discontinuance Policy.

Reviewing the Drainage Policy



Implementing and funding of Rights of Way construction schemes through Special Charge/Rate schemes.


Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



4.2. Timing

In order that the Rights of Way implementation plan can be incorporated within Council’s capital works program, the actions have been prioritised in accordance with the following scale:




$50,000 (guidelines)






$25,000 (Discontinuance assessment)





* Approximately 80% of this funding is currently funded. ** Currently $50,000 major maintenance funded. Whilst a priority for timing has been allocated to each action, the implementation of any action is dependent on the availability of funding resources within the timeframes. Priority firstly will be given to improving the management of Rights of Way.

4.3. Costing and Budget Allocation

Many of the actions required to facilitate the Strategy require funding and will pose a significant additional cost to Council. The cost of implementing the Strategy is estimated to be:

$21,000 for the audit and re-categorisation of the Rights of Way network.

$100,000 for the preparation of a number of guidelines relating to Rights of Way themes and for engaging urban design professionals to design a small number of demonstration Rights of Way projects.

$100,000 per annum for increased maintenance requirements on Class 1A and Class 1B category Rights of Way.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



$12.8m for the construction of unconstructed Category 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D (assuming that approximately 25% of unconstructed Rights of Way will undergo construction over the longer term).

The timing and funding of specific projects should be determined through the preparation of works programs, which, to be effectual, need to be linked to tangible performance measures and the Capital Works budget. There may also be further funding opportunities available from the State Government i.e. RoadSafe, Transport Accident Commission (TAC), Australian Greenhouse Office to offset the cost of initiating cycling, walking, DDA compliance and lighting programs in Rights of Way. Grant opportunities may be available through the Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure (DTPLI) for upgrading urban spaces in its Creating Better Places program. Additionally, it may be possible to elicit and use developer contributions to fund infrastructure improvements, particularly where development is likely to occur around and in Activity Centres.


4.3.1 Report progress against actions in the Strategy to Council annually.


Operating Costs

4.3.2 Identify and seek funding from grants and other sources to assist Council with the implementation of the Strategy.

Ongoing All Council Units Operating Costs

4.3.3 Establish a 10-year Rights of Way program within the Capital Works Program


Operating Costs

4.4. Monitoring and Review Process

Monitoring and review of the Strategy is essential to assess whether the implementation of the various actions has improved the use and management of Rights of Way. Monitoring the Strategy on a regular basis will allow for those actions which are successful to be added to over the life of the Strategy and those actions which are not as successful to be reviewed and amended as necessary to achieve the objectives of the Strategy.

5.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



APPENDICES Appendix A – Council strategic documents influencing use and decision making for Rights of Way.

Strategic Document Implication for Rights of Way

Banyule City Plan 2013-2017

Council’s City Plan 2013 – 2017 which includes our five key objectives:

People - Community Strengthening and Support Planet - Environmental Sustainability Place - Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment Participation - Community Involvement in Community Life Performance - Use our Resources Wisely

Street Numbering and Naming Guidelines

The Guidelines articulate procedures for naming and numbering of properties within Banyule.

Community Inclusion and Access Policy

Specific aims of the Inclusion and Access Policy relevant to this Strategy are:

To improve the access to and usage of the City of Banyule’s resources by community members who are people with disabilities.

To remove barriers which presently exist with regard to access and participation.

Municipal Strategic Statement

Planning, land use and development are guided by the Municipal Strategic Statement. Through this vision, the Municipal Strategic Statement supports the need to manage Rights of Way to enhance improved transport and liveability.

Road Management Plan 2009

The Road Management Plan sets out the recommended service levels, inspection regimes and proactive maintenance routines to keep constructed Rights of Way in serviceable condition.

Structure Plans – Heidelberg, Ivanhoe and Greensborough

The Structure Plans articulate the long-term higher order development vision for Heidelberg, Ivanhoe and Greensborough.

Safer Design Guide The Guide sets out safer design and land use principles which are to be considered by Council, development proponents and the community when proposing or considering changes or additions to the urban environments. Activation of the Activity Centre Rights of Way would be considered within its guidelines.

Neighbourhood Character Guidelines

The Guidelines cover the whole municipality and provide guidance to development on the preferred future characteristics of each designated area. Positive elements of existing character are to be retained and enhanced. This includes streets and Rights of Way in the municipality.

Banyule Residential Vehicle Crossing Policy 2012

This Policy covers the whole municipality and provide guidance to the provision of vehicle crossovers. In particular:

Where there is a second frontage that is away from the site’s main frontage and streetscape, such as at a rear laneway that is a Rights of Way,

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



the preferred location for the vehicle crossing will be at the Rights of Way.

Where a site has laneway access, assessment will have regard to security, manoeuvrability and appropriateness of this alternative location. In some instances that may require laneway widening.

In circumstances where vehicle access is obtained via an unmade Rights of Way, construction of the Rights of Way will be at the responsibility of the landowner unless otherwise agreed by Council.

Assessment of any alternate frontage for a vehicle connection will consider traffic impacts on local roads, arising from identified laneways being used for site access.

Att

ach

men

t 1

4.2

Item: 4.2



Appendix B – GIS Map of Right of Way within Banyule

Att

ach

men

t 2

4.2

Item: 4.2

Attachment 2: Banyule Rights of Way Policy


BANYULE RIGHTS OF WAY POLICY

Att

ach

men

t 2

4.2

Item: 4.2



Schedule

Date Review No. Review September 2012 1 Reviewed by Michelle Herbert following

discussions with Property Coordinator

December 2012 2 Reviewed by Michelle Herbert

April 2013 3 Reviewed by Michelle Herbert following DK restructuring

April 2014 4 Reviewed and edited by David Bailey

1.

1.

Att

ach

men

t 2

4.2

Item: 4.2



INTRODUCTION

1.1. Purpose

The purpose of the Banyule Rights of Way Policy (the Policy) is to clarify Council’s role with respect to, and facilitate the co-ordinated management of Rights of Way within the City of Banyule.

1.2. Objective of the Policy

The overall objective of the Policy is to establish clear direction for dealing with the identified key issues associated with Rights of Way, having regard to legislative requirements and existing Council policies, strategies and guidelines.

1.3. Application of the Policy

This Policy applies to all Rights of Way within the City of Banyule. The Policy will be implemented in accordance with the Banyule Rights of Way Strategy 2014 – 2024.

1.4. Policy Context

This Policy does not replace Council’s responsibilities under State legislation, but should be read in conjunction with the legislation and existing Council policies, strategies and guidelines. The Policy responds to community expectations associated with Council’s management role in respect to Rights of Way.

This Policy has been prepared in accordance with Council’s City Plan 2013 – 2017 which includes our five key objectives:


Council is the custodial manager of Rights of Way but is rarely the registered owner. Notwithstanding that Council may not be registered as the owner, this custodial managerial role confers on Council legal and regulatory responsibilities, and customer expectations. Section 205 of the Local Government Act 1989 and Section 40 of the Road Management Act 2004 confer these responsibilities on Council.

1.5.

Att

ach

men

t 2

4.2

Item: 4.2



Key Issues

The key issues in the management of Rights of Way are categorised as follows:

Identification


Numbering and naming of Rights of Way

Clarification

Heritage


Maintenance



Improvement

Construction of unconstructed Rights of Way


Rights of Way abutting existing or new Development


Closure


Discontinuance

1.6. Definitions

In the context of this policy the following definitions apply:

Activity Centre means the areas identified as Activity Centres within the

Banyule Planning Scheme. closure means thoroughfare access to the road by vehicles is

prohibited. Council means Banyule City Council. discontinuance means the removal of the ‘road’ status and

extinguishment of carriageway easement rights. Drainage Policy means the Drainage Policy defining division of

responsibilities and management of drainage within the municipality adopted by Council in March 1998

Resultant Land means the land from former Rights of Way or roads on

completion of the requisite statutory procedures to discontinue.

Att

ach

men

t 2

4.2

Item: 4.2



Rights of Way means those numbered and named in Banyule City Council’s Road Register (as amended from time to time).

road means any road, street, Rights of Way, laneway, unused

road, passage, cul de sac, by-pass, bridge or ford, footpath, bicycle path or nature strip and any culvert, kerbing or other land or works forming part of a road.

Road Management Plan means the Banyule City Council Road Management Plan

adopted by Council on 17th June 2013. Road Register means the Register of Public Roads kept and maintained

by Council in accordance with Section 19 of the Road Management Act.

Special Rate/ Charge Scheme means a special rate or special charge scheme declared by

Council pursuant to Section 163 of the Local Government Act 1989.

Service Authority means any provider of public utility services, whether

statutory or not and any other public person or instrumentality having rights or responsibilities over Rights of Way.

unconstructed Rights of Way means Rights of Way on which no physical surface works

have been carried out by Council or Service Authorities. unused road means no evidence of current vehicular or pedestrian

usage from which an opinion could be formed that the road is required as a road for public use.

2.

Att

ach

men

t 2

4.2

Item: 4.2



VISION, PRINCIPLES and OBJECTIVES

2.1. Vision

The vision for the Policy is: To provide well-managed, safe and accessible Rights of Way throughout the City of Banyule that enhance the local and wider community wellbeing, while maintaining and creating new opportunities for pedestrians, cyclists, public safety and community amenity.

2.2. Principles

The Policy has been formulated on the following set of principles:

Sustainability

Balancing the current and future needs of the community, the environment and the economy to provide quality of life for today and tomorrow’s communities. Effective, Coordinated and Efficient Movement

Balancing the efficiency of Rights of Way across the City of Banyule to optimise capacity, maximise use of resources and facilitate integrated travel. Understanding transport users’ needs and improving our Rights of Way to address those needs. Choice and Diversity

Encouraging and providing for choice and diversity in lifestyle, culture, transport and environment. Stakeholder Engagement and Community Participation

Taking into account the interests of Rights of Way users and members of local communities through appropriate engagement. Financial Responsibility and Resource Efficiency

Guiding Council investment, spending, maintenance and natural resource use in an efficient, equitable and sustainable manner. Integrated Decision Making Achieving objectives through coordination across all departments and external stakeholders.

2.3.

Att

ach

men

t 2

4.2

Item: 4.2



Objectives

The objectives to ensure the efficient management of Rights of Way are:

Identification

To maintain an up-to-date accurate and detailed database of all Rights of Way in the City of Banyule.

To establish a classification criterion for all Rights of Way having regard to the Road Management Plan.

Clarification

To prioritise the use and management of all Rights of Way according to their public need.

To ensure existing or proposed new Rights of Way meet Council standards when a new development is proposed with its primary access off Rights of Way.



To ensure landowners and developers contribute financially to the capital cost of upgrading and lighting Rights of Way, through special charge schemes.

Maintenance

To define Council’s management practices and responsibilities in relation to maintenance of Rights of Way having regard to the Road Management Plan.

To ensure that Rights of Way required for public use are accessible, safe and appropriately constructed and maintained, subject to budgetary constraints.

To preserve the stormwater overland flow path function of Rights of Way in

known flood zones.

To protect public utilities and other service assets and enable their orderly

provision and coordination for the benefit of the community.

To provide for effective transport and land integration use within Rights of Way.

Improvement

To improve, where appropriate, Rights of Way that have potential for greater public use, subject to budgetary constraints.

To enhance transport safety and accessibility of Rights of Way.

To enhance public safety, lighting and drainage along and within Rights of Way.

To activate and (where necessary) increase the width of Rights of Way particularly within Activity Centres.

To ensure Rights of Way are enhanced by proposed development directly abutting those Rights of Way.


Att

ach

men

t 2

4.2

Item: 4.2



To fund a ten year Rights of Way program using Capital Works and Development Contributions.

Closure



3.

Att

ach

men

t 2

4.2

Item: 4.2



POLICY PROVISIONS

3.1. Introduction

This Policy is designed to produce a coordinated approach to the management of Rights of Way. In managing Rights of Way, Council will have regard to:

Legislative requirements and Council policies, strategies and guidelines; and

Existing and future community and other stakeholders’ interests, needs and/or requirements.

The interrelated nature of the Key Issues identified in Section 1.5 suggests that they be dealt with in a holistic manner. However, to capture the distinct characteristics and meet the specific statutory requirements related to the issues, clear definitions are provided for each Key Issue together with Council’s actions to address the issue.

3.2. Identification

3.2.1. Identification and categorisation of Rights of Way

Purpose

To define Council’s responsibility in identifying and classifying Rights of Way having regard to the Road Management Plan.

Council Policy

Council will maintain a comprehensive database of all Rights of Way.

Council will maintain classification criterion for its Rights of Ways, having regard to the Road Management Plan.

3.2.2. Numbering and Naming Rights of Way

Purpose

To define Council’s role in the naming of ‘unnamed’ Rights of Way.

Council Policy

Council will establish and maintain clear guidelines and procedures for dealing with requests for naming Rights of Way with reference to Council’s Street Numbering and Naming Guidelines.

3.3.

Att

ach

men

t 2

4.2

Item: 4.2



Clarification

3.3.1. Heritage

Purpose

To define Council’s role in managing heritage issues relating to Rights of Way affected by a Heritage Overlay in the Banyule Planning Scheme or heritage elements including, but not limited to, bluestone.

Council Policy

Council will establish a Rights of Way Heritage Management Plan which identifies appropriate maintenance and service standards for Rights of Way affected by a Heritage Overlay or containing heritage elements.

Council will implement maintenance and service standards in accordance with the Rights of Way Heritage Management Plan, subject to budgetary constraints.

3.3.2. Illegal occupancy and encroachment

Purpose

To define Council’s role in facilitating the removal of illegal occupancy and encroachments (including fencing and gates) on Rights of Way in the City of Banyule.

Council Policy

Council will establish and maintain clear guidelines and procedures for investigating and facilitating the removal of illegal occupancy and encroachments on Rights of Way in the City of Banyule to protect the amenity and/or character of the surrounding area.

3.4. Maintenance

3.4.1. Maintenance, cleansing and infrastructure

Purpose

To define Council’s Rights of Way maintenance responsibility.

Council Policy

Council will establish clear guidelines and procedures for dealing with requests for maintenance and cleansing of Rights of Way.

Council will implement maintenance and service standards for Rights of Way in accordance with the Road Management Plan.

3.4.2. Drainage

Purpose

To define Council’s responsibility for drainage and legal point of discharge within Rights of Way, particularly where no formal drainage system exists.

Council Policy

Att

ach

men

t 2

4.2

Item: 4.2



Council will implement maintenance and service standards for drainage within Rights of Way in accordance with the Road Management Plan and Drainage Policy.

Council will address drainage issues that cause damage to properties and compromise public safety in accordance with the Drainage Policy.

Council will protect the legal point of discharge in Rights of Way by ensuring that all drainage matters are resolved prior to the sale of discontinued Rights of Way.

Council will identify and maintain Rights of Way that function as important overland flow paths for stormwater.

Where no formal drainage system exists or existing systems are inadequate or inappropriate, a Special Rate/Charge Scheme will be implemented and funded in accordance with the Drainage Policy.

3.5. Improvement


Purpose

To define Council’s role in facilitating the construction of Rights of Way which are required for road purposes by abutting owners or the general public.

Council Policy

Council will develop maintenance and service standards for unconstructed Rights of Way in accordance with the Road Management Plan.

Unconstructed Rights of Way identified as being required for road purposes will be prioritised for construction. Implementation and funding will be through a Special Rate/Charge Scheme and subject to budgetary constraints.

3.5.2. Activation of Rights of Way within Activity Centres

Purpose

To define and facilitate Council’s role in managing the activation of Rights of Way within or close to Activity Centres.

Council Policy

Council will develop an appropriate database of all Rights of Way within Activity Centres and identify whether they are suitable for activation.

Council will actively encourage development and promote the use of suitable Rights of Way within, and close to, Activity Centres for a wide variety of different uses, subject to all maintenance and safety standards being met.


Purpose

To define Council’s role in managing existing or new Rights of Way where proposed development faces and/or abuts Rights of Way or where all or part of the development has either its primary or secondary access from Rights of Way.

Council Policy

Att

ach

men

t 2

4.2

Item: 4.2



Council will establish guidelines for Rights of Way where a proposed or existing development faces and/or abuts Rights of Way and it is proposed that the Rights of Way is to be used as the primary or secondary access.

New or additional Rights of Way, proposed by developers will be subject to strict Council guidelines and standards and Council ownership will only be considered where it is in the broader public interest.

Developers must fully fund the capital cost of constructing, upgrading, draining and lighting new and additional Rights of Way abutting their development or where Rights of Way are to be used as the primary or secondary access.

3.5.4. Transport, parking and loading in Rights of Way

Purpose

To define Council’s role in managing all transport modes (including cyclists and pedestrians) accessing Rights of Way.

Council Policy

Any unconstructed road identified as being required for sustainable transport purposes will be prioritised for construction through a Special Rate/Charge Scheme.

Council will encourage and give preference to active transport modes in Rights of Way particularly close to Activity Centres.

Council will manage Rights of Way to achieve transport integration, choice and balance for all users.

3.6. Closure

3.6.1. Temporary and Permanent Closure

Purpose

To define Council’s role in implementing traffic management measures to effect the closure of Rights of Way.

Council Policy

Council will develop guidelines for the temporary or permanent closure of Rights of Way including transparent consultation with the community, public authorities and other stakeholders, assessing the impact on the amenity or character of surrounding areas and the function of Rights of Way as an important overland flow path for stormwater.


Purpose

To define Council’s role in facilitating the discontinuance and sale of Rights of Way which are no longer required as a road by abutting owners or the general public.

Council Policy

Att

ach

men

t 2

4.2

Item: 4.2



Council will develop clear guidelines and procedures for dealing with requests for the discontinuance of Rights of Way and the sale of the resultant land.

Council will not support the discontinuance of Rights of Way and sale of the resultant land where a ‘landlock’ situation would be created or where Rights of Way function as an overland stormwater flow path.

4.

Att

ach

men

t 2

4.2

Item: 4.2



IMPLEMENTATION

4.1. Policy Implementation

This Policy articulates a long term vision for the management of Rights of Way within the City of Banyule. The implementation of this Policy will be through the Banyule Rights of Way Strategy 2014 – 2024 which includes action plans for the range of issues identified.

4.2. Human Rights Charter

In accordance with Section 28 of the Charter of Human Rights, this Policy has been assessed as being compatible with the human rights protected by the charter. This assessment is based on a Statement of Compatibility of the Human Rights protected by the Charter that are relevant to this Policy.

4.3. References

In consideration or implementation of this Policy reference should be made to the following documents and any revisions or updates:

City Plan 2013 - 2017






Banyule Integrated Transport Strategy, 2003










Building Act 1993


Fences Act 1968






Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2 Attachment 3: Banyule Rights of Way Strategy 2014-2024


BANYULE RIGHTS OF WAY STRATEGY 2014-2024

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2



Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................ 1

1.1. Purpose .................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2. Rights of Way Definition .................................................................................................... 1

1.3. Rights of Way Ownership .................................................................................................. 1

2. STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION ................................................ 2

2.1. Vision, Principles and Objectives .......................................................................... 2

3. BACKGROUND, ISSUES & ACTIONS ....................................... 3

3.1. Existing Rights of Way Assets ............................................................................... 3

3.2. Key Issues ............................................................................................................... 3

3.3. Identification ............................................................................................................ 4

3.3.1. Identification and Categorisation of Rights of Way ................................ 4

3.3.2. Naming and Numbering Rights of Way .................................................... 7

3.4. Clarification ............................................................................................................. 9

3.4.1. Heritage ...................................................................................................... 9

3.4.2. Illegal Occupancy and Encroachment ................................................... 10

3.5. Maintenance .......................................................................................................... 11

3.5.1. Maintenance, Cleansing and Infrastructure .................................................................... 11

3.5.2. Drainage Infrastructure and Stormwater Overland Flow paths ................................. 16

3.6. Improvement ......................................................................................................... 17

3.6.1. Construction of Unconstructed Rights of Way .......................................... 17

3.6.2. Activation of Rights of Way in Activity Centres ......................................... 18

3.6.3. Rights of Way abutting existing or new development .............................. 20

3.6.4. Transport, Parking and Loading in Rights of Way .................................... 23

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2



3.7. Closure................................................................................................................... 25

3.7.1. Temporary or Permanent Closure .......................................................... 25

3.7.2. Discontinuance ........................................................................................ 26

4. IMPLEMENTATION .................................................................. 29

4.1. Strategy Implementation ...................................................................................... 29

4.2. Timing .................................................................................................................... 30

4.3. Costing and Budget Allocation ............................................................................ 30

4.4. Monitoring and Review Process .......................................................................... 31

5. APPENDICES ........................................................................... 32

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2

Attachment 3: Banyule Rights of Way Strategy 2014-2024


1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Purpose

The purpose of the Banyule Rights of Way Strategy 2014 – 2024 is to define and clarify how the Banyule Rights of Way Policy is to implemented and administered. The Strategy outlines the background and key issues identified in the strategic and operational management of Rights of Way, and identifies the management, implementation and review processes to achieve the vision, principles and objectives set out in the Policy. Definitions used in the Policy have the same meaning in the Strategy.

1.2. Rights of Way Definition

Rights of Way are generally narrow roads providing access to the rear or side of properties. There may be a right to use land for road or access purposes or land set aside on a plan of subdivision as a ‘road’ but never used or constructed as a ‘road’. Butterworth’s Concise Australian Legal Dictionary defines a ‘right of way’ as – ‘A right to pass over public or private land. The public has a right to pass over

a highway, which arises by way of statute or as a result of the dedication of the road. A right of way may exist for limited purposes and use for any other purpose may amount to a trespass.’

It also defines a ‘highway’ as – ‘Land set aside by long usage or by government Act as a public carriageway.’ Victorian State Government statutes and regulations provide no categorical definition for a right of way. For the purposes of this document, the definition adopted for Rights of Way means those numbered and named in Banyule City Council’s Road Register (as amended from time to time).

1.3. Rights of Way Ownership

Prior to the introduction of the Subdivision Act in 1989, legislative requirements for subdividing land did not provide for title to infrastructure assets to be transferred to Council upon registration of a Plan of Subdivision. It was common for allotments on the Plan of Subdivision to be sold to individual owners leaving the infrastructure assets, including title to the Rights of Way, in the name of the subdivider or original owner of the land. As a result Council is rarely the registered owner of such infrastructure assets, but is the custodial manager. While Council may not be registered as the owner, this custodial managerial role confers on Council legal and regulatory responsibilities, and customer expectations.

2.

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION

2.1. Vision, Principles and Objectives

This Rights of Way Strategy will be implemented in accordance with the Vision, Principles and Objectives set out in the Banyule Rights of Way Policy.

The Vision is:


In consideration or implementation of this Strategy reference should be made to the following documents and any revisions or updates:

City Plan 2013 - 2017






Banyule Integrated Transport Strategy, 2003-2013










Building Act 1993


Fences Act 1968






The following Acts of Parliament, associated guidelines and regulations also prescribe the use and management of Rights of Way:

Building Act 1993


Fences Act 1968

Geographic Places Names Act 1998


Metropolitan Fire Brigade Act 1958


Planning Scheme Decision Guidelines


Victorian Road Regulations

1.

3.

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



BACKGROUND, ISSUES & ACTIONS

3.1. Existing Rights of Way Assets

Rights of Way support and complement the existing road network throughout the municipality by providing direct and/or alternative access to properties abutting them and as alternative access to other streets and community facilities. They are used by a variety of vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists and often contain utility services. With over 30km and 260 individually identified Rights of Way throughout the municipality, a clear strategy is essential to manage these valuable community assets.

The majority of Rights of Way in the City of Banyule were created as part of original subdivisions of land in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Land development at that time usually resulted in the creation of Rights of Way at the rear of properties for access by night carts and sometimes for drainage purposes. Given the age of the Rights of Way – with the majority over 80 years old, many of them are in need of maintenance and/or renewal.

Unconstructed and constructed Rights of Way exist in the municipality with a mixture of surfaces varying from concrete through asphalt, brick pavers, bluestone and sprayed seal. The majority of constructed Rights of Way are concrete and approximately 3.1m in width and are located in the southern half of the municipality. However, the widths of the Rights of Way which vary from 1.8m up to 9.9m govern their usefulness for future purposes.

Approximately 25% of all Rights of Way in the municipality are classified as unconstructed (8km) and have a gravel (1km) or dirt surface (7km) and minimal drainage infrastructure. The unconstructed Rights of Way create maintenance and access/safety issues for people of limited ability, pedestrians and cyclists. A number of Rights of Way have bluestone elements (drainage channel and/or edging) which have heritage value.

3.2. Key Issues

The key issues in the management of Rights of Way identified in the Rights of Way Policy are:

Identification


Naming and numbering of Rights of Way

Clarification

Heritage


Maintenance



Improvement





Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



Closure


Discontinuance The key issues are closely interrelated and should be viewed in context with each other. The following sections expand on each of the identified key issues.

3.3. Identification

3.3.1. Identification and Categorisation of Rights of Way


Section 205 of the Local Government Act 1989 provides that ‘A Council has the care and management of … all roads that the Council has agreed to have the care and management of’. Section 205 also states that this section is subject to the Road Management Act 2004. Background

Council’s Rights of Way Register lists all Rights of Way as part of the Public Road Register incorporated in the Road Management Plan. The Rights of Way Register contained rudimentary information on each Rights of Way and allows them to be listed as constructed and unconstructed. The Rights of Way data has recently been revisited and data has been collected within a number of categories – constructed/unconstructed, open/occupied, material used in construction, surface type, length and width. The additional data has made identification and categorisation of Rights of Way easier. Additional data in categorising each Rights of Way could include proximity to an Activity Centre or community hub, and the degree and type of usage. Issue

High-quality information will make it easier for Council to make informed decisions in relation to Rights of Way including:

determining Rights of Way over which Council has care and management;

Council’s maintenance and management practices; and

Council’s responsibilities. Objective

To maintain an up-to-date accurate and detailed database of all Rights of Way in the City of Banyule. To prioritise the use and management of all Rights of Way according to their public need. To establish classification criterion for all Rights of Way having regard to the Road Management Plan.

Discussion

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



Council has different data sources for Rights of Way information including asset register databases, infrastructure and cleansing registers, property registers and street files. Collection of accurate, up-to-date information into an appropriately managed ‘one-stop shop’ available on a corporate management system will facilitate improved Rights of Way management decisions using a more informative and strategic classification system. This Strategy supports undertaking an audit of all Rights of Way to provide information on current usage, construction, infrastructure needs, maintenance, potential for pedestrian and cyclist use and potential for activation. This Strategy supports the classification of Rights of Way according to a number of current and anticipated factors and uses to improve their management. The classification of Rights of Way will consider the following factors:

Requirement for public use

If not required for public use, then discontinued

Location:

o Within or close to an Activity Centre

o Within a retail centre

o Close to a community hub or other activity generator

o Outside of the above three categories.

An important conduit for pedestrians and cyclists

Constructed or unconstructed In investigating the above factors, a two tier Rights of Way classification scheme is proposed. This would be considered for inclusion in the next iteration of the Road Management Plan following consultation within Council departments and the community.

Classification Sub-Class Description

Class 1 1A Rights of Way within Activity Centre boundaries.

1B Rights of Way outside Activity Centre boundaries but serving an important function as connectors to local community hubs and uses, or important from a drainage, cycling and pedestrian perspective.

1C Rights of Way other than 1A and 1B that provide access to private property or for public use.

1D Rights of Way not having a road function but requiring retention for stormwater overland flow path function.

Class 2 None Rights of Way not required for public use.

Class 1A Rights of Way

Class 1A Rights of Way are described as required for public access and within the boundaries of an Activity Centre (Principal, Major and Neighbourhood). They are important for transport permeability (vehicular, parking, loading); and sustainable transport (pedestrians and cyclists). They are most likely to have, or have potential

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



for, new development opening directly onto them. The character and function of these Rights of Way are significant and need to be protected. They may form an important part of the minor or major drainage system (including performing a function as important overland flow path for stormwater). All Class 1A Rights of Way should be constructed and require comprehensive maintenance and cleansing services. Resources will be directed firstly to Class 1 Rights of Way. Class 1B Rights of Way

Class 1B Rights of Way are the second level of Rights of Way in terms of strategic functionality to Council. While outside Activity Centres and less likely to be required for access to significant development in the future, they serve an important function as connectors to smaller local community hubs, schools, public transport, open space etc. They are also likely to be used by the broader community. Depending on their level of functionality, they may be constructed or unconstructed. They may form an important part of the minor or major drainage system (including performing a function as important overland flow path for stormwater), off-road bicycle network and provide opportunity for open space usage. Class 1C Rights of Way

Class 1C Rights of Way are those Rights of Way which do not serve the broader community. They most likely exist in isolation to other Rights of Way and likely serve residents who abut them. They are likely to be unconstructed and unsuitable for new development accessing them directly.

Class 1D Rights of Way

Class 1D Rights of Way are those Rights of Way which are not required for a road function but would serve a stormwater overland flow path function and should be retained. Class 2 Rights of Way

Rights of Way which do not fit the criteria of Class 1A, 1B, 1C or 1D are likely to be no longer required for public use and could be considered for discontinuance and sale. These Rights of Way would typically be unconstructed.

Actions


3.3.1.1.

Implement the Rights of Way classification system detailed above and incorporate into the Banyule Road Management Plan.

1 Asset Management

Operating

3.3.1.2.

Survey all Rights of Way and update the Rights of Way Register as part of the Public Roads Register database.

1 Asset Management

$6,000

3.3.1.3.

Review the Rights of Way Register database to reclassify the Rights of Way assets into the new classification system.

1 Asset Management

$5,000

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



3.3.1.4.

Conduct an audit of all available Rights of Way asset information held within Council’s information system to determine the extent of information held and identify any gaps.


$5,000

3.3.1.5.

Review the Rights of Way Register to ensure it captures information about Rights of Way including:

Surface Treatment

Carriageway characteristics

Drainage and Infrastructure

Overland flow path (flooding) status

Heritage Issues

Encroachments or obstructions.

1 Infrastructure Services

Included in 3.3.1.2

3.3.1.6.

Update the Rights of Way Register database on a regular basis to ensure updated Rights of Way information in relation to sales, discontinuances, encroachments and other relevant information.

Ongoing Asset Management

GIS Services

Included in operating costs


Rights of Way classification system and database established.

Rights of Way surveyed and Rights of Way Register updated regularly.

Rights of Way database maintained and updated regularly.

3.3.2. Naming and Numbering Rights of Way


Clause 5 of Schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1989 confers on Council the power to name roads and Rights of Way. In exercising this power Council must act in accordance with the guidelines in force for the time being under the Geographic Place Names Act 1998 and must advise the Registrar of the action it has taken. The Banyule Street Numbering and Naming Guidelines also apply.

Background

With the activation of Rights of Way around Activity Centres and the increasing number of developments directly abutting Rights of Way, there is likely to be an increased number of commercial and residential buildings which have or will have direct access to Rights of Way without the benefit of an alternative access onto a ‘main street’.

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



The naming of Rights of Way brings with it certain community expectations namely:

level of road maintenance/construction;

delivery of mail;

collection of garbage;

emergency vehicle access;

security; and

public lighting.

Issue

The creation of properties having their only frontage to Rights of Way creates issues where the property cannot be readily identified. This could cause issues service authorities including postal access and emergency services access.

Objective

To create an identity of place to Rights of Way where they are required as primary street addresses.

Discussion

Council is empowered under the Local Government Act 1989 to name roads and assign a number to any properties adjacent to any road. Any action by Council to number and name Rights of Way must be in accordance with the Geographic Place Names Act 1998 and the Street Numbering and Naming guidelines. Numbering and Naming of Rights of Way should only be considered when a property cannot be numbered to an existing property. In considering proposals to name Rights of Way Council must assess:

the necessity as opposed to desire to provide a street address;

the physical characteristics of Rights of Way, including the level of construction and width;

the level of support, or otherwise, of immediately affected property owners;

possible future development of adjacent and nearby land; and

the impact on the neighbourhood character. In selecting names for Rights of Way, Council must have regard to:

suggestions from developers and immediately affected property owners;

support of local interest parties;

indicative local history, flora or fauna and other significant features of the area; and

whether the suggested name is duplicated within the municipality. Actions


3.3.2.1.

Name and number Rights of Way only when a property cannot be numbered to an existing road, in accordance with Council guidelines.

Ongoing as required.

Governance and Laws.

GIS Services.

To be borne by the property developer


Numbering and naming Rights of Way carried out in accordance with Council’s Street Numbering and Naming guidelines.

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



3.4. Clarification

3.4.1. Heritage


The Banyule Planning Scheme provides the legislative context for managing heritage issues.

Background

The Rights of Way Register 2009 includes one fully bluestone Rights of Way however a recent audit of that Register has revealed seven fully bluestone Rights of Way comprising a 920m length within the municipality, plus approximately twenty Rights of Way with a bluestone element i.e. drainage channel or edging. Some of these bluestone elements have become ‘hidden’ under a layer of dirt over the last 50 to 100 years. This has significant implications for future and ongoing maintenance and rehabilitation requirements. In addition to bluestone elements, Rights of Way within the City of Banyule may also have other heritage elements such as pit lids or signage.

Issue

Rights of Way constructed from bluestone are by nature quite uneven and are an access impediment for most Rights of Way users with the exception of motor vehicles, although in the case of ambulances, patient ride quality is compromised. In particular, the bluestone surface is an issue for pedestrians, cyclists, mobility scooter users and people with disabilities. Maintenance of the bluestone Rights of Way is also an issue, with bluestone pitchers expensive and difficult to source. Additionally, specialist skilled labour is required to rehabilitate bluestone Rights of Way. Whilst it is understood that a number of Rights of Way contain bluestone elements, the age of Rights of Way within Banyule means that they may also contain other varied heritage elements such as pit lids and signage, which need to further investigated for heritage value.

With bluestone Rights of Way approaching 100 years old, rehabilitation is a significant issue with a decision needed on the form and type of replacement surface, to be used. This will be dependent on whether the Rights of Way is affected by a Heritage Overlay control in the Banyule Planning Scheme. The method of construction of Rights of Way varies dependent on the existing/expected users of the Rights of Way and whether it currently has a bluestone element and/or lies within a Heritage Overlay area. Generally a concrete surface treatment would be best for Rights of Way expected to have high pedestrian and cyclist usage. The current practice of replacing bluestone and other heritage elements in Rights of Way is not defined, a program is required to identify the location and elements of the bluestone and other heritage element Rights of Way within the municipality and clarify appropriate maintenance and service standards and rehabilitation practices for heritage Rights of Way. Any review should be taken in consultation with Council’s heritage advisor.

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



Objective



Actions


3.4.1.1.

Develop a program to expose and assess the condition of bluestone elements of Rights of Way which are covered with layers of dirt and gravel.

2 Operations $5,000

3.4.1.2.

Prepare a heritage management plan identifying appropriate maintenance, service standards and rehabilitation practices for Rights of Way with bluestone and other heritage elements both within and outside areas affected by a Heritage Overlay in the Banyule Planning Scheme.


$10,000

3.4.1.3.

Consider using asphalt/concrete when Rights of Way with high pedestrian and/or bicycle usage need rehabilitation or upgrading.

Ongoing Operations Capital Works Program


Guidelines established identifying appropriate maintenance, service standards and rehabilitation practices for Rights of Way affected by a Heritage Overlay or containing heritage elements including bluestone.

Maintain Rights of Way in accordance with the Heritage Management Plan, subject to budgetary constraints.

3.4.2. Illegal Occupancy and Encroachment


Local Law No. 1 2005 General Local Law

Background

Illegal occupancy and encroachments occasionally occur where Rights of Way are unconstructed and under-utilised, and back directly onto residential properties. A recent revision of data indicated fifty four separate incidents of occupation/encroachment within Rights of Way. The encroachment generally occurs when an adjacent property owner plants trees/scrubs within the Rights of Way or erects a gate or fence across it. Encroachments notified by neighbouring residents or Council’s Infrastructure, Cleansing and Parks departments are reported to

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



Council’s Local Laws unit which instigate measures to remove the encroachment. Encroachment can also occur where property boundaries are unknown.

Encroachments within Rights of Ways identified as important stormwater overland flow paths can have a dramatic effect on flood levels and inundation to properties. These encroachments must be removed immediately.

Issue

Illegal occupancy and encroachments of Rights of Way are not in the general public interest and should be removed where it is necessary to retain the integrity of the

Rights of Way and benefits to the community.

Objective


Actions


Audit undertaken identifying any illegal occupancy or encroachment on Rights of Way.

Illegal occupancies or encroachments removed promptly.

3.5. Maintenance

3.5.1. Maintenance, Cleansing and Infrastructure


Section 205 of the Local Government Act 1989 provides that ‘A Council has the care and management of …all roads that the Council has agreed to have the care and management of’. Section 205 also states that this section is subject to the Road Management Act 2004. Section 40 of the Road Management Act 2004 provides that the responsible authority has ‘a statutory duty to inspect, maintain and repair public roads’. However, the statutory duty imposed by subsection (1) does not create a duty to upgrade a road or to maintain a road to a higher standard than the standard to which the road is constructed. Background


3.4.2.1.

Council will proactively remove unauthorised encroachments or gates are erected in Rights of Way.



3.4.2.2.

Council will conduct an initial audit of all Rights of Way for encroachments and gates as part of its regular maintenance schedule and recheck for encroachments every 2 years to guard against future possible claims of adverse possession.



Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



The majority of Rights of Way within the City of Banyule were created as roads within a plan of subdivision and remain in the name of the original subdivider. Council has discretionary powers under the Local Government Act and the Road Management Act for the management of these Rights of Way. The management is undertaken by a number of Council departments including: Asset Management (maintenance of Rights of Way register); Property Services (discontinuance, selling of Rights of Way, valuations, legal matters); Infrastructure and Cleansing; Youth Services (graffiti); and Parks and Gardens (cutting grass, fire hazards etc.). Council’s Infrastructure and Cleansing Departments undertake maintenance and cleansing of all Rights of Way, including cleaning out drainage pits. They maintain both constructed and unconstructed Rights of Way. Generally, cleansing and maintenance is carried out on customer request however Rights of Way within or directly adjacent to shopping centres are cleaned once a fortnight. Expenditure on maintenance and cleansing is generally from the current operating budget with an additional $50,000 available for further more complex maintenance needs. Council’s Parks Department currently maintains 114 Rights of Way, with a maintenance routine of three to four cycles per year, an increase from the previous cycle of once a year. This is due to the growth season having increased in recent years due to rain and the reversal of drought conditions. This level of maintenance routine involves 12 two-man crews working two days to clear 13 Rights of Way each cycle. The Parks department is responsible for cutting grass, clearing vines and vegetation, removing branches and other green rubbish, and ensuring that a fire hazard does not exist during the spring/summer seasons. In recent years, Council’s Infrastructure, Cleansing and Parks Departments have noticed a trend of increased customer requests due in part to new residents moving in to the municipality, particularly in the Ivanhoe and Heidelberg areas where most Rights of Way are located. The provision of separate footpaths in Rights of Way in the municipality is not a usual occurrence due to the narrow width of the majority of Rights of Way. However, pedestrians do use Rights of Way as access ways to community facilities and as short cuts between facilities, for example the Rights of Way which runs between Ivanhoe Rail Station at Norman Street to the Ivanhoe Shopping Centre at Upper Heidelberg Road is well used by pedestrians and cyclists as a short and direct route between these facilities. The volume and speed of vehicles using Rights of Way is generally low, which assists in providing safer pedestrian and cycling conditions. Opportunities could be explored for shared road status with a posted lower speed limit of 20kph or less. Currently, there is no refuse collection provided to properties that front a Rights of Way, mainly due to Rights of Way width generally being 3.1m and Council’s side loading waste trucks being unable to operate in roads less than 5m wide. In these instances, rubbish bins need to be either privately collected or placed at the nearest intersection with an adjacent road. Within the City of Banyule, there is an issue with dumped rubbish being placed in Rights of Way by unknown persons; this is generally removed by Council’s Cleansing Department on a reactive basis. Melbourne Fire and Emergency Services Board (MFB) guidelines prescribe requirements for emergency vehicle access to a number of development scenarios from single residential to multi-storey commercial properties. The MFB prefer secondary access ways to be a minimum 3.5m wide. The width of awnings and

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



encroachment into Rights of Way also need to be considered in assessing development applications proposed to face Rights of Way. Ambulance Services stop at the closest and safest point of access to their destination. This can include Rights of Way if they are clear of vehicles and it is safe to travel. There are concerns with unmade and bluestone Rights of Way due to the bumpy ride and difficulty in manoeuvring injured or ill patients over these surfaces on trolleys. Similarly, Australia Post vehicles, particularly motorcycles can have minor difficulty negotiating unmade and bluestone Rights of Way. Identifying Council’s responsibility in the maintenance of Rights of Way and accurately defining appropriate maintenance and service standards is problematic for the following reasons:

the number of Rights of Way within the municipality (260 with varying conditions)

the responsibility to maintain rests only with those roads over which Council has agreed to have care and management of;

the level and type of construction is inconsistent;

constructed and unmade Rights of Way require different levels of maintenance;

the lack of obligation to undertake drainage or surface works on unmade roads.

Issue

Rights of Way should be maintained according to community amenity, health and safety requirements and other identified Council benefits.

Objective

To renew those Rights of Way that show good potential for public use, including pedestrian/cyclist usage.

Ensure that Rights of Way that are important for public use are accessible, safe and appropriately constructed and maintained.

Discussion

The Road Management Plan details the level of inspection and maintenance service for Rights of Way which are prioritised as category Level 4. The hierarchy classification is used to assist in prioritising works programs and also intervention responses to remedy defects; however the current constructed or unconstructed categorisation of Rights of Way gives little guidance for the prioritisation of Council resources in response to customer requests. The Strategy recognises the increased level of maintenance, cleansing and costs associated with Rights of Way and the likelihood that this will increase further in future years for Category 1 Rights of Way (particularly for Class 1A Rights of Way which require a high level of maintenance and cleansing in association with their higher public status) with some decrease for Category 2 Rights of Way as they are discontinued and sold. Until such time as Category 2 Rights of Way are sold, Council will assume responsibility to maintain all Rights of Way.

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



The Strategy proposes a maintenance schedule for each new category of Rights of Way based on the proposed categorisation. The proposed maintenance schedule is detailed below with approximate costs. The maintenance schedule will be included in the consultation around the next iteration of the Road Management Plan and will be subject to budgetary constraints. Summary of Maintenance Requirements

Classification Maintenance Requirements Cost (Approx)

Class 1A Council to maintain both constructed and unconstructed Rights of Way.


For constructed Rights of Way, Council will provide a 2-weekly maintenance check, removing dumped rubbish, removing graffiti, checking drainage, infrastructure etc.


$24,000/annually

$24,000/annually

$75,000/annually

Class 1B Council to maintain both constructed and unconstructed Rights of Way.


For constructed Rights of Way, Council will provide an 8-weekly maintenance check, removing dumped rubbish, removing graffiti, checking drainage.


$24,000/annually

$12,000/annually

$50,000/annually

Class 1C Council to maintain both constructed and unconstructed Rights of Way.


For constructed Rights of Way, Council will provide a 12-weekly maintenance check, removing dumped rubbish, removing graffiti, checking drainage.

$24,000/annually

$12,000/annually

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



Class 1D Council to maintain Rights of Way (not classified as Class 1A to 1C) for stormwater overland flow paths.

For all Rights of Way, Council will provide maintenance visits as required to ensure that stormwater overland flow paths are not compromised.

Included in above maintenance costs.

Class 2 Council will maintain both constructed and unconstructed Rights of Way until they are disposed of via a discontinuance and sale process.

Council will provide 3 to 4 maintenance visits a year aligned to the growing season for unconstructed Rights of Way to clear Rights of Way of all vegetation and to reduce any fire hazards. Dumped rubbish will also be cleared on these maintenance visits.

For constructed Rights of Way, Council will provide 4 visits per annum to clear dumped rubbish, remove graffiti etc.

$24,000/annually

Actions


3.5.1.1.

Maintenance of all constructed and unconstructed Rights of Way in line with the standards for Class 1 Rights of Way as detailed above. This is dependent on the above maintenance schedule being adopted as part of the next revision of the Road Management Plan and subject to budgetary constraints.

1 Asset Management

$245,000 annually

3.5.1.2.

Maintenance of all constructed Class 2 Rights of Way until discontinued and/or sold. This is dependent on the above maintenance schedule being adopted as part of the next revision of the Road Management Plan and subject to budgetary constraints.

1 Asset Management

Operations

$24,000 annually


All Rights of Way maintained in accordance with the maintenance requirements schedule.

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



3.5.2. Drainage Infrastructure and Stormwater Overland Flow paths


Section 205 of the Local Government Act 1989 provides that ‘A Council has the care and management of …all roads that the Council has agreed to have the care and management of.’ Section 205 also states that this section is subject to the Road Management Act 2004.

Section 163 of the Local Government Act 1989 also provides that ‘A Council may declare a special rate, a special charge or a combination of both only for the purposes of— (a) defraying any expenses; or (b) repaying (with interest) any advance made to or debt incurred or loan raised by the Council— in relation to the performance of a function or the exercise of a power of the Council, if the Council considers that the performance of the function or the exercise of the power is or will be of special benefit to the persons required to pay the special rate or special charge.’

Background

Many Rights of Way have the dual purpose of not only providing access to properties, but also to service the properties with drainage and other services. The drainage can be provided by open gutters or underground drainage pipes. The stormwater overland flow path function of many Rights of Way also need to be identified and considered.

Issue

Council’s drainage policy, dating back to 1998, identifies a lack of or inappropriate infrastructure within the municipality. Some Rights of Way act as drainage outlets for properties situated on either side. Other Rights of Way, whilst not having a road function perform an important stormwater overland flow path function.

In particular, identifying Council’s responsibility for drainage within Rights of Way is complicated by:

the number of Rights of Way within the municipality; the level and type of drain construction is inconsistent; the lack of community support for Council to implement drainage schemes to

undertake drainage or surface works on unmade roads.

Objective

To preserve the stormwater overland flow path function of Rights of Way in known flood zones.

To enhance drainage along and within Rights of Way, as required.

Discussion

Council’s Drainage Policy has not been reviewed for some time. A revised Drainage Policy should support the development and maintenance of a drainage system which will maximise its efficiency, ensures public safety and protects the environment. Drainage maintenance issues will be addressed as set out in Section 3.5.1, with a new category of Right of Way established which addresses the needs of those Rights of Way which do not have road function but which need to be retained to service an important stormwater overland flow path function.

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



Actions


3.5.2.1.

Review and Update Council’s Drainage Policy.


Operating Costs

3.5.2.2.

Maintenance of the drainage function of all Class 1 Rights of Way as previously described in Section 3.5.1

1 Asset Management

See Section 3.5.1


Maintenance and service standards for drainage within Rights of Way implemented in accordance with the Road Management Plan and Council’s drainage policy.

Drainage issues that cause damage to properties and compromise public safety addressed on an as-needs basis in accordance with the drainage policy.

Special charge drainage schemes implemented as required.

3.6. Improvement



Clause 1 of Schedule 11 of the Local Government Act 1989 confers on Council the power to construct and maintain roads.

Background

Approximately 75% of the Rights of Way within the municipality are constructed with either a concrete or asphalt surface. The constructed Rights of Way are mainly in Activity Centres and are used primarily as access to properties located along them or access ways for pedestrians and cyclists. The remaining 25% of Rights of Way are unconstructed; the cost to construct them would be approximately $500 per linear metre based on the average 3.1m width. Council does not fund construction of unconstructed Rights of Way; the full cost would have to be borne by adjacent property owners and recovered through a special rate/charge scheme as allowed in the Local Government Act Section 163 (7). No such special rate/charge scheme has occurred in Banyule for many years. Other methods of paying for construction could be through developer contributions and planning permit conditions on adjacent development.

Issue

Unconstructed Rights of Way used by the community can pose a liability for Council.

Objective

To construct unconstructed Rights of Way, where improved amenity, health, safety and other benefits (including for cyclists and pedestrians) to Council and the community can be demonstrated

Discussion

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



Unconstructed Rights of Way which are likely to be categorised Class 1A and Class1B Rights of Way and serve a public need will be identified by Council via auditing and Council will facilitate their construction to remove maintenance issues and improve accessibility, subject to budgetary constraints. Council will consider initiating a special rate/charge scheme to achieve construction of unconstructed Rights of Way and those property owners that gain a benefit from the construction will be required to contribute to the cost of construction. Developer contributions may be applicable for the development of Rights of Way in Activity Centres where there is a strategic need to construct the Rights of Way and a development contribution plan has been prepared on adjacent development. Actions


3.6.1.1.

Where Council has identified that an unconstructed Rights of Way is needed for public purposes, Council will facilitate its construction to reduce maintenance requirements and improve accessibility. Funding the construction of unconstructed Rights of Way will be either by a special rate/charge scheme or a developer contribution plan.

1 Asset Management/ Engineering Services

Capital Works Program

3.6.1.2.

Council will draw up a series of technical notes and drawings for the construction and rehabilitation of unconstructed Rights of Way.


Operating costs



Roads on unconstructed Rights of Way constructed through Special Rate/Charge Schemes as required.

3.6.2. Activation of Rights of Way in Activity Centres


The Banyule Planning Scheme and Activity Centre Structure Plans provide the legislative context.

Background

Activity Centres are identified areas for growth and activity by the State Government. State Planning Policy obliges Council to consider higher densities, particularly in Principal Activity Centres such as Greensborough and Major Activity Centres such as Ivanhoe and Heidelberg. To plan for Activity Centres, Council has undertaken structure plans which give Council, local community and other stakeholders a long term plan to guide land use and development in the centres.

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



Rights of Way within/close to Activity Centres and community hubs are particularly important because these are locations where strategic land use planning is promoting increased dwelling density. In these locations, there is a need for Rights of Way to support activated edges with property developments, easy pedestrian and cyclist access to nearby places, in addition to servicing the needs of motor vehicles. At the same time, Rights of Way close to Activity Centres tend to be quite narrow – approximately 3.1m in width, often with some heritage value. Activation of Rights of Way close to Activity Centres could take many forms, including the development of residential and commercial dwellings with ground floors opening directly to Rights of Way. Transport options, access for pedestrians and cyclists, carriageway widths, drainage, lighting and public safety all need to be taken into consideration. Activation could also open up Rights of Way for street festivals, street art and other uses. Whilst the City of Banyule does not currently have a ‘laneway culture’, improving laneways to provide interesting and useable community space is important particularly in those Rights of Way which directly abut Activity Centres. Land use planning for activity centres has established meaning to the term ‘Pedestrian Priority Precinct’. A pedestrian priority precinct is a network of streets around an Activity Centre, where the priority for transport is given over to pedestrians. These streets would typically have wider footpaths, lower speed limits (generally 40kph) and many pedestrian crossing facilities located along them. These precincts could be used as a tool to prioritise those Rights of Way which would be suitable for activation. Issue Rights of Way are increasingly becoming important frontages for residential developments. Consequently, consideration of enhanced urban design for the interface between Rights of Way and residential land will help promote activated frontages, permeable edges and Rights of Way that promote safety for all users. Objective

To activate Rights of Way spaces within and close to Activity Centres and community hubs.

Discussion

The identification and development of a demonstration revitalisation project in one or two Rights of Way in each Activity Centre could offer an opportunity to explore and test different scenarios and have a major long term benefit. Rights of Way in different Activity Centres in Banyule will require different design treatments to meet differing needs and expectations. Priority for activating the Rights of Way will be for the Class 1A category Rights of Way, however, Class 1B Rights of Way will be investigated and supported as they arise. The preparation of urban design guidelines for physical improvement to Rights of Way should ensure a design focus to prioritise pedestrian needs within Activity Centres over other modes of transport. The remodelled Rights of Way design should be safe to walk along, designed to promote very low traffic speeds and a new design ethos that takes an integrated approach to preferred design outcomes at the interface. Actions

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2




3.6.2.1.

Prepare a map for Ivanhoe, Heidelberg and Greensborough identifying Rights of Way suitable for activation having regard to the established ‘pedestrian priority precincts’ around Activity Centres.


$15,000

3.6.2.2.

Prepare guidelines for preferred design parameters for Rights of Way in Activity Centres behind shops.


$15,000

3.6.2.3.

As part of Activity Centre and Structure Plan planning, identify a small number of Rights of Way that could be candidates for revitalisation demonstration projects.


$10,000

3.6.2.4.

Advocate for and support community uses such as festivals and events in Rights of Way within Activity Centres.

Ongoing All of Council N/A


Rights of Way suitable for activation within the Principal and Major Activity Centres identified in an appropriate database.

Guidelines setting out appropriate design parameters for Rights of Way in Activity Centres established.

Maintenance and service standards for constructed and unconstructed Rights of Way within Activity Centres developed in accordance with the Road Management Plan.



The Banyule Planning Scheme provides the legislative context. Background

Rights of Way within/close to Activity Centres and community hubs are important because these are locations where strategic land use planning is promoting increased dwelling density. There is potential to consolidate a number of backyards on large blocks and provide a development opportunity which might not otherwise exist if access was only permitted from the street. As such, infill developments proposing the use of Rights of Way for access have been permitted by Council. Many developments propose vehicular and pedestrian access solely along Rights of Way.

Issue

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



Increasingly, developers are proposing both primary and secondary access off Rights of Way which are narrow in width, are not constructed to the appropriate trafficable standard, do not have satisfactory pedestrian and cyclist access, and lack a number of amenities such as lighting, security, appropriate drainage and garbage collection facilities. Currently, Council lacks guidelines which deal comprehensively with this issue. An associated issue is where a development may suggest a ‘new’ Rights of Way within the site envelope to provide access to all or part of the development. Funding of improvements to the Rights of Way may also be an issue. In order to accommodate development accessing directly to Rights of Way, a number of issues will need to be addressed for Rights of Way including:

Surface Treatment - it is important to provide a surface suitable for a mixed pedestrian and vehicular environment. As development off Rights of Way are likely to be close to Activity Centres, the surface should be fully accessible to all users and be bicycle friendly. In the majority of instances a concrete surface treatment would be preferred; this should incorporate traffic calming treatments capable of reducing traffic speeds to 20km/hr or less. Attention should be given to the Banyule Safer Design Guide, when mixing pedestrians and cyclists with vehicular traffic. Design involving bluestone would need to ensure that acceptable DDA access is maintained. The cost to construct the surface treatment and any additional infrastructure such as drainage improvements is to be borne by the developer.

Carriageway width – as Rights of Way are typically 3.1m wide or less, consideration needs to be given to widening carriageways to allow unimpeded access, particularly in relation to larger developments, accommodating other residents, emergency vehicle access, Australia Post delivery and waste collection etc. Rights of Way need to be wide enough to safely allow for a mixed pedestrian/vehicular environment. Guidelines relating to preferred surface treatment, carriageway width and infrastructure requirements for developments fronting Rights of Way should be developed to define the optimal environment for all users. The guidelines should consider possible mechanisms for achieving widening Rights of Way, including (but not exclusive of any other means) by negotiation with planning permit applicants in lieu of parking dispensation of proposed developments abutting the Rights of Way.

Utility service and drainage provision – Developers should be responsible for all costs and infrastructure associated with the provision of water, gas, electricity, communications and drainage to the development. Provision must be made for current drainage and legal point of discharge infrastructure in the Rights of Way. Any works required to dig up the Rights of Way surface treatment should be reinstated to Council satisfaction.

Street lighting – Rights of Way can be isolated, hazardous and dark places. Consideration needs to be given to the existing street lighting (if any) and the provision of adequate lighting for the new development to encourage safe use of the Rights of Way. Adequate carriageway width should be provided for positioning of light poles. To provide pedestrian safety and security in Rights of Way, there must be direct lines of sight through the entire Rights of Way.

Encroachment into the Rights of Way – Consideration should be given to the urban form of the development and whether there are encroachments into the

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



Rights of Way such as balconies etc., which would impede vehicular access and or block pedestrian/cyclist movement or create blind spots.

Emergency Vehicle Access and Waste Collection – Proposed developments must comply with the requirements set out in the Metropolitan Fire and Emergency Service Board’s guidelines - GL-27 Planning Guideline for Emergency Vehicle Access and Minimum Water Supplies. On Rights of Way less than 5m wide, Council’s waste collection vehicles are unable to collect waste. As part of the approval for any development to face a Rights of Way less than 5m wide, a waste management plan should be developed to the satisfaction of Council.

Traffic Management in Rights of Way – For any development that is anticipated to change the volume of vehicular traffic or increase the volume of pedestrian and cyclist traffic, a traffic impact statement should be submitted to demonstrate to the satisfaction of Council that the Rights of Way can safely accommodate the increased vehicular/pedestrian movements. Realignment works may be required to provide space for turning circles for vehicles through splayed corners or similar improvements between the development and the broader street network; these should be the responsibility of the developer to design and fund.

Objective:

To ensure that any upgrade or improvement of Rights of Way adjacent to existing or new Development occurs in a way that improves the accessibility, connectivity and safety of the Right of Way.

To clarify standards required by Council when a new or proposed development is proposed with its primary or secondary access off either an existing or new Rights of Way.

To ensure landowners and developers contribute financially to the capital and maintenance cost of upgrading Rights of Way.

Discussion

Broader Council strategies and Activity Centre planning direct a need to provide effective land use and development objectives that meet long term community needs and maintain and enhance infrastructure. Rights of Way, particularly those close to Activity Centres and transport hubs provide an opportunity for a different type of development form, less reliant on vehicular transport and which presents directly to the Rights of Way. When planning applications for developments adjacent to Rights of Way are received, attention should be given to improvement of the Rights of Way as set out in the proposed Guidelines (3.6.3.1). All costs associated with improvement of the Rights of Way in association with the development as determined by Council should be borne by the developer. This should include the full extent of the Rights of Way from the development to the main road exit, depending on the size and extent of the development. Implementation and funding will be set out in the guidelines to be developed as part of 3.6.3.1 Actions

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2




3.6.3.1.

Prepare transport and design guidelines for improvements to Rights of Way to ensure that:

The proposed ‘new’ or existing Rights of Way addresses all access issues, including preferred surface treatment, carriageway width, all infrastructure including drainage, lighting requirements.


$25,000

3.6.3.2.

Ensure that all criteria set out in the guidelines can be met prior to approving any development accessing existing or ‘new’ Rights of Way.



3.6.3.3.

Ensure that issues of urban design such as encroachment into a Right of Way have been considered for developments proposed to face Rights of Way to the satisfaction of Council.




Guidelines established for Rights of Way abutting existing or new development.


Rights of Way construction and upgrading schemes implemented and funded through Development Contributions/Special Charge/Rate Schemes as required.

3.6.4. Transport, Parking and Loading in Rights of Way


Parking and stopping vehicles in Rights of Way is influenced by the Road Safety Act (1986), Local Government Act (1989) and Council’s Local Laws. The Transport Integration Act 2007 also applies. Background

Rights of Way support and complement the existing road network within the municipality, by providing direct or alternative access to properties. They are used by a wide variety of transport users, including pedestrians and cyclists. Issue

Transport movements along Rights of Way take many forms and comprise many issues, including:

vehicular access and swept paths to properties abutting the Rights of Way,

pedestrian and cyclist access to nearby Activity Centres and community hubs,

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



reduced carriageway width leading to conflict between pedestrians and vehicular traffic, vehicles traveling in opposite directions, difficulty in access for emergency vehicles and the inability to provide footpaths on three metre wide Rights of Way,

Sight distance at intersections (typically Rights of Ways are not provided with adequate visual splays at intersections)

Car parking impeding vehicular and emergency vehicle access,

loading in Rights of Way situated at the back of shops and other facilities in Activity Centres.

surface treatments not being suitable for general accessibility and smooth ride by cyclists. The surface condition of Rights of Way is important to ensure that it is functional to all users.

Objective

To enhance transport safety and accessibility of Rights of Way

To provide for the effective integration of transport and land use within Rights of Way

Discussion

In general, the narrow carriageway width of Rights of Way is seen as a positive as it tends to lead to reduced vehicular speeds, reducing the risk of injury to pedestrians and cyclists, and giving the impression of a more personable and safe space. The volumes and speed of vehicles that utilise Rights of Way are generally low, so having vehicles and pedestrians sharing the same space is considered an acceptable outcome if vehicle speeds can be maintained below 20km/hr. Any carriageway widening will need to preserve the low speed environment and be weighted towards improving conditions for more sustainable transport. Consideration also needs to be given to Council’s safer design guide. Given the narrow nature of the vast majority of Rights of Way, there is little opportunity to park in them. In the event that a Rights of Way is widened in future, consideration needs to be given to the effects of parking, particularly with new development with little parking provided, not blocking the access of other Rights of Way users or emergency vehicles. Generally, a Rights of Way would have to be over 5.5m to allow parking to take place. Similarly, in commercial areas and behind shops in Activity Centres, many Rights of Way are used as the primary access for delivery and loading/unloading of goods. Again, this needs to be structured either by timing or location to prevent blocking access to the Rights of Way. The delivery and loading of goods shall occur in a manner that does not obstruct the use of the Rights of Way by other users and shall cause minimal disruption in the area. Actions

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2




3.6.4.1.

No parking or stopping of vehicles will be allowed in Rights of Way where through access is impeded by a parked/stopped vehicle.


3.6.4.2.

The delivery and loading of goods shall occur in a manner that does not obstruct the use of the Rights of Way by other users and causes minimal disruption to the area.


3.6.4.3.

The design and provision of transport infrastructure in Rights of Way will at all times provide for a safe, effective and accessible area for all users.


Statutory Planning

Operating Costs



Rights of Way construction schemes implemented and funded through Special Charge/Rate Schemes as required.

3.7. Closure

3.7.1. Temporary or Permanent Closure


The powers of Council over traffic are conferred pursuant to Section 207 of the Local Government Act 1989 and include the powers set out in Schedule 11 of the same Act. Issue

In certain circumstances there is a need to close a road (either permanently or temporarily) in order to restrict or prevent vehicular traffic movements, or in order to prevent any injury to any person; or damage to any property (including damage to the road itself) or for as long as is necessary for a procession, public ceremony or function. Situations arise where the closure of the Rights of Way is required in order to restrict vehicular access whilst still providing continued pedestrian access in the context of the legislation. Activation of Rights of Way in Activity Centres may also lead to a need to close a Rights of Way whilst still allowing pedestrian and/or cyclist movement, and/or allowing for street festivals. Objective


Actions


Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



3.7.1.1.

Consult with the local community when undertaking temporary and permanent closures of Rights of Way.


Operating Costs

3.7.1.2.

All temporary and permanent closures to be undertaken to Council satisfaction.


Operating Costs


Temporary or permanent closure of Rights of Way achieved consistent with Council’s community consultation process and is transparent.



Section 206(1) of the Local Government Act (1989) confers on Council the power to discontinue a road and includes the powers set out in Clause 3 of Schedule 10 of the same Act.

Background

The Local Government Act (1989) provides Council with the power to discontinue Rights of Way where the Council forms the opinion that the Rights of Way or road is ‘no longer reasonably required for public use’. In general, this means that Council must be satisfied that adjoining property owners do not reasonably require access to their property via the Rights of Way or road. Council does not encourage the discontinuance of Rights of Way that are constructed or contain open drains. However, such Rights of Way can be considered for discontinuance in certain circumstances i.e. when all abutting owners agree to meet the costs of removing the existing paving and/or installing an underground drainage system. There are a number of benefits from discontinuing Rights of Way that are no longer required, including:

Reduction in Council’s financial and legal liability e.g. cleansing, graffiti removal, maintenance, cleansing, drainage.

Increasing security of property and removing derelict and unused parcels of land.

Additional revenue from land transfer funds and possible rateable land. Objective


Discussion

The power to discontinue a road, and sell the resultant land, is conferred on Council pursuant to Section 206 (1) of the Local Government Act (1989) and includes the powers set out in Clause 3 of Schedule 10 of the Act.

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



As discussed previously, Class 2 Rights of Way, that is any Rights of Way which does not fit the criteria of the Class 1 categorisation, are considered to be no longer required for public use and can be discontinued and sold. These Rights of Way would typically be unconstructed. Many Class 2 Rights of Way could be defined as unsightly, unused Rights of Way and the sale of these would remove unnecessary security risks and risks to public health and safety. Class 2 Rights of Way are to be identified and collated as part of the Rights of Way categorisation process discussed earlier. All Class 2 Rights of Way have the potential for discontinuance and sale. Once the Rights of Way has been assessed as suitable for discontinuance, the statutory process can begin. Council will not commence statutory procedures to discontinue Rights of Way until it is satisfied the Rights of Way is no longer required as a road by abutting owners or the public generally by reason of its:

existing vehicular and/or pedestrian access utilisation/needs;

future road network expansion needs and/or its role in the linkage of bicycle and pedestrian networks.

Function as an important path for the flow of overland stormwater Council will not support the discontinuance of Rights of Way and sale of the resultant land where a ‘landlocked’ situation would be created. Council’s City Valuer will value the resultant land at current market value taking into consideration the locality, siting, area and whether or not the land is, or is to become, encumbered. In selling off Rights of Way, consideration needs to be given to the current drainage infrastructure and the function of the Rights of Way as a path for the flow of overland stormwater. In most instances, each individual property that abuts a Rights of Way, has an equal carriageway entitlement for the use of land, with purchasers of the resultant land from the Rights of Way sale are encouraged to integrate the land in a manner which does not detract from the visual amenity of the neighbourhood, or areas of environmental, heritage or landscape significance. Actions


3.7.2.1.

Review and Update Council’s Discontinuance Guidelines and Procedures. Assess and prioritise all Class 2 Rights of Way for possible discontinuance and sale, having regard to existing property Legal Point of Discharge (LPOD) within Rights of Way.

2 Property Services

$25,000

3.7.2.2.

Council to recover all costs it incurs in the discontinuance and sale of Rights of Way to adjacent owners. Capital raised from sale of unwanted rights of way to be placed in a separate Rights of Way budget.

Ongoing Property Services

N/A

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2




Rights of Way discontinued where it is demonstrated that the Rights of Way is no longer required for public use.

The discontinuance of Rights of Way and sale of the resultant land is achieved consistent with Council’s community consultation process and is transparent.

The existing streetscape is retained by the integration/development of the resultant land abutting the streetscape in character with the surrounding neighbourhood.

Removal of crossovers.

4.

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



IMPLEMENTATION

The City of Banyule Rights of Way Strategy identifies mechanisms to achieve a coordinated approach to Rights of Way issues within the municipality. Successful implementation of the Strategy requires:

Commitment of the necessary resources to undertake the collection of information, creation of databases and initial steps in the management actions;

A strategic approach to the management of Rights of Way within the City of Banyule;

Ongoing review of the Rights of Way implementation plan in relation to the strategy objectives; and

A coordinated approach to Rights of Way issues.

4.1. Strategy Implementation

The Strategy will be implemented by pursuing the actions within the Strategy including the following elements:







o preferred design parameters for Rights of Way in Activity Centres

behind shops.

Reviewing the Discontinuance Policy.

Reviewing the Drainage Policy



Implementing and funding of Rights of Way construction schemes through Special Charge/Rate schemes.


Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



4.2. Timing

In order that the Rights of Way implementation plan can be incorporated within Council’s capital works program, the actions have been prioritised in accordance with the following scale:










$25,000 (Discontinuance assessment)





* Approximately 80% of this funding is currently funded. ** Currently $50,000 major maintenance funded. Whilst a priority for timing has been allocated to each action, the implementation of any action is dependent on the availability of funding resources within the timeframes. Priority firstly will be given to improving the management of Rights of Way.

4.3. Costing and Budget Allocation

Many of the actions required to facilitate the Strategy require funding and will pose a significant additional cost to Council. The cost of implementing the Strategy is estimated to be:

$21,000 for the audit and re-categorisation of the Rights of Way network.

$100,000 for the preparation of a number of guidelines relating to Rights of Way themes and for engaging urban design professionals to design a small number of demonstration Rights of Way projects.

$100,000 per annum for increased maintenance requirements on Class 1A and Class 1B category Rights of Way.

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



$12.8m for the construction of unconstructed Category 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D (assuming that approximately 25% of unconstructed Rights of Way will undergo construction over the longer term).

The timing and funding of specific projects should be determined through the preparation of works programs, which, to be effectual, need to be linked to tangible performance measures and the Capital Works budget. There may also be further funding opportunities available from the State Government i.e. RoadSafe, Transport Accident Commission (TAC), Australian Greenhouse Office to offset the cost of initiating cycling, walking, DDA compliance and lighting programs in Rights of Way. Grant opportunities may be available through the Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure (DTPLI) for upgrading urban spaces in its Creating Better Places program. Additionally, it may be possible to elicit and use developer contributions to fund infrastructure improvements, particularly where development is likely to occur around and in Activity Centres.


4.3.1 Report progress against actions in the Strategy to Council annually.


Operating Costs

4.3.2 Identify and seek funding from grants and other sources to assist Council with the implementation of the Strategy.

Ongoing All Council Units Operating Costs

4.3.3 Establish a 10-year Rights of Way program within the Capital Works Program


Operating Costs

4.4. Monitoring and Review Process

Monitoring and review of the Strategy is essential to assess whether the implementation of the various actions has improved the use and management of Rights of Way. Monitoring the Strategy on a regular basis will allow for those actions which are successful to be added to over the life of the Strategy and those actions which are not as successful to be reviewed and amended as necessary to achieve the objectives of the Strategy.

5.

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



APPENDICES Appendix A – Council strategic documents influencing use and decision making for Rights of Way.

Strategic Document Implication for Rights of Way

Banyule City Plan 2013-2017

Council’s City Plan 2013 – 2017 which includes our five key objectives:


Street Numbering and Naming Guidelines

The Guidelines articulate procedures for naming and numbering of properties within Banyule.

Community Inclusion and Access Policy

Specific aims of the Inclusion and Access Policy relevant to this Strategy are:

To improve the access to and usage of the City of Banyule’s resources by community members who are people with disabilities.

To remove barriers which presently exist with regard to access and participation.

Municipal Strategic Statement

Planning, land use and development are guided by the Municipal Strategic Statement. Through this vision, the Municipal Strategic Statement supports the need to manage Rights of Way to enhance improved transport and liveability.

Road Management Plan 2009

The Road Management Plan sets out the recommended service levels, inspection regimes and proactive maintenance routines to keep constructed Rights of Way in serviceable condition.

Structure Plans – Heidelberg, Ivanhoe and Greensborough

The Structure Plans articulate the long-term higher order development vision for Heidelberg, Ivanhoe and Greensborough.

Safer Design Guide The Guide sets out safer design and land use principles which are to be considered by Council, development proponents and the community when proposing or considering changes or additions to the urban environments. Activation of the Activity Centre Rights of Way would be considered within its guidelines.

Neighbourhood Character Guidelines

The Guidelines cover the whole municipality and provide guidance to development on the preferred future characteristics of each designated area. Positive elements of existing character are to be retained and enhanced. This includes streets and Rights of Way in the municipality.

Banyule Residential Vehicle Crossing Policy 2012

This Policy covers the whole municipality and provide guidance to the provision of vehicle crossovers. In particular:

Where there is a second frontage that is away from the site’s main frontage and streetscape, such as at a rear laneway that is a Rights of Way,

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



the preferred location for the vehicle crossing will be at the Rights of Way.

Where a site has laneway access, assessment will have regard to security, manoeuvrability and appropriateness of this alternative location. In some instances that may require laneway widening.

In circumstances where vehicle access is obtained via an unmade Rights of Way, construction of the Rights of Way will be at the responsibility of the landowner unless otherwise agreed by Council.

Assessment of any alternate frontage for a vehicle connection will consider traffic impacts on local roads, arising from identified laneways being used for site access.

Att

ach

men

t 3

4.2

Item: 4.2



Appendix B – GIS Map of Right of Way within Banyule

Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2

Item: 5.2 Attachment 1: MAV State Council Resolutions May 2014


Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2



Att

ach

men

t 1

5.2



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1

Item: 6.1 Attachment 1: Operating Financial Report 10 months ended 30 April 2014.


Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1



Att

ach

men

t 1

6.1

