ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF THE HUME CITY COUNCIL … · MONDAY, 06 APRIL 2009 7:00 PM CRAIGIEBURN FUNCTION ROOMS OOUURR OVVIISSIIONN:: Hume – A prosperous, sustainable and vibrant

ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF THE HUME CITY COUNCIL

MONDAY, 06 APRIL 2009

7:00 PM

CRAIGIEBURN FUNCTION ROOMS

OOUURR VVIISSIIOONN:: Hume – A prosperous, sustainable and vibrant City: renowned for social justice, lifelong learning and community inclusion.

Hume City Council PAGE 1

HUME CITY COUNCIL

_______________________________________________________________________________ Notice of an ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF THE HUM E CITY COUNCIL to be held on Monday, 06 April 2009 at 7:00 PM at the Craigieburn Function Rooms _______________________________________________________________________________ To: a: Council Cr Jack Ogilvie

Cr Ros Spence Cr Adem Atmaca Cr Vic Dougall Cr Drew Jessop Cr Helen Patsikatheodorou Cr Geoff Porter Cr Ann Potter Cr Burhan Yigit

Mayor Deputy Mayor

b: Off icers

Mr Domenic Isola Mr Daryl Whitfort Mr Steve Craw ley Mr Mike Webb Mr David Keenan Ms Joy Nunn

Chief Executive Officer Director City Governance and Information Director City Infrastructure Director City Communities Director City Sustainability Director Public Relations and Learning

ORDER OF BUSINESS 1. PRAYER

Hume City’s religious diversity strengthens and enriches community life and supports the well-being of the cit izens of Hume City. Hume City Council acknow ledges the importance of spiritual life and the leadership offered by the Hume City Inter Faith Leaders Netw ork. In recognition of the religious diversity of residents in Hume City, Council has invited the Inter Faith Leaders Netw ork to take responsibility for the opening prayer at Council meetings. This evening’s prayer w ill be led by Captain Gary Grant, Senior Minister of the Salvos3064 Church. Our God and Father we come before you this evening and thank you for the gift of life and all that it means to us in this place. We pray tonight for the work of Hume City Council and its role in providing leadership and resources to the people of Australia that are living in Hume City. As those elected into office take their positions tonight, I pray that You God will guide their every decision and lead them in paths that bring justice and peace to this great city.

06 APRIL 2009 NOTICE OF MEETING ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF COUNCIL


I pray for wisdom, integrity and truth to guide their decisions, I also pray tonight Lord God, that you stir passion in these servants of this community, and that their discussions in this place tonight will be laced with your grace and truth and with your very presence. Father I pray for our State of Victoria, that you will bless it and help us to recover after the recent devastation this region has endured. I pray for those groups which seek to help and support the communities in which they are placed, for the groups of volunteers who serve, often without acknowledgment, and for those who lead our nation. I pray for understanding across the whole of Hume City, that we each would seek peace in our time and peace in our land. I pray also tonight Lord God for those who serve others in our community, local volunteer groups and emergency services personnel, that you would bless them and comfort them as they do their work amongst us. I pray for the processes in place, especially in this immediate area of Craigieburn, for the Renewal of the Craigieburn area, that we will guided by you in every decision and action taken to make this area a better place to live. We thank you Father for all you provide and trust you with our future. Amen.

2. APOLOGIES

3. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS:

Councillors' attention is draw n to the provisions of the Local Government Act 1989 in relation to the disclosure of conflicts of interests. Councillors are required to disclose any conflict of interest immediately before consideration or discussion of the relevant item. Councillors are then required to leave the Chamber during discussion and not vote on the relevant item.

4. CONFIRMATION OF COUNCIL MINUTES 4.1 Minutes of Meeting of the Hume City Council held on 10 March and 23 March 2009,

including Confidential Minutes. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Minutes of the Meeting of the Hume City Council held on 10 March and 23 March 2009 including Confidential Minutes, as circulated, w ith the minutes of 10 March 2009 being amended to show on page 5 PQ459 and PQ460 Maureen Reed, not Maureen Reid, and a correction to page 11 SPE006 to show Cr Yigit left the chamber during discussion on item SPE006 not SPE005, be confirmed.



5. RECEIPT OF COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE MINUTES AND

RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL TO BE ADOPTED: 5.1 Section 86 Committees

• Minutes of the Annual General Meeting of the Campbellf ield Community Centre

Committee of Management held on 19 February 2009 • Minutes of the General Meeting of the Campbellf ield Community Centre Committee of

Management held on 19 February 2009

• Minutes of the Gladstone Park Community Centre Committee of Management held on 18 February 2009

• Minutes of the Tullamarine Community Hall Committee of Management held on 16

February 2009 • Minutes of the Annual General Meeting of Westmeadows Hall Committee of

Management held on 26 February 2009 The follow ing are recommendations and actions submitted by Section 86 Committees which manage community facilities:

5.1.1 Campbellfield Community Centre Committee of Management Annual General Meeting held on 19 February 2009.

Committee Resolutions

(a) That Council receives and adopts the statement of accounts for the

period from 18/02/2008 to 19/02/2009. (b) That Council accepts Councillor Victor Dougall’s nomination as

Chairperson in lieu of Mohamad Abbouche previously nominated in the General Meeting dated 9 October 2008

(c) That Council endorse the election of the follow ing off ice bearers for the

ensuing 12 months.

Victor Dougall Chairperson Michael Brincat Secretary Rosaleen Stagnitta Treasurer / Coordinator Beth Jones Vice Chairperson

(d) That Council confirms acceptance of Mansour Rahme as a member of

the Committee (a signed Statement of Acceptance of Responsibilit ies and Obligations as a Special Committee Member has been received).



(e) That Council note the meeting dates over the ensuing 12 months

7 May 2009 General Meeting 23 July 2009 General meeting 15 October 2009 General Meeting 18 February 2010 Annual General meeting

(f) That the fees and charges for users of the centre be:

$18.00 per hour for regular users $30.00 per hour for main for Occasional Users $330.00 per day for party Hire, w ith $330.00 Bond (refundable)

(g) That the follow ing Fees for service w ere recommended to Council and

approved.

Treasurer/Coordinator $750.00 Secretary $600.00

5.1.2 Campbellfield Community Centre Committee of Management General Meeting held on 19 February 2009.


(a) That the Council receives and adopts the statement of accounts for the

period ending 19 February 2009; (b) That Council approves the request to purchase 5 tables up to the value

of $400.00.in total.

5.1.3 Gladstone Park Community Centre Committee of Management Annual General Meeting held on 18 February 2009.


(a) That Margaret Allen be a Committee representative in place of Chio

Foong (New form completed and to be sent to Council for approval). (b) That Council accept providing the facility as an Emergency Evacuation

centre for the Gladstone Park Nursing Home should the need arise. (c) That all off ice bearers with the exception of Chio Foong accepted their

nominations for the coming year. (d) That the fees for service be maintained at current levels. (e) That the Committee contribute $1000.00 tow ards the Billy Cart Derby as

part of the Broadmeadows Spring Festival. (f) That the fees for hire be maintained at current levels.



(g) That Council advise the Committee of costing and viability of putting 1 or 2 smokers poles around the centre.

(h) That Council accept the f inancials as tabled (i) That Council note the meeting dates over the ensuing 12 months

22 July 2009 General meeting 21 October 2009 General Meeting 24 February 2010 Annual General meeting

5.1.4 Tullamarine Community Hall Committee of Management Annual General Meeting held on 16 February 2009.


(a) That fees to increase by CPI, but Committee w ould prefer regular user

fees to remain the same.

Current fees are: Function $400.00 (including public liability insurance) Refundable Bond $400.00 Regular users $10.00

(b) That Honorarium, Cleaner charges and odd job charges be increased by

CPI.

(c) That Council notes the meeting dates over the ensuing 12 months.


(d) That the positions of the Committee remain the same as 2008

(e) That Council approve the purchase of 2 new table trolleys at $495 per

trolley.

(f) That Council approve the purchase of curtains for the hall at the quoted cost of $9200.00

5.1.5 Westmeadows Hall Committee of Management Annual General Meeting held on 26 February 2009.


(a) That the statement of accounts to 31 December, 2008 be received and

adopted.



(b) That authorisation from Council be given to pay the Secretary an annual $1000.00 fee for service and an annual $150.00 tow ards the Secretary’s phone rental ;

(c) That the follow ing members w ere appointed as off ice bearers for the

ensuing 12 months.

Dot White Chairperson Gw en Wilson Secretary Esther Sanderson Treasurer

(d) That Council note the meeting dates over the ensuing 12 months.


(e) That approval be sought from Council to increase casual booking fees to

$182.00 and to have no increase in permanent booking fees.

5.2 Councillor Representative Request

Councillor Geoff Porter has advised that as the Westmeadows Hall Committee of Management meets during off ice hours he is unable to attend the Committee meetings and w hile happy to be a Councillor contact to the Committee he w ishes to be removed as the Councillor Representative. This w ill assist the Committee in ensuring it has a quorum at its future meetings

5.2.1 Officers Comments

Annual General Meetings

The Committees held their Annual General meetings as required by the instrument of delegations At the meeting Committees w ere required to: • Appoint Off ice bearers for endorsement by Council; • Recommend fees for adoption by Council; • Recommend fees for service; and • Set meeting dates w hich will be advertised by Council The Committees have complied w ith most requirements.

Hall Hire Fees As with the previous year Officers have sought to reduce disparity in fee setting betw een the Committees that had evolved over time. The fees recommended by Officers have now reduced the variation. The fees w ill be included in Council’s Budget document and subsequently go through the public consultation process.



Audit of Section 86 Committees An Audit of Section 86 Committees w as conducted by Council’s internal auditor Deloitte’s early in 2009. The recommendations of the audit w ere subsequently adopted by the Audit Committee on 20 February 2009. Given the recent changes to the Local Government Act that affect the obligations of Section 86 Committee members it is now timely to meet w ith Committees to advise of the Audit Committee recommendations and update Committee members w ith the new obligations under the Local Government Act.

RECOMMENDATION:

5.3 That Council notes the minutes of the Section 86 Committee and adopts the

following recommendations.

5.3.1 Campbellfield Community Centre Committee of Management Annual General Meeting held on 19 February 2009.

(a) That the Financial statement for the period from 18/02/2008 to

19/02/2009 be noted and that the Committee be reminded that the financial reporting period is 1 July to 30 June each year.

(b) That the approval of office bearers recommended by the Committee

at the 9 October Committee meeting and approved by Council on 27 January 2009 be rescinded.

(c) That Council endorses the election of the following office bearers

for the ensuing 12 months:

Victor Dougall Chairperson Michael Brincat Secretary Rosaleen Stagnitta Treasurer / Coordinator Beth Jones Vice Chairperson

(d) That Council confirms the appointment of Mansour Rahme as a

member of the Campbellfield Community Centre Committee of Management

(e) That Council notes and advertises the meeting dates for the

ensuing 12 months

7 May 2009 General Meeting 23 July 2009 General meeting 15 October 2009 General Meeting 18 February 2010 Annual General meeting



(f) That Council recommends the following fees for hire of the Campbellfield Community Centre be included in the Council budget for 2009/2010 year:

All Permanent Bookings $18.00/hour; Occasional Bookings $30.00/hour; Functions (Party Hire) $340; and Refundable Bond (casual bookings) $340.00 Booking fee (refundable) $50.00

and that all other fee arrangements be revoked.

(g) That Council note that the following fees for service were approved

at its 27 January 2009 meeting

Treasurer/Coordinator $750.00 Secretary $600.00

(h) That Officer’s conduct training for Committee members regarding

compliance with the Instruments of Delegation and new Local Government Act obligations.

5.3.2 Campbellfield Community Centre Committee of Management General

Meeting held on 19 February 2009.

(a) That Council notes the statement of accounts for the period end 19 February 2009 and that the Committee be reminded that the financial reporting period is 1 July to 30 June each year.

(b) That Council endorses the purchase of 5 tables up to the value of

$400.00.

5.3.3 Gladstone Park Community Centre Committee of Management Annual General Meeting held on 18 February 2009.

(a) That Chio Foong no longer be a Committee member (b) That Margaret Allen be a Committee member subject to Council

receiving a statement of acceptance of responsibility and obligation.

(c) That Council’s Manager Leisure Services liaise with the Committee

regarding the request that the facility be used, should the need arise, as an evacuation centre for the Gladstone Park Nursing Home. Matters to be clarified are the terms and conditions of an agreement between Council and the Nursing Home. This to address issues including access, responsibilities, accountabilities, liability and term of usage.

(d) That Council requires a resolution of the Committee for the election

of the following office bearers for the ensuing 12 months:

Secretary/Chairperson Assistant Secretary/Treasurer



(e) That Council recommends the following fees for hire of the

Gladstone Park Community Centre be included in the Council budget for 2009/2010:

Permanent booking playgroup $6.00/hour All permanent Bookings $18.00/hour and that all other fee arrangements be revoked.

(f) That the fees for service be maintained at current levels

Secretary/Chairperson $1000.00 pa Assistant Secretary/Treasurer $1000.00 pa plus $20.00/month

telephone allowance and internet connection.

(g) That Officer’s conduct training for Committee members regarding

compliance with the Instruments of Delegation and new Local Government Act obligations.

(h) That Council approves the Committee’s contribution of $1000.00

towards the Billy cart derby as part of the Broadmeadows Spring festival.

(i) That Council advise the Committee of the cost to install 2 smokers

poles around the centre (j) That Council notes the financial statement for the period 1 July

2008 to 31 January 2009 (k) That Council notes and advertises the meeting dates for the

ensuing 12 months


5.3.4 Tullamarine Community Hall Committee of Management Annual General

Meeting held on 16th February 2009.

(a) That Council recommends the following fees for hire of the Tullamarine Community Hall be included in the Council budget for 2009/2010:

Permanent bookings $11.00/hour Casual Bookings (Function) $400.00 Casual booking Refundable Bond $400.00




(c) That Council approves the fee for Service payable to the Booking officer/Secretary/Treasurer, Cleaner charges and Odd Jobs charge being increased to:

Booking officer/Secretary/Treasurer $1100.00 pa Cleaner $16.00/hour Odd Jobs $16.00/hour

(d) That Council Officer’s conduct training for Committee members

regarding compliance w ith the Instruments of Delegation, new Local Government Act obligations and explain the rationale of fee increases


ensuing 12 months


(f) That Council endorses the following officer bearers for the ensuing

12 months

Robert Romans Chairperson Jan Hutchinson Booking officer/Secretary/Treasurer

(g) That Council approves the purchase of 2 new table trolleys at a

total cost of $990.00. (h) That Council approves the purchase of curtains for the hall subject

to verification by the Property Services Coordinator that the quotation received is competitive and appropriate.

5.3.5 Westmeadows Hall Committee of Management Annual General Meeting

held on 26 February 2009.

(a) That Council notes the statement of accounts to 31 December 2008. (b) That Council approves the fee for service for the Secretary being

$1100.00 pa and an annual $150.00 towards phone rental. (d) That Council endorses the election of the following office bearers

for the ensuing 12 months.

Dot White Chairperson Gwen Wilson Secretary Esther Sanderson Treasurer


ensuing 12 months




(f) That Council recommends the following fees for hire of the

Westmeadows Hall be included in the Council budget for 2009/2010:

Permanent booking $11.00 /hour Casual bookings $182.00 Casual booking Refundable bond $340.00


(g) That Officer’s conduct training for Committee members regarding

compliance with the Instruments of Delegation and new Local Government Act obligations

(h) That Councillor Geoff Porter no longer be the Councillor

representative (Committee member) of the Westmeadows Hall Committee of Management.

(i) That Councillor Porter be recorded as a Councillor contact for the

Committee

6. PRESENTATION OF AWARDS

6.1 Resident of the Month – Jules Bolukbasi

7. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME Answers will be provided to questions lodged by members of the public by noon on the day of the Council meeting pursuant to Council’s Governance Local Law No. 2.

8. NOTICES OF MOTION

Notice of Motion No.363 by Cr Drew Jessop

I hereby request that pursuant to Council’s Governance Local Law No. 2 (including Code of Meeting Procedures and Code of Conduct for Councillors) that the follow ing motion be included on the Agenda of the next Ordinary Council Meeting.

THAT Council donates the sum of $500.00 from the Mayor’s Discretionary Fund to the 2009 Craigieburn ANZAC Day Service, with the funds administered by the Craigieburn SES.



9. OFFICERS REPORTS The Mayor w ill ask the Councillors and gallery at the commencement of this section, w hich reports they w ish to speak to. These reports will then be discussed in the order they appear on the notice paper. Reports not called w ill be dealt w ith in a block resolution at the end. Item No Title Page HEALTH AND SAFETY HS35 Road Safety Grants 2009....................................................................................14

ARTS, LEISURE AND CULTURE AL43 Review Of The Hume Arts Advisory Team (HAART) ......................................19

ENVIRONM ENT EN38 Support 155 Business Program.........................................................................24 EN39 Pathways to Sustainability - Environmental Framework................................27

COUNCIL CN486 Carriageway Easement Proposal for Emu Bottom Homestead, Sunbury....33 CN487 15 Muirhead Court, Greenvale- Variation of Restrictive Covenant on Title. 39 CN488 45 Mundy Road, Sunbury - Use part of the existing building (approved for

the development and use for a rural industry) as a restaurant w ith liquor license and a reduction in car parking. ............................................................48

CN489 Section 173 Agreement - 116 Raleigh Street, Westmeadows........................62 CN490 Section 173 Agreement - 23 Hepburn Street, Dallas .......................................64 CN491 Section 173 Agreement - 460 Lancefield Road, Sunbury...............................66

10. PETITIONS AND JOINT LETTERS

11. DEPUTATIONS

12. URGENT BUSINESS

13. DELEGATES REPORTS

14. GENERAL BUSINESS



15. CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS The Meeting may be closed to members of the public to consider confidential matters. RECOMMENDATION: THAT the Council close the meeting to the public pursuant to Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989 to discuss any matter which the Council or special committee considers would prejudice the Council or any person.

16. CLOSURE OF M EETING

DOMENIC ISOLA CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

2 April 2009

06 APRIL 2009 REPORTS – HEALTH AND SAFETY ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF COUNCIL


COUNCIL PLAN THEME – HEALTH AND SAFETY REPORT NO:

HS35

REPORT TITLE:

Road Safety Grants 2009

SOURCE:

Jill Scanlon, Coordinator Community Safety and Development

DIVISION:

City Communit ies

FILE NO:

HCC09/33

POLICY:

Road Safety Plan

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE:

Safe and Healthy City

1. SUMMARY OF REPORT:

1.1 This report details the proposed Road Safety Grants 2009 program for local secondary

colleges and special development schools w ithin Hume City.

1.2 The Grants w ill assist secondary schools to provide a comprehensive and intensive program to introduce safe road practice and develop protective factors for Year 11 students through ‘Fit to Drive’ w orkshops and through participation in other road aw areness programs for students from Year 10 through to Year 12.

1.3 Special development schools w ill use the grants to assist w ith the development of

practical skills regarding use of different modes of transport for students who are of a similar age and w ho are developing independent living skills.

2. RECOMMENDATION:

That Council: 2.1 award a Hume Road Safety Grant to each of the following schools:

School Number of Participating students

Grant Amount $ (GST exclusive)

Aitken College 140 1,295 Craigieburn Secondary College 140 1,295 Gladstone Park Secondary College 200 1,670 Hume Central Secondary College 160 1,420 Ilim College 60 795 Isik College – Eastmeadows Campus 60 795 Isik College – Upfield Campus 60 795

06 APRIL 2009 REPORTS – HEALTH AND SAFETY ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF COUNCIL REPORT NO: HS35 (cont.)


2.2 presents the grants at a ceremony to be held on Wednesday 29 April 2009;

2.3 requires that schools in receipt of a Road Safety Grant 2009 comply w ith the following conditions: 2.3.1 provide a ‘Fit to Drive’ half-day workshop for all Year 11 students,

2.3.2 conduct a ‘Keys Please’ information session with Year 10 students and

their parents detailing requirements around the attainment of 120 hours of driving practice for all Learner Drivers,

2.3.3 ensure Year 12 students’ curriculum contains components that address attitudes to safe driving and safe celebration; or

2.3.4 provide information and practical skills regarding road safety and safe travel practices to students attending special development schools.

3. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

The funding for Hume Road Safety Grants is included w ithin Council’s 2008/2009 Budget. Additional funds of $1,500, to assist with the administration of the ‘Fit to Drive’ w orkshops at schools in Hume, has been provided to Council as a grant from Road Safe North West.

4. LEGISLATIVE POWERS:

The primary objective of Council, as stated in the Local Government Act (1989), is to endeavour to achieve the best outcomes for the local community having regard to the long-term and cumulative effects of decisions. The continuation of the Road Safety Grant program w ill contribute to Council’s obligations to ensure the safety and w ellbeing of its community through the promotion of safe driving practice to assist in the reduction of road trauma and driving fatalit ies in Hume City.

School Number of Participating students

Grant Amount in $ (GST exclusive)

Penola Catholic College 280 2,170 Roxburgh College 260 2,045 Salesian College 200 1,670 St Mary’s Coptic Orthodox College 60 795 Sunbury College 260 2,045 Sunbury Downs Secondary College 100 1,045 Broadmeadows Special Development School 100 625

Hume Valley School 220 1,375 Sunbury and Macedon Ranges Special School 100 625

TOTAL 2,400 $20,460



5. COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

5.1 All ‘Fit to Drive’ w orkshops conducted in Hume in 2008 had a mini-evaluation

conducted by facilitators on the day. Feedback from all the participating students w as overwhelmingly posit ive, w ith many comments regarding the continuation of this program for future years and students recognising that their know ledge of road safety and their understanding of how to remain safe on the road had been challenged, enhanced and heightened.

5.2 Feedback from schools stated that the Logistics Coordinator, w ho is recruited from within the state-w ide ‘Fit to Drive’ facilitator pool, continued to provide excellent pre- and post-workshop contact w ith schools, smooth recruitment of facilitators for workshops and conducted comprehensive debriefs to assist in the improvement of the program, ensuring that this information w as also passed on to school contacts. 5.2.1 Additional duties for the Logistics Coordinator, including liaison w ith school

contacts and coordination of school bookings, w as undertaken last year. This reduced the time associated w ith Council’s administration of the project and provided a single contact for schools regarding all the needs and questions associated w ith the ‘Fit to Drive’ w orkshops.

6. DISCUSSION:

6.1 Background

6.1.1 The Hume Road Safety Grants are in their f if th year of operation, w ith all

Secondary Schools in Hume City continuing to benefit from the provision of these grants tow ard the education of students in safe road practice.

6.1.2 Tw o secondary schools in Hume City w ere unable to complete the ‘Fit to Drive’ w orkshops last year with both schools. Each school has undertaken to run the ‘Fit to Drive’ w orkshops for both their Year 11 and Year 12 classes this year to ensure that all students continue to participate in program.

6.1.3 All three special development schools in Hume ran w orkshops and information sessions regarding safe travel specif ic to the needs of their students.

6.1.4 Input from facilitators, schools participants and logistics coordinators has continued to provide valuable feedback for program improvements local and at a state-w ide level including: (a) Continued quality control of w orkshop facilitation via sponsorship from

the RA CV of new facilitator training and incorporating accreditation of trained facilitators through either their bachelor degree (if applicable) or certif icate level competencies, w ith compulsory assessment of new facilitators and refresher training for existing facilitators.



(b) Continued support from Logistics Coordination for the Year 11

workshops through facilitator de-brief, logistics management before, during and after the w orkshop, liaising w ith schools regarding venues and w orkshop times and follow-up w ith schools w ith debriefings from both coordinators and students. The employment of the Logistics Coordinator has become a permanent, part-time role w ith a single person responsible for a specif ic municipality. The agreed state-w ide cost, to support these services for all municipalities, is $420 per workshop.

(c) Youth Resource Officers from Victoria Police assist w ith workshop discussion groups, and attend all secondary schools to present the Year 12 ‘Muck Up Day’ DVD and lead a discussion with Year 12’s about safe practice for end of year celebrations.

(d) Country Fire Authority and Metropolitan Fire Brigade personnel attend the ‘Fit to Dr ive’ w orkshops to highlight their experiences and lead discussions with participants about the impacts of road accidents.

6.2 Program Outline

6.2.1 The Hume Road Safety Grants is part of an integrated approach to road safety

in Hume that supports the implementation of a number of init iatives focusing on young people’s readiness and aw areness of their role in their ow n and their friends’ safety on the road. It is a condit ion of the grants that schools to run a holistic three year program through Years 10 to 12 entitled the ‘Fit to Drive’ Program.

6.2.2 The ‘Fit to Drive’ w orkshop is an interactive, experiential w orkshop targeting young people in Year 11. The ‘Fit to Drive’ w orkshop aims to assist young people to develop appropriate protective behaviours in response to inappropriate peer pressure w ith regard to driver and passenger behaviour. (a) Coordination of the Year 11 ‘Fit to Drive’ w orkshops is undertaken

utilising the Logistics Coordinator w ho in turn is supervised and supported through the State-w ide Coordinator of ‘Fit to Drive’.

6.2.3 Schools are expected to support the integrated approach by ensuring that the

‘Keys Please’ learner driver program is delivered at the Year 10 level. Parents and students are informed of the legal requirements for learner drivers and given appropriate information about gaining a Learners’ Permit. (a) Facilitation of these sessions is coordinated through VicRoads.

6.2.4 Schools are required to incorporate a screening of, discussion of and other

curriculum activities of the TAC DVD entit led ‘Muck Up Day’ w hich highlights the importance of celebrating safely at the end of Year 12. (a) Local Youth Liaison Officers from the Hume District of Victoria Police

conduct these sessions.



6.2.5 Special Development Schools run an individualised program to suit the needs of the students attending their facilit ies. This may include information and activities regarding safety w hilst walking, cycling, and travelling safely as a passenger in any vehicle or on public transport. (a) Each Special Development School conducts their ow n training and

information utilising the grant to purchase facilitation, resources and support for their students.

6.3 Proposed Grants

6.3.1 In 2009 f if teen local schools have registered for the Hume Road Safety Grants

program. Tw elve schools will each conduct a ‘Fit to Drive’ w orkshop for Year 11 students, one school w ill conduct separate sessions at each campus, w hilst the three special development schools w ill deliver relevant transport safety workshops and information sessions specif ic to the needs of their students.

6.3.2 Schools are asked to register the expected number of students w ho w ill participate in the ‘Fit to Drive’ w orkshop (all Year 11 students). This number is then rounded up to the nearest 20 (as a facilitator is needed for each group of 20 students). Each school receives $6.25 for each registered student. $420 is paid to each Secondary school as a contribution to the role of the Logistics Coordinator for the ‘Fit to Drive’ w orkshop. Special Development Schools do not require logistic coordination because they conduct a different program.

6.3.3 The total number of students expected to participate in road safety programs funded through the Hume Road Safety Grants 2009 is 2,400.

6.4 Presentation Ceremony 6.4.1 Council w ill formally aw ard the Hume Road Safety Grants to local secondary

schools and special development schools at a ceremony scheduled for 29 April 2009 in the Hume Global Learning Centre.

6.4.2 Presentations w ill be made to schools and to part icipating emergency services personnel w ho have embraced this program to raise aw areness at a local level about road safety.

7. CONCLUSION:

The Hume Road Safety Grants program is an effective way to incorporate road safety messages, w hich target young and learning drivers, into a school based setting and into a school’s curriculum. The continuation of this program w ill enable young people in Hume to be better prepared for driving.

06 APRIL 2009 REPORTS – ARTS, LEISURE AND CULTURE ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF COUNCIL


COUNCIL PLAN THEME – ARTS, LEISURE AND CULTURE REPORT NO:

AL43

REPORT TITLE:

Review of the Hume Arts Advisory Team (HAART)

SOURCE:

Anne Kershaw ,

DIVISION:

City Communit ies

FILE NO:

HCC06/540

POLICY:

Council Plan


Stronger Communit ies


This report confirms the Councillor to be appointed to the Hume Arts Advisory Team (HAART) and reviews the membership of this Advisory Committee. This review of HAART is particularly important given the strategic projects currently being undertaken by Council, particular ly the development of a new Arts and Cultural Strategy and the Performing Arts and Cultural Centre Feasibility Study. A number of new positions are proposed for HAART in order to strengthen its capacity to provide strategic arts and cultural advice to Council and provide netw orking and development opportunities for members.

2. RECOMMENDATION:

That Council: 2.1 endorses the attached revised Terms of Reference for the Hume Arts Advisory

Team (HAART);

2.2 appoints Cr Ros Spence, Portfolio Councillor for City Communities, to the Hume Arts Advisory Team (HAART), w ith Cr Helen Patsikatheodorou, the Councillor Assisting the City Communities Portfolio Councillor, to act as Deputy; and

2.3 notes that a further report w ill be prepared with nominations for the newly created positions on HAART: 2.3.1 Indigenous Art Representative 2.3.2 School Representative 2.3.3 Neighbourhood House Representative 2.3.4 Disability and Deaf Arts Representative 2.3.5 Co-opted staff representatives from Youth Services; Learning

Communities; Metro Access; and Festivals and Events.

06 APRIL 2009 REPORTS – ARTS, LEISURE AND CULTURE ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF COUNCIL REPORT NO: AL43 (cont.)


2.4 notes that a mechanism for appointing a Youth Art representative w ill be developed following adoption of the new Youth Services Strategy.


Council’s recurrent budget includes the provision of Off icer Support for the Hume Arts Advisory Team (HAART).


The provision of cultural services is a function of Council specif ied in the Local Government Act 1989.


Previously appointed Community Member posit ions on HAART w ere f illed through an Expression of Interest process advertised in the local papers and the arts section of the Saturday Age. Expression of Interest forms w ere also mailed to all members of the Hume Arts Register. New ly created positions are to be f illed through nominations from peak organisations, netw orks and advisory forums (including Gunung-Willam-Balluck Learning Centre, school principals and the Hume Disability Action Team). HAART acts as an advisor to Council on arts and cultural issues. Its community consultation and engagement role is particularly important as Council develops a new Arts Strategy and undertakes a feasibility study into the need for regional performing arts and cultural facilities in Hume City.

6. DISCUSSION:

6.1 Background

6.1.1 In September 2006 Council endorsed the establishment of a Hume Arts Advisory Team (HAART) comprising (Council Report AL8): (a) Chairperson and/or Patron (b) Arts and Culture Portfolio Councillor (c) Seven (7) Community Members (d) Manager Social Development/ Director City Communit ies (e) Arts & Cultural Planner.



6.1.2 The Terms of Reference endorsed for HAART identif ied the follow ing role for this Advisory Committee: (a) Provide strategic direction and advice to Council in relation to the

development of arts and cultural policy, programs, facilities and services; (b) Support Council in the development and implementation of arts events

and festivals; (c) Advocate to other levels of Government, business and philanthropic

organisations for arts and cultural initiat ives in Hume City; (d) Encourage netw orking of local arts and cultural organisations and artists;

and (e) Contribute to the development of a thriving arts and cultural industry

within Hume City.

6.1.3 Selection criteria w ere established for the appointment of Community Members, w ith the aim of ensuring a broad range of art forms and cultural practices were represented on HAART. Criteria for membership w ere also designed to ensure HAART reflected the cultural and geographic diversity of Hume City.

6.1.4 In December 2006 Council appointed the inaugural Chair and f ive (5)

Community Members to the HAART (Council Report AL12). These positions (each for a three year term) w ere f illed by: (a) Peter Sheldrake (Chair)

(b) David Osborne (Community Member)

(c) Tony Rains (Community Member) (d) Aslam Akram (Community Member)

(e) Margaret Miles (Community Member)

(f) Mary Herring (Community Member)

6.1.5 At the same Council Meeting, Council determined to f ill the remaining tw o Community Member posit ions by inviting nominations from: (a) Gunung-Willam-Balluck Learning Centre for an Indigenous Art

representative; and (b) Hume Youth Advisory Committee for a Youth Art representative.

6.1.6 The f irst meeting of HAART w as held in January 2007. The Advisory

Committee met regularly through 2007, developing a schedule of discussion topics and receiving presentations from arts and cultural program managers from across Hume City and Melbourne. HAART w as less active during 2008, due to the absence of staff in the Arts & Cultural Planner role.



6.2 Appointment of Councillor representative to HAART

6.2.1 Council’s Portfolio Councillor structure w as reviewed follow ing the November

2009 Council elections. It is proposed that the Portfolio Councillor for City Communit ies be allocated the Councillor position on HAART, as arts and culture falls w ithin the City Communit ies Directorate. The Councillor Assisting the City Communities Portfolio Councillor, w ould therefore act as the Deputy Councillor on HAART.

6.3 Review of HAART Membership

6.3.1 Council’s current arts and cultural priorities emphasise the value of HAART

and its advisory role to Council. The development of a new Arts Strategy and the Performing Arts and Cultural Centre Feasibility Study are major initiat ives that require input from an Advisory Committee such as HAART to ensure community consultation and engagement.

6.3.2 It is proposed that Council f ill the vacant Indigenous Arts position on HAART

by inviting the Gunung-Willam-Balluck Learning Centre to nominate a representative.

6.3.3 Council is currently review ing its youth participation programs as part of development of a new Youth Services Strategy. It is proposed that the mechanism for appointing a Youth Art representative to HAART be considered once the new Youth Services Strategy has been adopted.

6.3.4 The position of HAART Patron, included in the original Terms of Reference, has been retained. How ever it is not proposed to consider appointments to this position in the short-term. The posit ion of HAART Patron w ill be considered once the new Arts and Cultural Strategy has been adopted and Council is seeking to profile the w ork undertaken to implement the Strategy.

6.3.5 A review of HAART membership, based on its previous activities and the projects currently being undertaken by Council, suggests its role w ould be strengthened through the creation of a number of new positions. To broaden the areas of expertise available through HAART and add to the netw orking and advisory capacity of this Committee, it is proposed that three new positions be created: (a) School representative (w ith secondary schools as a priority) (b) Neighbourhood house representative (c) Disability and Deaf Arts Representative

6.3.6 To f ill these positions it is proposed that Council invite nominations from:

(a) School Principals, (b) Hume Neighbourhood House Netw ork, and (c) Hume Disability Action Team (currently being established).



6.3.7 To ensure that arts and cultural opportunities are integrated across Council, it is proposed that representatives from each of the follow ing w ork areas be co-opted onto HAART as required: (a) Youth Services (b) Learning Communities (c) Metro Access (d) Festivals and Events

6.3.8 These addit ional positions and co-opted members w ould increase HAART

membership to eighteen (18), comprising eleven Community Members and up to seven Council representatives (depending on the number of required co-opted members). This increase in membership is designed to improve the netw orking opportunities provided by HAART and broaden its areas of expertise.

6.3.9 Given the lack of meetings of HAART during 2008, it is proposed that the term of off ice for existing members be extended, and that both new and continuing Community Members occupy their positions until December 2011. This time period allow s HAART to have input into the development of a new Arts Strategy (due for Council endorsement in June 2009) and support the implementation of this Strategy for its f irst two years. Existing members of HAART have confirmed their interest in continuing their involvement on this advisory committee.

7. CONCLUSION:

The Hume Arts Advisory Team (HAART) performs an important arts and cultural advisory role for Council. Current Council initiat ives, particularly the development of a new Arts Strategy and Performing Arts and Cultural Centre Feasibility Study, give particular emphasis to the importance of HAART. The creation of new positions on HAART, and f illing existing vacancies on the Committee, will strengthen its capacity to provide strategic direction and advice to Council and ensure its contribution to a thriving arts and cultural industry w ithin Hume City.

06 APRIL 2009 REPORTS – ENVIRONMENT ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF COUNCIL


COUNCIL PLAN THEME – ENVIRONMENT REPORT NO:

EN38

REPORT TITLE:

Support 155 Business Program

SOURCE:

Rebekah Ritchie, Environment Officer

DIVISION:

City Sustainability

FILE NO:

HCC08/122

POLICY:

Local Water Action Plan


An Environmentally Sustainable City


1.1 In December 2008, the Victorian Government launched the Support 155 Business

Program, w ith the aim of encouraging all non-residential customers, including local government, to save w ater.

1.2 The campaign is aimed at sites using less than ten million litres of potable (drinking)

water per year. For Hume, these sites w ill predominantly be childcare centres, sporting pavilions and administrative buildings.

1.3 No targets are set under Support 155; rather it is an education based campaign, aimed

at employees in a w orkplace. Upon registration w ith the program, Hume City Council will be sent resource kits containing a range of educational mater ials.

1.4 Once registered, Council w ill be able to nominate facilities from each of the w ater

authorities regions (See Map 1 for the regions managed by Western Water, City West Water and Yarra Valley Water) to receive free w ater audits. The w ater authorities w ill assist w ith the implementation of the recommended changes.

Map 1 Water Authority Management Areas

06 APRIL 2009 REPORTS - ENVIRONM ENT ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF COUNCIL REPORT NO: EN38 (cont.)


2. RECOMMENDATION:

That Council: 2.1 registers all Council facilities that are not covered by the WaterMaps Program

with the Support 155 Business Program.

2.2 participates in the Support 155 Business Program.


3.1 Support 155 Business Program is a free support and netw orking service.

3.2 There is no f inancial obligation associated w ith registration or participation in the

program.

4. DISCUSSION:

4.1 BACKGROUND

4.1.1 At the Council meeting on 12 February 2007, Council committed to the Local

Water Action Plan (HCC05/793). The Local Water Action Plan identif ies actions that ensure the sustainable management of Hume’s w ater resources.

4.1.2 Council’s use of potable w ater has decreased from 443 mega litres in 2005/06

to 161 mega litres in 2007/08. This decrease has primarily been achieved through a reduction in irrigation.

4.1.3 To date Council has only undertaken limited retrofits to select Council

facilities. Support 155 Business Program w ill direct Council’s w ater saving focus to buildings, and w ill assist Council to achieve the objectives of the Local Water Action Plan.

4.2 SUPPORT 155 BUSINESS PROGRAM 4.2.1 Council has 211 sites that are eligible for the Support 155 Business Program.

To be eligible a site must be using under ten mega litres of water annually (Council’s largest w ater users, the Broadmeadow s Leisure Centre and Sunbury Leisure Centre, are covered by the WaterMaps Program).

4.2.2 Support 155 Business Program w ill provide Council w ith obligation free audits

to sites identif ied by Council as large w ater users with the potential for a reduction in use of potable w ater.

4.2.3 Follow ing on from these audits, the water authorities w ill assist Council w ith achieving the w ater reductions identif ied in the audits. This may include the provision of infrastructure at a cost to the w ater authorities.



4.2.4 The w ater authorities have stated that the Victorian Government w ill low er the trigger level for the WaterMaps Program if Support 155 Business Program is ineffective.

5. CONCLUSION:

Hume City Council has made substantial w ater savings over recent years. Council w ill continue to lead by example in the area of water conservation, including active participation in the Support 155 Business Program.

06 APRIL 2009 REPORTS – ENVIRONMENT ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF COUNCIL


REPORT NO:

EN39

REPORT TITLE:

Pathw ays to Sustainability; an Environmental Framew ork

SOURCE:

Karen Wilson, Sustainability Coordinator

DIVISION:

City Sustainability

FILE NO:

HCC08/171

POLICY:

Establishing Policy


An Environmentally Sustainable City


This report recommends that Council adopt Pathways to Sustainability; an environmental framew ork for Council (Appendix 1). The Framew ork establishes a medium to long term direction for Council to achieve its sustainability goals by follow ing f ive strategic pathw ays. A four-year Action Plan (Appendix 2) is also proposed for adoption to begin implementation of the Framew ork.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS:

That Council: 2.1 adopts Pathways to Sustainability as its strategic environmental framework.

2.2 adopts the four-year Action Plan (2009-2013).

2.3 receives a further report on the reviewed title, Terms of Reference and

membership of the Hume Environmental Sustainability Taskforce.


3.1 The four-year Action Plan (Appendix 2) provides a set of actions to be implemented by

2013. Many of the actions require consideration of the sustainability in decision-making that have little or no f inancial implications. Other actions w ill require either a different use of existing resources and in some cases additional resources as outlined. As specif ic programs are developed in keeping w ith the Action Plan, funding requirements will be incorporated into the budgetary process, including New Init iatives. The employment of an Environmental Education Officer is recommended for 2009/10 and has been outlined in a New Initiative.




4.1 Council must comply w ith and administer a suite of environmental legislation and

policy; implementation of the Framew ork w ill enable Council to meet its obligations and also establish policy to achieve the objectives.


5.1 There w as extensive community consultation in the preparation of the Framew ork,

including community forums, surveys (random and households receiving Council’s Environment newsletter, EcoTracks) and promotion in the local media and in Hume Pride.

6. DISCUSSION:

6.1 Background

6.1.1 Council adopted an Environmental Sustainability Framew ork in October 2002, which has underpinned the direction of a range of Council strategies and programs. The Hume Environmental Sustainability Taskforce (the Taskforce) was established to guide the implementation and review of the Framew ork and has been operating since this time.

6.1.2 The need for an updated Framew ork to guide Council’s decision-making w ith

regard to environmental directions and integration across the organisation w as identif ied through the Taskforce and implementation of the Council Plan.

6.2 Process for development

6.2.1 Council engaged Russell Fisher, Director Sustainability-in-Mind to assist w ith the development of the Framew ork. Russell w orked collaboratively w ith staff from the Sustainable Environment Department to prepare and implement a project plan. An outline of the Development of the Framew ork is provided in Appendix 3.

6.2.2 Key to the development of the plan has been extensive consultation. This has

included: (a) Initial and follow -up interviews w ith Directors and Management Teams to

discuss issues of sustainability and integration w ithin Council’s operations

(b) A staff forum specif ic to sustainability (c) Presentations at Lunchbox sessions held at Maffra Street Depot, GLC

and Sunbury (d) Community forums at Broadmeadows, Sunbury and Craigieburn (e) Community survey – 1000 randomly selected households and all

recipients of EcoTracks (f) Notices in Page 4 of local new spapers (g) Discussion at tw o Taskforce meetings



(h) Steering Group (until caretaker period) consisting of former Mayor and Environment Portfolio Councillor, CEO, Director City Sustainability, Manager Sustainable Environment, Manager Strategic Planning, Manager Marketing and Communications and Sustainability Coordinator.

6.3 Consultation outcomes

6.3.1 The draft Framew ork (refer appendix 1) summarises issues and directions identif ied through the community and staff consultation process.

6.3.2 The key directions identif ied by the community w ere:

(a) Educate community on basic environmental issues – provide

engagement, opportunities for leadership roles, practical information to become more sustainable at a household level

(b) Explore different ways to provide better quality practical environmental information

(c) Provide Council f inancial incentives for households or links to other schemes

(d) More activities and programs that link people to the natural environment and connect to each other, including links w ith indigenous and understandings and other cultural understandings

(e) Provide stronger leadership from Council and community through partnerships

(f) Use State of the Environment reporting to monitor, measure footprint more effectively and use this to guide future directions, focus on broader scale not just Council activit ies

(g) Greater Council advocacy for utility costs, w orking w ith community and State governments

(h) Support measures to grow food locally and sell local produce

(i) New housing to meet higher environmental and design standards

(j) Greater focus on Integrated Sustainable Transport Planning in new and existing areas: focus on w alkability, cycling and public transport.

6.3.3 The key issues and directions identif ied by staff are summarised: (a) Staff support stronger action and greater leadership by Council

(b) Key directions are to achieve greater integration of environmental

sustainability across all Council planning, Capital Works, service delivery and decision-making and to help staff become better informed about the environmental challenges and solutions



(c) To support these changes, greater emphasis is required on joint planning and service delivery, integration of environmental performance and reporting measures across Council and the development of skills, tools and systems to support staff work.

6.4 Draft Strategic Framew ork - Pathways to Sustainability (refer Appendix 1)

6.4.1 Vision

(a) The proposed vision builds on Council’s vision for Hume: -

Hume’s vision is a prosperous, sustainable and vibrant City: renowned for social justice, lifelong learning and community inclusion. (b) and proposes to add to this vision: - In keeping with our overall vision, we aim for Hume City to be Victoria’s leading sustainable City. (c) Further detail is outlined in the draft Framew ork (refer Appendix 1).

6.4.2 Pathw ays

Taking into account key drivers pertaining to sustainability and consideration of the consultation outcomes, the Framew ork proposes f ive Pathw ays to achieve the vision outlined in 6.3.1. (a) Create sustainable places

This pathw ay identif ies that opportunity to provide practical demonstrations of sustainable places w ithin Hume intrinsically linked to the natural environment w here there is a high quality of life, communit ies are diverse and inclusive and ‘green’ jobs are created. The Implementation Plan w ill identify a range of locations, at different scales and uses, across the City that w ill be the focus of this pathway.

(b) Create low footprint communit ies

Climate change, w ater scarcity and resource use influence the long-term sustainability of the Hume community and can be measured in terms of an ecological footprint. Creating a community w ith a low er footprint w ill be crucial to creating sustainable communities into the future and Council can play a key role in supporting the community in this transition, especially in leading the community through the international response to climate change.

(c) Support sustainability learning and action Hume has a strong commitment and strategy for lifelong learning and expanding this to incorporate sustainability learning and enable action is a key pathw ay.



(d) Build Council sustainability leadership Hume City Council has a reputation for leadership in the area of sustainability and environment. Developing this leadership role through partnerships and further broadening the incorporation of sustainability across the w hole of Council is fundamental to this pathw ay.

(e) Provide strong environmental stew ardship Council manages and influences many natural environmental assets and uses a range of resources. Ensuring stew ardship of Hume’s natural assets and improving environmental performance as Council delivers a wide range of services to the community is the f if th pathw ay.

6.4.3 Principles The draft Framew ork outlines key responsibilities across the organisation and a specif ic set of principles to underpin each of the f ive pathw ays.

6.4.4 Indicators

Indicators have been developed to support evaluation of the Framew ork over the medium- long term and w ill be reported to Council annually in conjunction with the current State of the Environment reporting framew ork.

6.5 Four-year Action Plan

6.5.1 A draft of the f irst four-year Action Plan (Appendix 2) has been prepared in keeping w ith the objectives of the Framew ork. The Action Plan sets out specif ic programs and policy development, including responsibilities, timeframes and resources. It outlines the use of a range of mechanisms to achieve the objectives – education, regulation, systems, policy, advocacy – these are all fundamental to the successful implementation of the Framew ork.

6.6 Monitoring and Evaluation

It is proposed that an annual Sustainability Report on Council’s progress be prepared to inform Council and the community. Council currently prepares an annual State of the Environment Report w hich will be integrated w ith the Sustainability Report.

6.7 Hume Environmental Sustainability Taskforce It is proposed that the Hume Environmental Sustainability Taskforce be retained, but with a more strategic focus; namely the oversight of the implementation of the Framew ork. It is proposed that the title, Terms of Reference and membership of the Taskforce be considered in a further report.



7. CONCLUSION:

Pathways to Sustainability and the accompanying Action Plan are key documents for Hume City Council and the Hume community to move tow ards a more sustainable City, identif ied in the Hume City Plan as a key goal. The Framew ork sets out a series of f ive pathways for Council over the medium term: the creation of more sustainable places from w hich Council and community can learn; support for sustainability learning and action, support for all sectors of the community to reduce the environmental impact of their activities, leadership from Council on a range of sustainability issues and f inally Council providing a high standard of stew ardship across Hume City. Moving along these pathw ays will ensure that Hume City progresses tow ards a more sustainable future.

06 APRIL 2009 REPORTS - COUNCIL ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF COUNCIL


COUNCIL PLAN THEME – COUNCIL REPORT NO:

CN486

REPORT TITLE:

Carriagew ay Easement Proposal for Emu Bottom Homestead, Sunbury

SOURCE:

Hayley Drummond, City Valuer

DIVISION:

City Governance and Information

FILE NO:

202964

POLICY:

-


A council engaging w ith and advocating on behalf of its community


Follow ing consideration of submissions, this report provides a recommendation regarding the proposal to grant a carriagew ay easement over the Council reserve at Homestead Way, Sunbury.

2. RECOMMENDATION:

That Council, having considered the written and verbal submissions received, resolves to grant a carriageway easement in favour of Emu Bottom Holdings Pty Ltd over the Council reserve described in Certificate of Title Volume 9469 Folio 832.


3.1 Council has obtained a current market valuation that has assessed the amount of

compensation payable to Council at $1,000 plus GST.

3.2 Any costs associated w ith the proposal, such as survey and legal fees, shall be payable by the applicants.


4.1 The process of granting the carriagew ay easement to the applicant requires Council to comply w ith sections 189 and 223 of the Act. This is because Council is providing an interest in land and therefore selling land w ithin the meaning of Section 189 of the Act.

06 APRIL 2009 REPORTS - COUNCIL ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF COUNCIL REPORT NO: CN486 (cont.)


4.2 This section of the Act provides that, before selling land, Council must ensure that: 4.2.1 a public notice of its intention to do so is given at least four weeks prior to the

selling; and

4.2.2 it obtains a current valuation of the land.

4.3 Pursuant to Section 223 of the Act: 4.3.1 a person has a right to make a submission in respect of such notice which

must be considered by Council in deciding w hether or not to proceed with the sale.

4.4 In accordance w ith these requirements, Council has obtained a current market valuation and published a public notice in the Age on 26 February 2009.


5.1 The community consultation has comprised public notices in the Age new spaper and

the Sunbury Leader.

5.2 Additionally, all the landholders w ithin the subdivision that created Homestead Way and Devon Park Close (LP 138012) w ere sent a letter advising them of the proposal and providing a copy of the public notice.

5.3 31 w ritten submissions w ere received, including 25 that w ere the same content but signed individually. All w ere against the proposal except Submission 4 w hich was made by the applicant’s solicitor.

5.4 The w ritten submissions (included in Attachment 1 and 2) were received from the follow ing: 5.4.1 Submission 1: Friends of Emu Bottom Wetlands Reserve. 5.4.2 Submission 2: Law rence and Kim Dittmer, 85 Homestead Way, Sunbury. 5.4.3 Submission 3: Sunbury Conservation Society Inc. 5.4.4 Submission 4: Rigby Cooke Lawyers, representing the applicant, Emu Bottom

Holdings Pty Ltd. 5.4.5 Submission 5: Diakou Faigen Law yers, representing Trevor Dance. 5.4.6 Submission 6: Emu Bottom Residents. 5.4.7 Submission 7: Trevor Dance, 45 Homestead Way, Sunbury.

5.5 Submission 6 is the same content as Submission 2 and comprises 25 residents of Emu

Bottom w ho individually signed the same submission. They are:

Name Address John Bennett 10 Homestead Way Hess N 10 Rigby Place Gauntlett E 115 Homestead Way Tanya Morgan 15 Devon Park Close G J & R E Trebley 20 Devon Park Close Kirsty Shaw 20 Homestead Way



Name Address N O’Shanassy 25 Devon Park Close Wicks F L 30 Homestead Way Tony Quick 330 Racecourse Road Watkins J R 340 Racecourse Road Rogow ski J R 35 Devon Park Close Phillips P G 35 Homestead Way Crombie A J 350 Racecourse Road Ryan M J 360 Racecourse Road Aquilina A 390 Racecourse Road Jodi Redman 40 Devon Park Close Robert Costello 40 Homestead Way G Hepburn 415 Racecourse Road Bekker A 445 Racecourse Road Lorna & Laurie Parker 50 Devon Park Close Mann C L 60 Homestead Way Marsh N 65 Homestead Way Barry & Marietta Hollands 70 Homestead Way Brew er A J 75 Homestead Way Campbell J F 95 Homestead Way

5.6 Additionally, at the meeting of the Committee of the Whole of Council held at 7pm at

the Sunbury Council Chamber, three people spoke in support of their submissions. These w ere:

5.6.1 Trevor Dance, 45 Homestead Way, Sunbury 5.6.2 John Bennett, 10 Homestead Way, Sunbury 5.6.3 Tom Callander from Rigby Cook Law yers. He spoke in support of the

proposal, acting on behalf of the ow ners of Emu Bottom Holdings Pty Ltd.

5.7 The Minutes of this Meeting are contained in Attachment 3.

6. DISCUSSION:

6.1 The follow ing is a summary of the areas of concern raised by submitters:

6.1.1 Pedestrian access w ill be restricted to the Emu Bottom Wetlands Reserve as

a result of this proposal. Off icer’s response: This proposal w ill not restrict access to the Wetlands Reserve.

6.1.2 Council approved the planning permit P11179 that the new entrance to Emu Bottom Homestead and the other new lots were to be off Racecourse Road. Therefore there is no need for Council to hand over a public reserve to a private company.



Council is not handing over a public reserve to a private company, it is allow ing access via a carriagew ay easement. The condit ions of planning permit P11179 allow s access from Racecourse Road to Emu Bottom Homestead.

6.1.3 The fee of $1,000 does not represent a fair market value w hen Emu Bottom

stand to gain a profit of w ell over an estimated $400,000 by avoiding conditions 2A and 5 of the permit issued. Off icer’s response: The valuation has been assessed based on the impact of the proposal on the council reserve. It w as determined that the proposal would have minimal valuation effect because there is already an existing carriagew ay easement w ithin the reserve. The granting of the carriagew ay easement does not mean that conditions 2A and 5 of the planning permit P11179 do not have to be applied.

6.1.4 Residents w ould be w illing to return their carriagew ay easement rights if it meant that the land reverted back to a reserve. Off icer’s response: Noted, how ever it is beyond the scope of the current proposal. Additionally, it w ould require all the residents within LP 138012 to agree to this process.

6.1.5 The temporary easement is only six metres w ide and is actually going to be

ten metres w ide under the proposal. Off icer’s response: There is no temporary easement. A six metre w ide easement has been granted to all the ow ners of the land w ithin LP 138012. How ever, this does not include the Title to the Emu Bottom Homestead and hence their application. The ten metres includes the open space either side of the road carriagew ay.

6.1.6 The change in the w idth of the carriageway easement from 6 metres to 10

metres w ill be a change in the use of the land. The off icer is incorrect in stating that the proposal w ill ‘not change the current use of the land.’ Council should have advertised the public notice under Section 192 of the Act because it is a change of use. Off icer’s response: This is not a new use for the site. The Homestead has been using the reserve as a driveway entrance for many years. Instead the proposal is to formalise their current use of the land.

6.1.7 We are opposed to any new lots having access rights. Off icer’s response: The new lots relate to planning permit P11179 that has conditions that the access w ill come from Racecourse Road.

6.1.8 When residents purchased the land at the t ime of the subdivision, the entrance w as a temporary one and so the land should go back to being a reserve.



Off icer’s response: Having reviewed the subdivision f ile and the previous report on this matter dated December 2004 (PE 727), w e have not found any reference to Emu Bottom Homestead having access over the reserve on a temporary arrangement.

6.1.9 The extension of the carriagew ay easement w ill ensure that a 100 year old

tree w ill need to be removed. Off icer’s response: This tree is subject to the native vegetation protection controls in the planning scheme. No protected trees w ill be removed as part of this proposal.

6.1.10 The carriagew ay has created dust and noise problems for residents. If the proposal goes ahead w ill there be a requirement for the drivew ay to be sealed with bitumen in an appropriate colour. Off icer’s response: If the proposal is successful then there w ill be a requirement for the ow ners of Emu Bottom Homestead to maintain the drivew ay, including any appropriate dust or noise suppressant measures.

6.1.11 This proposal w ill result in headlights shining into the w indows of dwellings located opposite the drivew ay. Off icer’s response: The Homestead has been using the drivew ay as its entrance for many years and therefore residents w ould have been aw are of this w hen they purchased the property.

6.1.12 The reference to other related companies in the public notice should be removed and it should have stated only Emu Bottom Holdings Pty Ltd. Off icer’s response: Emu Bottom Holdings Ltd changed from an unlisted public company in March 2004. The reference to other related entit ies is to cover the event of a future change in the legal structure. For these purposes, Council is dealing w ith Emu Bottom Holdings Pty Ltd.

6.1.13 Any agreement should be a 173 Agreement and registered on Title so it cannot be changed. Off icer’s response: Noted and Council w ill use a 173 Agreement if required.

6.1.14 Council should release the valuation report to the public.

Off icer’s response: The valuation report w as for the purpose of assessing the consideration payable to Council for the granting of easement rights over a portion of a Council Reserve and has been prepared by a Certif ied Practising Valuer. The valuation report is for the sole use of Council and consequently it shall not be released for external circulation.

6.1.15 We do not believe that the sale and change of the use of the land as proposed are in the best interests of the local community in accordance w ith section 3E(1) (a) of the Act. Off icer’s response: Section 3E (1) (a) states that the functions of a Council include advocating and promoting proposals w hich are in the best interests of



the local community. This proposal for a carriagew ay easement w ill formalise a current use of the land as a driveway access point for Emu Bottom Homestead. Access from Homestead Way is the preferred option for Council from a traff ic management perspective.

6.2 Additionally, Rigby Cooke Lawyers, acting on behalf of the applicant – Emu Bottom

Holdings Pty Ltd provided the follow ing points: (a) The 10 metre w idth includes the granitic sand drivew ay surface, its shoulders and

grassed swales and suff icient room for maintenance. It also allows for the w hole set off from the w estern boundary fence to be undivided, for ease of overall maintenance.

(b) Although an objecting submitter is understood to have suggested the width be

limited to six metres that w ould be an inadequate w idth for the related drainage and vegetation components and maintenance.

(c) An objecting submitter has suggested that there are some trees w ithin the ten

metre w idth. The main trees generally lie outside the ten metre w idth (although some overhang it). There is one substantial tree just w ithin the w idth, by the entry. These trees have been protected by our client for decades, and are subject to the native vegetation protection controls in the planning scheme. They are not at risk from the continued use of the carriagew ay.

(d) Our client w ill continue to have the obligation to maintain the drivew ay and to

carry appropriate public liability insurance. 6.3 Follow ing consideration of these submissions, it is proposed to proceed w ith granting a

carriagew ay easement to Emu Bottom Holdings Pty Ltd. This w ill be on the basis that the ow ners meet the follow ing conditions: 1. Public liability insurance of $20 million dollars. 2. Responsibility for maintaining the drivew ay to Councils satisfaction. 3. Payment of $1000 consideration in accordance w ith a current market valuation.

6.4 There are tw o main reasons for this: 1) Emu Bottom Holdings Pty Ltd have been using this reserve as their entrance for many years. Consequently, this proposal is not changing an existing use but w ill provide formalisation of these access rights. 2) The alternative is for access to the Homestead to be from Racecourse Road. Council has safety concerns from a traff ic management perspective about large vehicles, such as buses, from the Homestead turning directly into Racecourse Road.

7. CONCLUSION:

Follow ing consideration of submissions, it is recommended to proceed to grant the carriagew ay easement to Emu Bottom Holdings Pty Ltd. This w ill formalise the existing access arrangements to the Emu bottom Homestead over a council reserve.



REPORT NO:

CN487

REPORT TITLE:

15 Muirhead Court, Greenvale- Variation of Restrictive Covenant on Title.

SOURCE:

Kamal Hasanoff, Tow n Planner

DIVISION:

City Sustainability

FILE NO:

P13066

POLICY:

Hume Planning Scheme


Visionary, Strategic and Accountable Leadership and Service Excellence.

Application No: P13066 Proposal: Variation of Restrictive Covenant Location: 15 Muirhead Court, Greenvale. Zoning: Residential 1 Zone Applicant: Frank Iannotti Date Received: 7 November 2008 1. SUMMARY OF REPORT:

Approval is sought for the variation of a Restrictive Covenant affecting 15 Muirhead Court, Greenvale to facilitate its development w ith a dual occupancy development and allow future subdivision of the land. The application w as advertised to all beneficiaries of the covenant and f ive objections have been received. As Council cannot be satisf ied that beneficiaries of the restriction will not suffer loss or material detriment in the event of the restriction being varied, Refusal of the application is recommended.

2. RECOMMENDATION:

That Council resolves to issue a Notice of Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit for the Variation of a Restrictive Covenant at 15 Muirhead Court (Lot 7 on PS 508506L), Greenvale, on the following grounds: 1. Council is not satisfied that variation of the restriction would not result in

financial loss, loss of amenity, loss arising from change to the character of the neighbourhood or any other material detriment, being suffered by any owner of land benefited by the restriction.



3. PLANNING CONTROLS:

3.1 The property is located w ithin a Residential 1 Zone.

3.2 Clause 52.02 of the Hume Planning Scheme stipulates that a planning permit is required before a person proceeds to vary or remove a restriction on a tit le.

3.3 Section 60 (2) of the Planning and Environment Act (1987) sets out the follow ing tests

when assessing applications to vary restrictions: “The responsible authority must not grant a permit which allows the removal or variation of a restriction…unless it is satisfied that the owner of any land benefited by the restriction…will be unlikely to suffer:

(a) financial loss; or (b) loss of amenity; or (c) loss arising from change to the character of the neighbourhood; or (d) any other material detriment-

as a consequence of the removal or variation of the restriction”.

4. REFERRALS:

No referrals w ere required.

5. ADV ERTISING:

The application w as advertised in a local new spaper on 11th February 2009, one notice board w as erected on the site and notices were sent out to all beneficiaries of the covenant. Five objections w ere received.

6. DISCUSSION:

6.1 Site and Surrounds

6.1.1 The subject property is situated at 15 Muirhead Court, Greenvale and is a vacant lot in a recent subdivision consisting of 8 allotments. All properties within the subdivision are either occupied by single dw ellings or are vacant. The property title is affected by a restrictive covenant (AD872410R), w hich was created on 13 September 2005 w ith no expiry date.

6.2 The Proposal

6.2.1 The proposal is to amend the Restrictive Covenant on the land title to enable

the ow ner to make application for more than one dw elling on the site. The Restrictive Covenant currently prohibits more than one dw elling on the property and any subsequent smaller lot subdivision. The applicant proposes to vary the covenant by removing the restriction on the land to having only one dw elling on a lot.



6.2.2 In addit ion, the applicant seeks to delete clauses 5 and 6 of the Covenant.

Clause 5 reads: “that the Transferees shall not subdivide or cause or permit to be subdivided the Lot hereby transferred pursuant to any Act of Parliament regulation or ordinance including but not limited to the Subdivision Act 1988”. Clause 6 reads: “that the Transferee shall not put or cause or permit the said Lot to be put to dual occupancy use”.

6.3 Assessment of Planning Issues.

6.3.1 The application to vary the Restrictive Covenant w as submitted w ith a separate planning application (P13065) for the development of tw o double storey dwellings. The applicant has submitted the application for the tw o double storey development in order that beneficiaries of the Restrictive Covenant could view what the dwellings w ould look like if a variation to the Covenant w ere approved.

6.3.2 The application to vary the Covenant must be dealt w ith f irst as consideration

of the second application for the dual occupancy would have been entirely inf luenced by the application to vary the Covenant. The applicant has how ever recently w ithdrawn the dual occupancy proposal.

6.3.3 Clause 60 (2) of the Planning and Environment Act (1987) directs Council not to allow a variation to a restriction unless it is satisf ied that the tests outlined in the Act can be met.

7. SUMMARY OF OBJECTIONS: 7.1 Five beneficiaries of the restrictive covenant have lodged objections. A summary of the

principal objection/s together w ith off icer response are provided below .

Residents bought into the subdivision knowing that a Restrictive Covenant on Title would protect them from the encroachment of multiple dwellings and would help to establish a low density streetscape/subdivision.

7.2 The variation of the Covenant w ould certainly remove any protection afforded residents via the Covenant from the development of this lot for more than one dw elling. The applicant, upon purchasing the subject property, knew of the existence of a Restrictive Covenant on Title and the consequent limitations it imposes.

7.3 Whilst this is not a planning ground of objection, it is certain that the applicant w ould have been aw are of the restriction w hen he purchased the land as the restrictive covenant appears on his title.



If the application to vary the restrictive covenant is successful, it would set a precedent for remaining, vacant blocks to follow suit.

7.4 It is possible that should this application be approved it could lead to further similar applications being made.

If the application to vary the Restrictive Covenant is successful with the consequent construction of multiple dwellings, such an outcome would have a detrimental impact on property prices.

7.5 The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal give little w eight to this ground of objection. Removing or varying the Restrictive Covenant on Title would no longer limit the site to building only one dwelling nor set a number on the maximum number of dwellings i.e. multiple dwellings could be built.

7.6 Given the size of lots w ithin the immediate area of the subject site are betw een 740 sqm to 983 sqm, it is possible that more than tw o dwellings could be sought if further application to vary Covenants w ere submitted. Removing or varying the Restrictive Covenant on Title would create the possibility of the subject site being further subdivided. Such an outcome would impact on the openness of the streetscape and the character of the neighbourhood as allotment patterns would change.

7.7 Further subdividing the site may impact on the openness of the streetscape. The character of the immediate area w ill also alter as a result of higher density of dw ellings being permitted. If the application to vary the Restrictive Covenant is successful with the resultant construction of multiple dwellings, would increase noise other than normal to that of a single dwelling.

7.8 Any increase in noise from an additional dw elling on a lot is unlikely to be signif icant.

If the application to vary the Restrictive Covenant is successful with the resultant construction of multiple dwellings, such an outcome would increase traffic within the court.

7.9 There w ould be an increase in traff ic, however as a dw elling generates some 10 vehicle movements per day this is not a major issue.

8. CONCLUSION:

Pursuant to Clause 60 (2) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, Council must determine w hether it is satisf ied that any Covenant beneficiary w ill be unlikely to suffer any loss or detriment of the type listed under this clause.

Whilst some of the grounds of objection are not strictly on planning grounds, they do indicate that those benefitting from the Covenant consider they w ill experience some material detriment. In assessing each ground of objection it is considered that the grounds are reasonable and have enough substance to w arrant a refusal of this application.



LEWISTON GROVE

DU

NFE

R MLI

NE

AV

EN

U E

LEWI ST ON GROVE

MIL

LPO

RT

RIS

EM

ILL

POR

T R

ISE

M ILLPORT RISE

KIRKWELL COURT

BA RRYMORE ROAD

MUIRHE

AD COURT

CASTL E AVENUE

DARVE LL CO

URT

MU I

RHE

AD

CO

UR

T ARKL EY DRIVE

107107107107107

9090909090

111111111111111

113113113113113

115115115115115

117117117117117

119119119119119

121121121121121

123123123123123

1616161616 12121212121414141414

1111111111

1313131313

1515151515

1717171717

1919191919

2121212121

1717171717

16161616161414141414

1515151515

1313131313

1111111111

22222

99999

77777

5555533333

44444

4242424242

33333

55555

77777

99999

22222

44444

1111111111

66666

1313131313

88888

1010101010

11111

1212121212

3232323232

88888

4444444444

1414141414101010101088888

66666 1313131313

1111111111

9999977777

55555

33333

2727272727

164164164164164

7373737373

7575757575

7777777777

66666

7979797979

8181818181

34343434343636363636

3838383838

22222

1111111111

00000

666667070707070

6868686868

333335555511111

22222

4444466666

888886262626262

60606060601212121212

5858585858

9292929292

9494949494

9696969696

9898989898

100100100100100

1111111111

99999

1010101010

8888888888

99999

1010101010

77777

88888

93939393938686868686

9191919191

8484848484

8989898989

8282828282

8787878787

85858585858080808080

7878787878

111113333355555

77777

7272727272

44444

565656565614141414145454545454

1919191919

1717171717

1515151515

Subject Site











REPORT NO:

CN488

REPORT TITLE:

45 Mundy Road, Sunbury - Use part of the existing building (approved for the development and use for a rural industry) as a restaurant w ith liquor license and a reduction in car parking.

SOURCE:

Shobhna Singh Kumar, Senior Tow n Planner

DIVISION:

City Sustainability

FILE NO:

P13080

POLICY:



Visionary, strategic and accountable leadership and service excellence

Application No: P13080

Proposal: Use part of the existing building (approved for the

development and use for a Rural Industry) as a Restaurant w ith liquor license and a reduction in car parking.

Location: 45 Mundy Road, Sunbury

Zoning: Green Wedge Zone

Applicant: S and L Pitruzzello

Date Received: 13 November 2008 1. SUMMARY OF REPORT:

An application has been received for the use of part of the existing building (approved for the development and use for a Rural Industry) as a Restaurant w ith liquor license and a reduction in car parking at 45 Mundy Road, Sunbury (Melw ay Ref Page 8 E2). The application w as advertised and two objections have been received. As the use proposed is technically prohibited under the existing zoning, Refusal is recommended.



2. RECOMMENDATION: A. That Council having considered all relevant policies and objections, resolve to

issue a Notice of Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit for the use of part of the existing building (approved for the development and use for a Rural Industry) as a Restaurant with liquor license and a reduction in car parking at 45 Mundy Road, Sunbury, on the following grounds:

1. The proposed use as a Restaurant is prohibited w ithin a Green Wedge Zone

given the subject land is less than the area specified in the schedule to the zone (i.e. 80 ha).

B. That Council seek meetings w ith relevant Ministers to consider alternative

planning mechanisms that would facilitate the use as sought.


3.1 Clause 65 sets out decision guidelines w hich the Responsible Authority must consider

when deciding on an application relating to the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and the Hume Planning Scheme.

3.2 Council is required to consider both the State and Local Planning Policy Framew ork,

including the Municipal Strategic Statement and any relevant particular provisions.

3.3 As it relates to the proposal, the follow ing aspects of the State Planning Policy Framew ork are relevant:

3.4 Clause 17.04-1 Tourism – sets out the follow ing objective:

“To encourage tourism development to maximise the employment and long term economic, social and cultural benefits of developing the State as a competitive domestic and international tourist destination.”

3.5 Clause 17.05-2 Agriculture – provides the follow ing under General Implementation:

“Planning should support effective agricultural production and processing infrastructure, Rural Industry and farm-related retailing and assist genuine farming enterprises to adjust flexibly to market changes.”

3.6 As it relates to the proposal, the follow ing aspects of the Local Planning Policy

Framew ork are relevant:

3.7 Clause 22.02 – Rural Land Character and Urban Design Local Policy sets out the follow ing objectives:

“To ensure that the siting and design of new development protects and enhances the character of the City’s rural areas. To minimise the visual impact of development on and near prominent hilltops, steep slopes and ridgelines.



To protect significant roadside views of hilltops, creek valleys and other important features of landscape interest, from development that is poorly sited, or of an inappropriate scale, height, bulk or appearance.”

3.8 The subject site is located w ithin a Green Wedge Zone and is not affected by any

overlays.

3.9 The purposes of Green Wedge Zone are as follows:

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

To recognise, protect and conserve green wedge land for its agricultural, environmental, historic, landscape, recreational and tourism opportunities, and mineral and stone resources.

To encourage use and development that is consistent with sustainable land management practices.

To encourage sustainable farming activities and provide opportunity for a variety of productive agricultural uses.

To protect, conserve and enhance the cultural heritage significance and the character of open rural and scenic non-urban landscapes.

To protect and enhance the biodiversity of the area.”

3.10 Pursuant to Clause 35.04 of the Hume Planning Scheme, the use as a Restaurant is a

Section 2 Use (permit required) provided it complies w ith the follow ing: “Must be used in conjunction w ith Agriculture, Outdoor recreation facility, Rural industry, or Winery.

The number of patrons present must not exceed the number specified in a schedule to the zone or 150 patrons, whichever is the lesser.

If used in conjunction with Function centre, the total number of patrons present at any time must not exceed the number specified in a schedule to the zone or 150 patrons, whichever is the lesser.

The lot on which the use is conducted must be at least the minimum subdivision area specified in a schedule to this zone. If no area is specified, the lot must be at least 40 hectares. (NB The land is located w ithin Area A in the schedule thus the minimum subdivision area is 80ha).”

3.11 In this particular instance, given that the subject land has an area of only 63.46 ha ( less

than the minimum subdivision area specif ied in a schedule to this zone (i.e. 80ha), the use as a Restaurant is technically prohibited.

3.12 The application seeks approval for a reduction in car parking requirements and the permission to consume liquor on-site (Licensed premises). As such Clauses 52.06 and 52.27 of the Hume Planning Scheme are also relevant to this proposal.



3.13 The purpose of Clause 52.27 of the Hume Planning Scheme (Licensed Premises) is as follow s: “To ensure that licensed premises are situated in appropriate locations. To ensure that the impact of the licensed premises on the amenity of the surrounding area is considered.”

3.14 One of the purposes of Clause 52.06 of the Hume Planning Scheme (Car parking) is as follows: “To ensure the provision of an appropriate number of car spaces having regard to the activities on the land and the nature of the locality.”

4. REFERRALS:

No referral w as triggered pursuant to Clause 66 of the Hume Planning Scheme or Section 55 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

5. ADV ERTISING:

The application w as advertised to neighbouring property ow ners and occupiers by mail and a sign w as erected on site. Tw o objections have been received.

6. DISCUSSION:

6.1 Site and Surrounds

6.1.1 The subject property has frontage to Mundy and Deverall Roads and is

adjacent to the eastern side of the Calder Freew ay/Mundy Road off ramp on the north w estern outskirts of Sunbury. The land has a total area of 63.46 hectares w ith approximately 47 hectares under cultivation w ith olive trees.

6.1.2 The property is has approval to be used for the processing of olives and

grapes, the sales of the products from site, together w ith a single storey dw elling at the rear (north) of the processing building, although the uses are yet to commence. The proposed processing building has a f loor area of approximately 3,400m², the area devoted to manufacturing sales has an area of 267m² square metres and the dw elling has a f loor area of approximately 570m².

6.1.3 The land is reasonably f lat w ith no signif icant indigenous vegetation.

6.1.4 The surrounding properties are generally of a smaller size and are generally

developed w ith detached brick and tile dw ellings and rural outbuildings. The property is mainly out of view from the Calder Freew ay but w ithin view of adjoining properties as the land is relatively f lat and treeless. The region is characterised by vineyards, wineries and other agricultural pursuits.



6.2 Proposal 6.2.1 The applicant seeks to use part of the existing building, approved for the

development and use for a Rural Industry (Olive and Grape processing) for a Restaurant w ith liquor license and a reduction in car parking. Specif ically, the proposal can be described as follows: (a) The Restaurant is proposed to be located w ithin the existing building

located to the front of the building, facing w est, over the ground and f irst f loors.

(b) A maximum of 150 patrons is proposed.

(c) Liquor license is proposed for the follow ing hours: Mon - Thurs: 10.00am - 11.00pm Fri, Sat and Sun: 10.00am – 12.00am ANZAC day and Good Friday: 12.00pm – 11.00pm

(d) An additional 47 carspaces is proposed to be provided for the proposed use, creating a shortfall of 43 carspaces for which dispensation is being sought.

(e) No buildings and w orks are proposed for this use other than the

construction of an additional enclosed w aste receptacle area to the east (rear) of the existing building. This part of the proposal did not part of the original application but w as proposed during the course of the application process, follow ing an objection pertaining to rubbish on the site by an adjoining property ow ner.

6.3 Assessment of Planning Issues

6.3.1 Pursuant to Clause 35.04 of the Hume Planning Scheme, a planning permit is

required for a Restaurant use provided the use is in conjunction w ith Agriculture, Outdoor recreation facility, Rural industry, or Winery. The number of patrons present must not exceed the number specif ied in a schedule to the zone (none specif ied) or 150 patrons, whichever is the lesser. The lot on which the use is conducted must be at least the minimum subdivision area specif ied in a schedule to this zone (80ha specif ied).

6.3.2 In this particular instance, given that the subject land has an area of only 63.46 ha (less than the minimum subdivision area specif ied in a schedule to this zone (i.e. 80ha)), the use as a Restaurant is therefore prohibited.



6.3.3 The applicant w as aware that the site did not meet the lot size requirements as required by Clause 35.04 of the Hume Planning Scheme when lodging the application w ith Council. The application w as lodged on the basis of two VCAT decisions Jinalec Park PL v Mornington Peninsula SC (2007) VCAT 1238 (10 July 2007) and Ten Minutes by Tractor v Mornington Peninsula SC (2007) (10 October 2007), w hereby the applicant w as of the view that if the use w as a use in “conjunction w ith” the main use on the land, the secondary use is not a considered a prohibited use, as minimum lot areas no longer applied.

6.3.4 Council w as not convinced that the tw o decisions above had any relevance to

this application for the follow ing reasons: (a) The fact that the use is carried out “in conjunction” w ith the Rural

Industry use on the land does not make it a secondary or ancillary use. The use of the site as a restaurant, given its scale, is considered to be a use, defined on its ow n rights.

(b) In Jinalec Park PL v Mornington Peninsula SC (2007) VCA T 1238 (10 July 2007), the lot size condition w as not one of the issues that was dealt w ith.

(c) In Ten Minutes by Tractor v Mornington Peninsula SC (2007) (10 October 2007), the permit application did not meet the lot size condition, and that the application w ould be prohibited, except for the fact that a transitional provision applied to the application, having been lodged w ith the responsible Council prior to 31 October 2006. That transitional provision has since been repealed.

6.3.5 It must be noted that A mendment VC43, w hich introduced the minimum lot

size test into the Planning Scheme, w as specif ically introduced to (amongst others matters): “Ensure the nature and scale of uses in green wedge areas do not conflict with green wedge policy by: (a) ensuring that the use of land for Function centre, Group

accommodation, Research and development centre, Research centre, Residential building, Residential hotel and Restaurant is of a scale appropriate to green wedge areas and that these uses have an essential association and a genuine, close and continuing functional relationship to the non-urban use of the land;”

6.3.6 It w as Council’s understanding that both tests, i.e. “scale appropriate to green

wedge areas and that these uses have an essential association” and “a genuine, close and continuing functional relationship to the non-urban use of the land” had to be satisf ied.

6.3.7 Legal advice w as sought on this matter w hich aff irmed off icers’ assessment of the application, that is, the use as a Restaurant on the land is a prohibited use, given the existing lot size does not meet the minimum lot size specif ied in the zone.



6.3.8 The proposed use of the site as a restaurant, used in conjunction w ith the use as a Rural Industry is considered w orthy of support given the directions of Clauses 17.04-1 (Tourism) and 17.05-2 (Agriculture) of the Hume Planning Scheme. If the planning scheme provisions had permitted the use, given its benefits to the municipality, it is likely this application w ould have received off icer support.

6.3.9 Upon obtaining approval for the development and use of the site as a Rural

Industry (olive and grape processing), the landow ner has invested a signif icant amount of capital into the development of his land. This has been in the form of the building itself, investment in the machinery to be used in the processing of olives and in the planting of olives. The exceptional architectural quality of the building on site is obvious evidence of this.

6.3.10 The approved use is considered to not only provide directs benefits such as employment to the residents of the municipality but assist the economy by attracting visitors (as an anchor) from w ithin and outside the municipality. Allow ing the site to operate as a Restaurant, Rural Industry and other uses such as a Function Centre w ould provide the synergies required to attract tourism into the municipality. The spin off effect of this will benefit other local business.

6.3.11 It is considered that the subject site has the potential to accommodate similar uses to allow the synergies to occur. Its strategic location, w ith its “doorstep on the Calder Freew ay” gives the site an added advantage.

6.3.12 Nevertheless, the zoning provisions do not permit the use based on the size of

the lot and thus Council is left w ith no other option but refuse this application. 7. SUMMARY OF OBJECTIONS:

7.1 A summary of objections and off icer response follow s:

The lot size is less than the area required for subdivision as required by Clause 35.04 of the Hume Planning Scheme.

7.2 This is a valid planning consideration and is the basis of refusal for this application.

The outdoor lighting approved under Planning Permit No. P10778 is not baffled as required by this permit.

7.3 The condition requiring the baff ling of the light is associated w ith the rural industry use

approved under Planning Permit No. P10778. The use is yet to commence. Nevertheless, Council’s Planning Enforcement Department has approached the applicant w ho has acted to mitigate this issue. Council’s Planning Enforcement Department w ill follow up on this to ensure that the lights are baff led to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, as required by the permit condition.

Rubbish that will be produced by the approved and proposed uses will not be sufficiently contained on site.



7.4 This matter w as discussed w ith the applicant during the course of this application. The applicant had offered to alleviate this concern, construct an additional enclosed w aste receptacle area to the east (rear) of the existing building. Given that this application is now recommended for refusal, Council is not able to pursue w ith these negotiations under this planning application.

Car parking and traffic issues.

7.5 The application seeks a reduction in car parking requirements. This w ould have

received off icer support, subject to the landow ner entering into a Section 173 Agreement (pursuant to the Planning and Environment Act 1987) w ith Council to provide additional car parking should there have been an increased demand in future, if permit w ere to issue. The traff ic generated by the proposed use as a Restaurant is considered manageable in the context of the existing accessway and road netw orks.

Noise from the Restaurant and hours of operation will affect the neighbouring properties.

7.6 The proposed liquor license hours are as follows:

Mon - Thurs: 10.00am - 11.00pm Fri, Sat and Sun: 10.00am – 12.00am ANZAC day and Good Friday: 12.00pm – 11.00pm

7.7 The above times are not considered excessive given that the building in w hich the use

is proposed is located on a site w ith an area of 63ha, some 310m from the nearest adjoining dw elling. Furthermore, if permit w ere to issue, a condition on the permit would have required that noise levels emanating from the premises not exceed those required under State Environment Protection Policy (Control of Music Noise from Public Premises), No N-2.

8. CONCLUSION:

The proposed use, although consistent w ith the directions of the State and Local Planning Policy Framew ork as contained at Clauses 17.04, 17.05 and 22.02 and the requirements of Clauses 52.06 and 52.27 of the Hume Planning Scheme, is prohibited under the requirements of Clause 35.04. While the existing planning provisions prohibit the proposed use, it is considered appropriate that Council, w ith the landow ner commence discussions with relevant Ministers to examine the need to review these restrictive planning controls. The introduction of appropriate tourist related uses on Green Wedge land should be supported, particularly in this instance w here the land only fails to meet an arbitrary minimum lot size requirement. Aside from this, the application w ould have been supported as a model for how appropriate agricultural and tourism related enterprises can support the protection and enhancement of the Green Wedge into the future.



ATTACHMENT 1



ATTACHMENT 2



ATTACHMENT 3

06 APRIL 2009 REPORTS – COUNCIL ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF COUNCIL REPORT NO: CN488 (cont.)


ATTACHMENT 4

06 APRIL 2009 REPORTS – COUNCIL ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF COUNCIL REPORT NO: CN488(cont.)


ATTACHMENT 5

06 APRIL 2009 REPORTS – COUNCIL ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF COUNCIL REPORT NO: CN488(cont.)


ATTACHMENT 6

06 APRIL 2009 REPORTS – COUNCIL ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF COUNCIL


REPORT NO:

CN489

REPORT TITLE:

Section 173 Agreement - 116 Raleigh Street, Westmeadows

SOURCE:

Gloria Osagiede, Tow n Planner,

FILE NO:

P12928


Visionary, strategic and accountable leadership and service excellence

Application No: P12928 Proposal: Section 173 Agreement Location: 116 Raleigh Street, Westmeadows Zoning: Residential 1 Zone 1. SUMMARY OF REPORT

The ow ners of 116 Raleigh Street, Westmeadows have submitted a Section 173 Agreement in accordance w ith Condit ion 10 of Planning Permit P12928. The Agreement is required to ensure that the development of the site is in accordance w ith the plans endorsed pursuant to Planning Permit P12215 issued by Council for an additional dw elling and alterations to an existing dw elling on the subject land. The Agreement also ensures that a Statement of Compliance for the subdivision of the site cannot be issued until a Dealing Number from the Tit les Office is provided to Council to indicate the registration of the agreement on each lot. It is recommended that the Agreement be signed and sealed

2. RECOMMENDATION:

That Council resolves to sign and seal the Section 173 Agreement submitted in accordance with Condition 10 of Planning Permit P12928.


Section 173 of the Planning and Environmental Act 1987

4. BACKGROUND: 4.1 On 20 May 2008, Council issued Planning Permit P12215 to allow the development of

an addit ional dw elling and alterations to the existing dw elling on the subject land.



4.2 On 23 September 2008, Council issued a further Planning Permit P12928 for a two lot subdivision on the subject site in accordance w ith the approved development plan.

5. DISCUSSION:

Condition 10 of Planning Permit P12928 requires that the ow ner of the land must enter into a Section 173 Agreement to require the development of the land in accordance w ith Planning Permit P12215. The ow ner of the land must pay all costs relating to the preparation, execution and registration of the Section 173 Agreement. The Statement of Compliance w ill not be issued until a Dealing Number from the Titles Office is provided to Council to ensure its registration on each lot authorised by this permit. The agreement has now been submitted to Council for signing and sealing.

6. CONCLUSION:

As the Agreement has been submitted in accordance w ith the planning permit requirement, it is recommended that it be signed and sealed



REPORT NO:

CN490

REPORT TITLE:

Section 173 Agreement - 23 Hepburn Street, Dallas

SOURCE:

Narelle Haber, Senior Tow n Planner

DIVISION:

City Sustainability

FILE NO:

P12735

POLICY:



Visionary, strategic and accountable leadership and service excellence.

Application No: P12735 Proposal: Section 173 Agreement Location: 23 Hepburn Street, Dallas Zoning: Residential 1 Zone Applicant: Ayse Yurtman Date Received: 2 March 2009 1. SUMMARY OF REPORT:

Council has recently approved Planning Permit P12735 for a tw o lot subdivision of a unit development site of the subject land. The applicant has submitted a Section 173 Agreement to facilitate the subdivision of the land w hich w ill ensure that the development accords with the approved Planning Permit for the site (P12400). The agreement provided has been review ed and is suitable for signing and sealing.

2. RECOMMENDATION:

That Council resolves to sign and seal the submitted Section 173 Agreement in accordance with Planning Permit P12735.


The applicant w ill pay all costs associated w ith the creation and registration of this Section 173 Agreement on the relevant t itles.

4. LEGISLATIVE POWERS: Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.



5. BACKGROUND Council approved Planning Permit P12735 for a tw o lot residential subdivision in accordance with the endorsed plans. This subdivision is consistent w ith Planning Permit P12400 w hich authorises the development of tw o two-storey dwellings w ith attached garages at 23 Hepburn Street, Dallas.

6. PROPOSAL Law yers for the applicant have submitted an Agreement under Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to allow a Statement of Compliance to be issued for the subdivision of land, while ensuring that the development accords with the approved development permit.

7. ASSESSMENT It is appropriate to use a Section 173 Agreement in this instance as it ensures that unless Council otherw ise agrees, the development of the land must only occur in accordance with Planning Permit P12400.

8. CONCLUSION As the submitted Section 173 Agreement w ill ensure that the development at 23 Hepburn Street, Dallas accords w ith the approved development permit (P12400), it is considered suitable for signing and sealing.



REPORT NO:

CN491

REPORT TITLE:

Section 173 Agreement - 460 Lancefield Road, Sunbury.

SOURCE:

Narelle Haber, Senior Tow n Planner

DIVISION:

City Sustainability

FILE NO:

P12220

POLICY:

Hume Planning Scheme.


Visionary, strategic and accountable leadership and service excellence.

Application No: P12220 Proposal: Section 173 Agreement. Location: 460 Lancefield Road, Sunbury. Zoning: Green Wedge Zone Applicant: James Vincent Chester Guest Date Received: 4 March 2009 1. SUMMARY OF REPORT:

Council has previously approved Planning Permit P12220 w hich relates to a boundary realignment at 460 Lancefield Road, Sunbury. The applicant has submitted a Section 173 Agreement in accordance w ith the requirements set out under condition 2 of the planning permit. The agreement provided has been review ed and is suitable for signing and sealing.

2. RECOMMENDATION: That Council resolves to sign and seal the submitted Section 173 Agreement in accordance with Planning Permit P12220.


The applicant w ill pay all costs associated w ith the creation and registration of this Section 173 Agreement on the relevant Certif icate of Tit le’s.

4. LEGISLATIVE POWERS: Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.



5. DISCUSSION 5.1 Council approved Planning Permit P12220 on 26 August 2008 w hich relates to

boundary realignment in accordance w ith Plan of Subdivision PS612213Y at 460 Lancefield Road, Sunbury. Condition 2 of Planning Permit P12220 requires that a Section 173 be submitted to Council.

5.2 The Agreement stipulates that:

“Prior to the commencement of the subdivision, the owner must enter into and execute an agreement (in a form satisfactory to the Responsible Authority) with the Responsible Authority pursuant to Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. The owner/operator under this permit must pay the reasonable costs of the preparation, (and) execution and registration of the section 173 agreement. This agreement must provide for:

a) No further subdivision of lots 1-4 (inclusive) as shown on PS612213Y. b) Lot 4 on proposed PS 612213Y (being the balance of the Closed Road on Title

Vol. 8581 Fol. 451) across Emu Creek and to the east of this subdivision be consolidated with Lot 3 (lands contained in Vol. 10642 and Fol. 514 LP 89588) as part of this application/subdivision.

It is further required that this agreement must be registered at the Office of Titles pursuant to Section 181 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987”.

6. CONCLUSION

As this Agreement is consistent with the requirements specif ied on Planning Permit P12220

(condition 2), the Agreement is suitable for signing and sealing.

Documents

ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF THE HUME CITY COUNCIL … · MONDAY, 06 APRIL 2009 7:00 PM CRAIGIEBURN FUNCTION ROOMS OOUURR OVVIISSIIONN:: Hume – A prosperous, sustainable and vibrant